If Linus is the problem then I’m not gonna support him. But we don’t know who the problem was, other than “upper management”. You seem certain it is Linus, I am not so sure. For all I know it could be Yvonne. Jumping to conclusions about who did what is just as irresponsible as blindly following/trusting Linus.
Ultimately Linus is responsible as the head of the company, but if it wasn’t his direct actions then I am not gonna hold it against him unless he runs from the problem.
To be clear, I am not doubting Madison’s claims, I am just not reaching for the pitch forks either.
I do feel a bit icky about supporting the company where that kind of behaviour was allowed to flourish, and I hope (perhaps naively) that the individuals and behaviours are being appropriately addressed. Ultimately, it is up to LMG to prove to us that they have appropriately addressed them.
Edit: just read the bit about him chewing someone out publically in the office, definely not a good behaviour to be demonstrating. It’s definitely a sign that something is not okay at the top.
Even if Yvonne or anyone else is solely responsible in upper management, so what? They fire that one person and everything is magically fine? What about that time where at least one person harassed an employee (and it sounds like it’s multiple people doing it) and apparently literally everyone ignored it? This is a structural problem, sure there are ways harassers can get into positions of power but there should be no way for them to thrive in them. The instant she was harassed, in a sane company she should have been able to go to someone else in upper management and report that shit, the fact that nothing happened tells us nobody cared.
This on top of the overworking of employees means LMG is dead to me. There is nothing they can do to get out of this, they have been fucking around for years and now they’re finding out.
No, I’m not saying that just firing the person makes it right. At best it’s the start. I am saying that I want to see evidence of a cultural shift that ensures that what happened to Madison cannot happen again.
I 100% agree that its a structural problem, but that is a solvable problem if LMG really wants to fix it, it will cost money, time and likely require a lot of restructuring, but I don’t believe it is impossible.
I’m not confident that will happen, I am just being open to the slim possibility of happening.
Absolutely, he is ultimately responsible for the environment that allowed it to happen. It doesn’t mean he directly did the things being alleged. To me, Occam’s could be applied as: The company has known internal communication issues, the lack of an appropriate response to Madison’s treatment may stem from that.
And I also apply Hanlons as: Linus’ company is being incompetently managed (by his own admission), whichallowed Madison’s abuse to occur.
I’m not trying to absolve Linus of responsibility, he is ultimately responsible. But as long as he is not the direct cause of the problem, this is salvageable. Hiring the new CEO and getting their house in order will hopefully prevent this ever happening again.
I get their point as well though, these are very serious allegations, and something is very wrong. I feel terrible for Madison, this never should have happened.
It’s worth considering that for some of the people commenting, they may have direct personal experience with these kind of problems, and their response is rightfully coloured by that. I am fortunate that I have not directly been impacted by this kind of workplace abuse, so it’s a lot less personal.
If Linus is the problem then I’m not gonna support him. But we don’t know who the problem was, other than “upper management”. You seem certain it is Linus, I am not so sure. For all I know it could be Yvonne. Jumping to conclusions about who did what is just as irresponsible as blindly following/trusting Linus.
Ultimately Linus is responsible as the head of the company, but if it wasn’t his direct actions then I am not gonna hold it against him unless he runs from the problem.
To be clear, I am not doubting Madison’s claims, I am just not reaching for the pitch forks either.
I do feel a bit icky about supporting the company where that kind of behaviour was allowed to flourish, and I hope (perhaps naively) that the individuals and behaviours are being appropriately addressed. Ultimately, it is up to LMG to prove to us that they have appropriately addressed them.
Edit: just read the bit about him chewing someone out publically in the office, definely not a good behaviour to be demonstrating. It’s definitely a sign that something is not okay at the top.
Even if Yvonne or anyone else is solely responsible in upper management, so what? They fire that one person and everything is magically fine? What about that time where at least one person harassed an employee (and it sounds like it’s multiple people doing it) and apparently literally everyone ignored it? This is a structural problem, sure there are ways harassers can get into positions of power but there should be no way for them to thrive in them. The instant she was harassed, in a sane company she should have been able to go to someone else in upper management and report that shit, the fact that nothing happened tells us nobody cared.
This on top of the overworking of employees means LMG is dead to me. There is nothing they can do to get out of this, they have been fucking around for years and now they’re finding out.
No, I’m not saying that just firing the person makes it right. At best it’s the start. I am saying that I want to see evidence of a cultural shift that ensures that what happened to Madison cannot happen again.
I 100% agree that its a structural problem, but that is a solvable problem if LMG really wants to fix it, it will cost money, time and likely require a lot of restructuring, but I don’t believe it is impossible.
I’m not confident that will happen, I am just being open to the slim possibility of happening.
It has his name on it. It’s his responsibility. A lot of people here are avoiding Occam’s razor.
Absolutely, he is ultimately responsible for the environment that allowed it to happen. It doesn’t mean he directly did the things being alleged. To me, Occam’s could be applied as: The company has known internal communication issues, the lack of an appropriate response to Madison’s treatment may stem from that. And I also apply Hanlons as: Linus’ company is being incompetently managed (by his own admission), whichallowed Madison’s abuse to occur.
I’m not trying to absolve Linus of responsibility, he is ultimately responsible. But as long as he is not the direct cause of the problem, this is salvageable. Hiring the new CEO and getting their house in order will hopefully prevent this ever happening again.
You’re literally the only other person besides me in this thread who is waiting for a response before being outraged.
People and cancel culture is disgusting.
I get their point as well though, these are very serious allegations, and something is very wrong. I feel terrible for Madison, this never should have happened.
It’s worth considering that for some of the people commenting, they may have direct personal experience with these kind of problems, and their response is rightfully coloured by that. I am fortunate that I have not directly been impacted by this kind of workplace abuse, so it’s a lot less personal.