[throwaway5752]

As CEO, you have a moral obligation to your employees, a fiduciary responsibility to the board and stockholders, and a legal responsibility under California and Federal law that makes your suggestion poor advice.

It is very nice that in your instance and outcome that was so mutually agreeable was reached by all parties. However, it could have easily gone differently, and can go differently in the future. As other commenters in that other thread noted: if the individual who was harassed was on a PIP, if the individual harasses an external vendor/contractor/customer, if he or someone else harasses another employee in the future, if the harassee leaves the company under circumstances that are not mutually disagreeable... all of these are very likely to result in material civil settlements to the company (and possibly the CEO personally) if this is not handled in a way very close to what patio11 described. Raising with HR vs contacting a lawyer will certainly result in the same outcome, regardless.

[enraged_camel]

>>It is very nice that in your instance and outcome that was so mutually agreeable was reached by all parties. However, it could have easily gone differently, and can go differently in the future.

Exactly. It was a big risk and her company frankly got lucky that it worked out.