OT: So, a question ...

[michnittlion]

I guess there's some irony that I am the one asking this question given my opinions on "screw what the rule book says, do the right thing" --- but the question:

If, in a workplace setting, one employee put his hands on another employee's throat and shook him for a couple seconds while threatening to hurt him (this was legitimate, it was NOT joking around) ----- what should be done?

Other notes: (1) there were about 5 witnesses to this incident (i was not among them, I was in the bathroom at the time), (2) the "strangler" (near-peer level to me, not on my team but we do work together on stuff) is highly valuable to the organization, and (3) the "strangl-ee" (reports to me) just wants to move on and put the whole incident behind him.

I know my opinion --- the behavior is completely unacceptable and zero tolerance for that, termination. But my bosses aren't agreeing (warning instead of termination). I guess I gotta respect that, but it is bothering me.

 

[Obliviax]

I'd talk to him...set out a proper path. Its a more humane way to go. If he doesn't agree, then you can call the other.

The only downside for us is if the message isn't 'heard' and acted upon, and you may become vulnerable for not having reported it.

 

[PSU Mike]

Kick somebody in the nads to find out if that's acceptable.

 

[Obliviax]

Seriously, that's assault. It goes beyond work employee status. Its a crime. Why weren't the police called? I believe you are an attorney, no? If this isn't reported, and this guy goes off and harms someone, aren't you now liable? Isn't the firm now liable (to civil action)?

 

[Ranger Dan]

Is this a joke? I'm thinking it could be an analogy for the Sandusky shower incident the McQuery didn't do enough.

If this really is a true scenario, then you should have absolutely reported it to your human resources and his manager immediately. Then, your company's policies would take it from there.

 

[Bob78]

I guess there's some irony that I am the one asking this question given my opinions on "screw what the rule book says, do the right thing" --- but the question:

If, in a workplace setting, one employee put his hands on another employee's throat and shook him for a couple seconds while threatening to hurt him (this was legitimate, it was NOT joking around) ----- what should be done?

Other notes: (1) there were about 5 witnesses to this incident (i was not among them, I was in the bathroom at the time), (2) the "strangler" (near-peer level to me, not on my team but we do work together on stuff) is highly valuable to the organization, and (3) the "strangl-ee" (reports to me) just wants to move on and put the whole incident behind him.

I know my opinion --- the behavior is completely unacceptable and zero tolerance for that, termination. But my bosses aren't agreeing (warning instead of termination). I guess I gotta respect that, but it is bothering me.

Talk with either your functional lead (VP, perhaps?) or with HR. No one is so valuable that they can get away with that. That is serious stuff, goes to intimidation, bullying, hostile environment.... Any employee in a management capacity is considered an 'agent' of the company, and their witnessing / knowledge of such an incident with no action taken is a huge liability for the company. HR and Sr. Execs have a responsibility to keep the company out of trouble. Also, never assume that just because the 'victimized' employee says 'no big deal, let's forget it' now that they won't come back later after rethinking and discussing outside of work and wonder why no action was taken. They have a legitimate issue that needs to be - and needed to be - addressed, and the company cannot pull a Ralph Kramden and 'humminna humminna' their way out of it because the employee declared it a no biggie initially. In instances like this, the company management needs to subordinate the concern of the employee while at the same time assuring the employee that they will be completely protected against retaliation. If the offending employee is not terminated, he cannot even hint at retaliation or he will be fired with cause. This is serious stuff - other employees will be talking about it and waiting to see what management does. Inertia in these instances can kill company culture, morale, engagement, retention goals, etc. Good luck - I think you know the right thing to do, so go with that. You'll be glad you did when you look in the mirror.

 

[michnittlion]

Seriously, that's assault. It goes beyond work employee status. Its a crime. Why weren't the police called? I believe you are an attorney, no? If this isn't reported, and this guy goes off and harms someone, aren't you now liable? Isn't the firm now liable (to civil action)?

No, I am not a lawyer. It sure does seem like assault to me. The victim didn't want to do anything -- no police -- I don't get it but that is his choice.

I certainly DID report it up the company chain --- immediately, as I was one of the senior folk there (this was people out for drinks, ON the company dime and everyone knew it was company-sponsored). My higher-ups are the ones who have decided on the course of action. I certainly don't agree with it.

 

[MontereyLion]

I guess there's some irony that I am the one asking this question given my opinions on "screw what the rule book says, do the right thing" --- but the question:

If, in a workplace setting, one employee put his hands on another employee's throat and shook him for a couple seconds while threatening to hurt him (this was legitimate, it was NOT joking around) ----- what should be done?

Other notes: (1) there were about 5 witnesses to this incident (i was not among them, I was in the bathroom at the time), (2) the "strangler" (near-peer level to me, not on my team but we do work together on stuff) is highly valuable to the organization, and (3) the "strangl-ee" (reports to me) just wants to move on and put the whole incident behind him.

I know my opinion --- the behavior is completely unacceptable and zero tolerance for that, termination. But my bosses aren't agreeing (warning instead of termination). I guess I gotta respect that, but it is bothering me.

Two choices......1) termination......2) final warning

 

[michnittlion]

Is this a joke? I'm thinking it could be an analogy for the Sandusky shower incident the McQuery didn't do enough.

If this really is a true scenario, then you should have absolutely reported it to your human resources and his manager immediately. Then, your company's policies would take it from there.

No joke. The analogy to Sandusky/McQueary does not escape me.

I did report it to HR and his manager. Thus seem to be the way company policies "take it from here", which does confuse me.

 

[BlueBand]

If the decision is a warning, for whatever reason (doesn't seem right to me--you've just set a precedent that this behavior is acceptable), it should be a zero tolerance warning and the person should be required to get counseling. You're lucky the stranglee doesn't want to press charges. Are you sure they haven't been compromised or intimidated in some way? If so, that could come back to bite the company in the ass later.

 

[Ranger Dan]

I would be surprised if any publicly traded company wasn't operating on a zero tolerance policy for violence...

 

[Cruising Route 66]

I guess there's some irony that I am the one asking this question given my opinions on "screw what the rule book says, do the right thing" --- but the question:

If, in a workplace setting, one employee put his hands on another employee's throat and shook him for a couple seconds while threatening to hurt him (this was legitimate, it was NOT joking around) ----- what should be done?

Other notes: (1) there were about 5 witnesses to this incident (i was not among them, I was in the bathroom at the time), (2) the "strangler" (near-peer level to me, not on my team but we do work together on stuff) is highly valuable to the organization, and (3) the "strangl-ee" (reports to me) just wants to move on and put the whole incident behind him.

I know my opinion --- the behavior is completely unacceptable and zero tolerance for that, termination. But my bosses aren't agreeing (warning instead of termination). I guess I gotta respect that, but it is bothering me.

It's clearly a personnel/senior management issue. If personnel is unaware of the incident they need to be notified, anonymously if necessary by someone who witnessed the event. Then its up to personnel to take it to the firm's legal counsel and senior management for disposition.

 

[roswelllion]

Michnit,

As I recall you have been fairly critical of the C/S/S actions. To carry the JS analogy a little further, think now that this employee [the agressor] hurts someone 6-7 years from now, and all hell breaks loose about why you [not a direct witness] didn't do more. Couple questions,
. 10 years from now how good do you think everyone's recollections will be?
. how much would your company stand behind you?
. who do feel is most responsible for what happens now [the victim, the direct witnesses, you or your employer?.

 

[MontereyLion]

I'd talk to him...set out a proper path. Its a more humane way to go. If he doesn't agree, then you can call the other.

The only downside for us is if the message isn't 'heard' and acted upon, and you may become vulnerable for not having reported it.

Boy that sounds familiar..........that didn't work the last time we heard about that approach.

 

[psu00]

No, I am not a lawyer. It sure does seem like assault to me. The victim didn't want to do anything -- no police -- I don't get it but that is his choice.

I certainly DID report it up the company chain --- immediately, as I was one of the senior folk there (this was people out for drinks, ON the company dime and everyone knew it was company-sponsored). My higher-ups are the ones who have decided on the course of action. I certainly don't agree with it.

Oh the irony of this post. In other words- you did exactly what Paterno did (both of you not witnessing the respective events but reporting it up the chain of command).

Seriously, if it truly was not a joke, then you need to notify HR and let the company procedures kick in. I don't care how valuable the guy is to the company- you can't go around choking coworkers.

From prior experience we all know that the Vic who says everything's ok now can change his mind (and maybe the veracity of the account in the future??) and people will accuse you all of knowing and doing nothing. Your post could be taken out of context with charges that you "covered up" the attack. They should just shut the whole company down!! (Sarcasm intended- but wow on the similarities).

 

[michnittlion]

Michnit,

As I recall you have been fairly critical of the C/S/S actions. To carry the JS analogy a little further, think now that this employee [the agressor] hurts someone 6-7 years from now, and all hell breaks loose about why you [not a direct witness] didn't do more. Couple questions,
. 10 years from now how good do you think everyone's recollections will be?
. how much would your company stand behind you?
. who do feel is most responsible for what happens now [the victim, the direct witnesses, you or your employer?.

Those are all legitimate questions. As I said, the irony here does NOT escape me.

(1) Everybody's recollections will not be good in 10 years. I had early in the process harped on JoePa's 2011 GJ testimony and the way he worded some things, but I realized pretty quickly that was incorrect for me to do. Memories fade.

(2) My company will protect (1) the company first, and (2) me (if at all) second. That's what companies do.

(3) I feel the people most responsible now are a tie between (1a) me and (1b) my employer. Yes I have reported it up, but I am not off the hook, I don't think. Perhaps it is me resigning over this, and documenting my reasons why. Perhaps it is something else. But I still believe in people doing the right thing when the higher-ups don't.

 

[Peetz Pool Boy]

i dont agree with CR66 often, but he is correct on this one. it doesn't surprise me that you don't understand the basics of the employee/supervisor relationship.

If you do anything more than report this to your HR department, you automatically expose yourself to legal consequences.

You report the incident to HR and don't discuss it thereafter unless compelled to do so by counsel or management. Its really up to your company's management to deal with it.

Im actually most surprised that this prized employee didn't have his hands around your neck. Im fairly confident that you're threatened, professionally, by this prized employee.

 

[Bardo]

I guess there's some irony that I am the one asking this question given my opinions on "screw what the rule book says, do the right thing" --- but the question:

If, in a workplace setting, one employee put his hands on another employee's throat and shook him for a couple seconds while threatening to hurt him (this was legitimate, it was NOT joking around) ----- what should be done?

Other notes: (1) there were about 5 witnesses to this incident (i was not among them, I was in the bathroom at the time), (2) the "strangler" (near-peer level to me, not on my team but we do work together on stuff) is highly valuable to the organization, and (3) the "strangl-ee" (reports to me) just wants to move on and put the whole incident behind him.

I know my opinion --- the behavior is completely unacceptable and zero tolerance for that, termination. But my bosses aren't agreeing (warning instead of termination). I guess I gotta respect that, but it is bothering me.

If you're a manager, you are responsible to handle this, otherwise you are now responsible. You need to take it to the top, and those in between will also pay a dear price. That might be you, if you don't act. I have 30+ years of high level management, and had a similar situation during a start up, & the senior mgr made an unwanted advance. He was suspended, yhen gone. It really hurt, but it was the right thing.

 

[jim cummings]

You should do more.

 

[psu00]

Those are all legitimate questions. As I said, the irony here does NOT escape me.

(1) Everybody's recollections will not be good in 10 years. I had early in the process harped on JoePa's 2011 GJ testimony and the way he worded some things, but I realized pretty quickly that was incorrect for me to do. Memories fade.

(2) My company will protect (1) the company first, and (2) me (if at all) second. That's what companies do.

(3) I feel the people most responsible now are a tie between (1a) me and (1b) my employer. Perhaps it is me resigning over this, and documenting my reasons why. Perhaps it is something else. But I still believe in people doing the right thing when the higher-ups don't. I'm still NOT off the hook morally, IMO.

Fair enough, but let's be very frank- that's because of the very striking similarities to the JS mess and the 4 years of arguments over it. Would you (or any of us in a similar position) still be so conflicted if this happened before JS.......where you reported it up the chain (properly) for the higher ups to act and the Vic told you everything's ok and he just wants to 'move on'? Frankly, that's very difficult for any of us to honestly answer IMO.

Even with all the JS background and "poster fights" here over events for 4 years........you still were somewhat uncertain as to the next proper step and asked. I'm not trying to be critical (seriously- I'm not) but I think in the quiet of the night as you stare at the ceiling before going to sleep- you can get a little more perspective/ insight on these type issues than many who shoot from the hip while 'Monday morning quarterbacking'. Sometimes things aren't as straight forward (at least initially) as the masses think in retrospect.

I think we all would find ourselves in the same conflicted state (for lack of a better term) that you did. Life is generally not as black and white as many think- there's an awful lot of gray.

 

[psu00]

Michnittlion- I don't think you should resign over it. I'd suggest you email (for the record as opposed to verbally discussing it) your bosses who made the decision. State the facts as you were told and respectfully suggest they take a second look at the situation as you think more should be done. CC the head of HR to the same email. After that I'm not sure what else you can do (although I'm sure the torch and pitchfork crowd would blame you for not calling the cops on the alleged assault that you never saw).

 

[michnittlion]

Michnittlion- I don't think you should resign over it. I'd suggest you email (for the record as opposed to verbally discussing it) your bosses who made the decision. State the facts as you were told and respectfully suggest they take a second look at the situation as you think more should be done. CC the head of HR to the same email. After that I'm not sure what else you can do (although I'm sure the torch and pitchfork crowd would blame you for not calling the cops on the alleged assault that you never saw).

I think you are right regarding the email ---- document, document, document, and protect myself at the same time.

Resigning: well, I do have to eat. And fund all the trips to football games the next few months. Resigning doesn't help in that regard, but it may be time to start thinking of an exit strategy (I always have kept my network strong).

Not to harp too much on JoePa, but most of my problems with 2001 are rooted in my belief that it has been fairly well proven that he knew about 1998 then. In my situation, this is a true bolt from the blue. Never would have predicted this. But it did happen.

Thanks.

 

[The Spin Meister]

Michnittlion- I don't think you should resign over it. I'd suggest you email (for the record as opposed to verbally discussing it) your bosses who made the decision. State the facts as you were told and respectfully suggest they take a second look at the situation as you think more should be done. CC the head of HR to the same email. After that I'm not sure what else you can do (although I'm sure the torch and pitchfork crowd would blame you for not calling the cops on the alleged assault that you never saw).

-----
This is what I was going to suggest. Get it all in writing, all the facts that you know. Then document to whom and how it was sent. If you email it, print out a copy and keep in your files as emails sometimes disappear or seem to get altered, or so I've heard. If you have a relationship with an attorney, have him/her retain a copy.

 

[N&B4PSU]

If the decision is a warning, for whatever reason (doesn't seem right to me--you've just set a precedent that this behavior is acceptable), it should be a zero tolerance warning and the person should be required to get counseling. You're lucky the stranglee doesn't want to press charges. Are you sure they haven't been compromised or intimidated in some way? If so, that could come back to bite the company in the ass later.

Absolutely my first concern is that the employee goes to an attorney and claims he was intimidated into letting the matter slide. good freaking luck.

my other questions ran to whether this was out of the blue or the strangler has always been a loose cannon.. was there provocation of any real sort.. is the stranglee a trouble-maker...

none of it excuses anything but it provides depth.

if it gets reported to HR it's on them to resolve the matter.. meaning legal calls the ball. considering the witnesses (and now it being in social media), they have little choice but to pack him.. and they better find a way to deal with the stranglee, too.

 

[91Joe95]

Your employee should not have a say in the company punishment, he's the VICTIM. If you don't report this to hr asap, enjoy your lawsuit. There is no place for workplace violence. If your company doesn't can the perp asap, you're facing a serious lawsuit as soon as the victim wises up.