this post was submitted on 24 May 2024
324 points (88.8% liked)

Technology

60103 readers
4699 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There were a series of accusations about our company last August from a former employee. Immediately following these accusations, LMG hired Roper Greyell - a large Vancouver-based law firm specializing in labor and employment law, to conduct a third-party investigation. Their website describes them as “one of the largest employment and labour law firms in Western Canada.” They work with both private and public sector employers.

To ensure a fair investigation, LMG did not comment or publicly release any data and asked our team members to do the same. Now that the investigation is complete, we’re able to provide a summary of the findings.

The investigation found that:

  • Claims of bullying and harassment were not substantiated.

  • Allegations that sexual harassment were ignored or not addressed were false.

  • Any concerns that were raised were investigated. Furthermore, from reviewing our history, the investigator is confident that if any other concerns had been raised, we would have investigated them.

  • There was no evidence of “abuse of power” or retaliation. The individual involved may not have agreed with our decisions or performance feedback, but our actions were for legitimate work-related purposes, and our business reasons were valid.

  • Allegations of process errors and miscommunication while onboarding this individual were partially substantiated, but the investigator found ample documentary evidence of LMG working to rectify the errors and the individual being treated generously and respectfully. When they had questions, they were responded to and addressed.

In summary, as confirmed by the investigation, the allegations made against the team were largely unfounded, misleading, and unfair.

With all of that said, in the spirit of ongoing improvement, the investigator shared their general recommendation that fast-growing workplaces should invest in continuing professional development. The investigator encouraged us to provide further training to our team about how to raise concerns to reinforce our existing workplace policies.

Prior to receiving this report, LMG solicited anonymous feedback from the team in an effort to ensure there was no unreported bullying and harassment and hosted a training session which reiterated our workplace policies and reinforced our reporting structure. LMG will continue to assess ongoing continuing education for our team.

At this time, we feel our case for a defamation suit would be very strong; however, our deepest wish is to simply put all of this behind us. We hope that will be the case, given the investigator’s clear findings that the allegations made online were misrepresentations of what actually occurred. We will continue to assess if there is persistent reputational damage or further defamation.

This doesn’t mean our company is perfect and our journey is over. We are continuously learning and trying to do better. Thank you all for being part of our community.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Contort3860@links.hackliberty.org 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah, I was trying not to be biased and immediately think this was all BS. Then I read the part about a case for defamation and just immediately went back to "fuck these guys".

Just came across as the bully playing the victim trying to show how reasonable and nice they're being by not "retaliating" by bullying any further.

[–] Boozilla@lemmy.world 25 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I agree with you, it reads that way to me as well. Playing devil's advocate, if the accused company really was innocent of these charges and it was a disgruntled / vindictive employee...I can understand them wanting to put that out there. However, considering the power imbalance here, I think it was a dumb move. They should have taken the high ground this time and held that idea in reserve. I don't think LTT is innocent here, BTW. I don't know how guilty or not guilty they are. The place has a bad smell to it, though.

[–] Grangle1@lemm.ee 28 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Linus himself just seems to give off that "nice guy on camera, exact opposite behind the scenes" kind of vibe. I've seen him get a bit riled up on podcast videos and it really comes off like he's holding back. Perhaps the employee's story was all too believable from others who get that perception of him. So I could see how the defamation threat would be like him/the company to try to show "we're really angry and could do more but we're gonna hold our temper".

[–] folshost@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I kinda get that vibe too. But without knowing more about him, I imagine what I perceive might also just be someone who's very confident in themselves who doesn't necessarily care very much what others think about him. Which, Linus has built his own company from the ground up, and it has made him very wealthy, so, he has some legitimate reason for that confidence, in his competence and his f you money. I suppose that might also co-occur with easily overlooking other people's problems, or being narcissistic though. Which is bad for a boss (e.g. Elon). Still, hard to just summarily judge without more information

[–] Boozilla@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Appreciate the nuanced take and you make some great points. I question his actual competence, though. I think he's good at faking it. The channel has always lacked rigor.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca -2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The channel has always lacked rigor.

Then again, they're doing 10-15 minuite videos on what is essentially an entertainment platform, not multiple hour PHD dissertations.

[–] Aphelion@lemm.ee 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If he's just making videos for entertainment, then stop putting up false benchmarks and bad data. People are using his videos to make expensive buying decisions, and I don't see any disclaimers on said videos saying "this is just for entertainment purposes".

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca -2 points 7 months ago

People using a single youtube video from a single youtube channel to make expensive buying decisions is the bigger problem.

[–] Boozilla@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

Then again, they do reviews and give tech recommendations all the time. It's even in the name.

[–] Boozilla@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Completely agree. His creepiness is obvious to me. Unfortunately half this community will rally behind their boy no matter what he does. It's disappointing but not surprising. It's never been a serious / professionally operated channel, but it's popular with a certain demographic.

They should have taken the high ground this time

Any time there is this big of a power imbalance they should always take the high ground. And when they don’t that’s a good sign that you shouldn’t have much respect for them.