One of my bosses verbally attacked me...how to handle this

[TMifune]

I have proved which point? That he is sexist? Because that's the issue I was addressing. Oh and to use your logic . . nobody said anybody said what he said was ok.

 

The point you proved was that people care more about a salve for their immediate outrage than anything getting better. Nobody's proven anything about him being inherently sexist. He said one extremely rude thing. That single thing doesn't completely define him. I'm not even convinced that what he said was inherently sexist. It was definitely rude. I can completely see why she'd be offended. I can't see why she'd be threatened

 

I will admit that it's possible I misinterpreted this:

 

Grotesque, I hope he gets fired, no doubt that would add fuel to his misogynistic fire.

 

Which may have been a simple statement, but I took it to demonstrate that you'd rather he get fired and then behave worse (with more fuel on his misogynistic fire) than that he not get fired and behave better.

 

Which I think the statement:

 

I don't believe that a sexist or racist or homophobic person will learn their lesson, and I don't believe an apology is sufficient to ensure this and other victims of his misogynistic rants are protected from further abuse.

 

supports. One act is enough for you define him as inherently that one thing. And as you said, those people are irredeemable right? So of course you want punishment over any kind of balance or redemption because you don't believe redemption is even possible (which again proves my point). So the larger question is, if those people are completely irredeemable under your belief system, what do you do with them? Fire them? Blacklist them so they can never work and have to live on government assistance? Just kill them?

 

Everybody makes mistakes. Some people grow, some people learn. But those few that do are sooooo much less likely to when you place additional roadblocks in their way, when you seek retribution instead of understanding and balance, because you give them an easy scapegoat for their blame that allows them not to really look at themselves.

 

Threatening behaviour should not be tolerated under any circumstances and I get the feeling TMI that were the roles reversed you might be a little less forgiving of a woman who told a single father he ought to keep his d*ck in his pants etc etc sexist threatening rude remarks.

 

It may surprise you to know, that I think all people should give thought to the possibility of a a child being the outcome before engaging in any P in V sexual activity. It's the least you can do for your future children to think about whether the person you're planning on stumping is really going to be any kind of decent parent to them should that action bring them into existence.

 

That said, if we flip it around so this drunk person is a female is it still sexist? It's definitely still rude. Hence my classification. I don't think that the sex/gender of the participants should necessarily change that.

[TMifune]

There's actually some of wisdom in this, but I'm not sure to what extent it can be applied here. I do think, as a whole, we lean way too much on punitive measures to enact social change, which is the equivalent of putting a band-aid over gangrene.

 

Right, but once the mob has a target in sight, if you say anything other than "Let's get him!" then they paint you like you're some kind of advocate of his behavior. I'm tired of being painted like I support someone's statement because I don't support the way people counter that statement.

 

That said, I don't think the OP is obligated to look out for any kind of great social good and is entitled to act in her own individual interests which includes, simply, not having to be called a a sl*t in public, on the job, and by a workplace superior.

 

I honestly think seeking greater punitive measures against someone to soothe your outrage, without a mind toward balance and justice is a slow poison to the outraged person. I was suggesting she consider that for her good not society's.

[Doc Blaze]

The point you proved was that people care more about a salve for their immediate outrage than anything getting better. Nobody's proven anything about him being inherently sexist. He said one extremely rude thing. That single thing doesn't completely define him. I'm not even convinced that what he said was inherently sexist. It was definitely rude. I can completely see why she'd be offended. I can't see why she'd be threatened.

 

 

"You're a single mom, right?" I said "Yes, what does that have to do with a slot machine?" He said "So you're already bamboozled, and maybe if you'd kept your legs closed in the past, you wouldn't be a single mom and wouldn't be in your situation right now."

 

are you serious, just stop

[TMifune]

are you serious, just stop

 

100% But I really don't think most people are seeing my point beyond their assumption that I support this guy's statement....something I haven't said anywhere in this thread.

[BritterSweet]

I agree that the OP should report what happened and that what the guy said was inappropriate enough to be harassment and grounds for firing. I disagree that this is just a bloodthirsty torch-and-pitchfork mob mentality that will "harm the OP."

 

Letting this go with an informal (possibly insincere) apology that doesn't have to be kept in his records since it's not in writing will just give the message that this kind of workplace will not help its employees who get harassed and will not enforce the laws to protect them from it. Following protocol with regards to harassment and enforcing it with consequences is for the good of the business as well as targets of harassment.

 

And to answer a certain question, even though TMI probably intended for it to be rhetorical, yes a woman telling a man "you should have kept your package in your pants and maybe you wouldn't be a single father" is still sexist, still hostile, still considered sexual harassment, and still grounds for firing.

[happyfrank]

In post 22 she says it's been a hostile environment for a while . Whether that means him I'm not sure . However do not discount us as "emotional". That's condescending .We do have brains to think with . When the teacher forced the classroom bully to say sorry did the classroom bully say oh my gosh I've had horrible actions and I should stop them . Or did they go ahead with their usual crap ? Personally I think it is the second . I never had a bully say sorry to me and mean it , ever .

 

I think she means her job in general. Not him. This is the first time she had issue with boss from sister company.

[Somegirl613]

I sincerely thank everyone who took the time to respond to my post. I went to work last night and he was there, he pulled me aside and said he apologizes if he offended me. I told him I was extremely offended, he had no right to comment on my personal life or my sex life and to never speak to me that way again. I told him how humiliated I was that it was said in front of my customers and that I felt degraded and he knows nothing about my life, so it's not his place to have an opinion on it. I also told him that I was going to speak to HR just so that it's documented in case it does happen again. He's also been told to stay away from me for a while, and to not sit on my bar until I've had some time cool down. I'm going to HR Monday, there was no one there today, I just want them aware of the situation and for it to be on record if it happens again.

[Wiseman2]

Excellent. Glad you stood for yourself and spoke your mind. Do file a grievance with HR, they will decide what it is and if there is anything actionable there.

I also told him that I was going to speak to HR just so that it's documented in case it does happen again. He's also been told to stay away from me for a while, and to not sit on my bar until I've had some time cool down. I'm going to HR Monday, there was no one there today, I just want them aware of the situation and for it to be on record if it happens again.

[Somegirl613]

Thank you Wiseman.

[Seraphim]

That is good for you.

[TMifune]

And to answer a certain question, even though TMI probably intended for it to be rhetorical, yes a woman telling a man "you should have kept your package in your pants and maybe you wouldn't be a single father" is still sexist, still hostile, still considered sexual harassment, and still grounds for firing.

 

The rhetorical that I proposed was whether it would be the same if a drunk female made the same statement to the female OP.

[Seraphim]

The rhetorical that I proposed was whether it would be the same if a drunk female made the same statement to the female OP.

 

In that case the drunk woman should be reported too.

[Ms Darcy]

What he said was rude. It was not sexual harassment.

 

If you think it needs to be documented because it's likely to happen again, then by all means document it with HR. But if your motive is to see him punished because you were offended, then I think you're ultimately going to do more harm then good for yourself.

 

I'm not sure if it's correct to say that wasn't sexual harassment.

 

"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.

 

Harassment does not have to be of a sexual nature, however, and can include offensive remarks about a person’s sex. For example, it is illegal to harass a woman by making offensive comments about women in general.

 

Both victim and the harasser can be either a woman or a man, and the victim and harasser can be the same sex.

 

Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted).

 

The harasser can be the victim's supervisor, a supervisor in another area, a co-worker, or someone who is not an employee of the employer, such as a client or customer."

 

 

[Ms Darcy]

Once was already one time too many.

 

I think this is the truth. There is no way to change everyone's behavior. But consequences can go a long way to change THIS guy's behavior. Honestly, if it was within the appropriate labor laws, and was independently confirmed that these statements were accurate, I would fire that guy.

[thornz]

The point you proved was that people care more about a salve for their immediate outrage than anything getting better. Nobody's proven anything about him being inherently sexist. He said one extremely rude thing. That single thing doesn't completely define him. I'm not even convinced that what he said was inherently sexist. It was definitely rude. I can completely see why she'd be offended. I can't see why she'd be threatened

 

I will admit that it's possible I misinterpreted this:

 

 

 

Which may have been a simple statement, but I took it to demonstrate that you'd rather he get fired and then behave worse (with more fuel on his misogynistic fire) than that he not get fired and behave better.

 

Which I think the statement:

 

 

 

supports. One act is enough for you define him as inherently that one thing. And as you said, those people are irredeemable right? So of course you want punishment over any kind of balance or redemption because you don't believe redemption is even possible (which again proves my point). So the larger question is, if those people are completely irredeemable under your belief system, what do you do with them? Fire them? Blacklist them so they can never work and have to live on government assistance? Just kill them?

 

Everybody makes mistakes. Some people grow, some people learn. But those few that do are sooooo much less likely to when you place additional roadblocks in their way, when you seek retribution instead of understanding and balance, because you give them an easy scapegoat for their blame that allows them not to really look at themselves.

 

 

 

It may surprise you to know, that I think all people should give thought to the possibility of a a child being the outcome before engaging in any P in V sexual activity. It's the least you can do for your future children to think about whether the person you're planning on stumping is really going to be any kind of decent parent to them should that action bring them into existence.

 

That said, if we flip it around so this drunk person is a female is it still sexist? It's definitely still rude. Hence my classification. I don't think that the sex/gender of the participants should necessarily change that.

 

Actually you are proving that despite my stating in very plain terms that I hoped he was fired in order to protect the OP and others in that environment, you continue to push this agenda of everybody being so outraged and wanting to see him punished.

 

I couldn't give a flying f*ck about the "boss" being punished, I care about him being removed from the environment to protect staff and customers from this kind of disgusting display.

 

The fact that despite my clarification you are still trying to put words in my mouth to support your argument is seriously irritating.

 

Yes his behaviour is sexual harassment as demonstrated by various posts relating to legal definitions of sexual harassment!

[annie24]

I would go to HR. Though he was technically a "customer" at the time, he's still your higher up and shouldn't be speaking to you (or anyone!) like that. Especially not at the work place. I think you should report him to HR because I doubt you are the first person he has berated.

[annie24]

There's actually some of wisdom in this, but I'm not sure to what extent it can be applied here. I do think, as a whole, we lean way too much on punitive measures to enact social change, which is the equivalent of putting a band-aid over gangrene.

 

That said, I don't think the OP is obligated to look out for any kind of great social good and is entitled to act in her own individual interests which includes, simply, not having to be called a a sl*t in public, on the job, and by a workplace superior.

 

I don't know the leniency this workplace has towards such incidents, but I'd hate for it to be the type to allow two strikes and for the guy to get away with a repeat occurrence because the OP failed to file a formal report the first time it happened. Once was already one time too many.

 

Not at OP's workplace, but I heard from a friend about our previous workplace what happened. She was a foreign student and there was an older man, a coworker, who was making a lot of sexual comments towards her that made her feel really uncomfortable. She finally lashed out at him and told him to knock it off forever, and he did. She didn't take it to their supervisor because she was afraid as she was here on a student visa and didn't want to "rock the boat." She graduated, moved on, and never worried about him again. A few years later, she got a call from her old boss. The boss asked if the man had ever sexually harassed her. She she admitted he had, but didn't report it because she was afraid of what might happen to her. Well, the guy started harassing the new next young woman who started working there and she filed a formal complaint. However, because it was a "first offense," the boss could not fire him. The boss told my friend she wished she had just come forward so she could have fired him. Instead, she was stuck with him until that team had to move locations and sign new contracts, and he simply wasn't offered a new contract.

 

So I guess that the moral here is to document it - because 1) it might give him the wake up call he needs - to stop drinking and berating coworkers!! and 2) it might help the next woman or man he does this to.

[Cheetarah]

Somewhat related to Annie's story, I experienced some sexual harassment(as well as racial) in the workplace a long time ago. I DID talk with HR about it, and even called the EEOC to be advised. HR handled it very poorly by basing giving it the brush off. I wound up quitting. Actually, I didn't quit - I just didn't show up anymore which led to my termination, naturally.

 

About a year later they contacted me because this same person had been caught exposing himself on the freight elevators to fellow coworkers. They wanted me to A) Offer me my job back, and B). Prod me to see if I would be willing to testify in the suit brought against him.

 

My response was to hang up on them. I probably should have testified, but in my head at the time I was really upset that I had been given a brush off and I figured they had audio/video documentation of his elevator business so I didn't do it.

 

I'm glad these things are taken more seriously now, and I'm really sad that this man had to expose himself on video before anyone took action. HR could not rug sweep at that point, and I am very confident I wasn't the first person to be on the receiving end of his harassment. So yeah..I am very glad we have these measures in place.

[Seraphim]

Sexual harassment is so extensive against women. I suffered sexual harassment by FOUR different individuals in just one work place. It was a factor in my quitting as well . The union just kept protecting these people . Between sexual-harassment and being discriminated against for medical factors I just drove away one day. Two weeks later I brought them back their security pass and said F you.

[TMifune]

I couldn't give a flying f*ck about the "boss" being punished, I care about him being removed from the environment to protect staff and customers from this kind of disgusting display.

 

If that's the case, aren't there other remedies short of firing that could achieve this goal? Why prejudice firing over every other possible course of action?

 

The fact that despite my clarification you are still trying to put words in my mouth to support your argument is seriously irritating.

 

What I offered was an explanation of my reasoning. If you see that as "putting words in your mouth" I doubt there's any communication to be found between us.

[superfan]

Sexual harassment is so extensive against women. I suffered sexual harassment by FOUR different individuals in just one work place. It was a factor in my quitting as well . The union just kept protecting these people . Between sexual-harassment and being discriminated against for medical factors I just drove away one day. Two weeks later I brought them back their security pass and said F you.

 

Maybe it's because women experience harassment of this kind on such a massive level that is part of why it isn't taken seriously. It's easier to be dismissive of it and try to "protect the harasser's job" then it is to admit that these things are ACTUALLY harassment. Hopefully our culture is going in a more positive direction as more and more people realize this behavior is unacceptable.

 

Well, almost everybody.

[midnightdeirdre]

OP, have you heard of ruindays.com ? You should send that boss one of the anonymous pranks that site offers---I sent my old 6th grade science teacher an exploding glitter tube! Like your boss, he embarrassed me once in class and was very hard on 12-year olds. He even once claimed that, "Spelling is a waste of time, a waste of energy..." So I also sent him an exploding glitter card, complete with a personal message: "To Mr. Ball: Spelling rules, science drools."

I guess people are right when they say children are the future.