Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

[Kishkumen]

I wonder if John Dehlin knew that we just want the facts and are not partisan, even though we have been plagued by Rosebud for all these years?

John is many things, but impartial and dispassionate are not among them.

[consiglieri]

So the only way J D can beat a sexual harassment rap is to award R B the entire company?

That seems a little extreme to me.

That's not my position. I've been involved with cases like this and usually the result is to do what Open Stories Foundation did and offer the supposed victim a severance package along with a non-disclosure agreement. John Dehlin is Open Stories Foundation and always was regardless of whether or not he stepped over the line. The solution is to protect the company while giving Rosebud some compensation to "go away," especially after she acted the way she did.

I wasn’t responding to your post and did not think it your position.

My comment just happened to post under yours.

Sorry for the confusion.

I am interested in hearing from those who have suggested this would have been the right way to handle things.

[dastardly stem]

I wish I understood these things better.

Is this hypothetical scenario that you describe illegal and/or unethical?

It comes from a lawyer who is trying to dig down on what happened. John Dehlin just said that Rosebud promised that she would "go away" if things got to where it harmed him or mormonstories. That seems to be an admission that he had the power in the relationship, regardless of whether or not Rosebud welcomed the attention. Relationships are not always on equal footing. Sometimes one dominates over the other and perhaps in this case, Rosebud threw herself at John Dehlin and John Dehlin relented with the condition of her "going away" if she pressured him too much. Extracting an agreement like that is something a semi-famous person could do with a groupie. Then, from there, Rosebud got toxic and something had to be done.

As far as it being legal. Yes it was from the evidence I have seen. It is not per se illegal for managers to have relationships with employees or board members to have relationships with other board members. Post break-up, perhaps a case can be made that a firing was because of the break-up and that may rise to the level of a wrongful termination under Utah Law. For this reason, a wise HR person would just offer a severance package with a non-disclosure agreement and have the problem go away.

Unethical, yes, as far as getting into the relationship in the first place. John Dehlin shouldn't have done it and he admits as much.

Thanks Dr Exiled. I appreciate this added perspective adding what usually happens in scenarios like this. The idea that she agreed as they started their personal relationship or professional one is mind-bending a bit. What kind of conversation was happening that led to a point for her to say, "Ok...fine...if this relationship hurts our families (well duh...) or the foundation we're trying to create, then I'll just slyly walk away". It seems clear, she forgot that really weird sounding agreement, John totally misunderstood her thinking on that, or she lied, as he suggested, and agreed thinking she wasn't going to follow through with that anyway or thought they were going to run off and be together or something so it didn't matter. I'm guessing based on the logic of the sexual harassment position, this only adds to that allegation. What kind of working combined with personal relationship could that amount to but a very uneven one--perhaps one epitomizing sexual harassment in the work place?

Thinking of all the work places I've been in and all the extra-marital relationships that have occurred (and I'd roughly say 90% included men in higher positions then the women), I'd be floored to think any of the women agreed to leave quietly to protect the company and their families as the relationship got started if things between the two went south. I'd probably be equally disturbed if the man actually expected the woman to follow through with that. Unfortunately I doubt very much that none proceeded without the man thinking, at least implicitly, that there was some sort of agreement that matched what John describes. That too doesn't speak well to any of this on his part. It is a mess and I doubt it's easy to deal with for a small start up org like Open Stories Foundation was. It's really no wonder the whole board quit not long after this all went down, after trying to get a new direction to take hold.

Ah well, I mean I can't reiterate enough this was nearly 10 years ago. THere's little anyone can do about it now. It was time for Rosebud to move on years back and yet here we are typing in a thread of over a hundred pages talking about it still.

[Esme]

What kind of working combined with personal relationship could that amount to but a very uneven one--perhaps one epitomizing sexual harassment in the work place?

Yep.

[Analytics]

But now we have new light and knowledge from the horse's mouth. It is now to be believed that there was an equal relationship at work.

I assume you are speaking for yourself, because I didn't read anything that leads me to believe that.

So far mormonstories has asked 'what else could be done?' as though sexual harassment is acceptable if there doesn't seem to be a good way to deal with it that also protects the perpetrators from losing anything. The statement below is jawdropping, and to me reinforces the idea that there still is no understanding of the sexual harassment that took place:

I think Joanna and the board did the best they could to make it all equal and fair. Without ending Mormon Stories of course.

So equal and fair, but not really, because the perpetrator needed to be protected. I haven't seen any sense of accountability or even acknowledgement of the case for sexual harassment so far. I've already stated I think there is no solution to be had now, other than individual judgments made against the character by readers. Mormonstories is not helping his case so far, in my opinion.

You judge JD as the perpetrator because Rosebud was his subordinate, right?

From my perspective, the significance of the lovers’ relationship as depicted on the organizational chart depends on the specifics of the organization. For example, if this took place at a huge factory that offered the only decent jobs in a small town, then the supervisor/subordinate relationship would be extremely important, because the supervisor would have inordinate control over the subordinate’s livelihood. Therefore, hold the superior to a higher standard and automatically fire him if anything inappropriate happens (even then, if the subordinate went to the supervisor and while unbuttoning her shirt said, “I’d do anything for a raise,” it would be hard for me to say that the supervisor was the perpetrator and the subordinate was the victim).

In contrast, imagine a startup law firm where the only capital it has is the charisma, contacts, experience, and skills of the individual associates. In this case, the organizational chart really doesn’t matter all that much. If a managing partner tried to manipulate a junior partner with sex, she could fairly easily go someplace else, and take her clients with her. If an imprudent relationship developed at this hypothetical law firm, I’d be less likely to automatically label the lawyer with the more impressive title on his business card as the perpetrator and the other as the victim.

I reject the accusation that JD “sexually harassed” Rosebud because I reject the construct that Rosebud was JD’s subordinate in any meaningful way. They got into a stupid relationship as equals, and both paid a heavy price for doing so. The real victims are everybody else that was hurt by their decisions.

[Dr Exiled]

It comes from a lawyer who is trying to dig down on what happened. John Dehlin just said that Rosebud promised that she would "go away" if things got to where it harmed him or mormonstories. That seems to be an admission that he had the power in the relationship, regardless of whether or not Rosebud welcomed the attention. Relationships are not always on equal footing. Sometimes one dominates over the other and perhaps in this case, Rosebud threw herself at John Dehlin and John Dehlin relented with the condition of her "going away" if she pressured him too much. Extracting an agreement like that is something a semi-famous person could do with a groupie. Then, from there, Rosebud got toxic and something had to be done.

As far as it being legal. Yes it was from the evidence I have seen. It is not per se illegal for managers to have relationships with employees or board members to have relationships with other board members. Post break-up, perhaps a case can be made that a firing was because of the break-up and that may rise to the level of a wrongful termination under Utah Law. For this reason, a wise HR person would just offer a severance package with a non-disclosure agreement and have the problem go away.

Unethical, yes, as far as getting into the relationship in the first place. John Dehlin shouldn't have done it and he admits as much.

Thanks Dr Exiled. I appreciate this added perspective adding what usually happens in scenarios like this. The idea that she agreed as they started their personal relationship or professional one is mind-bending a bit. What kind of conversation was happening that led to a point for her to say, "Ok...fine...if this relationship hurts our families (well duh...) or the foundation we're trying to create, then I'll just slyly walk away". It seems clear, she forgot that really weird sounding agreement, John totally misunderstood her thinking on that, or she lied, as he suggested, and agreed thinking she wasn't going to follow through with that anyway or thought they were going to run off and be together or something so it didn't matter. I'm guessing based on the logic of the sexual harassment position, this only adds to that allegation. What kind of working combined with personal relationship could that amount to but a very uneven one--perhaps one epitomizing sexual harassment in the work place?

Thinking of all the work places I've been in and all the extra-marital relationships that have occurred (and I'd roughly say 90% included men in higher positions then the women), I'd be floored to think any of the women agreed to leave quietly to protect the company and their families as the relationship got started if things between the two went south. I'd probably be equally disturbed if the man actually expected the woman to follow through with that. Unfortunately I doubt very much that none proceeded without the man thinking, at least implicitly, that there was some sort of agreement that matched what John describes. That too doesn't speak well to any of this on his part. It is a mess and I doubt it's easy to deal with for a small start up org like Open Stories Foundation was. It's really no wonder the whole board quit not long after this all went down, after trying to get a new direction to take hold.

Ah well, I mean I can't reiterate enough this was nearly 10 years ago. THere's little anyone can do about it now. It was time for Rosebud to move on years back and yet here we are typing in a thread of over a hundred pages talking about it still.

I said earlier that the damages Rosebud suffered probably had a maximum range of $20,000.00, if that. She hadn't been there that long and the defense could make this into a mixed motive case where while she may have a case, it is outweighed by her conduct in trying to maneuver a coup herself. In the end, she had to go.

Having said that. The admission of the "go away" promise seems odd as in who would make such a promise unless there was some power dynamic involved. Perhaps in the beginning Rosebud signaled that she wanted to get close and JD, the star, and he took the bait, thinking that his starhood could control the situation, demanding the terms of the breakup when he deemed it necessary. He was "shocked" when she didn't comply? Really?

Or, perhaps, he made that part up for effect, as in thinking that both being married, they needed to have this type of agreement ahead of time if things got too hot and steamy. It might be an attempt to create a little victimhood. This type of agreement makes things more exciting and prohibited, as in they both knew it was dangerous but they couldn't resist. However, there had to be a way to end it if things got too out of hand. Anyway, I have a hard time seeing Rosebud making such an agreement or if she did, she didn't mean it and perhaps it shows how JD doesn't see things from a woman's point of view? This promise looks more like an agreement one makes with an object, not a person. But, a starstruck Rosebud could have made this agreement and JD was too naïve to understand that such an agreement is impractical and nonsensical? Maybe it was his rationalization that made him think that Rosebud would go away on command?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Analytics,

Kinda hard to do your job in the middle of a conference when your totes equal board member cuts your access to your tools to do your job. I don’t recall equals having that kind of power over one another, in any organization.

- Doc

[Esme]

John says that Rosebud made a promise to go away and then didn't keep her promise. He is focused on the audacity of someone promising something and then not following through. I guess she is the bad guy in his eyes for not keeping her word.

Promises were made that Rosebud's employment was conditional on the relationship. Quid pro quo.

Obviously he had more power in that arrangement because the agreement allowed him to cause her to lose her job at any time if he decided to sever the relationship.

[Analytics]

Analytics,

Kinda hard to do your job in the middle of a conference when your totes equal board member cuts your access to your tools to do your job. I don’t recall equals having that kind of power over one another, in any organization.

- Doc

Can you refresh me on the details of this incident? Did JD cut off Rosebud's access because she didn't "go away" per the quid pro quo promise, or did he cut her off because she was spreading lies about another MS employee and board member pressuring her to have sex with him?

I would think that if JD was going crazy crazy and spreading lies that could bring down the organization, Rosebud and the rest of the board could have found a way to cut off his access, too. The organization was a non-profit controlled by a board of directors. It was not John's sole-proprietorship.

[Esme]

I would think that if John Dehlin was going crazy crazy and spreading lies that could bring down the organization, Rosebud and the rest of the board could have found a way to cut off his access, too.

How? He had all the login credentials.