Might loose job for tickling

[doseone]

More info

Okay since a lot of people thing I'm not telling them the whole story here is some more background. She never gave me her myspace page, but I found her on there as it isn't hard since I have a lot of co-workers I list as friends on there, which she did as well. I contacted her several times not only through myspace, but our personal work e-mail and it was always cordial/friendly. I overhead her telling people that she use to be a massage therapist, but stopped doing it as it use to cramp up her hands too much so now she only does it for friends/family. I sent her a work e-mail, saying, "hi I hope this doesn't come across wrongly of me to ask, but would you be willing to give me a massage sometime?" She replied, "don't worry about it, and I wouldn't mind giving you one, but I'm kind of busy at the moment, so I can't gurantee when I'd be able to give you one." I replied back, no worries, and to just keep me in mind or inform me when she did or would have time. A couple days later was when I sent the infamous e-mail. Once again I kept it to work related stuff, but ended it with, I hope you don't mind me confessing this to you but I like being tickled. It's not a sexual thing for me, but more something I use to de-stress and relax sometimes. I can't remember if I put this or not, but I'm including it in for arguments sake, as I might have said, "do you know of anyone who might be interested in helping me out sometime"

She never replied or answered back to this one, I think I then sent her another message through myspace and again through our work e-mail. I can't remember exactly what I wrote, but I think it was something like "haven't heard back from you regarding previous message, I hope I didn't freak or weird you out any as that was not my intention. The last one I sent her went like this, "ok I apologize for sending you that message that revealed something personal about me, as I wasn't trying to start anything. If you want, can we just forget I ever mentioned it or that I brought it up?

As for someone who said I walked out of the HR meeting, I would agree with that, but it wasn't an official meeting. I was approached by my supervisor out of the blue saying that I had to report to administration, I said ok, but I wanted to know what it was about or in regards to. She told me that she couldn't discuss that with me, and that I just had to go. I said that I wasn't going to go, with out knowing what the meeting was about or what it was referencing. So she asked me if I would go, if she talked to me privately in her office to let me know what was happening. I said sure, so we went into her office where she closed the door, and started to describe the complaint about me and so on. During the middle of our conversation where I was still trying to hear all the details and what was happening, there was a knock on the door and in walked a bunch of administrators as well as HR people. I immediately felt ambushed as well as uncomfortable. So I got up and said either, "I can't do this right now, or I don't feel comfortable in this situation" and walked out of my supervisors office. Where I proceed to go back to my station, as I saw two co-workers talking. I interupted them, just to let them know that I was leaving to go to lunch since it was practically that time anyway, and that I would be back in an hour when my lunch period ends. While at lunch, I got the call telling me to not return to work, that I was suspended with out pay. So, not once did I ever have an "official" meeting or opportunity to apologize or hear what the charges were against me. As for the most part they were keeping it a secret against me or were unwilling to inform me about anything. Hope that helps.

 

[WorkInProgress]

I'm with you 100%, especially with regard to the ambush in the boss's office, and I've never been so flabbergasted in my life as I am now to see that there are people here on this board who think they behaved properly by firing you for that. You had been given to believe that you could talk to the boss privately first, and you had ever right to expect that under the circumstances. In fact, I think that they should be in some administrative trouble for the way they acted.

Banshee, do you actually mean to tell me that you would fire somebody without first giving that person the opportunity to talk to you in private and be heard? You actually mean to say that you don't consider it egregious behavior on their part to interrupt a meeting that he had been told would be private, and force him to deal with all three of them together when he was right in the midst of a private meeting?

 

[KrazieDog]

I'm with you 100%, especially with regard to the ambush in the boss's office, and I've never been so flabbergasted in my life as I am now to see that there are people here on this board who think they behaved properly by firing you for that. You had been given to believe that you could talk to the boss privately first, and you had ever right to expect that under the circumstances.

His boss told him he HAD to report to administration. He asked why and was told by the boss that he/she could not discuss why(maybe by rule/maybe by law) and he said "no". I understand being sympathetic to his plight, but don't act like he did everything exactly like he should. Then when they came to him, he walked out. Doesn't matter if it was for lunch, you don't just decide to go to lunch when they come to discuss something serious with you. Doseone admits also, that may have been hasty. That was probably the big deciding factor of the dismissal. I totally understand about "off the clock blabitty blab", the thing is a worker came with a complaint of "possible" sexual harassment and in today's world you better fucking believe that they are going to investigate it, as they should. And that would have been the time to say it was harmless and be apologetic and say you'd have no further contact with her. Now at that point if they got stupid and fired you based only on the outside contact, then a lawyer would have been totally appropriate. As Prime said, this is based on the facts we were given here.

You have to take a step back from the situation to see it. I'm not saying they are right to meddle in what anyone does "off the clock". I'm saying, with the information given, this is common sense.

 

[Wolf]

Thanks for the clarifications

Your candor in giving us more detail in the situation is admirable, but you may have cost yourself some support. I have to confess my opinion of whether you should have been fired has changed from "I don't think so" to "Maybe". Here's why:

Okay since a lot of people thing I'm not telling them the whole story here is some more background. She never gave me her myspace page, but I found her on there as it isn't hard since I have a lot of co-workers I list as friends on there, which she did as well. I contacted her several times not only through myspace, but our personal work e-mail and it was always cordial/friendly.

Okay, no huge problem so far....you used work as a reason to contact them, that's not a crime. Happens all the time.

I overhead her telling people that she use to be a massage therapist, but stopped doing it as it use to cramp up her hands too much so now she only does it for friends/family. I sent her a work e-mail, saying, "hi I hope this doesn't come across wrongly of me to ask, but would you be willing to give me a massage sometime?" She replied, "don't worry about it, and I wouldn't mind giving you one, but I'm kind of busy at the moment, so I can't gurantee when I'd be able to give you one."

Here's where it starts to get tricky. You brought up the topic of massage without any info or suggestion from her. In a work email. That's not going to look good. Except to their lawyers.

I replied back, no worries, and to just keep me in mind or inform me when she did or would have time. A couple days later was when I sent the infamous e-mail. Once again I kept it to work related stuff, but ended it with, I hope you don't mind me confessing this to you but I like being tickled. It's not a sexual thing for me, but more something I use to de-stress and relax sometimes. I can't remember if I put this or not, but I'm including it in for arguments sake, as I might have said, "do you know of anyone who might be interested in helping me out sometime"

Okay. I don't want to be overdramatic, here, but there's the smoking gun that the company's attorneys will use to eviscerate you on the stand. This "off work" email can now be connected to the work email, establishing a pattern. And, in the interests of clarity, let's revisit a point:

I hope you don't mind me confessing this to you but I like being tickled. It's not a sexual thing for me, but more something I use to de-stress and relax sometimes.

This was a lie, wasn't it? I used to be a massage therapist, and I can tell you, someone asking me to do something that gives them sexual pleasure, when they specifically deny that it's for that purpose, would be dishonest and creepy. Think about it.

She never replied or answered back to this one, I think I then sent her another message through myspace and again through our work e-mail. I can't remember exactly what I wrote, but I think it was something like "haven't heard back from you regarding previous message, I hope I didn't freak or weird you out any as that was not my intention. The last one I sent her went like this, "ok I apologize for sending you that message that revealed something personal about me, as I wasn't trying to start anything. If you want, can we just forget I ever mentioned it or that I brought it up?

Okay, two things: repeated emails on the same subject (at work and off work), and your apologies will be another point where the attorneys will smell blood in the water. This could be interpreted as consciousness of guilt (too strong a term, but they'll be more likely to use that than "acknowledgment of possible wrongdoing").

The additional info about the meeting speaks to what they'll say; Your supervisor spoke to you in private, and most likely had to have HR there, as a matter of policy. Your saying it was an "ambush" probably won't fly. I don't doubt that it felt that way, but it sounds like they were trying to follow some sort of procedure. You were embarrassed and ashamed, and fled. But you got yourself into this by contacting a co-worker, through work, and that can't be undone. How exactly should they have brought this up, when your co-worker made her complaint?

I can't stress it enough, this company (if it's of any size at all) has lawyers; its own department, perhaps, and if not, a law firm on retainer. Perhaps both. These are going to be very well paid attorneys with staff members working for them. If you've told us all (or even most) of the details that you think might reflect poorly on you, again, you're to be commended for your candor. But in my opinion, you're screwed. If you couldn't handle a meeting, how will you handle an attorney asking if you have a tickle fetish on the stand?

I don't think you meant any harm. You're young, and you thought you were going to get something you wanted without necessarily hurting anyone, and without having to truly reveal something private and embarrassing. Use it as a learning experience.

I think you're out of luck on this one, but I wish you luck anyway.

 

[tickledgirl]

I hope you don't mind me confessing this to you but I like being tickled. It's not a sexual thing for me, but more something I use to de-stress and relax sometimes.

Not to pile on (a couple of other people have pointed this out) but it's pretty clear that this wasn't true. In other posts here, you've referred to tickling being a fetish for you. So it is something sexual.

And it seems quite possible that she picked up on that. Again in other posts here, you've referred to friends who've been upset by your interest in tickling. Evidentally they picked up on your sexual feelings about tickling, and the target of this email probably did too.

It may feel like I'm dredging up your old posts to pick on you. I truly don't mean to put you on the spot. But an opposing attorney will mean to put you on the spot, and they'll have access to the same evidence. You can be sure they'll be much nastier about how they portray you.

So I'd recommend against going the legal route. The best possible outcome would be that you manage to force your current employers to give you your job back...after your interest in tickling has been dragged out for your co-workers in the worst possible light. The more likely outcome is that you'd lose, be out a lot of legal fees, and still be "outed" in the workplace. (And if there's a record of formal legal proceedings, your employers would be much safer talking about that to someone who calls to check references.

[Edit: I missed that you'd been fired. Deleting bit that didn't take that into account]

 

[primetime]

Doesone, thanks for being more specific. But, now a lot of people will understand your company's point of view. You used their resources (work computers, email..etc) to correspond with someone. You also asked for a massage from someone who didn't bring it up to you. You also mention you liked to be tickled, but the problem was that you put the word "sexual" in your email. That is your undoing. You related the tickling to sex. If you would have never put that in the email, you would be fine now. Then you went on to apologize. That can show that you felt some kind of guilt towards mentioning your fetish.

I know you meant no harm, but after what you put, I can see how the situation at work can get out of hand. Again, bailing on HR can show "signs of guilt", even if you intended otherwise. HR was there to figure out the situation, not interrogate you. Your overreaction hurt your cause. I wish you all the luck in finding a new job. Just be careful going forward...

 

[WorkInProgress]

I think you should do your best to apologize and back down. If that doesn't work, resign (with something in writing saying they'll keep their mouths shut) and find a new job.

He's already been fired, so the only way he can resign now is if he opens legal proceedings and then reaches a settlement with them.

We all have opinions here, but most of us aren't lawyers (I'm certainly not), and the next step is sitting down with a really good lawyer to see what options there are. Presumably, the first thing to find out from there is what kind of internal appeals process there is. The ideal would be for it to be the personnel directors, rather than Doseone, who are on the defensive about their behavior, because their behavior is indefensible.

 

[tickledgirl]

He's already been fired, so the only way he can resign now is if he opens legal proceedings and then reaches a settlement with them.

Oops, I missed that post. My mistake. Thanks for correcting it.

We all have opinions here, but most of us aren't lawyers (I'm certainly not), and the next step is sitting down with a really good lawyer to see what options there are.

That's a fine idea, but not a cheap one. I'm not sure it's worth what it would cost.

Presumably, the first thing to find out from there is what kind of internal appeals process there is. The ideal would be for it to be the personnel directors, rather than Doseone, who are on the defensive about their behavior, because their behavior is indefensible.

As you said, we all have opinions here. Yours differs from mine.

 

[Mitchell]

Now that I have more information, I see a couple of problems here.

First, you used work e-mail to discuss tickling. Huge issue there. You are thus using their resources to contact her about a sexual fetish.

Next, they can use the idea of you being untruthful about contacting her saying it was work, and then trying to slip your sex fetish in there. In the old company I worked in, I could just see e-mailing a girl, and being to her like "Gee, we have to sell this much shampoo or whatever this month, and by the way, Miss X, I like to be tickled, and do you have ticklish toes?" I'd have been in trouble right away.

I know some people who have authority power to hire and fire in companies, who have read this thread, and they told me that, if you had done what you did in their company, you probably would have been let go as well.

I'm not sure if you may have a case with the manner in which they let you go. I'm not an attorney, and you probably should seek legal advice.

I hope you can resolve this in your favor. If not, things are a learning experience. I know that I've posted on here before that when I first got this computer, I got a Terms of Service violation warning from AOL, for discussing tickling in a general chatroom, because a girl became angry with me for doing so. It was right after that, that I found the TMF, and now limit my discussion of tickling and feet to TMF, and a foot fetish chatroom only. These are the subjects of the chat, and it is appropriate to discuss here. In the future, I would not discuss tickling with anyone in your work place, unless you know they can be trusted, or, in the case of a girl, if she is a close personal friend you know for a while, or a girlfriend, who happens to work with you, and you know she can be trusted.

Good Luck. Please keep us posted on any updates.

Mitch

 

[booberrytickle]

Legal Issues

I just saw this thread and, as much as I generally don't like to admit that I am actually a lawyer, I thought I would chime in to at least clear up what appears to be confusion about employee rights, harassment and other workplace issues. While it may be too late to help the original poster, I just want to clear a few things up. By the way, I do a lot of employment law and have seen this type of situation way too much. First, let's start out by clearing up any issues regarding what needs to happen before you are terminated...for any reason: The predominant law in the United States is "at will" employment. In other words, you can be terminated for any reason, or no reason at all, as long as that reason is not legally prohibited (discrimination, etc.). Many companies have procedures that generally need to be followed, and there may be an issue if they fail to follow those procedures, but unless you have a claim that you have been discriminated against based on your age, gender, race, religious affiliation, etc., your claims will be limited. Any belief that you can't get fired unless your employer gives you notice or otherwise finds a performance related reason is simply not consistent with applicable law.

Now, getting to the harassment issue, this is the federal standard...there are also a myriad of state laws. Sexual harassment falls into two general categories: 1) quid pro quo ("sleep with me or you won't get promoted"); and 2) hostile work environment. In this scenario, we are primarily talking about the second category. A hostile work environment can arise from any unwelcome conduct and is not limited to sexual advances. As a matter of fact "sexual harassment" is merely a sub-category of gender discrimination (although the "harasser" and victim can both be either male or female). The standard for what constitutes workplace harassment is based on a reasonable person. Given that the law imposes duties and liabilities on the employer to take action if made aware of any alleged harassment, your employer can, and is probably obligated, to take disciplinary action, including termination, in the event of anyone in management observes or is made aware of workplace harassment that is documented (through statements or investigation). There is even a potential claim for someone who observes the behavior and wasn't the victim. The failure to cooperate in an investigation is also generally misconduct and teh employer is generally in a better legal position terminating or disciplining the alleged harasser than taking no action at all. That being said, the type of incident described by the original poster seems like something that would implicate a required investigation and some sort of warning or other disciplinary action. The "failure to cooperate", whether there was an "official" meeting or not, is likely what led to the problems.

Sorry for the legal mumbo-jumbo, but this question seems to come up all the time in an apparent effort to justify or even seek permission to discuss tickling or tickle someone at work. Consensual relationships between co-workers have their own set of issues. But in this legal environment, you tickle at your own risk at work and termination and/or legal action are certainly among the likely consequences. I have just as many fantasies as the next guy, but just use common sense.

 

[WorkInProgress]

(With reference to my view that their behavior is indefensible... )

As you said, we all have opinions here. Yours differs from mine.

In my present workplace, which is an academic environment, if a complaint were made against me, I am positive that my department chair would invite me into his office to express my feelings to him. After listening to me attentively and trying his best to see my point of view, say to me, "I'm afraid I'm not going to be able to support you entirely, because I really do disagree with your actions in the matter." But he would do that only with deep regret and only after starting out predisposed to listen to me and wanting to be as fair to me as possible. Not only that, but if any other administrators were to barge in on the meeting, he would say to them, "Would you excuse us please? We're having a private meeting." Then, once we were alone, he would say to me, "Unfortunately, the next step after our meeting is that you're going to have to meet with them, and here's what I would advise you to do in that instance."

Now, I pose a question to the people who disagree with me. Why, I ask you, why do you not agree that the scenario that I describe in this post would have been the proper way to handle it? Why do you disagree with my assertion that Doseone has been robbed of civilized treatment by not having this scenario followed? Again, in my scenario, the boss can still refuse to side with him, and he still has to meet with HR eventually, but in my scenario they behave like civilized people in the process. Will you please, several of you, explain why you do not consider my scenario to be the way civilized people would have behaved, and why you do not consider what they did instead to be uncivilized?

 

[Morpheus72]

Realistically...

As I was told by the HR person at the company for which I work, "it's easier for the company to fight a lawsuit for wrongful termination than it is to fight a sexual harassment lawsuit."

Hence, the firing.

Morph

 

[waltermego]

Doseone:

Many people here have offered there opinion on your actions and I am positive that you realize that it was a mistake.

I just wanted to offer you something to think about and discuss with your lawyer.

You mentioned your fear of "being labeled" in your furture employment pursuits. Make sure you share this with your lawyer. As someone who is involved in management for the past 8 years and currently serving the role of high level management including HR I can let you in on a small bit of information.

Most employers are fearful of giving a bad recommendation to formal employees. In fact the last 3 companies I had been employed by have a "verification of employment only" policy. This means the company will only allow its management or personnel to verify the dates of employment. The reason employers are fearful is that the terminated employee has the upper hand in a lawsuit for damaging furture employment opportunities. Employers do not do a very good job at teaching management on what to say or not to say, it is easier to have them say nothing about a former employees work ethic or character.

I am assuming your lawyer will try to negotiate in some way with your former employer to keep an expensive trial from forming. Keeping you from being "blackballed" can be part of that negotiation.

Good Luck,
Waltermego

 

[WorkInProgress]

As I was told by the HR person at the company for which I work, "it's easier for the company to fight a lawsuit for wrongful termination than it is to fight a sexual harassment lawsuit."

Hence, the firing.

Morph

That brings an excellent insight into the matter: They're afraid of being sued by this woman.

But, I think society needs a more refined definition of sexual harassment. I think, at this point, we all agree that it is clear-cut sexual harassment, deserving of severe punishment, when a supervisor says or implies to a subordinate, "If you want a good position in this company, sleep with me," and when a company condones such actions. I think we can also agree that, beyond that, there are some gray areas where people could reasonably differ over whether such and such an action constitutes sexual harassment, the relevant catchphrase being "hostile environment." Moreover, beyond that gray area, most of us can agree that it there are applications of the term which are just silly.

That said, here's what Doseone is up against. Even though he is not this woman's supervisor, the fact that he had been there five years and she was new can, arguably, put her in a position of vulnerability, of perceiving Doseone as having some power over her future, even if he's not her supervisor. After all, when we're new on a job, we perceive are senior co-workers as supervisors and superiors of an informal sort. Thus, any kind of entreaty that says "Deal with me personally on your own time" can feel threatening.

And...that said...I continue to stand by my most recent post about what civilized people would have done in this situation. But, now that it has come to a legal matter, I do think these dimensions are going to come to bear on it.

Speaking for myself, by the way, I think I would go for a settlement that involved an amicable termination and a promise not to spill dirt to future employers. Not all of us are ready to hold public press conferences about are fetish lives just yet.

 

[E-Dawg]

It may be too late.....

It may be too late. You should think before you act. The least you can do now is appologize to her. But as far as being fired, this is why you should've taken the time to think about how your actions would affect you. If you do get fired, it will be on your record and make it harder to find another job. Nowadays, one bad mark on your reputation can ruin you whole life. Don't let your fetish destroy you.

 

[vsa7a]

so youre fired eh?

learn your lessons. you should of left that 'sexual' part out. you could of said i liked being tickled. and that was it. but then again you can have miscommunication which is a bitch. and finally, regardless if tickling is 'sexual' or a 'fetish' to you or not. you got to leave that out because thats not cool.

if only you had left the 'sexual' or 'fetish' mentality out or better yet not start at all you would of been fine.

i hoped you resigned before they told ya youre going to be terminated.

 

[Wolf]

Really, taking things into account;

And playing Devil's Advocate, 'cause that's what I'm fond of;

Is it realistic to expect that the OP will actually take a case like this to court? This is someone who couldn't bring himself to admit what he really wanted to do with a co-worker that he wanted to do it with (claiming it was non-sexual).
Someone who literally ran away from a situation that he found embarrassing;
Do you think he's going to be comfortable taking the stand in a civil trial and talking about his tickle fetish? Because I can guarantee you, his company's attorneys will have no problem asking him. And this is not a criminal trial. He can't refuse to testify. The other side can call him. And you can bet your bottom dollar they will.

I realize there's a strong "It has to do with tickling, and anything that makes our little pee-pees hard can't be wrong" sentiment at work here, along with some specious arguments that the EEOC or other Federal concerns might be involved here. Baloney. Sexual fetishes are not the same as sexual orientation. Having a sexual fetish does not make one a protected class. You want to open up that can o' worms? Great. NAMBLA's on line one.

He screwed up. He used work channels (and off work) to do it. He tried to set up a massage with a co-worker, and told her what he wanted, denying it was sexual in nature, but asking if she knew anyone who could "help him out". She got creeped out, and reported it. When his bosses tried to confront him on it (regardless whether they coddled him sufficiently through the process), he ran. (He ran so far awaaaaay... Sorry. Couldn't be avoided. Moving on...)

Like it or not, sympathize with him or not, he initiated this situation. He's got to take whatever he can from it, be it a life lesson, or just a reminder that despite the Echo Chamber effect that forums like this one can cause, what we like ain't everyone's particular cup of tea; as a matter of fact, it makes some people downright queasy. That may be 'their problem', but it's also their right.

 

[LuckyAndre]

I think you took it as, since she is a massage therapist, what better way to get myself tickled...because Im into being tickled, right???

Where you fucked yourself was your wording. You overheard that she did massages. You thought that this is your chance to GET TICKLED. So you fly off the email. Now, she said she wouldnt mind giving you the massage. So you know you got the first part outta the way. You should have, "Just be careful how you massage, haha, I'm ticklish, haha..." Make a joke about it. and then LEAVE IT ALONE. Wait until the day of massage comes, and GET your massage, and wait until she hits that ticklish spot of yours, then you come clean, SLIGHTLY. If she sees it as fun, oh yes, she will do it again. And eventually she will know you LIKE to be tickled, and of course it WILL show that you like it SEXUALLY. You frigging put tickling and sexual in the same email to her. FOOL FOOL FOOL.

You know damn well if you were tied to a massage table right now and being tickled by the massage therapist from work, you would have been firing off a long post in one of the other forums here saying, YES, I WAS TICKLED BY A CO WORKER!..and every one would have chimed in saying you are lucky, bla bla.. You have to look at the big picture. You wanted to get tickled by someone. How do I get myself there? First dont lose your job over it.

Yeah, you thought you would buy yourself some room by saying, "Oh, its not sexual for me, heh heh." As if she would say, Oh Noooooo I wasnt thinking that at all!" The moment you said it, you opened that door.

Like all of you here, I love tickling as well. But my other love is smelling womens feet. Stinky womens feet. I dont know why. But I know THAT is what I want to do. So how do I do it? I make it a reverse situation. If the girl has shoes off, whatever I make a comment, "ew it stinks in here" they may get offended, but they will defend those feet as not. I keep up at different times as a joke....to see their mood to my "joking". If they laugh it off, NO, I dont go and say, "you know your stinky toes, turn me on". Ill wait until THEY will say, "you keep it up Andre and Ill put my stinky toes on you." "NO You wont, get those things away from me" and keep on telling them not too, UNTIL they do get them on me. Then work my magic from there. At this time I have a girl who will do my wishes with smelly feet for me. A girl who I neverrrrrrr thought I would have the chance with. And you know what? She is a co-worker.

Sorry to sound harsh above, but it is what it is. And me personally, after all this legal advice everyone is giving you (which is good!)..do you REALLY want to win, and then STILL work there at the same place, after all that?? With the looks and stares. And then someone said something about suing for that also about harrasment, bla bla. YOU started all this. Why stay there to turn things around as you being the victim, cause everyone is saying "Hey there goes Joe Tickles over by the water cooler, huh huh haa" Your gonna get pissed and toss papers everywhere and go hide in a stairwell yelling to yourself, "why did I do this, why why".

I get ridiculed ALL the time at work. Because of my license plates. And I have no shame. Even my general manager stopped me in the parking lot and said, "Andre does that say what I think it says?" Yes sir it does. He laughed and said "I dont think I want to know the details" and that was it. Everyone knows. And im just fine where I work at, because I dont let it effect my work and people around me.

Anyway, lesson learned my friend. Look into other fields and start fresh. Good luck

 

[SmarterthanU]

I've been reading through these posts - I'd just like to comment broadly.

1) He did not screw himself with his wording of the email. He screwed himself by sending the email. There was no better way to handle doing the deed. The deed should not have been done in the first place.

2) His company has the right to terminate him, as many people (including a lawyer) have made clear. Where a lot of people get into trouble at work is when they assume they have rights that they don't have.

3) I'd be willing to bet that the company didn't decide to terminate on the email alone. I don't know if there was any prior history of bad behavior or poor judgment, but if there was, that would have made a big difference. I guarantee that the post-confrontation reaction was everything. Had he been completely cooperative things might have worked out better for him.

4) People's advice to hire a lawyer: wrong. That was the last thing he should have done, and I doubt he could have found a reputable lawyer to take the case anyway. If it was an illegal termination based on a discrimination claim, then yes, by all means, hire an attorney. In this case, bringing in an attorney just shows even more bad judgment.

5) What I'm a little shocked about is how little anyone has talked about the female in this case, and her rights. Looking at things from her perspective, what would we see? I put myself in the situation. A guy I work with and I hardly know overhears me talking to people I do know about how I used to be a massage therapist. He asks me to give him a massage. Given that there are lots of practicing massage therapists out there, what would be the true motive for such a request? Duh. Then I get an email through my Myspace page (I did not give this person my contact info, he obviously found it by searching online), which modifies the request for a massage into a thinly-veiled request to be tickled. I work with this person. He has access to me every day now. I show the email to my boss (which is, in itself, embarrassing), and instead of an apology and an assurance that I'm not in for daily misery at my job, what I get is a denial that the people I have rightly turned to for help have any business getting involved. This is a straightforward attempt at disempowerment. It's the same thing as telling me that I have to deal with this man directly. All of this is textbook stalker mentality. Now I'm terrified.

I really hope that everyone who reads this thread learns something, whether about other people or themselves.

 

[tickledgirl]

That brings an excellent insight into the matter: They're afraid of being sued by this woman.

But, I think society needs a more refined definition of sexual harassment. I think, at this point, we all agree that it is clear-cut sexual harassment, deserving of severe punishment, when a supervisor says or implies to a subordinate, "If you want a good position in this company, sleep with me," and when a company condones such actions. I think we can also agree that, beyond that, there are some gray areas where people could reasonably differ over whether such and such an action constitutes sexual harassment, the relevant catchphrase being "hostile environment." Moreover, beyond that gray area, most of us can agree that it there are applications of the term which are just silly.

That said, here's what Doseone is up against. Even though he is not this woman's supervisor, the fact that he had been there five years and she was new can, arguably, put her in a position of vulnerability, of perceiving Doseone as having some power over her future, even if he's not her supervisor. After all, when we're new on a job, we perceive are senior co-workers as supervisors and superiors of an informal sort. Thus, any kind of entreaty that says "Deal with me personally on your own time" can feel threatening.

And...that said...I continue to stand by my most recent post about what civilized people would have done in this situation. But, now that it has come to a legal matter, I do think these dimensions are going to come to bear on it.

Could his employers have been more sensitive or "civilized" about how they handled this? From what we've heard (one side of the story) yes, they could and should have been.

But regardless of that, I think the OP made mistakes in his communication with a co-worker, and compounded those mistakes with his reaction. (If your supervisor says "We've got a sexual harassment problem, you need to talk to HR" you don't get to specify who you will and won't talk to, and under what circumstances. If you want to keep your job, you cooperate.

If you feel the charge is unfounded, make that case. But refusing to talk because "it was something that occurred outside of work and not during actual work time than it was none of their business" is a recipe for...well, for losing your job.

As it happens, something that happens between co-workers outside work can still be considered harassment, especially if it happens using work resources, and even if his communication had been 100% honest. But even if you're completely in the clear, refusing to meet with HR and present your case is a recipe for trouble.

 

[WorkInProgress]

SmarterThanU: He was very cooperative about talking with his boss privately. The boss could have helped him prepare to see HR. Again, the boss also could have regretfully said "I can't go along with you on this one," but he should have been able to have that meeting first.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that he shouldn't have done what he did in the first place, but I stand by what the company should have done.

I don't see how bringing in a lawyer can make anything worse. The presence of a lawyer does not imply that he's absolutely right and the company is absolutely wrong. The lawyer simply knows what questions to ask, and makes sure the company follows its own written personnel policies.

 

[SmarterthanU]

SmarterThanU: He was very cooperative about talking with his boss privately. The boss could have helped him prepare to see HR. Again, the boss also could have regretfully said "I can't go along with you on this one," but he should have been able to have that meeting first.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that he shouldn't have done what he did in the first place, but I stand by what the company should have done.

That's not my read of the account in post #1. He says that he first refused to talk to anyone, since it was none of their business. He says he then reluctantly agreed to talk to his boss. He says that when administration and HR showed up, he refused to talk to them. In fact, he said, he walked out on them. That's not being cooperative, in my view.

I don't see how bringing in a lawyer can make anything worse. The presence of a lawyer does not imply that he's absolutely right and the company is absolutely wrong. The lawyer simply knows what questions to ask, and makes sure the company follows its own written personnel policies.

Getting a lawyer to review his termination - fine. Showing up with a lawyer to the hearing - terrible idea.

 

[tickledgirl]

I don't see how bringing in a lawyer can make anything worse. The presence of a lawyer does not imply that he's absolutely right and the company is absolutely wrong. The lawyer simply knows what questions to ask, and makes sure the company follows its own written personnel policies.

The presence of a lawyer says you're treating this as an adversarial situation. Sometimes that's unavoidable. But it should not be a first choice.

5) What I'm a little shocked about is how little anyone has talked about the female in this case, and her rights. Looking at things from her perspective, what would we see? I put myself in the situation. A guy I work with and I hardly know overhears me talking to people I do know about how I used to be a massage therapist. He asks me to give him a massage. Given that there are lots of practicing massage therapists out there, what would be the true motive for such a request? Duh. Then I get an email through my Myspace page (I did not give this person my contact info, he obviously found it by searching online), which modifies the request for a massage into a thinly-veiled request to be tickled. I work with this person. He has access to me every day now. I show the email to my boss (which is, in itself, embarrassing), and instead of an apology and an assurance that I'm not in for daily misery at my job, what I get is a denial that the people I have rightly turned to for help have any business getting involved. This is a straightforward attempt at disempowerment. It's the same thing as telling me that I have to deal with this man directly. All of this is textbook stalker mentality. Now I'm terrified.

While I'd agree very much with this read, I'd also point out that the woman doesn't just deserve (and have the legal right!) to be protected against a stalker. She has the right to be comfortable in the workplace, and not to have to deal with co-workers projecting their fetishes onto her.

Maybe she wasn't terrified. Maybe she was just creeped out. That's not okay either.

 

[SmarterthanU]

While I'd agree very much with this read, I'd also point out that the woman doesn't just deserve (and have the legal right!) to be protected against a stalker. She has the right to be comfortable in the workplace, and not to have to deal with co-workers projecting their fetishes onto her.

I certainly meant to convey that as well. 100% agreement.

 

[vsa7a]

I've been reading through these posts - I'd just like to comment broadly.

1) He did not screw himself with his wording of the email. He screwed himself by sending the email. There was no better way to handle doing the deed. The deed should not have been done in the first place.

2) His company has the right to terminate him, as many people (including a lawyer) have made clear. Where a lot of people get into trouble at work is when they assume they have rights that they don't have.

3) I'd be willing to bet that the company didn't decide to terminate on the email alone. I don't know if there was any prior history of bad behavior or poor judgment, but if there was, that would have made a big difference. I guarantee that the post-confrontation reaction was everything. Had he been completely cooperative things might have worked out better for him.

4) People's advice to hire a lawyer: wrong. That was the last thing he should have done, and I doubt he could have found a reputable lawyer to take the case anyway. If it was an illegal termination based on a discrimination claim, then yes, by all means, hire an attorney. In this case, bringing in an attorney just shows even more bad judgment.

5) What I'm a little shocked about is how little anyone has talked about the female in this case, and her rights. Looking at things from her perspective, what would we see? I put myself in the situation. A guy I work with and I hardly know overhears me talking to people I do know about how I used to be a massage therapist. He asks me to give him a massage. Given that there are lots of practicing massage therapists out there, what would be the true motive for such a request? Duh. Then I get an email through my Myspace page (I did not give this person my contact info, he obviously found it by searching online), which modifies the request for a massage into a thinly-veiled request to be tickled. I work with this person. He has access to me every day now. I show the email to my boss (which is, in itself, embarrassing), and instead of an apology and an assurance that I'm not in for daily misery at my job, what I get is a denial that the people I have rightly turned to for help have any business getting involved. This is a straightforward attempt at disempowerment. It's the same thing as telling me that I have to deal with this man directly. All of this is textbook stalker mentality. Now I'm terrified.

I really hope that everyone who reads this thread learns something, whether about other people or themselves.

<B>CONCUR!</B>

BOTTOM LINE: you may have your constitutional rights but the other person and your company has rights too. apologize, resign, sell pencils for a living do whatever you have to do but a lawyer aint gonna cut it.