HR Interviewing People About Co-worker's "jokes"

[Aquapoon]

A male co-worker had made some inappropriate jokes in the office. Some were of a crude, sexual nature with a female employee.

 

It appears someone who has witnessed some of this has said something to HR. Some employees have been called in and asked specific questions about some of these incidents.

 

What is the possible fallout from this. Can the offending employee be fired? Can he get away with a warning? Does it make a difference who complained? If he keeps his job, then what? Thanks for any input.

[CC12]

I'd like some more info.

 

What kind of inappropriate, crude, sexual, jokes were made? What were the jokes?

 

What exactly is your role in this? How are you involved? Are you the one who made the inappropriate jokes?

[TAV]

It will definitely go on his record and the rest is up to company policy.

 

As a woman I'm just glad your HR dept. is taking this seriously. I work with a lot of men and I know one or two with a peculiar sense of humour too. I'm very direct and have told them to their face they are crossing boundaries. That usually helps.

 

I would not report them unless they made me feel unsafe or kept up the rude remarks despite my warnings. I had a guy some 5 yrs ago who would turn every business meeting into an occasion to comment on my looks. He kept doing it over and over again, despite my nudges and one time he put his arm around me when we were walking the corridor. That is when I reported him to my boss. His own boss gave him a warning and took him off the account we were working on.

 

When I transferred to a different dept. a few years later I ran into him again. He behaved with me but when my co-worker told me that she felt uncomfortable around him because he had started massaging her shoulders out of the blue one day, we both went to our manager and I also told him about the history I had with this guy.

 

He left the company soon after. I'm not sure if this was forced or not.

 

I'd like to stress that most men I work with are respectful but there are bad eggs everywhere it seems. I don't think women should have to put up with this. I always wonder how these men would feel if someone approached their wife, daughter or mother in the same manner.

[UpwardForward]

I'd like some more info.

 

What kind of inappropriate, crude, sexual, jokes were made? What were the jokes?

 

What exactly is your role in this? How are you involved? Are you the one who made the inappropriate jokes?

 

What difference does it make.

 

Whether it be jokes or people living to make sexual double meanings out of everything.

 

It has no business in the workplace.

[Got it]

Yes your co-worker could be terminated over it. Mostly his comments broke their sexual harassment policy at am minimum. I am shocked how blase people are in the workplace. I hope people realize that even if the person you are making these comments to is okay with it, that it is done in the presence of another, the third party can take offense and file a legitimate complaint.

 

For example, we had an issue where a male and a female were in the workplace and having a very racy and detailed conversation on what they would do to each other and what they liked in regards to sex in general. A third party was working near them and had to listen to them. Third party filed a complaint and the male and the female were terminated.

 

My rule of thumb, in the workplace, run through all conversations through your head and if it isn't something you would say in front of your mother and grandmother then keep your mouth shut.

[Aquapoon]

...I hope people realize that even if the person you are making these comments to is okay with it, that it is done in the presence of another, the third party can take offense and file a legitimate complaint.

 

Yes, this is what has happened in this case.

 

FWIW, I am not the offending employee. Trust me when I say his jokes more than crossed the line of what is appropriate workplace behavior. They were not merely comments, but involved visual "embellishment".

 

As far as I know, the woman involved has not been interviewed. If HR is doing a thorough investigation, don't others think this would happen?

 

Also, how many incidents and how much corroborating evidence is needed to justify termination? One incident, or multiple incidents? The word of one person? Five people? Does everyone's stories need to jibe 75%? 100%?

 

I'm just trying to gain insight. I've never been exposed to this process and am unfamiliar with the details and legalities involved.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Aquapoon

[pink_sugar]

A lot of times the offending employee will be suspended pending investigation. This actually happened to a friend of mine who was falsely accused. She ended up just quitting on the spot because it was likely she could have been fired anyways and she didn't want to deal with the humiliation.

[anne1707]

The woman may not have been interviewed along with other employees as she is probably the one who made the initial complaint and has therefore already made a statement to HR

[Art_Critic]

Just because a complaint was filed doesn't mean the person will be fired, they will investigate and then make a determination if what was said deserves nothing being done, a slap on the wrist, a written warning or a firing.

 

I would guess if they said something out of line and a complaint was filed that a written warning is what will take place if this was their first offense.

[USMCHokie]

I'm so glad I work in the environment I work in...

[Aquapoon]

The woman may not have been interviewed along with other employees as she is probably the one who made the initial complaint and has therefore already made a statement to HR

 

While this could be possible, a different person in the dept seems to be the "consensus pick" as the one who complained to HR.

 

 

Just because a complaint was filed doesn't mean the person will be fired, they will investigate and then make a determination if what was said deserves nothing being done, a slap on the wrist, a written warning or a firing.

 

I would guess if they said something out of line and a complaint was filed that a written warning is what will take place if this was their first offense.

 

Can anyone comment on this? The other position would be that the female could sue the company for sexual harassment. Subjecting his employer to such liability would be grounds for termination of the offending employee.

 

I don't know the answer. Just trying to learn which side of this is more likely.

[Got it]

While this could be possible, a different person in the dept seems to be the "consensus pick" as the one who complained to HR.

 

 

 

 

Can anyone comment on this? The other position would be that the female could sue the company for sexual harassment. Subjecting his employer to such liability would be grounds for termination of the offending employee.

 

I don't know the answer. Just trying to learn which side of this is more likely.

 

Does it matter who has been interviewed and why? I would not expect to be able to rely on gossip to tell me what is happening in an investigation. If you are not the offending party I would concentrate on my job and move forward.

 

The normal/usual protocol is to have a complaint filed either the offended or a witness. HR will talk to them and then have them write their statement recapping what they told HR. They will be asked who else they think HR should speak to, and why they may be witness, offended, offender. HR will follow the leads and speak to those parties following the same process, they will speak to any other parties suggested. HR may circle around and re-interview a party if needed. HR will interview the offender and may suspend pending investigation. HR will then wrap up their investigation, put together their findings and present to necessary parties, i.e. head of HR, specific individuals in management, and/or executives, etc. A decision is made and executed. Many companies will take a very firm stand on these things and find it "easier" to just terminate. They have zero tolerance policy.

 

Not all cases of inappropriate behavior would warrant termination. Also there is criteria to constitute sexual harassment. If you wan to learn more about harassment, protected characteristics, etc. please go to EEOC Home Page for more information. I am sure your HR department can also counsel you in a general sense on HR 101. Your company handbook is also a good resource.

[pink_sugar]

Does it matter who has been interviewed and why? I would not expect to be able to rely on gossip to tell me what is happening in an investigation. If you are not the offending party I would concentrate on my job and move forward.

 

The normal/usual protocol is to have a complaint filed either the offended or a witness. HR will talk to them and then have them write their statement recapping what they told HR. They will be asked who else they think HR should speak to, and why they may be witness, offended, offender. HR will follow the leads and speak to those parties following the same process, they will speak to any other parties suggested. HR may circle around and re-interview a party if needed. HR will interview the offender and may suspend pending investigation. HR will then wrap up their investigation, put together their findings and present to necessary parties, i.e. head of HR, specific individuals in management, and/or executives, etc. A decision is made and executed. Many companies will take a very firm stand on these things and find it "easier" to just terminate. They have zero tolerance policy.

 

Not all cases of inappropriate behavior would warrant termination. Also there is criteria to constitute sexual harassment. If you wan to learn more about harassment, protected characteristics, etc. please go to EEOC Home Page for more information. I am sure your HR department can also counsel you in a general sense on HR 101. Your company handbook is also a good resource.

 

This. It seems suspension pending investigation is most likely and whether or not they are terminated depends on the results. Most companies have a zero tolerance policy against sexual harassment and that means verbal or written warnings will be bypassed.

[Aquapoon]

Does it matter who has been interviewed and why? I would not expect to be able to rely on gossip to tell me what is happening in an investigation. If you are not the offending party I would concentrate on my job and move forward.

 

The normal/usual protocol is to have a complaint filed either the offended or a witness. HR will talk to them and then have them write their statement recapping what they told HR. They will be asked who else they think HR should speak to, and why they may be witness, offended, offender. HR will follow the leads and speak to those parties following the same process, they will speak to any other parties suggested. HR may circle around and re-interview a party if needed. HR will interview the offender and may suspend pending investigation. HR will then wrap up their investigation, put together their findings and present to necessary parties, i.e. head of HR, specific individuals in management, and/or executives, etc. A decision is made and executed. Many companies will take a very firm stand on these things and find it "easier" to just terminate. They have zero tolerance policy.

 

Not all cases of inappropriate behavior would warrant termination. Also there is criteria to constitute sexual harassment. If you wan to learn more about harassment, protected characteristics, etc. please go to EEOC Home Page for more information. I am sure your HR department can also counsel you in a general sense on HR 101. Your company handbook is also a good resource.

 

Thanks for breaking it down. This is the kind of info I've been seeking.

 

I working very closely with those affected by this situation. The outcome will have a significant impact of many of us.

 

Edit - btw, based on the time between interviews that I know of, the investigation has been going on for over a week. There has yet to be any suspension.

Edited July 28, 2014 by Aquapoon

[CC12]

What difference does it make.

 

Whether it be jokes or people living to make sexual double meanings out of everything.

 

It has no business in the workplace.

 

Did you think I was implying that it was okay to make sexual jokes in the workplace? I wasn't.

 

OP, is there any reason you can't do what "Got it" suggested here?

 

If you are not the offending party I would concentrate on my job and move forward.

 

I realize you work closely with these people and some of them might be your friends, but be very careful about getting involved in this. I wouldn't even discuss it with anyone at work anymore.

[Got it]

Thanks for breaking it down. This is the kind of info I've been seeking.

 

I working very closely with those affected by this situation. The outcome will have a significant impact of many of us.

 

Edit - btw, based on the time between interviews that I know of, the investigation has been going on for over a week. There has yet to be any suspension.

 

Unless you are the manager of those involved it is not your primary concern. Management will have that figured out as soon as they can. You are taking on far more responsibility than you need to. If you are management then you need to speak to your next level to find out what you need to do. If you have concerns, talk to your direct supervisor to go over your concerns.

 

Don't micromanage HR's investigation. Just let it happen and go from there. If you have concerns talk to them directly. Every company does things differently and like I said before not ever investigation warrants suspension.

[Aquapoon]

Unless you are the manager of those involved it is not your primary concern. Management will have that figured out as soon as they can. You are taking on far more responsibility than you need to. If you are management then you need to speak to your next level to find out what you need to do. If you have concerns, talk to your direct supervisor to go over your concerns.

 

Don't micromanage HR's investigation. Just let it happen and go from there. If you have concerns talk to them directly. Every company does things differently and like I said before not ever investigation warrants suspension.

 

You're reading into it too much. Just letting it happen is exactly what I'm doing. I just wanted to gain a better understanding of the general process in such situations.

[Emilia]

Jesus, at my work we sleep with each other. Making inappropriate jokes is the last thing anyone worries about.

[Got it]

You're reading into it too much. Just letting it happen is exactly what I'm doing. I just wanted to gain a better understanding of the general process in such situations.

 

What I am saying, because most of it is confidential, watching from the outside and trying to assess what is going on is very difficult. Cases vary, company's approaches vary, etc. As long as they are following state and federal laws then then they may vary on how they are approaching things.

 

But really HR can best advise you on this specific case (if they will advise you). There are so many variances that it is hard for us to tell you outside of a generic approach.