Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

[Symmachus]

Her threats, however, come after her firing. It is not clear to me that she ever threatened John until she was out of plays. Until she was asked to resign, she was still hopeful that John would consummate the relationship and she would get what she wanted. When it was clear that she would no longer be in a position where she could pursue John, and she was being left with very little benefit from her efforts on the Open Stories Foundation end, and she was then fired, that is when she pulled out her knife and started demanding that they give her back her Open Stories Foundation goodies.

Ah, thank you for that clarification. It helps me to clarify my question. Lem's comments about the power dynamics are instructive, but I'm just wondering if they apply in this situation, and especially which side of that power dynamic the law is weighted towards. Is it still sexual harassment if the pressure to initiate/continue a sexual relationship is not coming from the one with power to fire/remove but rather from someone lower in the organizations hierarchy? What, in short, was the Open Stories Foundation supposed to do here in terms of the law?

[drumdude]

It's a bit disappointing that Open Stories Foundation decided NOT to implement a ban on work relationships in their new policies after this event. In an ideal world both Dehlin and Rosebud would have been fired under a no-romantic-relationships policy in 2012. John would have had to publicly admit fault, and Open Stories Foundation would be defunct at that point. He could have tried to rebuild his podcast under another name dealing with an audience that knew what he had done.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Perhaps it’s my experience having been a career enlisted man, but in my opinion higher standards apply when the superior is the head of the organization. Within the military context not only are sexual relationships between bosses and subordinates verboten, but so is fraternization. If one or the other occurs, there will be an independent inquiry after credible allegations or information about superior-subordinate relationship is revealed. This becomes an order of magnitude greater when, say, a General is damned an E-4 rather than an E-6 damned an E-4, because the power of the superior and organizational reputation is wildly different between a General and an E-6.

If coercion or favoritism are found, then the head of the organization is usually terminated. John Dehlin asking or suggesting that Rosebud move on is coercive. Whether or not he meant one thing or another doesn’t really matter in this instance. It’s how it’s perceived by the organization, the individual, and the public. The fact that there are questions surrounding his intent is enough to get him fired from his position. Which, from appearances, happened. But we know it was just a workaround to keep him making money for the organization, and no one believes for a second that he isn’t running things. If he up and quit Open Stories Foundation would essentially stop existing, or at the very least become so irrelevant that it might as well not exist.

Regardless, consensual sex, sexual activity, or inappropriate emotional whatever by a married individual with a subordinate is rightly viewed as inconsistent with a leader's obligation to set an example of integrity for the organization, especially when accompanied by embarrassing emails, texts, and workplace behavior. How Dehlin has managed to survive this with a career in counseling is astonishing to me. How he continues to get gigs and guests is doubly astonishing to me. I don’t get it.

- Doc

[Kishkumen]

Ah, thank you for that clarification. It helps me to clarify my question. Lem's comments about the power dynamics are instructive, but I'm just wondering if they apply in this situation, and especially which side of that power dynamic the law is weighted towards. Is it still sexual harassment if the pressure to initiate/continue a sexual relationship is not coming from the one with power to fire/remove but rather from someone lower in the organizations hierarchy? What, in short, was the Open Stories Foundation supposed to do here in terms of the law?

If they had been a larger organization, and thus fallen within the statutory scope, they would have been in trouble for pressuring her to resign and then firing her on account of her relationship with the Executive Director.

[Kishkumen]

It's a bit disappointing that Open Stories Foundation decided NOT to implement a ban on work relationships in their new policies after this event. In an ideal world both Dehlin and Rosebud would have been fired under a no-romantic-relationships policy in 2012. John would have had to publicly admit fault, and Open Stories Foundation would be defunct at that point. He could have tried to rebuild his podcast under another name dealing with an audience that knew what he had done.

Yeah. True. They really should have. No brainer, in my opinion.

[Kishkumen]

Perhaps it’s my experience having been a career enlisted man, but in my opinion higher standards apply when the superior is the head of the organization. Within the military context not only are sexual relationships between bosses and subordinates verboten, but so is fraternization. If one or the other occurs, there will be an independent inquiry after credible allegations or information about superior-subordinate relationship is revealed. This becomes an order of magnitude greater when, say, a General is stupid an E-4 rather than an E-6 stupid an E-4, because the power of the superior and organizational reputation is wildly different between a General and an E-6.

If coercion or favoritism are found, then the head of the organization is usually terminated. John Dehlin asking or suggesting that Rosebud move on is coercive. Whether or not he meant one thing or another doesn’t really matter in this instance. It’s how it’s perceived by the organization, the individual, and the public. The fact that there are questions surrounding his intent is enough to get him fired from his position. Which, from appearances, happened. But we know it was just a workaround to keep him making money for the organization, and no one believes for a second that he isn’t running things. If he up and quit Open Stories Foundation would essentially stop existing, or at the very least become so irrelevant that it might as well not exist.

Regardless, consensual sex, sexual activity, or inappropriate emotional whatever by a married individual with a subordinate is rightly viewed as inconsistent with a leader's obligation to set an example of integrity for the organization, especially when accompanied by embarrassing emails, texts, and workplace behavior. How Dehlin has managed to survive this with a career in counseling is astonishing to me. How he continues to get gigs and guests is doubly astonishing to me. I don’t get it.

Yep! Because the US military, for all of its faults, is a whole different order of magnitude of seriousness, not to mention many of orders of magnitude of size, as perhaps the single largest and most generously funded operation on the globe, and dinky little micro-org Open Stories Foundation was a way of minimizing taxes while doing a kind of public service. The people who are after Dehlin now think Open Stories Foundation should have been the US military at the time. I hope Open Stories Foundation starts to understand that they need to up their game significantly now.

And, by the way, we should also be asking ourselves why it is that Open Stories Foundation only had two employees, according to RFM's guests, who were after all insiders on the board, and, whoops!, the two of them had an affair and the one of them who was in charge arranged for both himself and the subordinate to resign. Even further, we should ask how it is that Rosebud became the second employee in the first place. Favoritism? John scoping out his future spouse? It does not look good at all. Dumb, dumb, effing stupidly moronic, bush league, and saints preserve us from this mess.

[Lem]

Lem, I would like your insight into the scenario symmachus brought up, where does the sexual harassment issue land when the subordinate is begging for sex from her superior? I believe the situation is more complex then the narrative from the Text messages we have access to. I would imagine the proper action from the superior would be to immediately report the texts to other senior members, and let them handle the future work arrangements?

What a mess this all is, once again, don’t eat where you Sh!t

Agreed! I was basing my assessment only on Dehlin's texts, not on Rosebud's, who I agree is not reliable. And yes, it should have been reported immediately, but obviously wasn't.

Doc Cam's most recent post about the military approach summed it up quite well. It's not a "MeTooEra-standard" of sexual harassment, as someone referred to it, it is a long-standing recognition that power differentials matter.

This is a small outfit, so legally they got away with it, but it doesn't make it right.

[Lem]

Perhaps it’s my experience having been a career enlisted man, but in my opinion higher standards apply when the superior is the head of the organization. Within the military context not only are sexual relationships between bosses and subordinates verboten, but so is fraternization. If one or the other occurs, there will be an independent inquiry after credible allegations or information about superior-subordinate relationship is revealed. This becomes an order of magnitude greater when, say, a General is damned an E-4 rather than an E-6 damned an E-4, because the power of the superior and organizational reputation is wildly different between a General and an E-6.

If coercion or favoritism are found, then the head of the organization is usually terminated. John Dehlin asking or suggesting that Rosebud move on is coercive. Whether or not he meant one thing or another doesn’t really matter in this instance. It’s how it’s perceived by the organization, the individual, and the public. The fact that there are questions surrounding his intent is enough to get him fired from his position. Which, from appearances, happened. But we know it was just a workaround to keep him making money for the organization, and no one believes for a second that he isn’t running things. If he up and quit Open Stories Foundation would essentially stop existing, or at the very least become so irrelevant that it might as well not exist.

Regardless, consensual sex, sexual activity, or inappropriate emotional whatever by a married individual with a subordinate is rightly viewed as inconsistent with a leader's obligation to set an example of integrity for the organization, especially when accompanied by embarrassing emails, texts, and workplace behavior. How Dehlin has managed to survive this with a career in counseling is astonishing to me. How he continues to get gigs and guests is doubly astonishing to me. I don’t get it.

- Doc

I don't either.

[Kishkumen]

It's not a "MeTooEra-standard" of sexual harassment, as someone referred to it, it is a long-standing recognition that power differentials matter.

This is a small outfit, so legally they got away with it, but it doesn't make it right.

I agree that it doesn't make it right. And I don't think I was accurate in the way I expressed "MeToo-era standard." People are appropriately applying further scrutiny to these situations now, and they are because of #MeToo. On the job one interacts professionally and respectfully with everyone, both because it is the right thing to do and because it is the prudently cautious thing to do. Frankly, I would avoid both the John Dehlins and the Rosebuds of the workplace. There is no way I would choose to work with either one of them.

There is also a separate question of proportionality, however. Rosebud was apparently aggressively pursuing John to try to persuade him to have intercourse with her over his objections. On a human level that changes our perceptions of the situation, and I think rightly so. The power differential does not erase that fact. It does not absolve her of her responsibility for her own actions on a moral level. She knew John was married, and she both wanted and sought to alienate John from his wife by deepening her romantic involvement with John. That too is wrong. It may only be a common law tort, but it is absolutely morally wrong.

[Res Ipsa]

The problem is the firing after she wouldn't take a reduced position, especially if she had told the board she'd been harassed. That's a no no.

Thank you for the clarity and precision on the legal end.

You’re welcome. There are lots of good lessons to learn here.