I professional zoned him

Post Reply New Topic

Either way, he did wrong. It doesn't matter if he just wanted to meet over coffee or pull an all-night sex marathon. He hit on a customer, on company property, and on company time. In every reputable company I've ever worked for or with, that is an offense that usually results in immediate dismissal, if not only a few days off without pay to think about it.

The chap will have been fired by now, there would be too much of a chance that he could ruin the hotels reputation...
He took a risk with someone else's business and I have to agree that the outcome is not on you.

There is no way of knowing his intentions, but there were some negative signs, such as taking a risk with someone else's hard work to elevate himself.

I'm curious though, would you have accepted his offer of lunch if his gesture had been more modest (eg a free sandwich) and less grandiose (a hotel suite)?

Objection! Your Honor, defense is attempting to trick the witness into making an exculpatory conjecture...

Since he made her feel uncomfortable I agree that he should get in trouble if he's not allowed to comp rooms like that &/or if he's not allowed to flirt with customers like that. That said I don't think he should be treated like he was only looking for sex & would of rapped her if she wouldn't put out. From what I had understood from her post, I thought she didn't feel threatened by him until after she talked with her friend. We could not tell what his intentions were & it seemed like ST was making an assumption when there was no hard evidence to support it. She had also said how she didn't want to get him in trouble & then mentioned that she reported him which did NOT make sense to me. She explained some & it's a little clearer to me. I still don't think he should be accused of only being interested in her for sex unless there's something else that she needs to explain to me cuz I'm missing some key information if there is.

Sorry what rules are you talking about and what jurstriction? Normally fireable offences relate to contracts but also civil and criminal law. I was talking to the criminal threshold of sexual harassment not the civil threshold for being dismissed for sexual misconduct which is lower depending on jurisdiction.



How do you know this.? Do you knoe exactly how the upgrade was processed or what oppoval or authority was given for upgrades in general.


I didn't guilt trip anyone. That is her choice. I may need to re-read the thread to see if I missed something. Possibly I did.
I responded to what I understood from where I left off.


Sure.

That is a fair point, there are a few assumptions due to gaps in the information.

A man who would break corporate protocol will break other rules, as well.Clue card says, "You're An Aspie. Social perceptions may be difficult. Consult a friend".Such is the nature of harassment -- the perpetrators rarely ever leave any material evidence behind, and many have plausible deniability. In such causes, it's better to err on the side of safety and send the perpetrator packing.It doesn't have to make sense to you. Deal with it. I didn't want to send the guy who stole my camera to jail, but he broke the law. Even though I got my camera back, he still broke the law. It was the judge who sent him to jail, not me. It was the clerk's boss who fired him, not Summer.I have explained it to you. He hit on a customer, on company property, and on company time. If that isn't clear enough for you, then I don't know what would be.

Nitpicking aside, it was unprofessional behaviour and there's nothing nice about doing something for someone with ulterior motives.

Nick - nobody says he wanted to rape her , but there's nothing nice about expecting a reward (even just her company or attention) for that kind of gesture and it's especially inappropriate with strangers and in a professional setting to boot.

This is why I taught my kids to never, ever accept any "free" things or favours from people they aren't really close to.

Corporate rules for employee behavior. Most reputable companies that I've worked for or with have this thing called an Employee Handbook, in which acceptable and unacceptable behaviors are spelled out -- you may have seen one (I hope you've read it). One of the standard rules under 'Harassment' includes asking for a date from co-workers, clients, and/or customers, and especially on company property and on company time.Unless he was the manager, it is unlikely that he had the authority to comp an upgrade. Otherwise, ordinary clerks would be comping entire weekend stays for their friends and family. Every reputable company that I've worked with or for that has a comp policy requires authorization from a managment-level employee.Count on it. I've initiated action against subordinates for harassment and similar offenses.

Last edited by Fnord on 13 May 2019, 4:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I think this is the part that I had issue with, the assumption of sexual harassment as a justification for action.

As broadly as sexual harassment is defined in most places of employment, a cheerful "Good Morning" could be enough to accuse someone of sexual harassment. A typical definition might say, "Any unwanted and or unwelcome attention or behavior of a sexual nature", leaving the "sexual" part up to the interpretation of the victim -- too much or too little eye contact, for example.

A smart and well-trained HR group will know what to look for -- certain patterns of behavior, like giving someone a gift and "suggesting" to meet them someplace outside of working hours and away from the workplace.

I'd like to point out that, as a hotel employee, he very well might've had access to spare room keys. If he thought he a a chance, it might've lead to him entering your room without your approval.

For future reference, be very careful about accepting "gifts" from random men.

That's a more concise explanation. Thank you.Good deal! I told the same thing to my kids, and that if someone wanted to give them a gift, they should check with me first. You can never be certain whether someone is just being nice or trying to 'groom' them, so it's better to err on the side of their safety.

I learned that this is a rule that even men should follow -- Beware of Strangers Bearing Gifts. You never know what they may expect in return.

Again what exactly are you talking about here? You appear to be talking about either crime of harassment or a comoany code of conduct, and the motivation for such. Yet most of what you say isn't nessarily pertinent. However motivation only really relates to intent if they can demonstrate the harassing behaviour. But harassment could be proven or disproven independent of those factors.
Criminally that obviously depends on the actual law in said jurisdiction that happens to use the term "harassment"
However if we were to generalise repition is a fairly typical requirement of anti-harassment legislation for most clauses/categories. There is of course other legislation which regard to other interactions.

Well, the man in question is certainly idiot, that's for sure.