Teddy wrote on Jul 12, 2020, 23:31:
MrBone wrote on Jul 12, 2020, 22:36:
Interesting how some posters believe in guilty until proven guilty in regards to these cases. Perhaps someone should blanket accuse some of you. That would be grand.
See, the thing about that is, a company doesn't have to follow that. They can decide you're guilty based on accusations, or they can decide it's not worth the hassle or negative PR of waiting for a longer investigation. You do not have a right of presumed innocence when it comes to your employment. That only applies in court. If these people felt themselves wronged, they can take the company to court for slander and see what happens. Of course that drags all the evidence that the company has against them out into the open during a trial. Up to them if they truly believe they've done nothing wrong.
Now of course is the time when someone will try to cry "wrongful dismissal" which is a load of nonsense unless you were dismissed under discriminatory circumstances (and no, these don't apply).
Although you are correct largely in the US, things can change that, like contracts, or if they aren't in an at will state, or want to sue claiming a protected reason.
Also about being innocent, when you start getting rid of executives like this, especially more than one, it's extremely likely that there's some legit basis to the accusations. It's not just a one off accusation. There's a pattern for this to happen. If this was just to throw someone to baseless claims of the wolves of social media, they could have picked one particular guy and gotten rid of him as a scapegoat, and claimed they fixed everything. It's also not just picking a bunch of people who they want to save money so they can hire replacement college grads, that happens with peons, not executives. If this was a bunch of people getting unjustly tossed because of politics or something, there's be much more discussions, people defending themselves in interviews and social media, people wouldn't be going quietly into the night. Executives aren't involved in trying to unionize, so it's not that either. No, there was enough there to hire investigators. This is the behavior you'd see with a bunch of NDAs, like you get gone, stay quiet, here's a bunch of money, and we won't further pursue this stuff against you kinda thing.
Like can anyone think of a legit scenario with this kinda behavior of getting rid of multiple executives and others in a single company with a short time span where there wasn't something that had basis to it? One where no one involved is talking or going into details trying to defend themselves? Something where the CEO and cofounder himself comes forward and essentially calls HIS OWN WORKPLACE unsafe, noninclusive, not respecting people and having toxic behavior? You don't do that if there's zero basis. No, most companies would be more defending, saying it they were going to have new policies, or maybe it was one bad apple, not talking bad about their own company. That's incredibly demoralizing to a company's morale if it's not true. That's a good way to tank your stock if it's not true.