I've been in contact with quite a few LMG employees. Many have given me statements about the abuse and sexual harassment Madison endured while working there.
One of them also gave me a recording of this meeting that was never supposed to be released. This is my proof that I have talked to LMG employees and have sources inside. I post this as verification of that fact.
I cannot out these people or give direct quotes out of fear they will suffer consequences, but I hope they come forward publicly even if it means risking their careers.
I can tell you their accounts match hers. And even go into further detail. One person constantly was mentioned more than others, but she's not naming names so I won't either.
She is telling the truth.
This meeting kinda goes along with how she mentioned her being sexually harassed was regarded as he causing drama.
(speaker 1, Linus) So we called this meeting because it's come to our attention that we need to have a quick chat about the best way to handle HR related feedback and rumors. We won't be giving any names for what I hope are extraordinarily obvious reasons, but what we can do is give you the following guidelines for problem solving and conflict resolution.
Sorry that this is all boring and corporate, but here we are. Number one, always stand up for what's right. We're only a team as long as we're all working together and working for each other. That's the most important one. Number two, always reflect on your own personal experiences and use your common sense. Few things in life are truly black and white. Number three, always wait to hear both sides of a story before passing your own judgment. Be cautious when you know that one side is bound by legal and ethical disclosure guidelines, when the other is not. Carefully consider what it says about the character of someone who would engage in that type of gossip against someone who has no power to defend themselves.
Number four, always encourage openness and transparency. If you have a problem, you need to speak up. We want to fix it. If you receive feedback about somebody else at this company, the first response is, have you spoken with this person? Followed closely by, you need to speak with this person. We don't solve interpersonal issues here, or really anywhere in your life, if you wish to live in a drama free zone, by engaging in water cooler politicking. So, if for any reason that individual is not comfortable approaching the person they're having a conflict with, we have a chain that they're supposed to follow.
So first, you advise them to take the problem to their manager. Followed by me or Yvonne, followed by our third party HR firm. I hope that you all trust that we're here to make this a safe, fun, and productive workplace, and we won't tolerate mistreatment of any of our team members.
If you have any reason to believe otherwise, then I refer you again to point number four, which is to address the issue with the individual directly, or bring it to me or Yvonne, or bring it to our third party HR firm. Since I'm not at liberty to share any details about what occurred, uh, all I can do is ask that you trust me and Yvonne.
Um, some of you know us very well, I've been here a very long time, um, some of you have not been here for as long, but I like to think that whether you've been here for nine years or nine days, you're here for a reason and you believe that we are utmost to run this company with integrity and compassion.
Um, We can't solve problems we don't know about though, so on that note, I'd like to invite anyone who has concerns about a fellow team member or about a manager to submit their feedback either by speaking with their manager, me or Yvonne directly, or if you would prefer to provide your feedback anonymously, we have an option for that as well.
It's the manager and co worker feedback form. Uh, Yvonne, if you're not aware of it, show of hands who is not aware of it. Hey, a lot of people aren't aware of it. Good, so now we all know. There's an anonymous form, if for whatever reason you're not comfortable, (inaudible) you can talk to me or Yvonne directly about it (inaudible) in the general chat.
It's a safe space to provide us ideas for improvement, or if you're consumed by the holiday spirit and you want to say nice things, you can do that too. Does anybody else have any questions?
Not a single questions? Wow, that must have been a really good speech.
(speaker 2, James)You gonna dance on that table, or just stand on it?
(speaker 1, Linus)That's it! So, um, Yvonne, did you have anything you wanted to add?
(speaker 3, Yvonne)(inaudible) Somebody said (inaudible) if you guys want to sanitize your hands, help yourself with free (inaudible)?
(speaker 1, Linus)Yeah, that was actually just totally random timing. It came up the stairs a moment ago. Dennis is on it. Alright. Thank you everyone. Have a wonderful and, uh, productive rest of your day. And weekend.
EDIT: added who was speaking. Don't know who speaker 2 is.
EDIT 2: I was told Speaker 2 is James
EDIT 3: Ivonne > Yvonne
EDIT 4: "near Yvonne directly" > me or Yvonne directly" and fixed that last thing Yvonne said
Sounds like a pretty standard meeting imo. Doesn't that mean they haven't committed transgressions or don't need to change. But for a company of their size at the time there is nothing particularly wrong with what was said here.
There was a comment a bit similar to yours on the original reddit thread and I think it got a good reply by the OP. The main criticism was that their structure for escalating such problems is flawed. Talking to your manager about his/her misbehaviour isn't exactly the solution here.
Nahh, I don't know about you but I've never been in a corporate meeting where an employee publicly makes a stripper joke at the owner, during a meeting about sexual harassment. On top of that no one in the room reacts to it, including the head of HR present. Their work environment is beyond fucked.
Uhh really? Points number two and three could easily be interpreted as: "Don't be oversensitive" and "Don't believe the allegations of overly sensitive people". Added to that, the statement that they do not "solve" interpersonal relationships rather than leave your interpersonal relationships outside of the workplace followed by the "anonymous" report forum that apparently existed without anyone's knowledge? How would you feel if you heard "we don't solve interpersonal problems but feel free to come to us with feedback."? Followed by James' inappropriate joke with zero response from the top management that were both present...
It’s not ideal in a few ways, but I think the bigger thing here is at least one employee is willing to risk their job to prove that they agree with her and use the recording as identity proof
One thing I noticed from a brief glance is that they mentioned that they have anonymous report form to the verge, while hiding the fact a lot of people are not aware such form existed at the time Madison worked there.
If you're at the point where you're hiring an outsider to investigate, you effectively have an obligation to let them do their job. That means staying out of the way, because anything you do poisons their inquiry.
If you weren't hiring an outsider and were investigating internally, you still wouldn't talk about it in a fucking meeting until you know what happened. You talk to each person individually to get their account. "Interrogating" witnesses in a group both violates the privacy of the (alleged) victim and lowers the quality of their recollection of events because they get shaded by everyone else.
The fact that people weren't aware of the appropriate method of elevating complaints is bad (though not as unusual as it should be). The rest is pretty standard.
I think you are correct, this meeting in isolaton is fine. The indirect implications, however, is that this meeting constitutes the full internal review and response to an employee leaving in a disgruntled state. I obviously don't know that is true, however the fact that linus has admitted to being shocked by the allegations suggests that a the very least an effective HR exit interview hasn't happened.
If I was running a company, regardless of my position on personal care about my employees wellbeing, I'd want meetings such as the one in this post a routine. Not only 'when something happens'. I'd want one on one interviews in the cases like this. So that when things like a former employee comes out with allegations like this I'm not shocked, because I already know and tried to deal with them reasonable or I have solid grounds to claim that reasonable effort was undertaken to know these things were happening.
I don't know how it is in Canada, but C suite and board can have personal liability with duty of care to employees in Australia. Ignorance is not generally an excuse for a good reason.
There are a number of red flags here. 'We can't know about problems if you don't tell us about them' is bullshit. It is not on the employees to ensure that people don't get harassed or mistreated.
The 'sorry we have to be corporate' at the start is also problematic. Dealing with toxic work culture is not 'boring corporate stuff' and leadership should not make that suggestion.
The whole thing feels like a teacher reprimanding a bunch of unruly teens about classroom drama. Which seems misguided at best. If your company is infested with gossip, badmouthing and harassment, it's not because you happened to hire all the gossipy people, it's because you're creating a bad work culture that reinforces that kind of behavior, and you need to address that instead of blaming the people who work for you. Managers don't go around berating colleagues for the heck of it, they do it because it is accepted normalized behavior. And that starts from the top.
Well, those are certainly the correct words, but without an insiders feel for the tone and sincerity, hard to know if it was enough. I hope the perpetrators were appropriately punished/dismissed, but that is something we may never know (nor have any right to know). Hopefully if this is a widespread issue, then others will come forward.
Someone (probably James Strieb) literally made a joke about strippers during the talk about sexual harassment. And the response was not to immediately say "The fuck is wrong with you? I mean. That is a very inappropriate way to behave and can make your co-workers uncomfortable and it will not be accepted"
I don't think "the perpetrators" were punished or dismissed.
I don't understand why you are being downvoted. I mean, I wouldn't call it a disaster so much as a "four seasons landscaping" vibe. Why is the (CVO?) giving a lecture (speech?) about HR reporting practices? This should have been done in a professional manner by an HR rep. Formal training would be pretty standard way to ensure all employees are aware of HR reporting policies and where to find reporting forms. I don't know why Linus hasn't been basically muzzled by his wife and other colleagues at this point. He needs to stop. He's not the CEO, and he's not HR. He should have been in the audience listening to an HR presentation at best.
EDIT: Jame's comments should have grabbed the immediate attention of Linus, the CEO, Yvonne, and whoever is representing HR. It's inappropriate, untimely, and tone deaf. And no one called him out for it.
There is nothing in this audio recording that I find particularly concerning other than James' comment. It sounds just like a standard meeting that I would have had during a morning brief. Knowing the context of James' comment was directed at Linus, who is a close friend, probably smirked and kept on going.
When you add the context of sexual harassment, it doesn't look good and is an inappropriately timed joke. However, nothing about the meeting indicates that it was about sexual harassment in particular from listening to the audio. If I missed it, please inform me.
Maybe it is because I heard these types of conversations frequently, it doesn't seem like a big deal. They even say you can contact a manager, Linus or Yvonne, or the anonymous hotline. So people have options if they have a problem in particular with leadership.
I am not dismissing that sexual harassment may have taken place, but from the context from the audio given, it doesn't appear anyone speaking knows about it.
Same thoughts here, I was hoping it'd be some slam dunk evidence to support the stuff we've heard but if anything it just makes the waters even murkier. There's a 3rd party HR firm involved that she could have gone to? She said only Linuses wife was the HR there.
Probably that Linus' wife managed the relationship with the 3rd party HR. It could be that the 3rd party HR were mainly used for payroll and tax purposes. If they had limited scope, then likely they were not functioning as a real HR department
Doesn't look professional. Looks like a family run business meeting in the kitchen of a small restaurant where they blame the staff for all the problems.
The point of the release seems to be to prove that they have insider infoz not to say this audio release is damning. It just adds credence to other information.
Seems to confirm the fact that the complaints were not seen as more than gossip. This meeting sounds like a not so elaborate attempt at lid installation on a boiling issue.
I don't quite get some of the responses in this thread.
I'm not here to defend Linus, I'm angry at him for whole lots of stuff that came out recently and earlier too, but if this recording is what we are solely supposed to go by, then I have to say he actually handled it well. What arose from the meeting is another issue, according to Madison nothing did, but I don't quite see what you guys expected? You wanted Linus to call out the person in a meeting who harassed her?
First of all, what Madison has stated happened is disgusting.
I listened to the meeting, what is unreal about it? In a meeting with all members, this is what I would expect to hear. What would you expect to be said in this meeting? If you give others a whiff that this might be about you, then you would open yourself to legal issues.
Again, nobody should go through what Madison stated happened. And their processes were unsatisfactory and I’m hoping Terran can actually address it.
Don't start the meeting by apologizing for being 'boring and corporate' as that sends out the wrong message.
Don't blame employees for bad company culture. A workplace where people are belittled, bullied, harassed, etc. doesn't just spring into being, it emerges due to neglect of basic HR needs.
Information on how you'll evaluate and change procedures, because they obviously aren't working.
Some sort of acknowledgement of psychological harm that has been done by bullying, gossip, etc., instead of just describing it as 'personal problems'.
Don't emphasize your own stated powerlessness. If you're the CEO, that's a devastating message for employees. If they get the impression that you're not in control, they will absolutely not feel safe.