New Allegations against Kent Hehr

[chemgear]

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/otta...ehr-had-to-go/

Raworth didn’t complain in 2008, because she feared compromising her dream job. “If I said anything, I would be labelled as difficult or labelled as someone who wouldn’t play the game,” she says.

David Swann, who led the Alberta Liberal party during part of Hehr’s two terms, said in an 2016 interview his colleague would often spend long nights out at pubs with younger legislature staff. Sometimes Hehr would be “spouting off” in ways that concerned the leader. “I don’t think he ever did anything illegal, but he was certainly pushing the boundaries with staff,” Swann recalled for a 2016 Maclean’s profile of Hehr, shortly after his cabinet appointment.

“I was concerned at one time it might get out of hand, but then he met a couple of women in his life that I think helped him get back to get some of the balance. And he has matured.” Swann declined comment Thursday.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by chemgear

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/otta...ehr-had-to-go/

Raworth didn’t complain in 2008, because she feared compromising her dream job. “If I said anything, I would be labelled as difficult or labelled as someone who wouldn’t play the game,” she says.

David Swann, who led the Alberta Liberal party during part of Hehr’s two terms, said in an 2016 interview his colleague would often spend long nights out at pubs with younger legislature staff. Sometimes Hehr would be “spouting off” in ways that concerned the leader. “I don’t think he ever did anything illegal, but he was certainly pushing the boundaries with staff,” Swann recalled for a 2016 Maclean’s profile of Hehr, shortly after his cabinet appointment.

“I was concerned at one time it might get out of hand, but then he met a couple of women in his life that I think helped him get back to get some of the balance. And he has matured.” Swann declined comment Thursday.

I do think that this is exactly the kind of thing that can't be tolerated. I have no doubt that her and others in her position felt they couldn't say anything, and that's not right. But my issue is with the people who were warning here (and presumably others) who felt it was bad enough that new hires ought to be warned, but not bad enough to take more aggressive action. Is the system setup in a way that would implicate these potential whistleblowers as well?

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

It's a difficult question to answer. First of all you never go directly to your boss and make any accusations. You register a complaint with HR. Say there's talk in my office that my boss is grabby with the women. I simply can't go to HR and make any accusations based off hearsay seeing I have witnessed nothing. However if a female made accusations and an investigation was taking place I could bring my concern to HR that this has been ongoing talk in the office and bothers myself and others that it has not been addressed.

with respect to the bolded, in fact you can. And indeed, I suspect that most employers would argue that you have a duty to do so. Obviously no responsible employer would ground a disciplinary decision on hearsay evidence alone. However, a report based on hearsay gives an employer the opportunity to begin an investigation which may or may not substantiate the allegations.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Makarov

with respect to the bolded, in fact you can. And indeed, I suspect that most employers would argue that you have a duty to do so. Obviously no responsible employer would ground a disciplinary decision on hearsay evidence alone. However, a report based on hearsay gives an employer the opportunity to begin an investigation which may or may not substantiate the allegations.

Lol, well apparently some would. I mean the "evidence" here is entirely hearsay and people who think he "is creepy" and yet the guy was booted from cabinet. I know what you mean...but the reality is that in the current climate business decisions are being made where men are literally accused of something one day and forced out a day later. Surely there are some who deserve that and that will prove fitting, but we can be just as sure that others are caught up in this frenzy who do not.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Slava

Lol, well apparently some would. I mean the "evidence" here is entirely hearsay and people who think he "is creepy" and yet the guy was booted from cabinet. I know what you mean...but the reality is that in the current climate business decisions are being made where men are literally accused of something one day and forced out a day later. Surely there are some who deserve that and that will prove fitting, but we can be just as sure that others are caught up in this frenzy who do not.

Fair enough. It seems that in high publicity workplaces/environments, the second (and very important) step of the process is being skipped or forgotten. That is a problem (that will probably end up costing some organizations some money).

[KevanGuy]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Yeah, I kind of take some issue with this as well. If somebody had just stepped in and said "Hey Kent, this isn't cool. Knock it off.",.

How do you know this didn't happen? Maybe people should take responsibility for their own actions instead of making it everyone else's business.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I went to MRC at the same time as Hehr, and I heard the same things. There's a Hollywood narrative that suffering a tragedy or disability is ennobling and makes people into heroes. I don't think that's the way the world really works.

Hehr may fall into that category of people who use their disability to help enable their bad behavior. it allows him to get away with things a regular abled guy could not. no one wants to be seem as picking on the disabled person, or he would be given more latitude as "he's been through so much"

I've seen quite a few people over the years use their handicap as a way to bully people and cross the line of socially acceptable behaviour.

[OMG!WTF!]

The other thing with respect to timing (why did they just go public now) it might be because there wasn't a body of evidence ten years ago. A one off in the elevator might have been easier to get away with. After ten years of similar behavior, it might simply be a case of enough is enough.

Also I don't worry too much about people being wrongly accused. Anyone wrongly accused would likely have a chorus of supporters, not accusers.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Why is that a joke? You think she's making it up?

Not at all.

I’m saying that if you are going to make a claim like this in the media, it’s a fair expectation that you’re going to be asked to back it up, something that is not unreasonable at all.

We are moving to a model where you can make an accusation in the media with zero evidence and the person you are acccusing will be crucified on your work alone. There is no way for someone who is accused to defend themselves from these claims since accusations are being made anonymously and never in a court where facts and evidence can be presented. Even if the claims are tried in court, acquittals are meaningless since your name is already destroyed.

The model used in some European countries should be adopted. Names withheld until convicted.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by KevanGuy

How do you know this didn't happen? Maybe people should take responsibility for their own actions instead of making it everyone else's business.

I would sure hope that the HR department at the provincial legislature wouldn't brush these kinds of things aside though. Just turning a blind eye to any alleged sexual misconduct would be egregious to say the least?

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Also I don't worry too much about people being wrongly accused. Anyone wrongly accused would likely have a chorus of supporters, not accusers.

Who is going to speak up if you’re falsely accused? Supporters of those who are accused are being lumped in with them.

Margaret Atwood spoke out in support of due process and voiced concerns about the MeToo movement getting out of control and now she’s being vilified for that.

[OMG!WTF!]

We are moving to a model where you can make an accusation in the media with zero evidence and the person you are acccusing will be crucified on your work alone. There is no way for someone who is accused to defend themselves from these claims since accusations are being made anonymously and never in a court where facts and evidence can be presented. Even if the claims are tried in court, acquittals are meaningless since your name is already destroyed.

These accusations aren't about what's legal or illegal. If you have to break the law to step down from public office we're screwed. Bad behavior is enough to justify someone getting canned for sure.

But you know, there are several laws protecting people from slander and libel. One court of public opinion strategy is to stand up to your false accuser. If your entire staff doesn't quit, then maybe you'll be on to some path of redemption. Hehr hasn't been loud and clear in his denial of the situation. I don't know if we've seen a false accusation yet.

A reasonable amount of proof can be determined in most cases.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Yeah, I kind of take some issue with this as well. If somebody had just stepped in and said "Hey Kent, this isn't cool. Knock it off.", then maybe a) he would have changed his behavior and been more respectful, and b) this wouldn't have been drawn out for so long.

Maybe I am just projecting how I would react to being told that I was out of line on something of that nature. I don't know what went on here though, but I kind of liken it to maybe body odor or bad breath - you're kind of nose-blind to it, and if nobody corrects you on it, you'll probably stay that way and people will just warn others not to get to close to you because your breath smells like dead rodents, instead of helping to solve the problem.

Or maybe it would have just been

c) Nothing changes, because sometimes an a-hole is just an a-hole and doesn't care what you think.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by KevanGuy

How do you know this didn't happen? Maybe people should take responsibility for their own actions instead of making it everyone else's business.

Of course they should, but some people are also completely tone deaf to their own stupidity. The reason for workplace sexual harassment and sensitivity courses is because a lot of people still don't understand or get it, and need to be educated.

I don't know how you can justify letting it get to the point where it's a defacto office policy to stay out of arms reach of Hehr.

edit: to clarify - I didn't mean "somebody" as in one of the recipients of Hehr's comments, I meant somebody that is acting in an HR capacity on behalf of the victims.

[GGG]

I don't think the I didn't know any better defense is an acceptable excuse.

But the HR and management processes need to be looked at because that is how these complaints should be addressed. If they failed as they did in most of these cases: Lauder, Gomeshi, Brown etc it needs to be looked at.

If people didn't go to HR the question needs to be looked at as to why doesn't it seem safe to go to HR and if they failed to react why didn't that system work.

[Jiggy]

Interesting article on the Liberals not doing a proper investigation with the allegations on Darshan Kang. I wonder how they deal with Kent's situation.

Link to the article: http://calgaryherald.com/news/politi...on-under-wraps

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Apparently the woman who made the latest accusations has demanded the media stop contacting her about it and has said she won’t be commenting on it further.

What a joke.

I don't think getting harassed at work makes it acceptable to be harassed by the media, do you?

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Some of you seem to be operating under the naive belief that the HR department is there to protect employees.

[GreatWhiteEbola]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

He's not going to step down. Maybe rolls down though.

Do you stand by this comment?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Meh, I took a shot in the dark.