
A note from Keith - kevingibbon
http://keithrabois.tumblr.com/post/41463189288/a-note-from-keith
======
danilocampos
What an impossible position.

On the one hand – work has become such a big part of our lives. If we make it
impossible for romance and work to co-exist, that reduces a lot of surface
area for finding long-term romantic partners.

On the other – at a certain level of authority and prominence, you just
shouldn't have sex with someone you're working with. There's too much that can
go wrong. This is the nightmare scenario for at least one of the parties,
though we don't know for sure yet who it is.

But even if things don't shit the bed quite this bad, you're just asking for
awkwardness and trouble in most cases.

Impossible.

~~~
tlogan
I'm not sure if this impossible position is given: he fucked up. He was
C-level executive, his partner got hired, but he did not tell a word to HR (or
company) about their relationship. Now, you have impossible position.

If the company and HR knew about their relationship then his position might
not be so impossible.

~~~
danilocampos
Relationships are nebulous, unpredictable things.

Sometimes it feels like even _talking_ about a relationship to other people
can effect the state of that relationship. It's easy in hindsight to say, hey,
you shouldn't have done it this way. But maybe at certain points it looked
like it was about to dissolve itself, but didn't... who knows. I can see a few
reasons why I wouldn't want to say anything, especially if this person wasn't
a direct report.

(This is taking the story at face value – who knows the truth and if there was
a more nefarious reason behind the withholding of that information.)

It's a spectrum. Consider two extremes:

Smart and clean: Don't form relationships at the office, period.

Dumb and messy: As CEO, have sex with the office manager of your small
startup.

This sounds like something very much in the gray area in between.

~~~
chollida1
> I can see a few reasons why I wouldn't want to say anything, especially if
> this person wasn't a direct report.

Really?

The guy was the COO, almost by definition everyone else in the company reports
to him through some direct line.

The guy admitted to having a physical relationship. There is absolutely no
gray area here as far as HR would be concerned.

Your a C level exec, you have a physical relationship with someone else at the
company, whether or not it stopped before that person arrived, you report it
the first moment you know that person starts working at your company.

I agree relationships are messy and life has lots of gray areas. This,
however, is not one of them. This is HR 101 and if your still not convinced he
admitted he knew this and should have reported it.

~~~
danilocampos
You are absolutely, 100% right.

Wouldn't _want_ to say anything isn't the same as wouldn't say anything. We do
things all the time where we know it's the wrong call, but we want to do it a
certain way anyway.

I doubt there's anyone who believes he should have said something more than
he. I just get the mindset that clouded things.

I know I should have gone to the gym this week. I didn't. You can probably
understand the thinking, moods and circumstances that made that true, but we'd
still agree I made the wrong call. That's all I'm saying.

------
run4yourlives
_Several months after our relationship began, I recommended that he interview
at Square._

I don't know Keith, anyone at his company, this story or have any opinion on
who did or didn't do what to whom.

I will just say this: The quote above, regardless of who says it when, is
perhaps the worst business decision a person could ever make. Full Stop.

Please, don't do this. Especially if you are the boss.

~~~
spuz
I don't understand. Maybe we have different professional cultures. Why is
having an undisclosed relationship with another employee the worst possible
business decision? (Certainly in my culture I can think of much worse
decisions one person could make).

~~~
danso
1\. "You want to break up with me? oK, you're fired"

2\. "Maybe Bob is the better qualified candidate, but I'm going to promote the
guy who's having sex with me"

~~~
mturmon
3\. "You're the boyfriend of the COO? Congratulations, you're hired into my
group as advisor for internal strategy. Can we three have lunch together some
time?"

~~~
spuz
Again, this is a situation where there is a conflict of interest that could
happen whether there is a romantic relationship between the two employees.
Would HR really have the ability to stop such a promotion knowing that at the
same time they must keep and relationship confidential?

In the UK, I've never been asked by a company to disclose any office
relationships. Usually such relationships are had in the open even between
different level employees.

~~~
mturmon
Significant promotions have input from far up the management chain, as well as
from HR (independently). There will be a board that meets to debate the
qualifications of this year's crop of promotion candidates. As the promotion
gets more senior, the board will be less ad hoc and more formal, with members
from farther across the organization, chosen by highly placed
engineers/managers.

So, the board has considerable power. If the relationship is not open, the
board may end up with members with conflicts of interest (COI).

The promotion process at my large (5000 employees) California-based
organization was changed a few years ago so that HR has input into every
promotion, even junior developers. The board used to have pretty much the last
word, but now HR has independent input into the decision, partly to put a
check on potential COIs like the one I mentioned above. (There are other
reasons too.) There was considerable grumpiness from engineering management,
and there is foolishness resulting from the change.

HR: "From what you sent us, it seems like the candidate has a _significant_
role in project X, but not a _highly significant_ role...could you provide
additional material to document a _highly significant_ role?"

I assume lawsuits from unhappy employees were the reason for these changes.
Large organizations are really afraid of large settlements and bad PR from
employee lawsuits. All these questions would be decided by a jury, in a
setting ripe for David vs. Goliath thinking.

------
ucpete
Interesting to read his note after this infamous story:

[http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/06/masters-their-
do...](http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/06/masters-their-domain)

~~~
samstave
WTF?!

I knew Thiel was gay - and until today had no idea Rabois was as well. The
story you linked to is the first time I've seen this and to see that they were
some ultra conservative bible toting rebels is... Bizarre.

Are they Tech's equivalent of the anti-gay senators caught in rest-stop
bathrooms?

How weird this got quickly

~~~
slapshot
> to see that they were some ultra conservative bible toting rebels is...
> Bizarre.

Or Mother Jones is trying to set up a strawman of them as being homophoboic
bigots without realizing that they were actually protesting [1] the then-
controversial Stanford speech code, which prohibited much more speech than the
government could prohibit. Lawsuits [2] were underway against the speech code
and it was a bit of a topic of the day.

As others have pointed out, the safest way to protest a speech code that bans
certain slurs against protected groups is to attack your own group. Rabois
standing around using anti-gay slurs can easily prove that he's actually
protesting the speech code by saying "look, I'm not homophobic, I'm actually
gay myself." A bunch of white guys standing around dropping the n-word would
not work out as well.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Rabois#Early_life> [2]
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corry_v._Stanford>

~~~
cadlin
I looked through your links and don't see anything about Keith Rabois being
gay. That he was might be common knowledge, but it's not intimated on those
sites.

~~~
mattdeboard
Keith Rabois is the author of the post you're commenting on.

~~~
cadlin
Right, I was commenting on this:

"As others have pointed out, the safest way to protest a speech code that bans
certain slurs against protected groups is to attack your own group. Rabois
standing around using anti-gay slurs can easily prove that he's actually
protesting the speech code by saying "look, I'm not homophobic, I'm actually
gay myself.""

Also, if he were a closeted homosexual it would make sense as to why he didn't
tell Square about the relationship.

------
jjb123
Am I the only one that was confused about that last line of "already working
on something new and hope to announce that in February"...

He's gone through something as traumatic as a lawsuit, a resignation,
potential for trial, potential embarrassment of family, friends, colleagues
all in the last two weeks... And his sign-off is that he has, in the midst of
it all, already begun to work on a new startup?

~~~
felideon
Maybe that's his therapy for coping. Would you rather him tear his clothes and
put sackcloth on his waist?

~~~
jjb123
I can totally understand if it's his therapy, it would likely be mine... That
doesn't answer the confusion in a teaser of a big work/unrelated announcement
being in there though.

~~~
jmcqk6
If it's something you're using to keep your mind off of other things, it seems
completely natural to mention it. I really don't see a problem here.

~~~
jjb123
It's not the mentioning that seems off; it's that it reads like a teaser, not
therapy.

------
jacalata
It's interesting that he says Square had no knowledge of the relationship
until the lawsuit. I've heard of companies requiring that you tell HR if you
are in a relationship with another employee- seems that level of disclosure
would be very smart for someone at the top of the company, at least.

~~~
spuz
It strikes me as odd that a company should be automatically given privilege to
the personal relationships of its employees. Maybe I'm not fully understanding
the situation here but I cannot see any reason for why an employee's
relationship with another employee should be of any concern to the company.

~~~
brown9-2
A company would want to know of a relationship outside of work in case there
are conflicts at work between the two employees in the future.

And because a reporting relationship between sexual partners is a bad idea.

"I think we need to let X go" could take on a whole new context if the speaker
was just dumped by X.

~~~
spuz
OK, but I still don't see what HR could do in those cases with prior knowledge
that they could not do with knowledge at the time an issue is raised.

For example, if I have just been fired by the manager who I just dumped, I go
to HR and have them resolve the situation then and explain the conflict of
interest given that we were in a relationship. The manager is given a talking
to, I keep my job and the situation is resolved. Please explain how this
situation plays out differently under your rules.

~~~
brown9-2
You could reassign employees so that there is no reporting relationship which
is a universally bad idea.

------
jmcgough
from Square:

“The first we heard of any of these allegations was when we received the
threat of a lawsuit two weeks ago. We took these allegations very seriously
and we immediately launched a full investigation to ascertain the facts. While
we have not found evidence to support any claims, Keith exercised poor
judgment that ultimately undermined his ability to remain an effective leader
at Square. We accepted his resignation.”

------
kogir
Proof of authenticity?

Anyone could have registered that tumblr, and it has no other content.

Please leave tabloid gossip to the tabloids until real information is
available - and then leave it off HN.

~~~
kevingibbon
Techcrunch has confirmed it.

[http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/25/rabois-left-square-over-
sex...](http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/25/rabois-left-square-over-sexual-
harassment-claim/)

~~~
kogir
Please forgive me if I don't count coverage by Techcrunch as verification. Did
he tweet it? Link from FB? Send a signed email?

It could be legit, but the bar should be higher than this.

~~~
kevingibbon
Every tech site is referencing it.

~~~
niggler
Wasn't there a post yesterday about how gaming sites reference sources because
others do (without any due diligence)?

~~~
rabble
That's true, but Kara usually does a pretty good job of actual journalism and
verifying sources.

------
Benoit_
I don't understand your reactions. Maybe because I am not from the US.

People say: you should NOT hire your partner.

So, you should NOT hire friends? So, you should NOT hire people you like? So,
you should NOT hire people for who you have any opinion? So, you should NOT
have any hobbies other employees can have?

Our decisions are obviously biased by our feelings, and it's normal, we want
people reliable, people we can trust! What's wrong with that?

In some cases, we want objective decisions. In these cases, you should just
recognize your incapacity to be unbiased and let other people take the
decision.

When I read the blog post, Keith didn't seem to have faced a such case, so
non-disclosed his relationship seemed to have been the best decision to avoid
to influence other people decisions.

It's common to meet the "love of our life" where we work, I don't understand
why it should be forbidden to those who have a management role.

------
zaidf
I think the general accepted idea that the victim of said offenses should
remain anonymous while the _accused_ is outed is very sad and makes little
sense. It makes the whole "innocent until proven guilty" idea a joke given the
ample data that show permanent damage that mere accusation can cause even if
you are proven innocent later.

~~~
brown9-2
The accused has outed himself.

------
someoneannon
When I was in my very early 20s I had a very bad false accusation made against
me. It was the most awful time of my life, an ex who had issues and needed
better support than I was able to give made the decision to go to the police
with a made up story. I was interviewed and spent the next two weeks on a
knife edge but ultimately everything was okay. I was very angry with her for
such a long time but now now realise that it wasn't her falt and that the
illness she suffered from was to blame.

If he is in the same situation that I was in, I can only feel sorry for both
parties as it is such a terrible thing to happen.

(posting annonamusly for obvious reasons)

------
SeoxyS
I have been refusing to recommend my otherwise perfect-fit girlfriend for a
position at my company for precisely this reason. You never know what might
happen; and while I love her, I know it's best to keep professional and
personal lives apart. You don't shit where you eat. It might sound cliché, but
there's truth to it.

------
kiskis
offtopic, and i'm not a native english speaker, but he refers to his partner
as "he and his". does this mean that it's a gay relationship?

~~~
nathan_f77
Yes.

------
VMG
Good PR move to write a preemptive blog post.

Everybody seems to be on his side without having the details.

------
d0m
Is it considered illegal to have a relationship with someone working at the
same company?

~~~
cookiecaper
No, but it is illegal to use workplace positions of authority to coerce or
pressure subordinates or colleagues into sexual activity.
<http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm>

~~~
csense
To this, I would add that it's difficult to determine when this has taken
place. Often it's a case of "he-said she-said," unless the harasser manages to
leave evidence (or in this particular case, "he-said he-said").

The large potential financial payoff from a successful lawsuit gives the
accuser a motive to lie or misremember.

Also, people are notoriously bad about communicating with each other about
relationships. So it's possible that the accuser genuinely thought he was
being coerced, when this was not actually the case. I.e. if he'd simply broken
up with Mr. Rabois instead of filing a lawsuit, there might have been no work-
related consequences whatsoever; but he didn't believe this.

------
selectout
Sad to see things like this happen, but I can't wait to see what he is able to
come up with and bring to the world next. He has done amazing jobs in his
previous roles and I am excited to see what he brings next from the PayPal
Mafia.

------
mbell
I am wildly confused.

Who is bringing this lawsuit?

The person he had the relationship with?

If not, who else and why/how would they have any grounds to do so?

EDIT: It appears the relationship ended in December
([http://allthingsd.com/20130125/exclusive-interview-keith-
rab...](http://allthingsd.com/20130125/exclusive-interview-keith-rabois-talks-
about-sexual-harassment-claims-becoming-a-distraction-at-square-and-whats-
next/?mod=tweet)).

I guess that that opens up the options for who was possibly behind it and what
the possible motivation was.

------
rdl
OMG, that is so fucked up. I can't imagine what Keith is feeling right now. I
am sure this will get resolved as well as possible, but even if everything is
dropped, it's a huge distraction for him.

Keith is an excellent human being and I am confident he acted appropriately
(with the exception of being too trusting of this guy, and recommending him
for Square, which was probably a mistake, but not a malicious act, rather an
overly-generous act).

I am confident I would react much more poorly in this situation.

------
jusben1369
It feels like there are several more shoes to drop still so probably best to
hold off too many conclusive judgement calls.

------
mwetzler
Can anyone explain why Keith leaving the company absolves Square of a
potential lawsuit? If the company actually did something illegal, isn't the
damage already done and still punishable? Seems there are quite a few missing
pieces to this story. In any case it's a shame for all involved.

~~~
kevinpet
I think they could claim not to have had any knowledge of anything until now.
It's much easier to sue over things that the company knew about.

------
late2part
Am I the only one that think Square sucks for not standing by their COO
against this action that looks like blackmail?

His judgement was bad? Enough to fire him over?

Or this another case of a corporation putting overly politically correct
perception and avoidance of risk beyond taking care of their own?

If you believe Mr. Rabois' story, he did nothing wrong, and the allegations
are baseless.

So, why is Square peeved enough to let him go? I don't believe for an instance
that Mr. Rabois is leaving out of altruistic ideals for Square.

------
AlexeyBrin
I've learned a similar lesson the hard way ten years ago. However, in my case
there was no lawsuit involved.

------
buf
Saddest news I've read all day. Sex happens. Why ruin someone for this?

~~~
danso
Huh? From what Keith says, his accuser is claiming that non-consensual acts
occurred. Whether that is the case will be up to the courts to decide, but
this is not just "Sex happens"

~~~
rhizome
He said the suit alleges _the relationship_ was not consensual. There's a
difference, and I'm guessing it's oriented around the employment aspect.

~~~
danso
Yes, you're right. The suit apparently alleges that the relationship itself
was not consensual. However, that almost necessarily means that acts within
that relationship, if they were seen as "necessary to keep the relationship
going", would be non-consensual.

I don't mean rape (or else I think Keith's response would have a different
approach). How Keith describes it, it could be anything relationship-related,
just as sexual harassment does not necessarily involve sex.

~~~
buf
Again, in any sexual facet not pertaining to rape, I find this news saddening.

If I were to enter into a relationship with you, and I said that the only way
I would continue the relationship is if you kept it under wraps, then is that
really qualification as sexual harassment?

The fact that we provide legal representation for people who have the choice
to discontinue a relationship is beyond me.

~~~
jordo37
It could very well be the opposite, the case is probably alleging that in
order to get / keep the job the accuser had to continue a sexual relationship.

------
abraininavat
To those of you who immediately believe the tumblr and therefore condemn the
accuser as a liar: On what basis do you make your judgment? Do you:

1\. Know Keith or the accuser personally, and therefore have the capacity to
make an educated guess as to the veracity of the claims?

2\. Believe that rich people, well known people, or people with blogs don't
have the capacity to do what Keith is accused of doing?

3\. Believe the first side of the story you hear in any given situation?

If neither 1, 2, nor 3 is the case, I urge you to not jump to conclusions.
There's a human being on the other side of the story.

~~~
falcolas
There's a human being on both sides of the story here. And being falsely
accused of sexual harassment is a painful event.

I can't side with either party right now (due to the lack of facts), but I
certainly feel more for Keith than I do the other, anonymous party.

~~~
nbashaw
That's the point - just because the other party is anonymous doesn't mean they
deserve less empathy. Of course, we're biased to the more vivid human
character, but it's just a bias. Let's try and correct it with reason.

~~~
reinhardt
"Of course, we're biased to the more vivid human character"

Not really, we're biased to the alleged victim (aka the accuser). Granted, not
as much as if it was female but still.

------
j98h
what this mean "user like this"?? reading the dramatic situation and then view
a lots of "user like this". They make me have a little smile, sorry.

~~~
mattdeboard
It's a social feature on Tumblr. It's like "Favorite" on Twitter.

