Re:Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee
by ThrustVectoring on Monday February 20, 2017 @04:38AM
(#13685856)
>Now the answer is probably they had defended and covered up that manager's behavior before. Blog alludes to that. So it became a pattern. Then just when another similar complaint popped up, admitting it was wrong and doing anything besides what they did before, would have meant acknowledging how wrong they have been in the past. "But we've already covered up for him 10 times, why is this special now..." kind of deal.
That analysis lets management offer HR as a scapegoat too easily, IMO. Why was HR willing to defend and cover up that managers behavior the first time? "If you make things difficult for me, things will end up difficult for you", and you end up promoting sycophants and pushing out anyone with a spine.
In other words, HR doesn't create corporate culture. Management does. And the culture they wound up with both convinces managers that they can get away with this BS, and HR to cover it up.
Re:Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee
by dkarapetyan on Monday February 20, 2017 @02:04AM
(#13685050)
They were gaslighting her. This is how incompetent people do cover ups. Well maybe they were not so incompetent but had never faced anyone clever enough to see through the bullshit.
Re:Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee
by csharpminor on Monday February 20, 2017 @01:38AM
(#13684914)
HR is subordinate to management. It sounds as though management was unwilling to take action to remove the responsible individual.
Re:Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee
by rhizome on Monday February 20, 2017 @01:53AM
(#13684993)
I think it's likely they were just "out of sight, out of mind" about HR details; it's not the most exciting part of running a business. They didn't get to call it "Boober" by bragging about new funds in the 401(k) plan.
Is there an HR major? Or is it MBA student who never graduate? How does one end up picking a good HR person vs just a friend-of-a-friend? Programmers go to an interviews and they get slammed with whiteboard silly algorithm questions. What kind of question do HR people have to answer to pass the test?
It seems here protecting the company would have been firing the person proposing sex on the spot. Blog author even had the chat logs as evidence from what I understand!
Now the answer is probably they had defended and covered up that manager's behavior before. Blog alludes to that. So it became a pattern. Then just when another similar complaint popped up, admitting it was wrong and doing anything besides what they did before, would have meant acknowledging how wrong they have been in the past. "But we've already covered up for him 10 times, why is this special now..." kind of deal.