344
(Audio of the) Mandatory meeting after Madison's departure from LMG.
(www.reddit.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
344 points (94.3% liked)
Linus Tech Tips
3526 readers
8 users here now
~~⚠️ De-clickbait-ify the youtube titles or your post will be removed!~~
~~Floatplane titles are perfectly fine.~~
~~LTT/LMG community. Brought to you by ******... Actually, no, not this time. This time it's brought to you by Lemmy, the open communities and free and open source software!~~
~~If you post videos from Youtube/LTT, please please un-clickbait the titles. (You can use the title from https://nitter.net/LTTtranslator/ but it doesn't seem to have been updated in quite some while...)~~
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
There is nothing in this audio recording that I find particularly concerning other than James' comment. It sounds just like a standard meeting that I would have had during a morning brief. Knowing the context of James' comment was directed at Linus, who is a close friend, probably smirked and kept on going.
When you add the context of sexual harassment, it doesn't look good and is an inappropriately timed joke. However, nothing about the meeting indicates that it was about sexual harassment in particular from listening to the audio. If I missed it, please inform me.
Maybe it is because I heard these types of conversations frequently, it doesn't seem like a big deal. They even say you can contact a manager, Linus or Yvonne, or the anonymous hotline. So people have options if they have a problem in particular with leadership.
I am not dismissing that sexual harassment may have taken place, but from the context from the audio given, it doesn't appear anyone speaking knows about it.
It does reinforce Madison's claim that they want to keep everything verbal, rather than put things on record with HR.
This is a big red flag already. A proper record is needed by any good and fair company.
There is even more concerning part where Linus discussed the order of complaints - first the immediate manager, then Linux/Yvonne, and the only third party HR.
This is big no no for any reputable company. If you feel harassed, you generally go to HR directly, you don't give managers any information.
Such managers are not equipped with HR related situations and by saying your piece to more people, you're ensuring that people you complaint about knows that you're making a complaint and they can use their power and sway you.
This is biggest issue for me in the video which essentially nullified the existence of HR in LMG if they are this far off to employees.
That's not how it works anywhere I've worked, including some very large companies. As a manager, my team Is supposed to come to me first unless they are uncomfortable doing so.
I'm not 100% sure about the companies you worked with, but I've to go through a lot of training videos in all my companies I worked with. One theme is consistent - you go to your manager when you've work related challenge, but as soon as it comes to sexual harassment, managers are not expected to be equipped in such things and thus approaching the right authority is utmost required.
Isn't timing of this recording when company was at 50 people? Think they haven't gotten to full HR services yet, just HR for payroll and admin. Linus and Yvonne probablyb still handled staff issues directly. Not ideal, but not unexpected.
Same thoughts here, I was hoping it'd be some slam dunk evidence to support the stuff we've heard but if anything it just makes the waters even murkier. There's a 3rd party HR firm involved that she could have gone to? She said only Linuses wife was the HR there.
The audio also indicated that many staff members did not know about the anonymous option
They did say they would post it "on general chat" to make everyone aware of it...
Probably that Linus' wife managed the relationship with the 3rd party HR. It could be that the 3rd party HR were mainly used for payroll and tax purposes. If they had limited scope, then likely they were not functioning as a real HR department