• MoonlightFox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    Not that I condone or want to minimize the experience.

    But isn’t that something that happens at pretty much all companies given a certain size? The more people work somewhere the higher the likelihood that some form of sexual harassment would happen? LTT has >100 employees I believe. LTT seems to be a place that takes good care of their employees compared to most companies.

    I kinda feel that disregarding the entire company because of a sexual harassment incident is heavy handed. Note that I do not know of the extent that this has happened.

    I am open to having my mind changed here.

    • Ooops@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Not that I […] want to minimize the experience.

      But isn’t that something that happens at pretty much all companies

      Pick one…

      • MoonlightFox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Thanks, I see that this was somewhat contradictory.

        My point is that the issue with SA and sexual harassment is so prevalent in society that it happens everywhere. A company of a 100 employees or more would probably have someone acting badly. As long as it is handled and the parties face some sort of consequences that prevents it in the future I don’t see how disregarding an entire company is productive or helpful. If there is proof of them not taking the harassment seriously, then I think boycotting is productive. I have not seen evidence of this in regards of LTT.

        The statistics on SA and sexual harassment in society pretty much points in the direction that it is a huge problem and happens everywhere, and therefore should be expected to happen at LTT as well. Not that it is OK.