Andy9o8 2
Recommended Posts
QuoteQuoteA DZ isn't a bar.
But it certainly is a bar right about sunset on. Earlier if the winds kick up for the evening.
It's not a bar, it's a drop zone. There are a few with a liquor license, in which case it is a drop zone with a bar. Most DZ's have neither.
But by your logic, my house is a bar, the baseball fields are a bar, my neighbor's yard is a bar, etc. Damn near the whole world is a bar if the only qualifier is that people are consuming alcohol.
It's a rather strict definition to insist on a liquor license, though I wonder if government entities paid us much attention if it would provoke a response.
Your personal residence is not at all like a open air business. A softball field is a public place - in CA drinking there would be illegal open consumption, though enforcement in such areas is typically non existent. Same with tailgating at parking lots for football games, which meanders between public and private space.
In contrast, the DR has this going on every day. We have "beer lights." We have beer rules. Beer fridges. Even a arm(s) signal in the sky. Snore has a physical bar - I doubt they have any commercial license. (P does, and SkyD has that concession that may) It's pretty damn organized.
skipbelt 0
QuoteQuoteCommunication with the tandem student eliminates the feelings of inappropriate "grabbing" as you call it.
I say "excuse me" a lot when adjusting and checking straps while explaining what and why I'm doing what I'm doing. It typically leads to them understanding, appreciating, and being thankful that I did what I did.
The environment only leads to bawdy jokes if we allow it to. There is no need for those with students/customers.
It's one thing for us to joke around with each other, it's another thing entirely to extend that behavior to student/customers/first timers.
Again I say, it's wrong.
Period.
You can eliminate a lot of misunderstandings with simple verbal language, though this isn't going to be a complete fix. Between the especially uptight, those who can't hear over the noise, and those who are out of their minds with anxiety, you can still find trouble. And in a time sensitive situation, you fix the problem first, worry about feelings later.
The dropzone is an adult playground. In many places, it's not kid friendly, with lots of sex, drugs, alcohol, and "free spirited" behaviour. We don't have to change to the standard of the most prudish. And if the DZ is stifling, many upjumpers will go to a more fun place.
But in contrast, the DZ is also a business that has to focus on the tourist jumpers. They do have an incentive to be more accommodating.
all staff at our dz submitted to drugtesting shortly after our annual safety meeting. we have a breathalyzer at manifest if suspicions arise. we have a midnite curfew that's mandatory for 1st load, and 8 hour curfew thereafter. as to topic, being ex military i cringe sometimes when i see the tm's gearing up. because vertant and inadvertant actions can be interpreted in the worst possible light !
QuoteQuoteGiven the use of the term "cunt" and reference to "menstrual cycle", you clearly have an unbiased view.
You'd get slaughtered by an attorney.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Hee hee. What did I say that isn't true? Of course, you have a point. I can imagine a lawyer trying to convince a carefully hand-picked jury of clueless dolts that, while I hadn't done anything wrong, I deserve to be found "guilty" because I used such words to describe the situation.
Ah, but you don't define the legal issue, there, Jon, the law does. And, in the context of discrimination law, what he'd be trying to convince them is that what you did - even if you claimed it was totally innocuous - was was wrong because of what your intent was. And then he'd use those words of yours (which are admissible) as evidence of your true intent. And then you'd have to look those dolts in their eyes and explain yourself. ("Well, see... I didn't mean "cunt" in the derogatory sense...")
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Andy: Go back and read my description of what happened, then point out where I did anything wrong.
Shaking a woman's hand and kissing my own wrist does not fall into any conceivable category of "harassment." The only harassment that occurred that day was the way I was treated by managers who had been trained to assign automatic credibility to a woman, regardless of the facts.
This is one reason I declined an invitation to enter managment training. I simply will not treat people this way.
Cheers,
Jon
billvon 3,085
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>Go back and read my description of what happened, then point out where I
>did anything wrong.
Kissing yourself during an introduction to her could well become harassment; it is not any kind of normal social interaction. Whether or not it does depends on whether or not you continue it.
Yes, you may think it's cute or funny or ironic. But so do 90% of the people who get in hot water for sexual harassment. "I was just telling her a funny joke! People here tell dirty jokes all the time." "I was just showing her something that came in to my COMPANY ACCOUNT as junk mail! It's not my fault if she thought it was porn." "Hey, everybody else talks about that fifth point of attachment, not my fault she's a stuck up cunt with a self image problem."
And from the perspective of a manager, in the case of the last one, it's going to become a problem 99.9% of the time - because the person involved has proven they are going to take it personally.
>The only harassment that occurred that day was the way I was treated by
>managers who had been trained to assign automatic credibility to a woman,
>regardless of the facts.
As a manager you MUST take seriously any complaint about sexual harassment, no matter what the sex of the person complaining. And the very first thing that you (or more likely HR if it's a larger company) will talk to the person who is seen as harassing, and ask them to stop. If they do, then end of problem.
They were doing their jobs, in other words. If kissing yourself is not important to you, and you stop doing it, then you've done your part as well.
>did anything wrong.
Kissing yourself during an introduction to her could well become harassment; it is not any kind of normal social interaction. Whether or not it does depends on whether or not you continue it.
Yes, you may think it's cute or funny or ironic. But so do 90% of the people who get in hot water for sexual harassment. "I was just telling her a funny joke! People here tell dirty jokes all the time." "I was just showing her something that came in to my COMPANY ACCOUNT as junk mail! It's not my fault if she thought it was porn." "Hey, everybody else talks about that fifth point of attachment, not my fault she's a stuck up cunt with a self image problem."
And from the perspective of a manager, in the case of the last one, it's going to become a problem 99.9% of the time - because the person involved has proven they are going to take it personally.
>The only harassment that occurred that day was the way I was treated by
>managers who had been trained to assign automatic credibility to a woman,
>regardless of the facts.
As a manager you MUST take seriously any complaint about sexual harassment, no matter what the sex of the person complaining. And the very first thing that you (or more likely HR if it's a larger company) will talk to the person who is seen as harassing, and ask them to stop. If they do, then end of problem.
They were doing their jobs, in other words. If kissing yourself is not important to you, and you stop doing it, then you've done your part as well.
skipbelt 0
a guy did this same thing to me once, i'll go into the details if requested, but in the end it was a weird gesture that i never mentioned again before now. probably 15 years ago. i just wrote it off as an awkward attempt at humor. the guy appeared to me to be quite conceited at any rate. no harm no foul. no runs no drips no errors.
i write this post while listening to
sounds of silence - simon and garfunkel !
i write this post while listening to
sounds of silence - simon and garfunkel !
As a manager you MUST take seriously any complaint about sexual harassment, no matter what the sex of the person complaining...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
There was no harassment, sexual or otherwise. (On my part.)
If managment has an obligation to take seriously complaints about harassment, what did they ignore MY complaint about the way I was being harassed?
And given the nature of the facts I presented, why are you so eager to find me guilty of something, rather than see this for what it was: An ignorant kid manipulated by left-wing culture, making an issue of an innocent, innocuous exchange?
Cheers,
Jon
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
There was no harassment, sexual or otherwise. (On my part.)
If managment has an obligation to take seriously complaints about harassment, what did they ignore MY complaint about the way I was being harassed?
And given the nature of the facts I presented, why are you so eager to find me guilty of something, rather than see this for what it was: An ignorant kid manipulated by left-wing culture, making an issue of an innocent, innocuous exchange?
Cheers,
Jon
skipbelt 0
Jon i really kinda like how you handled it, set them back on their heels !
as i write this i am listening to
i don't want your love -duran duran-
oddly appropriate !
as i write this i am listening to
i don't want your love -duran duran-
oddly appropriate !
billvon 3,085
>There was no harassment, sexual or otherwise.
Like I said, it has to be a continuing pattern of behavior to become a real issue of sexual harassment. If she asked you to stop (or asked you through management to stop) and you do - then there's no problem.
>If managment has an obligation to take seriously complaints about
>harassment, what did they ignore MY complaint about the way I was being
>harassed?
Well, not being there, I don't know why. But if you presented yourself at all like you presented yourself here, then it would be pretty clear that you primarily wanted to get back at a "brain dead high school cunt" and make her management look stupid.
>And given the nature of the facts I presented, why are you so eager to
>find me guilty of something . .
I said very clearly that as long as you stopped kissing yourself (which it sounds like you did) then you are not guilty of anything, and have nothing to worry about.
>An ignorant kid manipulated by left-wing culture, making an issue of an
>innocent, innocuous exchange?
Sounds like the one here with the big issue is you. You clearly became very angry at a request to "cut it out" - and are apparently still angry over it.
Like I said, it has to be a continuing pattern of behavior to become a real issue of sexual harassment. If she asked you to stop (or asked you through management to stop) and you do - then there's no problem.
>If managment has an obligation to take seriously complaints about
>harassment, what did they ignore MY complaint about the way I was being
>harassed?
Well, not being there, I don't know why. But if you presented yourself at all like you presented yourself here, then it would be pretty clear that you primarily wanted to get back at a "brain dead high school cunt" and make her management look stupid.
>And given the nature of the facts I presented, why are you so eager to
>find me guilty of something . .
I said very clearly that as long as you stopped kissing yourself (which it sounds like you did) then you are not guilty of anything, and have nothing to worry about.
>An ignorant kid manipulated by left-wing culture, making an issue of an
>innocent, innocuous exchange?
Sounds like the one here with the big issue is you. You clearly became very angry at a request to "cut it out" - and are apparently still angry over it.
>If managment has an obligation to take seriously complaints about
>harassment, what did they ignore MY complaint about the way I was being
>harassed?
Well, not being there, I don't know why. But if you presented yourself at all like you presented yourself here, then it would be pretty clear that you primarily wanted to get back at a "brain dead high school cunt" and make her management look stupid...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I did not use such words during our conversation, and even if I had it's irrelevant. I hadn't done anything wrong and was being treated like crap. This kind of treatment will provoke anger. I wasn't trying to "get back" at anyone, I was trying to figure out what the problem was in the first place.
Doesn't there come a point where we're allowed to tell someone that their complaints are petty, that they need to lighten up and let the small stuff roll off their backs? Especially when there obviously wasn't anything wrong in the first place? After all, my harassment complaint is far more substantive than was hers, and you're telling me to ignore it and not make a fuss. Why can't a woman be held to the same standard?
(And for the record, she didn't accuse me of "harassment." She said I "made her uncomfortable." Since when did humans earn the right not to be made "uncomfortable?" Who taught her to use those words? ...cough...Gloria Allred...)
According to your logic I can complain about you for whatever trivial reason (I don't like your T-shirt, or the way you keep saying "Oh my God, " etc.) and managment is obligated to call you in for a conference and warn you to read my mind and avoid saying/doing anything I might not appreciate, no matter how petty.
If you've had a lobotomy you probably would not be offended by this treatment, but if you're like the rest of us it would make you angry.
Somehow I don't think this is what legislatures had in mind when they invented "sexual harassment" law, nor was this what the public had in mind when it gave consent to the creation of such laws.
Cheers,
Jon
>harassment, what did they ignore MY complaint about the way I was being
>harassed?
Well, not being there, I don't know why. But if you presented yourself at all like you presented yourself here, then it would be pretty clear that you primarily wanted to get back at a "brain dead high school cunt" and make her management look stupid...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I did not use such words during our conversation, and even if I had it's irrelevant. I hadn't done anything wrong and was being treated like crap. This kind of treatment will provoke anger. I wasn't trying to "get back" at anyone, I was trying to figure out what the problem was in the first place.
Doesn't there come a point where we're allowed to tell someone that their complaints are petty, that they need to lighten up and let the small stuff roll off their backs? Especially when there obviously wasn't anything wrong in the first place? After all, my harassment complaint is far more substantive than was hers, and you're telling me to ignore it and not make a fuss. Why can't a woman be held to the same standard?
(And for the record, she didn't accuse me of "harassment." She said I "made her uncomfortable." Since when did humans earn the right not to be made "uncomfortable?" Who taught her to use those words? ...cough...Gloria Allred...)
According to your logic I can complain about you for whatever trivial reason (I don't like your T-shirt, or the way you keep saying "Oh my God, " etc.) and managment is obligated to call you in for a conference and warn you to read my mind and avoid saying/doing anything I might not appreciate, no matter how petty.
If you've had a lobotomy you probably would not be offended by this treatment, but if you're like the rest of us it would make you angry.
Somehow I don't think this is what legislatures had in mind when they invented "sexual harassment" law, nor was this what the public had in mind when it gave consent to the creation of such laws.
Cheers,
Jon
QuoteI hadn't done anything wrong...I was trying to figure out what the problem was in the first place....
What you did wrong was you acted in a manner that made someone complain (rightly or wrongly) about your actions. It involves their perception of the act, not yours.
QuoteDoesn't there come a point where we're allowed to tell someone that their complaints are petty, that they need to lighten up and let the small stuff roll off their backs?
In the case of a customer, nope, not at all. In the case of friends, why not? They are least likely to complain about it.
QuoteEspecially when there obviously wasn't anything wrong in the first place?
YOUR perception, not hers/his.
QuoteWhy can't a woman be held to the same standard?
They are technically. Reality may be a point for debate.
Quote(And for the record, she didn't accuse me of "harassment." She said I "made her uncomfortable."
Yep. This is a valid basis for a harassment complaint.
QuoteAccording to your logic I can complain about you for whatever trivial reason (I don't like your T-shirt, or the way you keep saying "Oh my God, " etc.) and managment is obligated to call you in for a conference and warn you to read my mind and avoid saying/doing anything I might not appreciate, no matter how petty.
Yes, anyone can complain about anything. Petty shit need not be addressed. Sexual harassment complaints should be, and by law I believe must be, addressed.
QuoteIf you've had a lobotomy you probably would not be offended by this treatment, but if you're like the rest of us it would make you angry.
What's making you angry is you are not accepting the validity of the harassment complaint.
QuoteSomehow I don't think this is what legislatures had in mind when they invented "sexual harassment" law, nor was this what the public had in mind when it gave consent to the creation of such laws.
I'm willing to bet that it is.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
skipbelt 0
many sexual harassment claims are frivolous , like this one . no one can make anyone do anything . making an environment , quite different !
billvon 3,085
>I hadn't done anything wrong and was being treated like crap.
That's what most people who end up guilty of sexual harassment think. "I do this ALL THE TIME and no one complains except this one fucking bitch!" Indeed, that's what the first post in this thread was about. We get used to doing what we like - but that's not always appropriate. This can be especially true for skydivers, for whom actions at the DZ are very different than actions in a workplace. What's funny to another skydiver may be offensive to someone you work with.
The sexual harassment questions:
Is this verbal or physical behavior of a sexual nature? In your case, yes; you were kissing yourself.
Is this conduct offensive to persons who witness it? In your case, yes, she said she was uncomfortable with your behavior.
Is this behavior being initiated by only one of the parties who has power over the other? If she had less seniority than you - or if you were indeed above her in position - the answer to this is yes.
Does the conduct make the employee’s job unpleasant? From what she said, apparently the answer here is yes.
Does the employee have to tolerate that type of conduct in order to keep his or her job? This, in your case, would be the biggie. If someone mentioned it to you, and you stopped, then end of story; problem solved. If you did not stop, and insisted on continuing to make such gestures, then it would be an ongoing problem - and she would have to tolerate it.
So how do you know that the person finds it offensive? Many people, especially people with less seniority, feel they cannot confront their boss/the guy who's been there longer/the assistant manager with such complaints, because it may end very poorly for them - they may be fired, or passed over for promotion, or given undesirable hours because the person being complained to may decide that the employee is a "brain dead high school cunt" based purely on the complaint. (Which happened in this case.)
So they go through management; indeed, that's on the top of the list of "how to handle harassment." That way management can deal with it before it becomes a big problem, and the risks of retaliation are minimized.
>According to your logic I can complain about you for whatever trivial
>reason (I don't like your T-shirt, or the way you keep saying "Oh my
>God, " etc.) and managment is obligated to call you in for a conference
>and warn you to read my mind and avoid saying/doing anything I might
>not appreciate, no matter how petty.
No. If the comments/gestures are of a sexual nature, then it's almost always appropriate to talk to the person making them - because they are generally not appropriate. If it's a T-shirt that says "kill the Jews" then yes, that might be appropriate to talk about. If it's a head scarf, or a gold cross, or a common expression (i.e. "that's a doozy!" if they are offended by doozies) then it may not be worthwhile to talk about.
If the person complaining about sexual harassment regularly complains about non-sexual issues, then at some point management may decide that he's more trouble than he's worth, and fire him.
>Doesn't there come a point where we're allowed to tell someone
>that their complaints are petty, that they need to lighten up and let the
>small stuff roll off their backs?
Again, 99% of the people who actually _are_ sexually harassing other people think this. When it's sexual in nature it's basically never appropriate in the workplace.
The reason the law came about is because there was a very pervasive attitude that women should just "suck it up and take it" - which seems to be the same attitude you have. People used almost identical language to defend behavior ranging from an email "would you do her?" thread, to posting suggestive pictures in a common area, to giving unwanted backrubs, to staring at someone's breasts whenever they met, to making sucking noises when a female co-worker walked by because "it was an inside joke."
And to reiterate once again, if you stopped once management talked to you about it, then there is no problem; the system worked as designed.
>After all, my harassment complaint is far more substantive than was hers
Your complaint was obviously an attempt to retaliate against a management decision you did not like, and most managers will be smart enough to realize that.
That's what most people who end up guilty of sexual harassment think. "I do this ALL THE TIME and no one complains except this one fucking bitch!" Indeed, that's what the first post in this thread was about. We get used to doing what we like - but that's not always appropriate. This can be especially true for skydivers, for whom actions at the DZ are very different than actions in a workplace. What's funny to another skydiver may be offensive to someone you work with.
The sexual harassment questions:
Is this verbal or physical behavior of a sexual nature? In your case, yes; you were kissing yourself.
Is this conduct offensive to persons who witness it? In your case, yes, she said she was uncomfortable with your behavior.
Is this behavior being initiated by only one of the parties who has power over the other? If she had less seniority than you - or if you were indeed above her in position - the answer to this is yes.
Does the conduct make the employee’s job unpleasant? From what she said, apparently the answer here is yes.
Does the employee have to tolerate that type of conduct in order to keep his or her job? This, in your case, would be the biggie. If someone mentioned it to you, and you stopped, then end of story; problem solved. If you did not stop, and insisted on continuing to make such gestures, then it would be an ongoing problem - and she would have to tolerate it.
So how do you know that the person finds it offensive? Many people, especially people with less seniority, feel they cannot confront their boss/the guy who's been there longer/the assistant manager with such complaints, because it may end very poorly for them - they may be fired, or passed over for promotion, or given undesirable hours because the person being complained to may decide that the employee is a "brain dead high school cunt" based purely on the complaint. (Which happened in this case.)
So they go through management; indeed, that's on the top of the list of "how to handle harassment." That way management can deal with it before it becomes a big problem, and the risks of retaliation are minimized.
>According to your logic I can complain about you for whatever trivial
>reason (I don't like your T-shirt, or the way you keep saying "Oh my
>God, " etc.) and managment is obligated to call you in for a conference
>and warn you to read my mind and avoid saying/doing anything I might
>not appreciate, no matter how petty.
No. If the comments/gestures are of a sexual nature, then it's almost always appropriate to talk to the person making them - because they are generally not appropriate. If it's a T-shirt that says "kill the Jews" then yes, that might be appropriate to talk about. If it's a head scarf, or a gold cross, or a common expression (i.e. "that's a doozy!" if they are offended by doozies) then it may not be worthwhile to talk about.
If the person complaining about sexual harassment regularly complains about non-sexual issues, then at some point management may decide that he's more trouble than he's worth, and fire him.
>Doesn't there come a point where we're allowed to tell someone
>that their complaints are petty, that they need to lighten up and let the
>small stuff roll off their backs?
Again, 99% of the people who actually _are_ sexually harassing other people think this. When it's sexual in nature it's basically never appropriate in the workplace.
The reason the law came about is because there was a very pervasive attitude that women should just "suck it up and take it" - which seems to be the same attitude you have. People used almost identical language to defend behavior ranging from an email "would you do her?" thread, to posting suggestive pictures in a common area, to giving unwanted backrubs, to staring at someone's breasts whenever they met, to making sucking noises when a female co-worker walked by because "it was an inside joke."
And to reiterate once again, if you stopped once management talked to you about it, then there is no problem; the system worked as designed.
>After all, my harassment complaint is far more substantive than was hers
Your complaint was obviously an attempt to retaliate against a management decision you did not like, and most managers will be smart enough to realize that.
skyrider 0
Bullshit, minorities love that crutch....
I was speaking by broad analogy; not saying it fit 100%. That's the nature of analogies: to illustrate generally, not to replicate. Anyhow, in the Skyride case, there was the possibility the DZ.com posts could have been admitted into evidence, but in that particular case, it didn't come to be.
But my general point to Jon or anyone else was to dispel the notion that something a person says on a website somehow cannot be used in court. Sometimes, it can. So, for example, if Jon is a witness in a court case, and he posts something on a public website or blog site like this one, and the post can be linked to him to the satisfaction of a judge, the judge could very well decide to admit his blog post into evidence for a purpose relevant to the trial in which he's involved, such as to establish his state of mind as to a material issue, or to impeach his credibility.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites