Current Legal System Unbalanced

[Equality]

There are serious problems with the current system. The prevailing belief that a woman would never lie myth coupled with the how it is perceived idiology added to the now popular zero tolerance policy has created an corrupt system. The protections afforded accusers have created an unjust system that only gives lip service to the consequences of false claims. Neither gender is more inherently honest than the other and unscrupulous people will use any means at their disposal to work the system. An employee in a protected class can easily avoid justified disciplinary action or termination by simply claiming harassment by an superior who is not in a protected class typically a white male. Once the claim is made the employer may or may not conduct a token investigation regardless of the outcome the company afraid of litigation will quickly and quietly get rid of the accused as they have little or no reason to fear litigation due to the abysmal lack of rights afforded by the legal system under today's legal system. The extremely smart false accuser will claim the harassment took place without witnesses thereby placing the accused in a no win senerio. Fight with no chance of winning if the accused can even find a decent lawyer willing to take the case coupled with the utter destruction of reputation and career or quietly leave and hope to get a new job quickly before financial destruction. Employment lawyers will quickly tell the accused that despite the injustice of what occured that the following two insurmountable legal issues prevail first most all states are fire at will and that the court system will side with the accuser.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely and society needs to wake up to the fact that we have given absolute power to the accuser as time passes this fallacy will destroy more and more lives, ultimately leading to an unjust backlash in the opposite direction.

As a woman I have seen and been subject to sexual harassment that went unpunished BUT I have seen far more false allegations taken to HR that are quietly swept under the rug as the innocent accused is ushered out the door and the guilty accused has secured a job for life with out fear of displinary action for any misconduct henceforth.

 

[cbg]

Do you have a legal question or are you just here to vent?

 

[Equality]

Was hoping to start an intelligent discussion. If it has to be a question my question would be what can be done.

 

[cbg]

About what? You've done a lot of generalization but nothing specific.

 

[Equality]

About correcting the current system so that the accused has legal rights as well for instance:
1 ensure an legitimate investigation is conducted prior to termination
2 he said she said allegations or any unproveable alkegation must be mediated prior to termination.

That would perhaps be a start. Most businesses as the law stands currently have two options quickly get rid of the accused guilty or not and risk a costly legal battle. The accused if terminated has little to no recourse.

While I fully agree that we need harassment laws I also feel that unless the law is designed to address false allegations it has the unintended effect of promoting them. Frankly in my work expirence I have seen true victims afraid to speak up yet false victims utilizing the current system for personal gain.

In my opinion we as a society need to rethink how to address harassment and how the legal system deals with it so it is just.

 

[Equality]

I should add that what led me to post was that recently I have observed the current system abused. In a case of proven same sex harassment the discipline was merely write-ups for all involved. The other a employee facing termination for theft accused a superior of harassment that was unprovable and therefore not investigated and the accused fired. Note her theft was not discoved until after the accused was fired but the company is sweeping that under the rug.

 

[Betty3]

Are you asking what can be done about false claims of sexual harassment & consequences done to the innocent accused etc. ......& some guilty accused getting away with it (or are you asking something else)?

 

[army judge]

I should add that what led me to post was that recently I have observed the current system abused. In a case of proven same sex harassment the discipline was merely write-ups for all involved. The other a employee facing termination for theft accused a superior of harassment that was unprovable and therefore not investigated and the accused fired. Note her theft was not discoved until after the accused was fired but the company is sweeping that under the rug.

Employers don't need to provide a reason when terminating an employee.

Neither do employees when they choose to terminate, VOLUNTARILY, their employment.

That's equality, if you ask me.

 

[Equality]

As I understand it a false claim must be proven. In a he said she said that is impossible even if motive can be shown due to the current mentality that women don't lie. What I am asking is if there is any movement toward fixing our current system. Most states are at will which also stacks the deck against the falsely accused. The other issue that requires addressing is discrimination/ harassment of gays/lesbians as they little to no recourse and therefore companies do little when a gay or lesbian is harassed.

 

[Equality]

Employers don't need to provide a reason when terminating an employee.

Neither do employees when they choose to terminate, VOLUNTARILY, their employment.

That's equality, if you ask me.

It is until the reason for termination is due to the way current law is written and enforced. The law influences how businesses make decisions. It was intended to protect against injustice but lack of forethought in its creation has led to further injustice. When a business keeps an dishonest employee and covers up theft to avoid a potential false retaliation claim due to jurys and courts siding with the female. We as a society need to step back and look at what we created and consider if it promotes justice or corrupts it.

For at will to truly be at will we should have no employment law period. As we do have employment laws, I want to know what ensures that they are having the intended effect of justice.

 

[Betty3]

For at will to truly be at will we should have no employment law period. As we do have employment laws, I want to know what ensures that they are having the intended effect of justice.

We have to have laws (employment & others). Of course, there are always going to be some guilty people "going free" & innocent people "convicted."

 

[Equality]

I agree we need laws. But when a law lends itself to abuse it needs to be examined and fixed. Currently a company is legally required to protect the accuser there is no protection as afforded the accused. Hence in the face of an accusation a company is far safer simply firing the accused who has little to no recourse. The company has no requirement to tell the accused what they have been accused of or get their version. By simply firing the accused they need not investigate and face no retaliation claims or any form of litigation.

This lopsided set of laws creates an win win for the unscrupulous that is not talked about. We have no idea how often false accusations occur as what lawyer in his or her right mind would take on such a case unless the accused has extremely deep pockets.

 

[cbg]

I can see that you have never been involved in sexual harassment investigation. It is by no means always cut and dried.

If you have a specific situation that you want opinions on, please provide details. Otherwise, this is just ranting and not productive.

 

[disagreeable]

You are under the delusion that the system is supposed to be fair. The system is slanted to advance the goals of the super rich. That means the gradual breakdown of the middle class (management), creating a society beholden to its gov't and breaking down the bond of religion by encouraging immigration at any price. The time to stop it was 60 years ago. Now its every man/woman for themselves.

 

[Elle]

I have no idea what disagreeable is talking about as it has nothing to do with this post but I do have a problem with what Equality is proposing. Employers are not courts. They are not trained investigators. They may not use lie detectors, rubber hoses or waterboarding to force the truth out of anyone. Most harassment takes place without witnesses for obvious reasons. Expecting an employer to conduct a legal investigation that would hold up in a court of law before they may fire someone is just unreasonable.

While you may disagree with how one particular employer chose to handle a specific situation, it does not mean the entire system is unjust. It means one employer may or may not have conducted an adequate investigation and come to a conclusion you may or may not agree with. Unless you were the one who conducted each investigation you don't have the whole story. i do conduct investigations and I will say that in all the years I have done so, I've never come across an employee not directly involved who had all the facts but plenty who have opinions they think are facts.

 

[Equality]

I was directly involved and can guarantee that the investigation was as stated. Three different attorneys stated that the company has no obligation to get the side of the accused that due to the accused having no legal protections companies are far more likely to simply get rid if the accused rather than investigate or pay a third party investigator. If they never tell the accused exactly what the accuser told HR then there is not even a defamation of character suit as recourse.

I want to be clear I an not talking about an accusation made to EEOC but merely to HR.

 

[cbg]

If you don't like the laws, the way to get them changed is to lobby your elected representatives for change. Ranting on a message board will not do it.

 

[lda01]

While I may not share the OP's view that "the system" is unfair, I do share the frustration that we as employers have to some degree become guilty unless proven innocent in some of these issues. Over the last two decades I've seen playing field tilted to the claimant's favor. In an effort to protect the rights of real victims, non-performing employees have been armed with tools to use against an employer. There's even a term for it…."fire-proofing" (AKA –claim fishing). That's when a non-performing employee hears the axe being sharpened and files one or more complaints (harassment, discrimination, bullying, ADA etc) in hopes of insulating themselves from an employment action. While filing such a complaint doesn't stop us from proceeding with the progressive discipline process, it mandates a higher level of diligence/documentation on our part and possibly the expense of legal counsel as a precaution against a retaliation claim.

I recall a conversation I once had with a state EEO investigator regarding a claim of age discrimination. The investigator began the call by telling me how much money he thinks the claimant will accept settle the claim. This is before hearing the employer's statement. As it turned out, this was one of those cases where the agency was so claimant-friendly that an employer was presumed guilty. Yep, I feel your pain OP, but take some comfort in the knowledge that this is a see-saw that can tilt both ways.

 

[army judge]

While I may not share the OP's view that "the system" is unfair, I do share the frustration that we as employers have to some degree become guilty unless proven innocent in some of these issues. Over the last two decades I've seen playing field tilted to the claimant's favor. In an effort to protect the rights of real victims, non-performing employees have been armed with tools to use against an employer. There's even a term for it…."fire-proofing" (AKA –claim fishing). That's when a non-performing employee hears the axe being sharpened and files one or more complaints (harassment, discrimination, bullying, ADA etc) in hopes of insulating themselves from an employment action. While filing such a complaint doesn't stop us from proceeding with the progressive discipline process, it mandates a higher level of diligence/documentation on our part and possibly the expense of legal counsel as a precaution against a retaliation claim.

I recall a conversation I once had with a state EEO investigator regarding a claim of age discrimination. The investigator began the call by telling me how much money he thinks the claimant will accept settle the claim. This is before hearing the employer's statement. As it turned out, this was one of those cases where the agency was so claimant-friendly that an employer was presumed guilty. Yep, I feel your pain OP, but take some comfort in the knowledge that this is a see-saw that can tilt both ways.

This is about the government using, abusing, and misusing the citizenry.

The fish is rotting from the head.

Government has gotten too big, and the people have allowed it.

There are no free lunches.

Remember the Trojan Horse?

Those "freebies" require us to surrender our liberties and freedoms.

Frankly, all I want to do is be left alone.

That'll never happen.

It has nothing to do with "R", "D", or "I".

The liberties, freedoms, and constitutional protections that were gifted to us, we've squandered for "freebies" and "alleged safety".

:no: :yes: