Politically Correct person makes man kill himself.

Originally Posted by Stuart C

The person reporting it to the company may not have known that it wasn't bullying.

and thats why he should have asked a few questions before going to the extreme of suspension

[Ed2020]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Ultimately, this is a management decision.

No, in many cases it absolutely isn't a management decision. And nor should it be.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by martyh

and thats why he should have asked a few questions before going to the extreme of suspension

I didn't think he did. I thought he just reported it to someone else who did the suspension. I agree, however, that the suspension should not have occurred.

[Dai]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

What killed the man was the actions of the *company*. Not the person who made the complaint. The company did not need to suspend him, which is what apparently caused the suicide.

The company had to play safe. In a world where legal action is the norm and the oldfashioned ideas of 'common sense' no longer are valid they have to play the PC game.

I maintain the individual who decided to set himself in judgement is the one with responsibility for the death.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Ed2020

No, it definitely isn't solely a managerial decision. It's a point of law.

No, it's a managerial decision as to how to handle it. Nothing in law says "If person A hears something from person B which offends person A, then person B must be suspended before investigating"

Originally Posted by Ed2020

There aren't two people involved there are three.

Um, the third person being the one asked why they think anything should be done when the two involved are perfectly happy with what occured would be in order.
Who esle did you think should be asked?

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by DaiNasty

The company had to play safe. In a world where legal action is the norm and the oldfashioned ideas of 'common sense' no longer are valid they have to play the PC game.

I maintain the individual who decided to set himself in judgement is the one with responsibility for the death.

The company may well have been protected if they just had evidence they have investigated the complaint.

Anyhow, as an experiment, let's turn the story around. If the article had been about a man who committed suicide after a comment made at work, no one had reported it and the company had done nothing because no one had reported it, would you still say everyone who saw what had happened and did nothing was right?

[Will21st]

Originally Posted by Ed2020

Except it's not just about whether the person to whom the comment was directed found it offensive. It's also about people around them who may overhear.

Nope.complaining is up to the person the remark was aimed at.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Ed2020

Except it's not just about whether the person to whom the comment was directed found it offensive. It's also about people around them who may overhear.

I don't accept that. why would somebody else find it offensive?
9 times out of 10 I'd say it's because they've been told to by the hysteria.

A little girl today likes to tell tales. always telling her mother 'Gary' said this 'Gary' did that. she thinks it pleases her mother to be told these tales. and I expect she feels good for it.

but I don't go running to her mother everytime she does or says something. If I did we'd argue with each other more than we do already

[Ed2020]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

No, it's a managerial decision as to how to handle it. Nothing in law says "If person A hears something from person B which offends person A, then person B must be suspended before investigating"

I never said there was a law that says person B must be suspended. My original statement was about the relevance of third parties overhearing and being offended. There is plenty in law that says that this is relevant - it is not just about the nature of the conversation between person A and person B and how they both perceived it.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Um, the third person being the one asked why they think anything should be done when the two involved are perfectly happy with what occured would be in order.
Who esle did you think should be asked?

Um... pardon? In the final part of your post (#61) you referred to "the two [people] involved". When having conversations and banter in the workplace you need to consider who else may overhear. As somebody overheard there were not two people involved - there were three.

---------- Post added at 22:59 ---------- Previous post was at 22:54 ----------

Originally Posted by Will21st

Nope.complaining is up to the person the remark was aimed at.

Nope. Plenty of company policies will disagree with you on that point. And anyone who overhears and is offended by the nature of the conversation has a right to raise a complaint. The complaint may not be upheld, but they still have a right to make it.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Ed2020

And anyone who overhears and is offended by the nature of the conversation has a right to raise a complaint. The complaint may not be upheld, but they still have a right to make it.

Does that include the one about seeing 2 fit ladies on the way into work. or just the 2 fat ones?

[Ed2020]

Originally Posted by Gary L

I don't accept that. why would somebody else find it offensive?

I was speaking generally, rather than about this specific case. Personally I wouldn't have found a remark like that to be at all offensive. Nevertheless it's not something I would say to somebody (even somebody I knew well) at work because I can kind of see how somebody overhearing may take it the wrong way or be offended.

If I was the manager responsible for dealing with it then I most definitely wouldn't have suspended anyone and if this man felt he was under any risk of losing his job over it then I can hardly think how they could have handled the situation worse. I think I'd probably just have had a quiet word and asked them to be mindful of who else may overhear things they're saying in jest.

Originally Posted by Gary L

9 times out of 10 I'd say it's because they've been told to by the hysteria.

As I said earlier I agree people seem to be getting more thin-skinned over the past few years. The only hysteria I've seen tends to come from sources like the Daily Mail though.

Originally Posted by Gary L

A little girl today likes to tell tales. always telling her mother 'Gary' said this 'Gary' did that. she thinks it pleases her mother to be told these tales. and I expect she feels good for it.

but I don't go running to her mother everytime she does or says something. If I did we'd argue with each other more than we do already

---------- Post added at 23:09 ---------- Previous post was at 23:07 ----------

Originally Posted by Gary L

Does that include the one about seeing 2 fit ladies on the way into work. or just the 2 fat ones?

Pardon?

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

...Anyhow, as an experiment, let's turn the story around. If the article had been about a man who committed suicide after a comment made at work, no one had reported it and the company had done nothing because no one had reported it, would you still say everyone who saw what had happened and did nothing was right?

I'm also interested to hear replies to this question. I hope no-one suggests the person contemplating suicide should "grow some" ...

[nomadking]

I'm still wondering how it could be taken the wrong way or truly offend someone, other than the PC mafia insisting that someone should be offended.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Ed2020

Pardon?

Sorry. that should be the converation heard about the 2 fit or fat ladies at work

[nomadking]

If someone was accused of being rude, shoving people out of the way at the top of a flight of stairs and other things, should they be suspended and potentially sacked?