That really said nothing. They actually previously had a policy that if you were required to take sexual harassment training and didn't you got docked 1 point? Wouldn't getting fired be a more appropriate penalty?
However they take this "seriously" so I'm sure everything will be fine for Google employees.
You didn't read the post carefully, apparently. Previously there was no penalty for skipping the mandatory training. (The fact that such training is "mandatory" is required by US law. Like most companies, such training is generally done on-line. It was that way at all of my previous places of employment, including at IBM. And I'm not aware of any impact, other than continuing to get nag e-mails, at any of my previous employers for not bothering to do the training.)
Moving forward, there now is a penalty for skipping said training. More importantly, it applies for everyone, including Directors and VP's, not just individual contributors. And one point on Perf is a big deal; it's the difference between Significantly Exceeds Expectation and Exceeds Expectations (or Exceeds Expectations vs Meets Expectations), and this impacts salary increases, bonuses, and promotion.
Have you ever been through sexual harassment training? Did you feel like it was helpful?
I've been through several and found that no one really takes it seriously. If the things they tell you in sexual harassment training are new to you, you probably aren't going to learn your lesson. Problem employees aren't going to change their behavior. Enforcement of standards is much more critical.
Sexual harassment training is a CYA move by companies.
If someone is constantly touching my shoulder and I'm not sure what it means, how should I react? Should I say something directly to the person? Should I tell my manager? If it is my manager, who could I talk to? If I complain about something that my boss is doing and it turns out to be an innocent misunderstanding, will it affect my performance review? What things are in place in the organisation to ensure that I won't be targeted for complaining about something? What happens if a really senior executive or something does something inappropriate? Does the organisation have enough power to deal with the situation? What should I do about things that only indirectly affect me? For example, my neighbour has a picture of their scantily clad boyfriend on their desk. It makes me uncomfortable. Should I ignore it? Should I say something? Is the fact that nobody has done anything about it before an indication that this is OK as far as the company policy is concerned? If I notice that a group of people are harassing someone else, how should I respond? What if it's always been this way and is part of the current culture? Should I ignore it? What if the seemingly harassed individual doesn't object?
I literally could go on for an hour or so. If your sexual harassment training doesn't answer questions like this, then I highly recommend that you be proactive and get the training fixed. If you think the answers to these questions are obvious, then I think you will be surprised that a lot of people will have different opinions. What's important is know what opinion your company has!
Edit: I should point out, having worked in several different countries before, that these kinds of questions are very culturally charged.
Repeatedly asking a woman out. I recall a friend upsetting a love interest because he didn't repeatedly ask her out, as was customary where she was from. She didn't think he was serious because he wasn't trying hard enough.
It used to be quite common everywhere. The idea that you should immediately give up after a single "no" is very modern even in the west, and by no means is it an idea all women are on board with.
For example. George Clooney had to ask his wife out three times before she said yes. I believe Melinda Gates said no to Bill Gates the first time he asked her out (and of course, he was her boss). In Russian culture it's common for women to say no to a man even if she likes him, because making him work for it is thought to increase the eventual strength of the relationship (you don't value what you get for free, essentially). In fact a friend of mine is married to a Russian woman and she's said in the past she said yes to him too easily and regretted not rejecting him before - but he's told her, if she'd done that, he'd have immediately given up because he was quite burned out on dating at the time. So she sort of accepts it but has small regrets.
Just search on Google and you can find many examples of cases where men asked women out several times and are now married.
Never mix up feminists with women, they aren't the same. I've met plenty of women who wish men would chase them, but it's too risky for men to do that these days.
You’re talking about something different. Or at least mixing examples. I’m quite aware that there are many examples of men not giving up the first time, but parent comment seemed to suggest that in their culture, the woman is expected to say no, despite their positive interest, and the man is expecting to receive a no, and is then expected to try more, as though this scenario is the norm and not the exception.
My wife works for a financial firm. Her European counterparts kiss each other goodbye. That's a no-no at an American workplace. The sexual harassment training I received actually discouraged us from even hugging. No contact except for handshakes. I personally don't mind that since I find it awkward to hug people outside of close friends and family.
I went through sexual harassment training, and it was helpful because in two later situations where I had to manage situations related to sexual harassment, I knew what to do.
We have separate curricula: one for all employees telling them "don't do it", and a second for managers telling them how to handle reported incidents and other things they may observe.
> Problem employees aren't going to change their behavior. Enforcement of standards is much more critical.
That's not the goal. If people don't know that slapping their colleagues' butt when drunk is wrong, online training is not going to help there.
Training is there so that when it comes time to arbitrate, they can point and say "Aha, we see you took the training, passed the quiz and you still did it, you can't claim you didn't know, you're gone buddy! buhbye" and they kick him out.
> Sexual harassment training is a CYA move by companies.
>Sexual harassment training is a CYA move by companies.
And so it should be abolished? I don't get your logic here. Shouldn't we be on the side of better training and more penalties for both employees and companies?
Perhaps you are comparing standard policy instruction with remedial instruction. I assume your statement "I've been through several" is only referring to the former.
Why would you fire a competent, productive employee for noncompliance if you could completely correct the noncompliance with a medium-sized slap on the wrist?
Since when do employees get to choose which trainings they will and will not take?
We have this training. Along with privacy training, and lots of other trainings. You take the trainings that HR lays out. If you want to play a game of pick-and-choose, then you're shown the door.
However they take this "seriously" so I'm sure everything will be fine for Google employees.