Edit - The Workplace Stack Exchange

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

So while I agree with seeing an attorney if the CEO doesn't ultimately take action (see OP's latest update), I disagree with pretty much the rest of this answer: First, while it might in fact be winnable, this isn't a "slam-dunk" case that would "have attorneys drooling" (no clear monetary damages, to state the most obvious); Second, if OP decides that walking away without a fight is necessary for her own safety and sanity, I'm not going to second guess that in the name of "setting women back"; Third, "token resistance" is PUA (pick-up artist) bullshit, pure and simple.
– BradC
Commented Mar 15, 2017 at 21:59
@BradC No clear monetary damages in a sexual harassment case? You must be joking. Absolutely joking. See this: nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/…. To quote the relevant part: Punitive damages are available if your employer was aware of the harassment but didn’t take any steps to correct the situation. This usually means that human resources or someone in upper management knew what was happening to you and failed to do anything about it. Which just fits like a glove in OPs case. Also, compensatory damages and front pay would be a given.
– DepressedDaniel
Commented Mar 15, 2017 at 22:14
@BradC And as to token resistance, well, I don't have mountains of sexual experiences to go by, but from my understanding it's a sufficiently real thing to receive some treatment in Psychology textbooks, etc. It may not apply to all women but certainly to some.
– DepressedDaniel
Commented Mar 15, 2017 at 22:21
Compensatory damages won't exist until/unless she is fired and/or loses a promotion, etc, which hasn't happened in this case. There is nothing to compensate for right now, financially speaking. And sure, it's possible she could win a punitive damage claim, but it is far from a slam dunk, especially since (up until the last update), the CEO didn't have all the details. Attorneys are less likely to take case on contingency if there are only punitive damages, because that is much more of a risk (for them).
– BradC
Commented Mar 15, 2017 at 22:24
Outside of psychology textbooks, "token resistance" is pretty much used only by the PUA community to excuse their ongoing harassment of a woman who has already told them no. So unless your point was "some dudes are total sleazebags that have convinced themselves your NO doesn't actually mean NO", then I don't know why you even brought it up. Because we already know this guy is a total sleazebag.
– BradC
Commented Mar 15, 2017 at 22:29

| Show 2 more comments

Correct minor typos or mistakes
Clarify meaning without changing it
Add related resources or links
Always respect the author’s intent
Don’t use edits to reply to the author

create code fences with backticks ` or tildes ~
```
like so
```
add language identifier to highlight code
```python
def function(foo):
print(foo)
```
put returns between paragraphs
for linebreak add 2 spaces at end
_italic_ or **bold**
quote by placing > at start of line
to make links (use https whenever possible)
<https://example.com>
[example](https://example.com)
<a href="https://example.com">example</a>

formatting help »
answering help »