|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
She is putting herself at risk by moving forward after being told not to do it. But isn't the BH at much greater risk? He is being exposed to an STD. I don't think she should tell the BH in her capacity as a HR manager. But others can tell him. She might be able to arrange that.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt Exposure 101
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554 |
She may be hampered by legal issues related to work, but that does not absolve her of her moral obligation to warn this man he is being harmed behind his back. Agreed - but the situation I describe does arise, she will likely find herself in another situation that tests her morals - should she lie to save her job and the possible legal costs to the business? She's been legally advised to not do it, and as such she should not do it, anonymously or otherwise, while she's in the employ of the business. OTOH, if she does choose to advise the H, she should also advise the business that she's doing so. To do otherwise demonstrates a lack of personal integrity IMO.
ManInMotion
===========
(see "MiM's Story" for more details)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
Here is the thing. She does need to protect herself legally and that is what the company lawyer is concerned about. RIGHTFULLY SO.
He obviously cannot involve the company in such a move.
But peanut has an obligation to her conscience that extends beyond her obligation to her company. Peanut has to live with her conscience, not her company. She has a moral obligation, as a human being, to warn this man what is being done to him behind his back. She is not absolved of that obligation just because her company does not want to assume that legal risk.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt Exposure 101
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,602
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,602 |
Since she was advised by her legal dept not to do it, IMO her hands are tied and it could certainly bite her in the butt if she does it.
In the MB world it's a no brainer, she should tell him, but IMO if she does she is taking a HUGE risk. Yes, it's very unfortunate for the BH and I hope someone does tell him. I just don't think it should be her especially if she has to do it then lie by omission if asked about it. All lies come out in the end and she should weigh the risks that it could come back at her.
LC
Last edited by lifeschoice; 01/15/09 07:36 PM. Reason: spelling
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,464
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,464 |
Well if someone were to tell ME, an Australian citizen, I'd have no problem passing on the information and completely forgetting how or where I learned about it.
Me: 56 (FBS) Wife: 55 (FWW)
D-Day August 2005
Married 11/1982 3 Sons 27,25,23
Empty Nesters.
Fully Recovered.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
Agreed - but the situation I describe does arise, she will likely find herself in another situation that tests her morals - should she lie to save her job and the possible legal costs to the business?
She's been legally advised to not do it, and as such she should not do it, anonymously or otherwise, while she's in the employ of the business. OTOH, if she does choose to advise the H, she should also advise the business that she's doing so. To do otherwise demonstrates a lack of personal integrity IMO. If I were her, I would not send the anonymous letter, but get someone else to do it. That way she is not directly involved. But, it would show a lack of integrity to NOT do it.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt Exposure 101
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
Well if someone were to tell ME, an Australian citizen, I'd have no problem passing on the information and completely forgetting how or where I learned about it. If someone told ME, a Texas CITIZEN, I would have no problem passing the information on.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt Exposure 101
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554 |
I wanted to add one more thought
If she had not been advised not to do it I would agree she should go for it.
She is putting herself at risk by moving forward after being told not to do it.
LC Agreed.
ManInMotion
===========
(see "MiM's Story" for more details)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554 |
If I were her, I would not send the anonymous letter, but get someone else to do it. That way she is not directly involved. But, it would show a lack of integrity to NOT do it. It's still an attempt at getting around specific advice given on the subject. FWIW, as a BS, I would not want someone putting their livelihood at risk to tell me something that I can and will likely find out through other sources. And if my W was to be suddenly fired from work, and one of her young male subordinates sent on leave at the same time, that would be something very difficult to explain away. Here's what I might do if I was in HR in this situation - I would call the OM into the office, explain why he was being suspended or let go, give him a brief "lecture" of the effects of adultery, and then ask him what he plans to do to address te damage that he's caused. Done right, HE will propose the idea of contacting the OM and apologizing for participating in the destruction of his M.
ManInMotion
===========
(see "MiM's Story" for more details)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
It's still an attempt at getting around specific advice given on the subject. Perhaps. But it still comes back to her moral obligation to warn this man while not placing her company in legal jeopardy. There are many ways to achieve that. And sure, he might find out in other ways, but he also might not. If everyone is more concerned about their OWN HIDE than in doing the right thing - which is usually the case with selfish people - then he will never find out and will only know the lies told to him by a wayward wife.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt Exposure 101
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554 |
I disagree. It still comes back to her moral obligation to warn this man while not placing her company in legal jeopardy. There are many ways to achieve that. She asked about it, and she has been WARNED to not do it. Any disclosure that occurs now will reflect badly on her UNLESS it's very clear that it came from someone else "in the know", e.g. the OM. And sure, he might find out in other ways, but he also might not. If everyone is more concerned about their OWN HIDE than in doing the right thing - which is usually the case with selfish people - then he will never find out and will only know the lies told to him by a wayward wife. If she's not prepared to tell the truth when questioned by WW, or her lawyers or representatives, then I suggest to NOT do it. Finally, as a BS, I will quite understand if someone didn't disclose my FWW's A to me because they were advised not to do so by their company for legal reasons. YMMV.
ManInMotion
===========
(see "MiM's Story" for more details)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 26
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 26 |
I have discussed it with the ops manager and she believes her husband may already be aware given some odd comments that have been made over the past few days. She said she found them odd and now puts 2 and 2 together.
Flowers were sent to her here at work the other day and she never took them home.
The email access will be live for me within the next hour and then I will know more.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,069
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,069 |
Hang in there. I would bet that the email will tell the whole story. Prepare yourself, and report back to us.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554 |
Hang in there. I would bet that the email will tell the whole story. Prepare yourself, and report back to us. ...and don't forget to check 'Deleted Items' and even use the "Recover Deleted Items" to see if she deleted any messages sent to or received from the OM.
ManInMotion
===========
(see "MiM's Story" for more details)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
Finally, as a BS, I will quite understand if someone didn't disclose my FWW's A to me because they were advised not to do so by their company for legal reasons. YMMV. I might understand it, but I would never accept such an act of pure abject moral cowardice and callousness. Honestly, MIM, can you truly see yourself sitting by idly while some poor chump was being lied to, cheated on and exposed to STDs and doing nothing? And calming your roaring conscience with the rationalization that you were told "not to" by your company because they were worried about their own asses?  I find it hard to believe you could really do that. I know I could not. I understand her company has to protect themselves legally, but that does not absolve her of her moral obligations. One cannot check their morals at the door.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt Exposure 101
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554 |
Honestly, MIM, can you truly see yourself sitting by idly while some poor chump was being lied to, cheated on and exposed to STDs and doing nothing? That's not what I'm suggesting. Neither is that what the orginator of this thread is doing. You are twisting the issue, ML. There are ways of her accomplishing the same results WITHOUT putting going against her company's wishes. I've suggested one such approach already.
ManInMotion
===========
(see "MiM's Story" for more details)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,602
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,602 |
Finally, as a BS, I will quite understand if someone didn't disclose my FWW's A to me because they were advised not to do so by their company for legal reasons. YMMV. I might understand it, but I would never accept such an act of pure abject moral cowardice and callousness. Honestly, MIM, can you truly see yourself sitting by idly while some poor chump was being lied to, cheated on and exposed to STDs and doing nothing? And calming your roaring conscience with the rationalization that you were told "not to" by your company because they were worried about their own asses? I find it hard to believe you could really do that. I know I could not. I understand her company has to protect themselves legally, but that does not absolve her of her moral obligations. One cannot check their morals at the door. This is a genuine question: Would you honestly risk your job to expose after you were told not to do it? BTW, You never answered my question about lying by omission. LC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,464
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,464 |
I've suggested one such approach already. Yes and waywards confess ALL THE TIME as we see here every day! Oh yeah and I believe in the tooth fairy and santa claus. :RollieEyes: Meanwhile, back at the looking glass, Alice was saying to the march hare............
Last edited by bigkahuna; 01/15/09 09:56 PM.
Me: 56 (FBS) Wife: 55 (FWW)
D-Day August 2005
Married 11/1982 3 Sons 27,25,23
Empty Nesters.
Fully Recovered.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,554 |
I've suggested one such approach already. Yes and waywards confess ALL THE TIME as we see here every day! Yup - my FWW, Looking4, and a bunch of others that have posted here... 
Last edited by ManInMotion; 01/15/09 09:57 PM.
ManInMotion
===========
(see "MiM's Story" for more details)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
This is a genuine question: Would you honestly risk your job to expose after you were told not to do it? Of course I would! I am just in shock anyone would view it any other way. Do people only do the right thing when it is not a risk to them? My gosh, I cannot fathom such a value system. Right is right. BTW, You never answered my question about lying by omission.
LC No, it is too vague of a question.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt Exposure 101
|
|
|
Moderated by Ariel, BerlinMB, Denali, Fordude, IrishGreen, MBeliever, MBsurvivor, MBSync, McLovin, Mizar, PhoenixMB, Toujours
|
1 members (1 invisible),
986
guests, and
51
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
