To Tell or Not to Tell

[Sharnita]

I'm not sure it is all that brief.  They were discussing their scores, then they tried to get somebody elses's score.  She resisted at first, they pressured her, she eventually broke down, then after she broke down they treated her with some unpleasantness.  This sounds like it was a bit of a process and somewhat time consuming.

[oceanus]

I am sure that when peoplr have faced sexual or racial harrassment and intimidation in the wlrkplace the argument that they are an adult and can take care of themselves has been trotted out

Even if that is true (and I'm not sure how one would know), sexual harassment and racial discrimination have nothing to do with the thread topic.

Why would harrassment over getting a better score on an evaluation be better or acceptable?

You lost me.
Better or acceptable?   Where did anyone say anything about "harassment" over getting a better score being better or more acceptable than anything?

The point is there is no reason to bring sexual harassment or racial discrimination into the discussion - which is about overhearing coworkers discuss performance evaluations.

[Sharnita]

They aren't simply discussing perfoemance evaluations any more than they would be discussing race or sexuality/sexual orientation.  They bullied somebody into revealing her rating when she made it clear she didn't want to and when they foudn out she had a hougher score they were unpleasant.  The fact that they were also discussing who they thought should get fired might also be questionable.  SInce the boss could be held responsible for a hostile work environment, (s)he might want to be aware.

[Moray]

I'm not sure it is all that brief.  They were discussing their scores, then they tried to get somebody elses's score.  She resisted at first, they pressured her, she eventually broke down, then after she broke down they treated her with some unpleasantness.  This sounds like it was a bit of a process and somewhat time consuming.

Or, it could have gone like this:

C&M: "Sooooo, how'd you do?"
R: "I'd rather not say"
C&M: "Come on, tell us!"
R: "Ok, I got 98 on badger skinning"
C&M: [snide comment because they each only managed a 65 on badger skinning]

That sounds like about 30 seconds, maybe a minute depending on the intricacies of the badger skinning discussion.

Sharnita, it's really clear that you feel strongly that this is a "Code Red" in terms of workplace interaction, but there simply isn't any evidence in the OP's posts to back it up. Sometimes minor sniping happens, and, because we're grown-ups, we evaluate the situation, shake our heads and move on. Not every negative interaction constitutes harassment.

[Sharnita]

Moray, I would say maybe Code Yellow or Orange.  Not suggesting anybody retain a lawyer over this.  Letting the boss know so that they can be advised to lay off, boss can determine if there is anyting to be concerned about personally, etc.

[Yvaine]

Not every negative interaction constitutes harassment.

This, exactly.

Sharnita, over the years I've read enough of your posts to understand that you feel strongly about reporting illegal activity, and I think this may be why this topic is touching a nerve with you. However, the fact that this post is upsetting to you doesn't necessarily mean anything illegal or actionable is taking place in this case, and this is really not anywhere near the same ballpark as some of the horrifying scenarios you've talked about over the years.

Not everything annoying fits the legal definition of harassment, and there's a difference between the legal and colloquial definitions of the word. It means something very specific legally, which I won't go into, but which I advise you to look up for yourself before dispensing what is dangerously close to legal advice. There's a colloquial definition that just means "bothering," and a lot of people run with that definition and think anything bothersome counts as legal harassment, which it doesn't.

[Sharnita]

Yvaine, maybe read my previous post.  Never suggested jumping into a lawsuit.

[Yvaine]

Yvaine, maybe read my previous post.  Never suggested jumping into a lawsuit.

I did read your previous post, and that's why I said you were close to giving legal advice, rather than reporting you for giving legal advice.

[Sharnita]

Yvaine, maybe read my previous post.  Never suggested jumping into a lawsuit.

I did read your previous post, and that's why I said you were close to giving legal advice, rather than reporting you for giving legal advice.

You seem to be dabbling yourself.

[Yvaine]

Yvaine, maybe read my previous post.  Never suggested jumping into a lawsuit.

I did read your previous post, and that's why I said you were close to giving legal advice, rather than reporting you for giving legal advice.

You seem to be dabbling yourself.

Asking you to look up the law for yourself is not legal advice.

Edited to add: In any case, Moray said the same thing I want to express, and more succinctly. This is just minor immature sniping.

[Mikayla]

I think this is 100 percent know your audience.  I've been in Toots' position before, where I didn't care about evals or what was said, and didn't have time to worry about it.  I've also been in the complete opposite situation, where talking about evals was a hangin' offense, and I needed my best employee (and friend, which may or may not matter) to keep a pulse on these things.  If someone was committing what would have been, in this case, a major violation of policy, of course I'd want to be told, even if I chose not to act on it right off. 

I think a lot depends on how big a violation this is, because this seems to vary. Most important, though, is the the employee/boss relationship, and whether the boss relies on the employee for observing things like this.  In that case, I don't think it has to impact the employee directly - her loyalty is to the boss.

[cass2591]

Edited to add: In any case, Moray said the same thing I want to express, and more succinctly. This is just minor immature sniping.

As is the bickering you and sharnita are involved in. Thread locked because the OP has decided to say nothing.