[flootch]

Eric couldn't find a single bankster guilty of anything in the 2008 meltdown, and he wasn't able to find anything wrong with Fast & Furious, so I have to disagree with you, his appointment will certainly provide the best outcome for Uber.

[CalChris]

One was found guilty, but point taken.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/04/magazine/only-one-top-ban...

None were found guilty in Britain as well. Nor did Congress enact any meaningful reform. Hell, Arizona has re-elected John McCain and he was a bag man for Charles Keating.

Seems like no one, Justice, Congress or the American people want to hold people accountable.

[bboreham]

> None were found guilty in Britain as well.

Interested to know why you exclude Jay Merchant, Alex Pabon, Peter Johnson et al from your count.

[CalChris]

Thanks. The article I read was from before those convictions. And given the relative sizes of our countries, y'all did a much better job of holding people accountable. We clearly didn't.

After Enron, many people (not enough) went to prison. Arthur Anderson was shut down with huge job losses. White collar jobs. Politicians and the Justice Department have no stomach for that.

Maybe they have a point. In the 30s, a lot of good banks went down as a contagion spread. In 2008, it was already bad and no one but no one wanted that. Lehman was more of a hit job favor for Goldman Sachs, but also a visible sacrifice. But no one wanted the 30s again.

[flootch]

Thanks, very interesting article on how we got there.

[brobinson]

His refusal to provide documentation related to Fast & Furious also earned him the honor of being the first cabinet member ever to be found in contempt of Congress

[grandalf]

> the best outcome for Uber

It's OK if it's the best outcome, so long as those who broke the law are fairly punished. At this point, I'm not aware that Susan has initiated a lawsuit, so I'm guessing she'll be contacted with a settlement offer.

This is a great example of how allowing a douche to act in a way that everyone knows violates sexual harassment laws can cost a company money and reputation.

If you're someone's boss, don't talk about sex with them unless you are sure they will be happy to have that conversation and won't have second thoughts within the statute of limitations.

[davedx]

If you are someone's boss don't proposition them, period. It is an abuse of power.

[grandalf]

Of course! My point was that even if you acknowledge some possible gray area, it's still a stupid thing to do.

[falcolas]

I think he is referring to a finding in Uber's favor by a biased party being bad in the public eye.

[mdip]

> best outcome for Uber.

Based on your comment, I'm inferring that your view is that the best possible outcome for Uber would be a situation where a sham investigation is performed, valid accusations are suppressed, they can claim everything's OK and continue business as usual (and that this is the outcome Uber desires -- and they may very well desire this, I'm certainly suspicious). If that's an incorrect read, then please accept my apologies for what follows because that's what I'm addressing in this response.

At this point "the genie is out of the bottle". Every major (and many minor) news source has reported on Sarah Fowler's allegations. There's no going back so some sort of response has to be made to what's being alleged. I see two possible, obvious, options: Suppress/obstruct/lie and distract with a sham investigation. Settle quietly with any accusers with strong NDAs. Come back in a few weeks with findings that are as transparent as mud or get in front of it, probably still settle quietly with accusers/NDAs, communicate internally and externally extremely strong policies addressing this sort of behavior and operate with a nearly "zero tolerance", weed out the bad actors and revisit/measure success at regular intervals.

The best possible, long term outcome for Uber would be to get to the truth of what is happening in a way that is as public and transparent as possible. Then "move heaven and earth" to correct it, continuing to operate as publicly as possible about the outcome. This is a "sharing economy" company where riders and drivers alike are being asked to put a great deal of trust in an entity that looks very untrustworthy at this point. Assuming the allegations are true, what's going on over there is all kinds of bad, and not just for the victims of harassment/discrimination. Sarah Fowler's allegations extend far beyond her personal experiences. The biggest red flag that I saw was the ineptitude and powerlessness exhibited by HR. Without a strong HR department with the ability to independently take action on ethical failures like this, the company, itself, cannot be trusted.

I've been lucky to be part of companies that had strong, established guidelines that extended beyond the protections of the law coupled with HR departments that had the authority to act independent of management[0]. I know of specific cases where popular, top performing managers were removed despite the desires of C-level executives. Policies left little room for interpretation, required yearly re-agreement (with really annoying and specific tests) and required reporting even of witnessed harassment (with teeth -- if you were a witness, failed to report and were found out, you were subject to termination with cause).

Companies that do not demand such obvious ethical behavior are almost certainly suffering from many forms of employee ethical lapses. Corporate culture that actively suppresses reporting of unethical/discriminatory and harassing behavior (through the inaction of HR), cause the "good people" to leave (or stay, but in a state of demotivation and without a chance that they'll ever stand up), and leave the company run by people you can't trust.

Again, assuming these are true allegations, this is a far worse place to be than the position of a company having to apologize for bad behavior, settle some lawsuits and take the necessary action to restore confidence in what they're doing. Attacking it head on comes with the immediate risk that the dirty laundry will be aired for all to see, customers will lose confidence in the company and they won't be able to regain trust quickly enough after the bad actors are rooted out and the problem is corrected, but the alternative is like a pot of soup set to boil. At some point, the multiplication of bubbles accelerates until it rapidly boils over and in this case that might not be something that can be recovered from. It's also possible we're witnessing that pot boiling over right now.

[0] I was never in HR, but had near family-level friendships with a higher-up in that department who shared information that they almost certainly should not have with me.