Mixing
Manager wants to hire an employee he's sleeping with, against the advice of his team leaders
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
8
down vote
favorite
Note: Although this is written in the first person, I am relaying it from a person who wants to remain anonymous. I can ask for clarification if needed but no identifying details will be provided.
Background
I'm leaving a non-management position with a nonprofit at the end of the month. The nonprofit operates at several sites within the region and my position reports directly to the manager of the site. Typically, he and his team leaders would interview and score candidates for this position and he would make the final selection as the direct supervisor.
One of the candidates to replace me is a co-worker (and friend) who we all generally expected to take this position at some point. She has the skills and temperament for it and honestly would hardly need to be trained in anything besides the paperwork. The problem is that recently it's become clear both to myself and to the team leaders—and probably most of the office, honestly—that she and the site manager are having an extramarital affair.
Given the circumstances, the team leaders and I all agree that it would be completely unethical for him to directly supervise her (or to be involved in hiring her—basically giving her a promotion, in that it has more responsibility and pay).
The reaction so far
The team leaders have approached him directly and emphatically about this being a problem. He confirmed their suspicions but didn't seem to take their concerns seriously, saying he would take the fall if word got out. We are all surprised and upset because we have always known him as a very competent and ethical manager. This is far from the reaction we would expect, based on having worked with him for years.
As some sort of compromise, he asked me to replace him on the interview committee. He didn't come right out and say why but he was hinting, and I told him that I know what's going on and she should look for another job, but didn't elaborate.
We interviewed three candidates earlier this week. I tried to be totally objective in scoring their responses to the interview questions. While my co-worker did very well, an internal candidate from another site actually gave better responses and scored higher in my final accounting.
Unfortunately, the team leaders are so upset by what's going on that they decided to rate all of the candidates equally, to force our manager to take responsibility for making an ethical decision. Then when we discussed the candidates and I let them know my ratings, the team leaders rigged their scores so that my co-worker and the other internal candidate would be tied anyway.
The other candidate has a glowing reference from her manager at one of our other sites and very good performance metrics. Yesterday my manager said he was leaning toward the other candidate, but today he said he's decided to offer the job to my co-worker. He said there are "other reasons" for her to have it.
My problem
Everything about this is frustrating but I'm most unhappy with my manager's behavior. Even though I'm leaving at the end of the month, I don't want the site to suffer the consequences of his bad decisions down the road. He's even said that if he's found out, he'll claim that he coerced our coworker to keep her from getting in trouble, which is insane and maybe even criminal.
How can I decide whether to confront him about his unethical behavior, or just stay silent? What potential consequences are important for me to consider, if I'm not going to be working there much longer?
I've talked with the co-worker and I don't think she's really been considering the potential consequences either. They're both going through divorces so it's understandable they aren't thinking that clearly. Nobody has talked to upper management or the company lawyer about this so far although a confidante of mine has suggested going to the lawyer. I don't want to rat him out to the lawyers without confronting him, either. I don't think I'm at risk because I've behaved ethically, I have absolutely no authority in this position and I'm not going to be here for long. He already gave me a glowing reference for the job I'm leaving to take and I don't think he'd retaliate in the future.
If I have a goal here, it's to try to defuse the situation and prevent him from making some really bad choices that could drive away a lot of employees and seriously impact the entire program. At least half of the people in the office know about their relationship and the position and nobody is happy about it. The team leaders are really upset and have let him know but they don't seem to be able to solve it. Can I do anything? Should I do anything? I have never been in this type of situation before.
interviewing ethics promotion conflict manager
asked Aug 14 '15 at 22:49
Air
2,13921317
 |Â
show 8 more comments
up vote
8
down vote
favorite
Note: Although this is written in the first person, I am relaying it from a person who wants to remain anonymous. I can ask for clarification if needed but no identifying details will be provided.
Background
I'm leaving a non-management position with a nonprofit at the end of the month. The nonprofit operates at several sites within the region and my position reports directly to the manager of the site. Typically, he and his team leaders would interview and score candidates for this position and he would make the final selection as the direct supervisor.
One of the candidates to replace me is a co-worker (and friend) who we all generally expected to take this position at some point. She has the skills and temperament for it and honestly would hardly need to be trained in anything besides the paperwork. The problem is that recently it's become clear both to myself and to the team leaders—and probably most of the office, honestly—that she and the site manager are having an extramarital affair.
Given the circumstances, the team leaders and I all agree that it would be completely unethical for him to directly supervise her (or to be involved in hiring her—basically giving her a promotion, in that it has more responsibility and pay).
The reaction so far
The team leaders have approached him directly and emphatically about this being a problem. He confirmed their suspicions but didn't seem to take their concerns seriously, saying he would take the fall if word got out. We are all surprised and upset because we have always known him as a very competent and ethical manager. This is far from the reaction we would expect, based on having worked with him for years.
As some sort of compromise, he asked me to replace him on the interview committee. He didn't come right out and say why but he was hinting, and I told him that I know what's going on and she should look for another job, but didn't elaborate.
We interviewed three candidates earlier this week. I tried to be totally objective in scoring their responses to the interview questions. While my co-worker did very well, an internal candidate from another site actually gave better responses and scored higher in my final accounting.
Unfortunately, the team leaders are so upset by what's going on that they decided to rate all of the candidates equally, to force our manager to take responsibility for making an ethical decision. Then when we discussed the candidates and I let them know my ratings, the team leaders rigged their scores so that my co-worker and the other internal candidate would be tied anyway.
The other candidate has a glowing reference from her manager at one of our other sites and very good performance metrics. Yesterday my manager said he was leaning toward the other candidate, but today he said he's decided to offer the job to my co-worker. He said there are "other reasons" for her to have it.
My problem
Everything about this is frustrating but I'm most unhappy with my manager's behavior. Even though I'm leaving at the end of the month, I don't want the site to suffer the consequences of his bad decisions down the road. He's even said that if he's found out, he'll claim that he coerced our coworker to keep her from getting in trouble, which is insane and maybe even criminal.
How can I decide whether to confront him about his unethical behavior, or just stay silent? What potential consequences are important for me to consider, if I'm not going to be working there much longer?
I've talked with the co-worker and I don't think she's really been considering the potential consequences either. They're both going through divorces so it's understandable they aren't thinking that clearly. Nobody has talked to upper management or the company lawyer about this so far although a confidante of mine has suggested going to the lawyer. I don't want to rat him out to the lawyers without confronting him, either. I don't think I'm at risk because I've behaved ethically, I have absolutely no authority in this position and I'm not going to be here for long. He already gave me a glowing reference for the job I'm leaving to take and I don't think he'd retaliate in the future.
If I have a goal here, it's to try to defuse the situation and prevent him from making some really bad choices that could drive away a lot of employees and seriously impact the entire program. At least half of the people in the office know about their relationship and the position and nobody is happy about it. The team leaders are really upset and have let him know but they don't seem to be able to solve it. Can I do anything? Should I do anything? I have never been in this type of situation before.
interviewing ethics promotion conflict manager
asked Aug 14 '15 at 22:49
Air
2,13921317
1
Please provide the Country?
– samarasa
Aug 14 '15 at 22:55
10
If your goal is to defuse the situation, stop fanning the flames. Either the candidate is competent or not. Either the manager can manage them fairly or not. Those are legitimate business issues and time will tell. What they're doing outside the office, and how much the company will punish them if it is forced to notice the situation, is thankfully not your problem.
– keshlam
Aug 15 '15 at 1:07
3
While the advice to the manager and the intended employee would be a very strong "don't do it, it will end up a mess", especially since it is a bit of a mess already, it's not something that I would try hard to solve during my last month of work. The problem is the manager's bosses job to solve, not yours.
– gnasher729
Aug 15 '15 at 12:38
7
The problem doesn't seem to be only your managers but also the team leaders. Forcing someone who has a conflict of interest to make a decision is bad and an ethical lapse at their part.
– Christian
Aug 15 '15 at 13:43
1
@Myles I can ask for details, but is that really useful and appropriate content for a problem statement? I know that the tl;dr is that the site turned into a train wreck and most of the management staff quit or was reassigned.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 18:56
 |Â
show 8 more comments
up vote
8
down vote
favorite
up vote
8
down vote
favorite
Note: Although this is written in the first person, I am relaying it from a person who wants to remain anonymous. I can ask for clarification if needed but no identifying details will be provided.
Background
I'm leaving a non-management position with a nonprofit at the end of the month. The nonprofit operates at several sites within the region and my position reports directly to the manager of the site. Typically, he and his team leaders would interview and score candidates for this position and he would make the final selection as the direct supervisor.
One of the candidates to replace me is a co-worker (and friend) who we all generally expected to take this position at some point. She has the skills and temperament for it and honestly would hardly need to be trained in anything besides the paperwork. The problem is that recently it's become clear both to myself and to the team leaders—and probably most of the office, honestly—that she and the site manager are having an extramarital affair.
Given the circumstances, the team leaders and I all agree that it would be completely unethical for him to directly supervise her (or to be involved in hiring her—basically giving her a promotion, in that it has more responsibility and pay).
The reaction so far
The team leaders have approached him directly and emphatically about this being a problem. He confirmed their suspicions but didn't seem to take their concerns seriously, saying he would take the fall if word got out. We are all surprised and upset because we have always known him as a very competent and ethical manager. This is far from the reaction we would expect, based on having worked with him for years.
As some sort of compromise, he asked me to replace him on the interview committee. He didn't come right out and say why but he was hinting, and I told him that I know what's going on and she should look for another job, but didn't elaborate.
We interviewed three candidates earlier this week. I tried to be totally objective in scoring their responses to the interview questions. While my co-worker did very well, an internal candidate from another site actually gave better responses and scored higher in my final accounting.
Unfortunately, the team leaders are so upset by what's going on that they decided to rate all of the candidates equally, to force our manager to take responsibility for making an ethical decision. Then when we discussed the candidates and I let them know my ratings, the team leaders rigged their scores so that my co-worker and the other internal candidate would be tied anyway.
The other candidate has a glowing reference from her manager at one of our other sites and very good performance metrics. Yesterday my manager said he was leaning toward the other candidate, but today he said he's decided to offer the job to my co-worker. He said there are "other reasons" for her to have it.
My problem
Everything about this is frustrating but I'm most unhappy with my manager's behavior. Even though I'm leaving at the end of the month, I don't want the site to suffer the consequences of his bad decisions down the road. He's even said that if he's found out, he'll claim that he coerced our coworker to keep her from getting in trouble, which is insane and maybe even criminal.
How can I decide whether to confront him about his unethical behavior, or just stay silent? What potential consequences are important for me to consider, if I'm not going to be working there much longer?
I've talked with the co-worker and I don't think she's really been considering the potential consequences either. They're both going through divorces so it's understandable they aren't thinking that clearly. Nobody has talked to upper management or the company lawyer about this so far although a confidante of mine has suggested going to the lawyer. I don't want to rat him out to the lawyers without confronting him, either. I don't think I'm at risk because I've behaved ethically, I have absolutely no authority in this position and I'm not going to be here for long. He already gave me a glowing reference for the job I'm leaving to take and I don't think he'd retaliate in the future.
If I have a goal here, it's to try to defuse the situation and prevent him from making some really bad choices that could drive away a lot of employees and seriously impact the entire program. At least half of the people in the office know about their relationship and the position and nobody is happy about it. The team leaders are really upset and have let him know but they don't seem to be able to solve it. Can I do anything? Should I do anything? I have never been in this type of situation before.
interviewing ethics promotion conflict manager
asked Aug 14 '15 at 22:49
Air
2,13921317
Note: Although this is written in the first person, I am relaying it from a person who wants to remain anonymous. I can ask for clarification if needed but no identifying details will be provided.
Background
I'm leaving a non-management position with a nonprofit at the end of the month. The nonprofit operates at several sites within the region and my position reports directly to the manager of the site. Typically, he and his team leaders would interview and score candidates for this position and he would make the final selection as the direct supervisor.
One of the candidates to replace me is a co-worker (and friend) who we all generally expected to take this position at some point. She has the skills and temperament for it and honestly would hardly need to be trained in anything besides the paperwork. The problem is that recently it's become clear both to myself and to the team leaders—and probably most of the office, honestly—that she and the site manager are having an extramarital affair.
Given the circumstances, the team leaders and I all agree that it would be completely unethical for him to directly supervise her (or to be involved in hiring her—basically giving her a promotion, in that it has more responsibility and pay).
The reaction so far
The team leaders have approached him directly and emphatically about this being a problem. He confirmed their suspicions but didn't seem to take their concerns seriously, saying he would take the fall if word got out. We are all surprised and upset because we have always known him as a very competent and ethical manager. This is far from the reaction we would expect, based on having worked with him for years.
As some sort of compromise, he asked me to replace him on the interview committee. He didn't come right out and say why but he was hinting, and I told him that I know what's going on and she should look for another job, but didn't elaborate.
We interviewed three candidates earlier this week. I tried to be totally objective in scoring their responses to the interview questions. While my co-worker did very well, an internal candidate from another site actually gave better responses and scored higher in my final accounting.
Unfortunately, the team leaders are so upset by what's going on that they decided to rate all of the candidates equally, to force our manager to take responsibility for making an ethical decision. Then when we discussed the candidates and I let them know my ratings, the team leaders rigged their scores so that my co-worker and the other internal candidate would be tied anyway.
The other candidate has a glowing reference from her manager at one of our other sites and very good performance metrics. Yesterday my manager said he was leaning toward the other candidate, but today he said he's decided to offer the job to my co-worker. He said there are "other reasons" for her to have it.
My problem
Everything about this is frustrating but I'm most unhappy with my manager's behavior. Even though I'm leaving at the end of the month, I don't want the site to suffer the consequences of his bad decisions down the road. He's even said that if he's found out, he'll claim that he coerced our coworker to keep her from getting in trouble, which is insane and maybe even criminal.
How can I decide whether to confront him about his unethical behavior, or just stay silent? What potential consequences are important for me to consider, if I'm not going to be working there much longer?
I've talked with the co-worker and I don't think she's really been considering the potential consequences either. They're both going through divorces so it's understandable they aren't thinking that clearly. Nobody has talked to upper management or the company lawyer about this so far although a confidante of mine has suggested going to the lawyer. I don't want to rat him out to the lawyers without confronting him, either. I don't think I'm at risk because I've behaved ethically, I have absolutely no authority in this position and I'm not going to be here for long. He already gave me a glowing reference for the job I'm leaving to take and I don't think he'd retaliate in the future.
If I have a goal here, it's to try to defuse the situation and prevent him from making some really bad choices that could drive away a lot of employees and seriously impact the entire program. At least half of the people in the office know about their relationship and the position and nobody is happy about it. The team leaders are really upset and have let him know but they don't seem to be able to solve it. Can I do anything? Should I do anything? I have never been in this type of situation before.
interviewing ethics promotion conflict manager
asked Aug 14 '15 at 22:49
Air
2,13921317
edited May 1 '17 at 16:27
asked Aug 14 '15 at 22:49
Air
2,13921317
asked Aug 14 '15 at 22:49
Air
2,13921317
asked Aug 14 '15 at 22:49
Air
2,13921317
2,13921317
1
Please provide the Country?
– samarasa
Aug 14 '15 at 22:55
10
If your goal is to defuse the situation, stop fanning the flames. Either the candidate is competent or not. Either the manager can manage them fairly or not. Those are legitimate business issues and time will tell. What they're doing outside the office, and how much the company will punish them if it is forced to notice the situation, is thankfully not your problem.
– keshlam
Aug 15 '15 at 1:07
3
While the advice to the manager and the intended employee would be a very strong "don't do it, it will end up a mess", especially since it is a bit of a mess already, it's not something that I would try hard to solve during my last month of work. The problem is the manager's bosses job to solve, not yours.
– gnasher729
Aug 15 '15 at 12:38
7
The problem doesn't seem to be only your managers but also the team leaders. Forcing someone who has a conflict of interest to make a decision is bad and an ethical lapse at their part.
– Christian
Aug 15 '15 at 13:43
1
@Myles I can ask for details, but is that really useful and appropriate content for a problem statement? I know that the tl;dr is that the site turned into a train wreck and most of the management staff quit or was reassigned.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 18:56
 |Â
show 8 more comments
1
Please provide the Country?
– samarasa
Aug 14 '15 at 22:55
10
If your goal is to defuse the situation, stop fanning the flames. Either the candidate is competent or not. Either the manager can manage them fairly or not. Those are legitimate business issues and time will tell. What they're doing outside the office, and how much the company will punish them if it is forced to notice the situation, is thankfully not your problem.
– keshlam
Aug 15 '15 at 1:07
3
While the advice to the manager and the intended employee would be a very strong "don't do it, it will end up a mess", especially since it is a bit of a mess already, it's not something that I would try hard to solve during my last month of work. The problem is the manager's bosses job to solve, not yours.
– gnasher729
Aug 15 '15 at 12:38
7
The problem doesn't seem to be only your managers but also the team leaders. Forcing someone who has a conflict of interest to make a decision is bad and an ethical lapse at their part.
– Christian
Aug 15 '15 at 13:43
1
@Myles I can ask for details, but is that really useful and appropriate content for a problem statement? I know that the tl;dr is that the site turned into a train wreck and most of the management staff quit or was reassigned.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 18:56
1
1
Please provide the Country?
– samarasa
Aug 14 '15 at 22:55
Please provide the Country?
– samarasa
Aug 14 '15 at 22:55
10
10
If your goal is to defuse the situation, stop fanning the flames. Either the candidate is competent or not. Either the manager can manage them fairly or not. Those are legitimate business issues and time will tell. What they're doing outside the office, and how much the company will punish them if it is forced to notice the situation, is thankfully not your problem.
– keshlam
Aug 15 '15 at 1:07
If your goal is to defuse the situation, stop fanning the flames. Either the candidate is competent or not. Either the manager can manage them fairly or not. Those are legitimate business issues and time will tell. What they're doing outside the office, and how much the company will punish them if it is forced to notice the situation, is thankfully not your problem.
– keshlam
Aug 15 '15 at 1:07
3
3
While the advice to the manager and the intended employee would be a very strong "don't do it, it will end up a mess", especially since it is a bit of a mess already, it's not something that I would try hard to solve during my last month of work. The problem is the manager's bosses job to solve, not yours.
– gnasher729
Aug 15 '15 at 12:38
While the advice to the manager and the intended employee would be a very strong "don't do it, it will end up a mess", especially since it is a bit of a mess already, it's not something that I would try hard to solve during my last month of work. The problem is the manager's bosses job to solve, not yours.
– gnasher729
Aug 15 '15 at 12:38
7
7
The problem doesn't seem to be only your managers but also the team leaders. Forcing someone who has a conflict of interest to make a decision is bad and an ethical lapse at their part.
– Christian
Aug 15 '15 at 13:43
The problem doesn't seem to be only your managers but also the team leaders. Forcing someone who has a conflict of interest to make a decision is bad and an ethical lapse at their part.
– Christian
Aug 15 '15 at 13:43
1
1
@Myles I can ask for details, but is that really useful and appropriate content for a problem statement? I know that the tl;dr is that the site turned into a train wreck and most of the management staff quit or was reassigned.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 18:56
@Myles I can ask for details, but is that really useful and appropriate content for a problem statement? I know that the tl;dr is that the site turned into a train wreck and most of the management staff quit or was reassigned.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 18:56
 |Â
show 8 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
20
down vote
Note: Although this is written in the first person, I am relaying it from a person who wants to remain anonymous.
How can I decide whether to confront him about his unethical behavior,
or just stay silent?
Here are some things to consider as your anonymous friend decides what to do:
- This is no longer your friend's problem. He/she is leaving.
- If the Team Leads are upset, it's up to them to do something about it, rather than expecting a short-timer to try and do something
- I can tell you from personal experience that folks don't want to hear an exiting employee try to tattle on remaining employees. Someone taking potshots on the way out is seldom treated seriously. If it's important enough, someone who will still be around needs to be the hero.
What potential consequences are important for me to consider, if I'm
not going to be working there much longer?
- Your friend's reputation might take a hit. While it may seem heroic, many (most?) folks don't like tattle-tales.
- Your friend could lose future employment references. Certainly the manager being ratted on would no longer be a reference, nor would the accused employee. In addition, other remaining employees could decide that your friend can't be trusted.
- The manager could retaliate against the Team Leads or make other employees suffer
- The manager could retaliate against your friend in some nasty way.
- While unlikely, your friend could get accused of defamation.
If your friend decides to go ahead and talk to upper management, the lawyer, or otherwise rat out the manager, he/she must make absolutely sure that she/he has all the facts right, and has some corroborating proof.
If your friend is leaving, and you are one of the people remaining at the company, then perhaps it should be you who steps up and does something. If not, perhaps that's one more reason why your friend should just remain silent.
answered Aug 15 '15 at 0:11
Joe Strazzere
223k106654921
Author's response, paraphrased: "I don't think most of that was even relevant, he was talking about tattling but I'm not going to go to HR." Apparently there is an expectation that at least one other employee eventually will if the coworker is hired. Also mentioned that one of the team leaders wants the manager to "get caught" so it sounds unlikely this will just blow over.
– Air
Aug 15 '15 at 15:33
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
-3
down vote
There are two parts here. One of them involves you. However Joe is right, it is best if you do nothing.
tl;dr You've committed unethical workplace actions. I'm uncertain how terribly (certainly from a workplace point of view) your manager has acted. Even if you were as clean as an angel, confronting your manager as you leave would only appear to be (and probably only is) a balm to boost your personal opinion of your moral superiority.
The real problem here is you and your team mates' actions.
The first issue is that people are upset at an extramarital affair being conducted by two people in the company. This affair will upset the delicate sensibilities of some people, but the fact seems to be that this manager is still managing this person, regardless of promotion or not. The problem then becomes something of "should this person be promoted", but by your account they are expected, trained and possibly groomed to be promoted. I'm not seeing any issue then, regarding "should this person be promoted".
What I am hearing from you is that you feel that someone having an extra marital affair does not deserve meritocratic treatment. This is a reason office affairs are frowned upon - except in the reverse.
Now, bearing that in mind, let's dive into:
The second issue is the unethical behaviour being exhibited by you and your team mates. If you cannot make a fair assessment, then you should recuse yourselves from the interview system. Your manager did it, and you, too, should have excused yourself:
Given the circumstances, the team leaders and I all agree that it would be completely unethical for him to directly supervise her
and
I tried to be totally objective in scoring their responses to the interview questions.
Both statements imply that you were biased against this person. You also outright state that your team-mates are biased against this person. None of you should have been part of the interview system.
This is just as bad - morally - as if the manager was promoting a person that was unfit for the job for some non-work related issue. You and your team mates are in fact more guilty of inappropriate work conduct than your manager.
If I was some super-manager here, I'd fire all of you, and split the chain of command between your manager and the underling.
~ ~ ~
Just re-read the question. The last paragraph stands out - it read to me as though OP was satisfied with their position as their reference from the manager in question was set, so now OP could act with abandon. Something about this troubles me, but as @Kat points out, this isn't the place for that.
answered Apr 30 '17 at 11:48
bharal
11.3k22453
5
There is nothing unethical about being uncomfortable with unethical behavior. Nothing unethical about disfavoring someone with a history of unethical behavior. And regarding the idea that personal morals are independent from job performance, the whole question is about a situation where the personal relationship clearly has already spilled over into work, so arguing that a meritocracy should overlook it is disingenuous.
– Ben Voigt
Apr 30 '17 at 21:03
1
It would be hypocrisy to act unethically, but the only presumption you have of unethical behavior is disfavor for actions which you condone, but are too cowardly to come out and say anything stronger than "more guilty of inappropriate work conduct". If you believed that the manager's behavior was inappropriate even a small amount, then what you call "interference" isn't inappropriate, let alone "more guilty". So you're actually inferring that the company has no business taking a stand against (1) breach of vows or (2) authority figures appearing to reward sexual favors. Absurd!
– Ben Voigt
May 1 '17 at 0:27
4
What an inane rant.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 16:47
1
I thought this was a good answer until the "bonus content" section. It seems you are trying to attack OP in any possible way, which isn't helpful.
– Kat
May 1 '17 at 17:01
1
@bharal Sounds more like OP was acting to try to minimize harm in careers from my perspective. It sounds like they specifically tried to approach it from an unbiased perspective (in the context it sounds like most/all involved parties had some bias as they had some idea about the relationship). They tried to score candidates fairly, but even mention that the candidate they chose seemed good to others. The manager then made the decision to hire the girl. I don't see how it's sabotage or unethical; besides the part where they didn't immediately raise the alarm to higher ups.
– JMac
May 1 '17 at 18:14
 |Â
show 4 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
20
down vote
Note: Although this is written in the first person, I am relaying it from a person who wants to remain anonymous.
How can I decide whether to confront him about his unethical behavior,
or just stay silent?
Here are some things to consider as your anonymous friend decides what to do:
- This is no longer your friend's problem. He/she is leaving.
- If the Team Leads are upset, it's up to them to do something about it, rather than expecting a short-timer to try and do something
- I can tell you from personal experience that folks don't want to hear an exiting employee try to tattle on remaining employees. Someone taking potshots on the way out is seldom treated seriously. If it's important enough, someone who will still be around needs to be the hero.
What potential consequences are important for me to consider, if I'm
not going to be working there much longer?
- Your friend's reputation might take a hit. While it may seem heroic, many (most?) folks don't like tattle-tales.
- Your friend could lose future employment references. Certainly the manager being ratted on would no longer be a reference, nor would the accused employee. In addition, other remaining employees could decide that your friend can't be trusted.
- The manager could retaliate against the Team Leads or make other employees suffer
- The manager could retaliate against your friend in some nasty way.
- While unlikely, your friend could get accused of defamation.
If your friend decides to go ahead and talk to upper management, the lawyer, or otherwise rat out the manager, he/she must make absolutely sure that she/he has all the facts right, and has some corroborating proof.
If your friend is leaving, and you are one of the people remaining at the company, then perhaps it should be you who steps up and does something. If not, perhaps that's one more reason why your friend should just remain silent.
answered Aug 15 '15 at 0:11
Joe Strazzere
223k106654921
Author's response, paraphrased: "I don't think most of that was even relevant, he was talking about tattling but I'm not going to go to HR." Apparently there is an expectation that at least one other employee eventually will if the coworker is hired. Also mentioned that one of the team leaders wants the manager to "get caught" so it sounds unlikely this will just blow over.
– Air
Aug 15 '15 at 15:33
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
20
down vote
Note: Although this is written in the first person, I am relaying it from a person who wants to remain anonymous.
How can I decide whether to confront him about his unethical behavior,
or just stay silent?
Here are some things to consider as your anonymous friend decides what to do:
- This is no longer your friend's problem. He/she is leaving.
- If the Team Leads are upset, it's up to them to do something about it, rather than expecting a short-timer to try and do something
- I can tell you from personal experience that folks don't want to hear an exiting employee try to tattle on remaining employees. Someone taking potshots on the way out is seldom treated seriously. If it's important enough, someone who will still be around needs to be the hero.
What potential consequences are important for me to consider, if I'm
not going to be working there much longer?
- Your friend's reputation might take a hit. While it may seem heroic, many (most?) folks don't like tattle-tales.
- Your friend could lose future employment references. Certainly the manager being ratted on would no longer be a reference, nor would the accused employee. In addition, other remaining employees could decide that your friend can't be trusted.
- The manager could retaliate against the Team Leads or make other employees suffer
- The manager could retaliate against your friend in some nasty way.
- While unlikely, your friend could get accused of defamation.
If your friend decides to go ahead and talk to upper management, the lawyer, or otherwise rat out the manager, he/she must make absolutely sure that she/he has all the facts right, and has some corroborating proof.
If your friend is leaving, and you are one of the people remaining at the company, then perhaps it should be you who steps up and does something. If not, perhaps that's one more reason why your friend should just remain silent.
answered Aug 15 '15 at 0:11
Joe Strazzere
223k106654921
Author's response, paraphrased: "I don't think most of that was even relevant, he was talking about tattling but I'm not going to go to HR." Apparently there is an expectation that at least one other employee eventually will if the coworker is hired. Also mentioned that one of the team leaders wants the manager to "get caught" so it sounds unlikely this will just blow over.
– Air
Aug 15 '15 at 15:33
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
20
down vote
up vote
20
down vote
Note: Although this is written in the first person, I am relaying it from a person who wants to remain anonymous.
How can I decide whether to confront him about his unethical behavior,
or just stay silent?
Here are some things to consider as your anonymous friend decides what to do:
- This is no longer your friend's problem. He/she is leaving.
- If the Team Leads are upset, it's up to them to do something about it, rather than expecting a short-timer to try and do something
- I can tell you from personal experience that folks don't want to hear an exiting employee try to tattle on remaining employees. Someone taking potshots on the way out is seldom treated seriously. If it's important enough, someone who will still be around needs to be the hero.
What potential consequences are important for me to consider, if I'm
not going to be working there much longer?
- Your friend's reputation might take a hit. While it may seem heroic, many (most?) folks don't like tattle-tales.
- Your friend could lose future employment references. Certainly the manager being ratted on would no longer be a reference, nor would the accused employee. In addition, other remaining employees could decide that your friend can't be trusted.
- The manager could retaliate against the Team Leads or make other employees suffer
- The manager could retaliate against your friend in some nasty way.
- While unlikely, your friend could get accused of defamation.
If your friend decides to go ahead and talk to upper management, the lawyer, or otherwise rat out the manager, he/she must make absolutely sure that she/he has all the facts right, and has some corroborating proof.
If your friend is leaving, and you are one of the people remaining at the company, then perhaps it should be you who steps up and does something. If not, perhaps that's one more reason why your friend should just remain silent.
answered Aug 15 '15 at 0:11
Joe Strazzere
223k106654921
Note: Although this is written in the first person, I am relaying it from a person who wants to remain anonymous.
How can I decide whether to confront him about his unethical behavior,
or just stay silent?
Here are some things to consider as your anonymous friend decides what to do:
- This is no longer your friend's problem. He/she is leaving.
- If the Team Leads are upset, it's up to them to do something about it, rather than expecting a short-timer to try and do something
- I can tell you from personal experience that folks don't want to hear an exiting employee try to tattle on remaining employees. Someone taking potshots on the way out is seldom treated seriously. If it's important enough, someone who will still be around needs to be the hero.
What potential consequences are important for me to consider, if I'm
not going to be working there much longer?
- Your friend's reputation might take a hit. While it may seem heroic, many (most?) folks don't like tattle-tales.
- Your friend could lose future employment references. Certainly the manager being ratted on would no longer be a reference, nor would the accused employee. In addition, other remaining employees could decide that your friend can't be trusted.
- The manager could retaliate against the Team Leads or make other employees suffer
- The manager could retaliate against your friend in some nasty way.
- While unlikely, your friend could get accused of defamation.
If your friend decides to go ahead and talk to upper management, the lawyer, or otherwise rat out the manager, he/she must make absolutely sure that she/he has all the facts right, and has some corroborating proof.
If your friend is leaving, and you are one of the people remaining at the company, then perhaps it should be you who steps up and does something. If not, perhaps that's one more reason why your friend should just remain silent.
answered Aug 15 '15 at 0:11
Joe Strazzere
223k106654921
edited Aug 15 '15 at 18:42
answered Aug 15 '15 at 0:11
Joe Strazzere
223k106654921
answered Aug 15 '15 at 0:11
Joe Strazzere
223k106654921
answered Aug 15 '15 at 0:11
Joe Strazzere
223k106654921
223k106654921
Author's response, paraphrased: "I don't think most of that was even relevant, he was talking about tattling but I'm not going to go to HR." Apparently there is an expectation that at least one other employee eventually will if the coworker is hired. Also mentioned that one of the team leaders wants the manager to "get caught" so it sounds unlikely this will just blow over.
– Air
Aug 15 '15 at 15:33
suggest improvements |Â
Author's response, paraphrased: "I don't think most of that was even relevant, he was talking about tattling but I'm not going to go to HR." Apparently there is an expectation that at least one other employee eventually will if the coworker is hired. Also mentioned that one of the team leaders wants the manager to "get caught" so it sounds unlikely this will just blow over.
– Air
Aug 15 '15 at 15:33
Author's response, paraphrased: "I don't think most of that was even relevant, he was talking about tattling but I'm not going to go to HR." Apparently there is an expectation that at least one other employee eventually will if the coworker is hired. Also mentioned that one of the team leaders wants the manager to "get caught" so it sounds unlikely this will just blow over.
– Air
Aug 15 '15 at 15:33
Author's response, paraphrased: "I don't think most of that was even relevant, he was talking about tattling but I'm not going to go to HR." Apparently there is an expectation that at least one other employee eventually will if the coworker is hired. Also mentioned that one of the team leaders wants the manager to "get caught" so it sounds unlikely this will just blow over.
– Air
Aug 15 '15 at 15:33
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
-3
down vote
There are two parts here. One of them involves you. However Joe is right, it is best if you do nothing.
tl;dr You've committed unethical workplace actions. I'm uncertain how terribly (certainly from a workplace point of view) your manager has acted. Even if you were as clean as an angel, confronting your manager as you leave would only appear to be (and probably only is) a balm to boost your personal opinion of your moral superiority.
The real problem here is you and your team mates' actions.
The first issue is that people are upset at an extramarital affair being conducted by two people in the company. This affair will upset the delicate sensibilities of some people, but the fact seems to be that this manager is still managing this person, regardless of promotion or not. The problem then becomes something of "should this person be promoted", but by your account they are expected, trained and possibly groomed to be promoted. I'm not seeing any issue then, regarding "should this person be promoted".
What I am hearing from you is that you feel that someone having an extra marital affair does not deserve meritocratic treatment. This is a reason office affairs are frowned upon - except in the reverse.
Now, bearing that in mind, let's dive into:
The second issue is the unethical behaviour being exhibited by you and your team mates. If you cannot make a fair assessment, then you should recuse yourselves from the interview system. Your manager did it, and you, too, should have excused yourself:
Given the circumstances, the team leaders and I all agree that it would be completely unethical for him to directly supervise her
and
I tried to be totally objective in scoring their responses to the interview questions.
Both statements imply that you were biased against this person. You also outright state that your team-mates are biased against this person. None of you should have been part of the interview system.
This is just as bad - morally - as if the manager was promoting a person that was unfit for the job for some non-work related issue. You and your team mates are in fact more guilty of inappropriate work conduct than your manager.
If I was some super-manager here, I'd fire all of you, and split the chain of command between your manager and the underling.
~ ~ ~
Just re-read the question. The last paragraph stands out - it read to me as though OP was satisfied with their position as their reference from the manager in question was set, so now OP could act with abandon. Something about this troubles me, but as @Kat points out, this isn't the place for that.
answered Apr 30 '17 at 11:48
bharal
11.3k22453
5
There is nothing unethical about being uncomfortable with unethical behavior. Nothing unethical about disfavoring someone with a history of unethical behavior. And regarding the idea that personal morals are independent from job performance, the whole question is about a situation where the personal relationship clearly has already spilled over into work, so arguing that a meritocracy should overlook it is disingenuous.
– Ben Voigt
Apr 30 '17 at 21:03
1
It would be hypocrisy to act unethically, but the only presumption you have of unethical behavior is disfavor for actions which you condone, but are too cowardly to come out and say anything stronger than "more guilty of inappropriate work conduct". If you believed that the manager's behavior was inappropriate even a small amount, then what you call "interference" isn't inappropriate, let alone "more guilty". So you're actually inferring that the company has no business taking a stand against (1) breach of vows or (2) authority figures appearing to reward sexual favors. Absurd!
– Ben Voigt
May 1 '17 at 0:27
4
What an inane rant.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 16:47
1
I thought this was a good answer until the "bonus content" section. It seems you are trying to attack OP in any possible way, which isn't helpful.
– Kat
May 1 '17 at 17:01
1
@bharal Sounds more like OP was acting to try to minimize harm in careers from my perspective. It sounds like they specifically tried to approach it from an unbiased perspective (in the context it sounds like most/all involved parties had some bias as they had some idea about the relationship). They tried to score candidates fairly, but even mention that the candidate they chose seemed good to others. The manager then made the decision to hire the girl. I don't see how it's sabotage or unethical; besides the part where they didn't immediately raise the alarm to higher ups.
– JMac
May 1 '17 at 18:14
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
-3
down vote
There are two parts here. One of them involves you. However Joe is right, it is best if you do nothing.
tl;dr You've committed unethical workplace actions. I'm uncertain how terribly (certainly from a workplace point of view) your manager has acted. Even if you were as clean as an angel, confronting your manager as you leave would only appear to be (and probably only is) a balm to boost your personal opinion of your moral superiority.
The real problem here is you and your team mates' actions.
The first issue is that people are upset at an extramarital affair being conducted by two people in the company. This affair will upset the delicate sensibilities of some people, but the fact seems to be that this manager is still managing this person, regardless of promotion or not. The problem then becomes something of "should this person be promoted", but by your account they are expected, trained and possibly groomed to be promoted. I'm not seeing any issue then, regarding "should this person be promoted".
What I am hearing from you is that you feel that someone having an extra marital affair does not deserve meritocratic treatment. This is a reason office affairs are frowned upon - except in the reverse.
Now, bearing that in mind, let's dive into:
The second issue is the unethical behaviour being exhibited by you and your team mates. If you cannot make a fair assessment, then you should recuse yourselves from the interview system. Your manager did it, and you, too, should have excused yourself:
Given the circumstances, the team leaders and I all agree that it would be completely unethical for him to directly supervise her
and
I tried to be totally objective in scoring their responses to the interview questions.
Both statements imply that you were biased against this person. You also outright state that your team-mates are biased against this person. None of you should have been part of the interview system.
This is just as bad - morally - as if the manager was promoting a person that was unfit for the job for some non-work related issue. You and your team mates are in fact more guilty of inappropriate work conduct than your manager.
If I was some super-manager here, I'd fire all of you, and split the chain of command between your manager and the underling.
~ ~ ~
Just re-read the question. The last paragraph stands out - it read to me as though OP was satisfied with their position as their reference from the manager in question was set, so now OP could act with abandon. Something about this troubles me, but as @Kat points out, this isn't the place for that.
answered Apr 30 '17 at 11:48
bharal
11.3k22453
5
There is nothing unethical about being uncomfortable with unethical behavior. Nothing unethical about disfavoring someone with a history of unethical behavior. And regarding the idea that personal morals are independent from job performance, the whole question is about a situation where the personal relationship clearly has already spilled over into work, so arguing that a meritocracy should overlook it is disingenuous.
– Ben Voigt
Apr 30 '17 at 21:03
1
It would be hypocrisy to act unethically, but the only presumption you have of unethical behavior is disfavor for actions which you condone, but are too cowardly to come out and say anything stronger than "more guilty of inappropriate work conduct". If you believed that the manager's behavior was inappropriate even a small amount, then what you call "interference" isn't inappropriate, let alone "more guilty". So you're actually inferring that the company has no business taking a stand against (1) breach of vows or (2) authority figures appearing to reward sexual favors. Absurd!
– Ben Voigt
May 1 '17 at 0:27
4
What an inane rant.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 16:47
1
I thought this was a good answer until the "bonus content" section. It seems you are trying to attack OP in any possible way, which isn't helpful.
– Kat
May 1 '17 at 17:01
1
@bharal Sounds more like OP was acting to try to minimize harm in careers from my perspective. It sounds like they specifically tried to approach it from an unbiased perspective (in the context it sounds like most/all involved parties had some bias as they had some idea about the relationship). They tried to score candidates fairly, but even mention that the candidate they chose seemed good to others. The manager then made the decision to hire the girl. I don't see how it's sabotage or unethical; besides the part where they didn't immediately raise the alarm to higher ups.
– JMac
May 1 '17 at 18:14
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
-3
down vote
up vote
-3
down vote
There are two parts here. One of them involves you. However Joe is right, it is best if you do nothing.
tl;dr You've committed unethical workplace actions. I'm uncertain how terribly (certainly from a workplace point of view) your manager has acted. Even if you were as clean as an angel, confronting your manager as you leave would only appear to be (and probably only is) a balm to boost your personal opinion of your moral superiority.
The real problem here is you and your team mates' actions.
The first issue is that people are upset at an extramarital affair being conducted by two people in the company. This affair will upset the delicate sensibilities of some people, but the fact seems to be that this manager is still managing this person, regardless of promotion or not. The problem then becomes something of "should this person be promoted", but by your account they are expected, trained and possibly groomed to be promoted. I'm not seeing any issue then, regarding "should this person be promoted".
What I am hearing from you is that you feel that someone having an extra marital affair does not deserve meritocratic treatment. This is a reason office affairs are frowned upon - except in the reverse.
Now, bearing that in mind, let's dive into:
The second issue is the unethical behaviour being exhibited by you and your team mates. If you cannot make a fair assessment, then you should recuse yourselves from the interview system. Your manager did it, and you, too, should have excused yourself:
Given the circumstances, the team leaders and I all agree that it would be completely unethical for him to directly supervise her
and
I tried to be totally objective in scoring their responses to the interview questions.
Both statements imply that you were biased against this person. You also outright state that your team-mates are biased against this person. None of you should have been part of the interview system.
This is just as bad - morally - as if the manager was promoting a person that was unfit for the job for some non-work related issue. You and your team mates are in fact more guilty of inappropriate work conduct than your manager.
If I was some super-manager here, I'd fire all of you, and split the chain of command between your manager and the underling.
~ ~ ~
Just re-read the question. The last paragraph stands out - it read to me as though OP was satisfied with their position as their reference from the manager in question was set, so now OP could act with abandon. Something about this troubles me, but as @Kat points out, this isn't the place for that.
answered Apr 30 '17 at 11:48
bharal
11.3k22453
There are two parts here. One of them involves you. However Joe is right, it is best if you do nothing.
tl;dr You've committed unethical workplace actions. I'm uncertain how terribly (certainly from a workplace point of view) your manager has acted. Even if you were as clean as an angel, confronting your manager as you leave would only appear to be (and probably only is) a balm to boost your personal opinion of your moral superiority.
The real problem here is you and your team mates' actions.
The first issue is that people are upset at an extramarital affair being conducted by two people in the company. This affair will upset the delicate sensibilities of some people, but the fact seems to be that this manager is still managing this person, regardless of promotion or not. The problem then becomes something of "should this person be promoted", but by your account they are expected, trained and possibly groomed to be promoted. I'm not seeing any issue then, regarding "should this person be promoted".
What I am hearing from you is that you feel that someone having an extra marital affair does not deserve meritocratic treatment. This is a reason office affairs are frowned upon - except in the reverse.
Now, bearing that in mind, let's dive into:
The second issue is the unethical behaviour being exhibited by you and your team mates. If you cannot make a fair assessment, then you should recuse yourselves from the interview system. Your manager did it, and you, too, should have excused yourself:
Given the circumstances, the team leaders and I all agree that it would be completely unethical for him to directly supervise her
and
I tried to be totally objective in scoring their responses to the interview questions.
Both statements imply that you were biased against this person. You also outright state that your team-mates are biased against this person. None of you should have been part of the interview system.
This is just as bad - morally - as if the manager was promoting a person that was unfit for the job for some non-work related issue. You and your team mates are in fact more guilty of inappropriate work conduct than your manager.
If I was some super-manager here, I'd fire all of you, and split the chain of command between your manager and the underling.
~ ~ ~
Just re-read the question. The last paragraph stands out - it read to me as though OP was satisfied with their position as their reference from the manager in question was set, so now OP could act with abandon. Something about this troubles me, but as @Kat points out, this isn't the place for that.
answered Apr 30 '17 at 11:48
bharal
11.3k22453
edited May 1 '17 at 17:27
answered Apr 30 '17 at 11:48
bharal
11.3k22453
answered Apr 30 '17 at 11:48
bharal
11.3k22453
answered Apr 30 '17 at 11:48
bharal
11.3k22453
11.3k22453
5
There is nothing unethical about being uncomfortable with unethical behavior. Nothing unethical about disfavoring someone with a history of unethical behavior. And regarding the idea that personal morals are independent from job performance, the whole question is about a situation where the personal relationship clearly has already spilled over into work, so arguing that a meritocracy should overlook it is disingenuous.
– Ben Voigt
Apr 30 '17 at 21:03
1
It would be hypocrisy to act unethically, but the only presumption you have of unethical behavior is disfavor for actions which you condone, but are too cowardly to come out and say anything stronger than "more guilty of inappropriate work conduct". If you believed that the manager's behavior was inappropriate even a small amount, then what you call "interference" isn't inappropriate, let alone "more guilty". So you're actually inferring that the company has no business taking a stand against (1) breach of vows or (2) authority figures appearing to reward sexual favors. Absurd!
– Ben Voigt
May 1 '17 at 0:27
4
What an inane rant.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 16:47
1
I thought this was a good answer until the "bonus content" section. It seems you are trying to attack OP in any possible way, which isn't helpful.
– Kat
May 1 '17 at 17:01
1
@bharal Sounds more like OP was acting to try to minimize harm in careers from my perspective. It sounds like they specifically tried to approach it from an unbiased perspective (in the context it sounds like most/all involved parties had some bias as they had some idea about the relationship). They tried to score candidates fairly, but even mention that the candidate they chose seemed good to others. The manager then made the decision to hire the girl. I don't see how it's sabotage or unethical; besides the part where they didn't immediately raise the alarm to higher ups.
– JMac
May 1 '17 at 18:14
 |Â
show 4 more comments
5
There is nothing unethical about being uncomfortable with unethical behavior. Nothing unethical about disfavoring someone with a history of unethical behavior. And regarding the idea that personal morals are independent from job performance, the whole question is about a situation where the personal relationship clearly has already spilled over into work, so arguing that a meritocracy should overlook it is disingenuous.
– Ben Voigt
Apr 30 '17 at 21:03
1
It would be hypocrisy to act unethically, but the only presumption you have of unethical behavior is disfavor for actions which you condone, but are too cowardly to come out and say anything stronger than "more guilty of inappropriate work conduct". If you believed that the manager's behavior was inappropriate even a small amount, then what you call "interference" isn't inappropriate, let alone "more guilty". So you're actually inferring that the company has no business taking a stand against (1) breach of vows or (2) authority figures appearing to reward sexual favors. Absurd!
– Ben Voigt
May 1 '17 at 0:27
4
What an inane rant.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 16:47
1
I thought this was a good answer until the "bonus content" section. It seems you are trying to attack OP in any possible way, which isn't helpful.
– Kat
May 1 '17 at 17:01
1
@bharal Sounds more like OP was acting to try to minimize harm in careers from my perspective. It sounds like they specifically tried to approach it from an unbiased perspective (in the context it sounds like most/all involved parties had some bias as they had some idea about the relationship). They tried to score candidates fairly, but even mention that the candidate they chose seemed good to others. The manager then made the decision to hire the girl. I don't see how it's sabotage or unethical; besides the part where they didn't immediately raise the alarm to higher ups.
– JMac
May 1 '17 at 18:14
5
5
There is nothing unethical about being uncomfortable with unethical behavior. Nothing unethical about disfavoring someone with a history of unethical behavior. And regarding the idea that personal morals are independent from job performance, the whole question is about a situation where the personal relationship clearly has already spilled over into work, so arguing that a meritocracy should overlook it is disingenuous.
– Ben Voigt
Apr 30 '17 at 21:03
There is nothing unethical about being uncomfortable with unethical behavior. Nothing unethical about disfavoring someone with a history of unethical behavior. And regarding the idea that personal morals are independent from job performance, the whole question is about a situation where the personal relationship clearly has already spilled over into work, so arguing that a meritocracy should overlook it is disingenuous.
– Ben Voigt
Apr 30 '17 at 21:03
1
1
It would be hypocrisy to act unethically, but the only presumption you have of unethical behavior is disfavor for actions which you condone, but are too cowardly to come out and say anything stronger than "more guilty of inappropriate work conduct". If you believed that the manager's behavior was inappropriate even a small amount, then what you call "interference" isn't inappropriate, let alone "more guilty". So you're actually inferring that the company has no business taking a stand against (1) breach of vows or (2) authority figures appearing to reward sexual favors. Absurd!
– Ben Voigt
May 1 '17 at 0:27
It would be hypocrisy to act unethically, but the only presumption you have of unethical behavior is disfavor for actions which you condone, but are too cowardly to come out and say anything stronger than "more guilty of inappropriate work conduct". If you believed that the manager's behavior was inappropriate even a small amount, then what you call "interference" isn't inappropriate, let alone "more guilty". So you're actually inferring that the company has no business taking a stand against (1) breach of vows or (2) authority figures appearing to reward sexual favors. Absurd!
– Ben Voigt
May 1 '17 at 0:27
4
4
What an inane rant.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 16:47
What an inane rant.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 16:47
1
1
I thought this was a good answer until the "bonus content" section. It seems you are trying to attack OP in any possible way, which isn't helpful.
– Kat
May 1 '17 at 17:01
I thought this was a good answer until the "bonus content" section. It seems you are trying to attack OP in any possible way, which isn't helpful.
– Kat
May 1 '17 at 17:01
1
1
@bharal Sounds more like OP was acting to try to minimize harm in careers from my perspective. It sounds like they specifically tried to approach it from an unbiased perspective (in the context it sounds like most/all involved parties had some bias as they had some idea about the relationship). They tried to score candidates fairly, but even mention that the candidate they chose seemed good to others. The manager then made the decision to hire the girl. I don't see how it's sabotage or unethical; besides the part where they didn't immediately raise the alarm to higher ups.
– JMac
May 1 '17 at 18:14
@bharal Sounds more like OP was acting to try to minimize harm in careers from my perspective. It sounds like they specifically tried to approach it from an unbiased perspective (in the context it sounds like most/all involved parties had some bias as they had some idea about the relationship). They tried to score candidates fairly, but even mention that the candidate they chose seemed good to others. The manager then made the decision to hire the girl. I don't see how it's sabotage or unethical; besides the part where they didn't immediately raise the alarm to higher ups.
– JMac
May 1 '17 at 18:14
 |Â
show 4 more comments
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f52154%2fmanager-wants-to-hire-an-employee-hes-sleeping-with-against-the-advice-of-his%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
1
Please provide the Country?
– samarasa
Aug 14 '15 at 22:55
10
If your goal is to defuse the situation, stop fanning the flames. Either the candidate is competent or not. Either the manager can manage them fairly or not. Those are legitimate business issues and time will tell. What they're doing outside the office, and how much the company will punish them if it is forced to notice the situation, is thankfully not your problem.
– keshlam
Aug 15 '15 at 1:07
3
While the advice to the manager and the intended employee would be a very strong "don't do it, it will end up a mess", especially since it is a bit of a mess already, it's not something that I would try hard to solve during my last month of work. The problem is the manager's bosses job to solve, not yours.
– gnasher729
Aug 15 '15 at 12:38
7
The problem doesn't seem to be only your managers but also the team leaders. Forcing someone who has a conflict of interest to make a decision is bad and an ethical lapse at their part.
– Christian
Aug 15 '15 at 13:43
1
@Myles I can ask for details, but is that really useful and appropriate content for a problem statement? I know that the tl;dr is that the site turned into a train wreck and most of the management staff quit or was reassigned.
– Air
May 1 '17 at 18:56