 |
|
Reality of the times
Posted on: December 7, 2017 at 07:24:53 CT
Silas MU
Posts:
12320
Member For:
8.27 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
Sexual harassment is wrong.
People should not work in fear of sexual harassment and retaliation.
But the way things are headed, where is the line drawn between sexual harassment, sexual assault, battery, or creepiness?
Corporations have HR policies. The three branches of government do not for the highest levels (elected officials and career appointees). The rank and file do have HR policies they are subject to. Higher officials have to go through an ethics process (which is biased, flawed and like a fox guarding the hen house).
The question arises, what is sexual harassment? What is not? If it isn’t a workplace incident, how do you deal with it? Most of the present cases are not in the workplace. Should criminal charges be the first step? Do the accused have a presumption of guilt? Or innocence?
I don’t have the answers but I think the questions should be asked.
Using 5 prominent individuals as examples, Weinstein, Weiner, Franken, Bush Sr and Moore, how would you answer these questions?
Criminal act - let the court decide?
Workplace impact?
Presumption of guilt?
There are many more questions that could be asked but it is already a complex issue. I will say that the 5 examples I cited are each different, and probably require a different solution. But, how each has been handled historically and presently, have been wrong.
How it is being played out today, is creating a bad precedent.
People should not work in fear of sexual harassment and retaliation.
But the way things are headed, where is the line drawn between sexual harassment, sexual assault, battery, or creepiness?
Corporations have HR policies. The three branches of government do not for the highest levels (elected officials and career appointees). The rank and file do have HR policies they are subject to. Higher officials have to go through an ethics process (which is biased, flawed and like a fox guarding the hen house).
The question arises, what is sexual harassment? What is not? If it isn’t a workplace incident, how do you deal with it? Most of the present cases are not in the workplace. Should criminal charges be the first step? Do the accused have a presumption of guilt? Or innocence?
I don’t have the answers but I think the questions should be asked.
Using 5 prominent individuals as examples, Weinstein, Weiner, Franken, Bush Sr and Moore, how would you answer these questions?
Criminal act - let the court decide?
Workplace impact?
Presumption of guilt?
There are many more questions that could be asked but it is already a complex issue. I will say that the 5 examples I cited are each different, and probably require a different solution. But, how each has been handled historically and presently, have been wrong.
How it is being played out today, is creating a bad precedent.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
Reality of the times - Silas MU - 12/7 07:24:53
-