Slashdot Mirror
Intel CEO Brian Krzanich Resigns Over Relationship With Employee (theverge.com)
Intel has announced that CEO Brian Krzanich has resigned from the company effective immediately. From a report: CFO Robert Swan is now Intel's interim chief executive officer. "Intel was recently informed that Mr. Krzanich had a past consensual relationship with an Intel employee," the company said in a press release. "An ongoing investigation by internal and external counsel has confirmed a violation of Intel's non-fraternization policy, which applies to all managers." Krzanich's immediate resignation was accepted to show "that all employees will respect Intel's values and adhere to the company's code of conduct," according to Intel.
Of course, we haven't heard from the employee. Relations between powerful and powerless always tend to look consensual from the viewpoint of the powerful.
>> non-fraternization policy Non fratzernization ? What's this kind of BS ?
Well known to any military.
Officers can't socialize with enlisted. (And, possibly, senior enlisted can't socialize with junior enlisted.)
It's detrimental to good order and discipline. Either you end up giving/getting special treatment - intentionally or not - or else others think you do, are suspicious that you are, etc.
Relationship was consensual. Policy is wrong -- employers should butt out of employees'/managers' private lives when they're off the clock. He was right to keep his private life private -- shame that someone snitched on him. Petty snitches make life worse for everyone.
Latin uses the male version of the word when referring to groups of mixed or indeterminate gender. This was probably a woman, but I'm just playing the odds because I don't know his sexual orientation and the majority of men seem to be straight.
A non-fraternization policy prohibits social activities, to some degree, between bosses and underlings. One of those areas of activities covered is usually sexual
Your ad here. Ask me how!
I wonder what his wife and two daughters think about that. Another Republican with loose morals.
Maybe he thought he could get away with it....seemed to work for this guy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...–Lewinsky_scandal
If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
If you want to have a relationship with a subordinate the right thing to do is to remove yourself from a position of power over them. No matter how good your intentions are it's probably only a matter of time until there is a conflict of interest or you make a request they feel like they can't refuse without it hurting their career. And when if/when it does eventually come out, every decision you ever made affecting them will be questioned.
As uncle Ben says, microwave rice isn't... I mean, with great power comes great responsibility.
In this case it seems that he probably didn't want to do any of that stuff because he is already married with kids. Still, perhaps it doesn't need so much media coverage... "Stepped down due to personal issues" is probably enough.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Fortunately, private life isn't the military -- employees shouldn't be treated like soldiers.
But the exact same underlying implied and always existing possibility of coercion exists. That's the problem. There is no way to eliminate the thought of possible retaliation from the mind of the underling, and therefore true consensuality is impossible.
> US culture
We recently in 2010 started hiring employees in Caracas, Venezuela. They are shockingly non-PC. Locally here in Seattle, we fired a male employee for wearing "dad" shorts too far above his knees. Later we had to let a woman go because she wore tank tops to work. We had a group of women threaten to quit and vandalize the office because we didn't fire tank top woman the first time they asked. In our VZ office, there's pictures of women in lingerie on the wall and a couple of the women have showed-up back from lunch in bikini tops. Completely different culture.
https://www.cnn.com/2014/06/17/politics/clinton-town-hall-what-to-watch/
On this problem particularly, Clinton later said, "We have so to send a clear message, just because your child gets across the border, that doesn't mean the child gets to stay. So, we don't want to send a message that is contrary to our laws or will encourage more children to make that dangerous journey."
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-obama-administration-children-human-traffickers/
Did the Obama Administration Place Immigrant Children With Human Traffickers?
A congressional report and criminal indictment resulted from a 2014 incident in which multiple immigrant children were handed off to a human trafficking ring.
True.
and so on...