Should I report naughty friend

EmmetSpiceland

Dav010 wrote: »

The guy was in his own home.

But in a “work capacity”. I mean, even if he was on the phone to these ladies it would still be skeevy behaviour.

EmmetSpiceland

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

But in a “work capacity”. I mean, even if he was on the phone to these ladies it would still be skeevy behaviour.

Seriously? Did you see Ming sitting at a table in his boxers while being interviewed? The fact is the op’s friend was in his own home, if he wants to walk around in the buff from the waist down with his hand on his tackle, so be it, we are allowed do that in our own homes, we are not allowed to do it in public.

Sleazy, no doubt, but who knows what people get up to in the privacy of their homes, and I include you in that.

EmmetSpiceland

Dav010 wrote: »

Seriously? Did you see Ming sitting at a table in his boxers while being interviewed? The fact is the op’s friend was in his own home, if he wants to walk around in the buff from the waist down with his hand on his tackle, so be it, we are allowed do that in our own homes, we are not allowed to do it in public.

Sleazy, no doubt, but who knows what people get up to in the privacy of their homes, and I include you in that.

I did. And I saw his, alleged, Tweet from the other week. No one was “impressed” with that.

As I’ve stated previously, this whole thing only becomes an “issue” for the women in the OP’s work is if he brings the deviant to the attention of HR.

Whatever I get up to in my own home is my business, but when I’m working from home there is certain level of “professionalism” expected. Even if I’m in my underwear and a shirt, it should be expected that I don’t fondle myself while in conversation with my colleagues. At the very least.

Gruffalux

Dav010 wrote: »

The fact is the op’s friend was in his own home, if he wants to walk around in the buff from the waist down with his hand on his tackle, so be it, we are allowed do that in our own homes, we are not allowed to do it in public.

.

During work hours he would be dismissed if he was found to be drinking at home, taking drugs, going for walks with the dog during work hours, and so on. I seriously doubt **** is permitted on the company dime, and especially over unsuspecting colleagues on screen in a work meeting.

Gruffalux

Gruffalux wrote: »

During work hours he would be dismissed if he was found to be drinking at home, taking drugs, going for walks with the dog during work hours, and so on. I seriously doubt **** is permitted on the company dime, and especially over unsuspecting colleagues on screen in a work meeting.

Maybe a new employee handbook is needed where the employer dictates what you can do in your own home.

AndrewJRenko

Dav010 wrote: »

Maybe a new employee handbook is needed where the employer dictates what you can do in your own home.

Which would open up an absolute can of worms of legal, data protection, safety and IR issues for an employer.

Gruffalux

Dav010 wrote: »

Maybe a new employee handbook is needed where the employer dictates what you can do in your own home.

During working hours one is contracted to work.

bertiebomber

who cares if he **** over the work colleagues hed be fired if he did it in the office i think its funny and if the women knew they 'd be bonkers and huffing and puffing sexism ha ha.. You should get a life mate leave your buddy alone to play with his tool as he sees fit. Maybe you should release a bit of steam too !!

sbsquarepants

Sardonicat wrote: »

I genuinely believe no man can resist tugging himself if he see a female on a screen.

Or even if we don't:D

Gruffalux

Gruffalux wrote: »

During working hours one is contracted to work.

Most people can walk and chew bubblegum at the same time.

Snickers Man

Mr.S wrote: »

Ahh yes let's just ignore blatant sexual misconduct in the workplace.

As is patently obvious from the OP, he's not actually IN the workplace. Are you seriously trying to regulate and enforce what people do in the privacy of their own homes?

JJayoo

Piehead wrote: »

A co-worker who is a buddy of mine has admitted to fapping off to the pictures on zoom calls of female attendees when they are talking. Not everyone has their camera on so he can’t been seen as his is off (he claims it’s broken). Nevertheless its seems somewhat deviant behaviour and must be against some work policy. Should I report to HR? May be just my word against him though?

Calling bullsh1t on this, you don't have any friends so this "buddy of mine" thing is clearly made up

Snickers Man

Gruffalux wrote: »

**** during a work meeting to the girls talking on screen is not normal.

....sez you

Snickers Man

Gruffalux wrote: »

So if a landlord had installed a secret camera and was **** about their tenant in real time, are you saying it is about the same as if they wanked about the tenants photos that they found on social media. People are arguing to defend privacy, including you, but here you are ignoring the invasion of the others privacy.

A landlord installing a secret camera in a tenant's bedroom or bathroom, in anticipation of catching them in the nude or during some private ablution is of course an invasion of privacy. The tenant thinks they are alone and behaves accordingly. like walking around with their boobs/schlong out and dangling.

A woman in a business Zoom meeting KNOWS she is being filmed and will be aware that people are watching her. She will behave accordingly, and her demeanour will likely reflect that.

Now if some guy wants to give himself a tug while watching that, in the privacy of his own room and in a way that people don't know what he's doing, then what the hell harm? He's not seeing anything his more sober colleagues aren't.
So it's hardly an invasion of privacy.

Piehead

Snickers Man wrote: »

A landlord installing a secret camera in a tenant's bedroom or bathroom, in anticipation of catching them in the nude or during some private ablution is of course an invasion of privacy. The tenant thinks they are alone and behaves accordingly. like walking around with their boobs/schlong out and dangling.

A woman in a business Zoom meeting KNOWS she is being filmed and will be aware that people are watching her. She will behave accordingly, and her demeanour will likely reflect that.

Now if some guy wants to give himself a tug while watching that, in the privacy of his own room and in a way that people don't know what he's doing, then what the hell harm? He's not seeing anything his more sober colleagues aren't.
So it's hardly an invasion of privacy.

I wouldn’t really agree with that point tbh

sbsquarepants

Piehead wrote: »

I wouldn’t really agree with that point tbh

Is it really all that different to battering the lad off himself to the latest Taylor Swift or Dua Lipa video. I'm sure neither Taylor nor Dua would be any more impressed than Natalie from accounts.



They're all only doing their jobs!

chrissb8

Dav010 wrote: »

That is not the case. In Ireland, permission to record a conversation between two parties can be given by one party only. Put simply, as long as you are one of the people in the conversation, you can record it without the permission of the other person.

I did not know that, and now I am freaked out as to why such a law does not exist.

Piehead

The deviant was at it again and I recorded him saying it this time. Seems like it’s a fairly regular activity for him !

tjdaly

You shouldn't be recording people without their permission OP.

EmmetSpiceland

Piehead wrote: »

The deviant was at it again and I recorded him saying it this time. Seems like it’s a fairly regular activity for him !

Not gonna lie but I don’t think HR will want to touch this with a “barge pole”.

Maybe if word got to the “subjects” of this lad’s wankery it might force their hand but without that pressure they’ll probably just thank you for bringing it to their “attention” and would appreciate if you left it with them.

Jaysus Christ.

You’ll have to post pictures of these female attendees.

Gruffalux

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Not gonna lie but I don’t think HR will want to touch this with a “barge poll”.

Maybe if word got to the “subjects” of this lad’s wankery it might force their hand but without that pressure they’ll probably just thank you for bringing it to their “attention” and would appreciate if you left it with them.

Your ''barge poll'' should be a ''barge pole''...

EmmetSpiceland

Gruffalux wrote: »

Your ''barge poll'' should be a ''barge pole''...

Much obliged, G. My screen cover has gotten a bit battered and is wrecking “havoc” with the autocorrect.

Great to have people, like yourself, keeping an eye on “things”.

Gruffalux

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Much obliged, G. My screen cover has gotten a bit battered and is wrecking “havoc” with the autocorrect.

Great to have people, like yourself, keeping an eye on “things”.

''You'' ''are'' ''welcome'' ''!'' '' ''

AndrewJRenko

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Not gonna lie but I don’t think HR will want to touch this with a “barge pole”.

Maybe if word got to the “subjects” of this lad’s wankery it might force their hand

Ooooohhh Matron....

dotsman

Piehead wrote: »

The deviant was at it again and I recorded him saying it this time. Seems like it’s a fairly regular activity for him !

You record conversations with your friends so that you can trick them into giving you evidence so that you can absolutely humiliate them and destroy their career?

Perhaps the thread title should be changed to "cúnts who pretend to be your friend, but are actually the worst scumbags ever".

Seriously, as fcuked up as your friend is, he is not the real villain in this story!

o1s1n

I tried to use an inverted comma this morning in an email and the button wasn't working.

Seems EmmetSpiceland used them all up.

Sardonicat

o1s1n wrote: »

I tried to use an inverted comma this morning in an email and the button wasn't working.

Seems EmmetSpiceland used them all up.

He's addicted!

AndrewJRenko

How long before the friend is caught?

https://twitter.com/jason_koebler/status/1318252755601870849?s=19

Potential-Monke

I got through 10 pages before I stopped reading.

Couple of points. Firstly, admission of guilt is not evidence. It can become part of evidence, but is not evidence in itself. It's why if someone walks into a Garda station tomorrow and says "I murdered John Doe last night". He won't immediately be charged with murder. He will be arrested and an investigation will take place, which involves corroborating evidence to make the case "beyond reasonable doubt".

Now, **** at a zoom meeting may not immediately be a criminal law matter (civil law is on the balance of probabilities), but it could turn into it if the Gardai get involved (which they usually do with sexual harassment cases, if it so warrants it).

Also, people saying that your home is your home even if you're working from home. It is incumbent on the employee to find a suitable area to perform their duties from home. If you can't provide that, your employer should arrange a suitable alternative. If you apply for a job that is working from home anyway, you need to have this before you apply. Granted, the Covid situation has muddled things, but that's then a conversation for the employee to have with their employer to work around it. If you've told your employer you have a suitable area, then it's on you to ensure you have.

Taken from here:

"Employers must check that your temporary home workspace is suitable for the work. This includes things like safe access to the space, essential equipment, that the space is big enough and free of clutter, there is adequate lighting, ventilation, heat, and that electrical sockets, plugs and cords are in good condition."

Also, you're entitled to a tax relief for working from home, either your employer pays you and it's tax free up to €3.20 per day, or you claim that back at the end of the year (the former is worth more). For this purpose, a space in your house is considered your work area, and as such you have to ensure to abide by normal work regulations and company policies.

As for the (most likely made up) original OP question, you have 2 options. A: say nothing, move on. B: say it to HR, move on. Nothing will happen on your word alone. You may be creating more hassle for yourself, and you'll definitely be creating hassle for the other lad, all based on what could be explained as a throw away comment with no intent, as there is no other proof (that you know of). Either way, if you do report it you won't hear the outcome.

Also, is it really a place you've worked if you haven't cracked one out at some stage?

Gruffalux

https://twitter.com/razibkhan/status/1318341898713681920?s=19

Hector Savage

Piehead wrote: »

A co-worker who is a buddy of mine has admitted to fapping off to the pictures on zoom calls of female attendees when they are talking. Not everyone has their camera on so he can’t been seen as his is off (he claims it’s broken). Nevertheless its seems somewhat deviant behaviour and must be against some work policy. Should I report to HR? May be just my word against him though?

Promote that man !! he seems like upper management material!!

B.A._Baracus

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I got through 10 pages before I stopped reading.

Couple of points. Firstly, admission of guilt is not evidence. It can become part of evidence, but is not evidence in itself. It's why if someone walks into a Garda station tomorrow and says "I murdered John Doe last night". He won't immediately be charged with murder. He will be arrested and an investigation will take place, which involves corroborating evidence to make the case "beyond reasonable doubt".

Now, **** at a zoom meeting may not immediately be a criminal law matter (civil law is on the balance of probabilities), but it could turn into it if the Gardai get involved (which they usually do with sexual harassment cases, if it so warrants it).

Also, people saying that your home is your home even if you're working from home. It is incumbent on the employee to find a suitable area to perform their duties from home. If you can't provide that, your employer should arrange a suitable alternative. If you apply for a job that is working from home anyway, you need to have this before you apply. Granted, the Covid situation has muddled things, but that's then a conversation for the employee to have with their employer to work around it. If you've told your employer you have a suitable area, then it's on you to ensure you have.

Taken from here:

"Employers must check that your temporary home workspace is suitable for the work. This includes things like safe access to the space, essential equipment, that the space is big enough and free of clutter, there is adequate lighting, ventilation, heat, and that electrical sockets, plugs and cords are in good condition."

Also, you're entitled to a tax relief for working from home, either your employer pays you and it's tax free up to €3.20 per day, or you claim that back at the end of the year (the former is worth more). For this purpose, a space in your house is considered your work area, and as such you have to ensure to abide by normal work regulations and company policies.

As for the (most likely made up) original OP question, you have 2 options. A: say nothing, move on. B: say it to HR, move on. Nothing will happen on your word alone. You may be creating more hassle for yourself, and you'll definitely be creating hassle for the other lad, all based on what could be explained as a throw away comment with no intent, as there is no other proof (that you know of). Either way, if you do report it you won't hear the outcome.

Also, is it really a place you've worked if you haven't cracked one out at some stage?

I think you may be taking this a little too seriously... especially for a thing that likely never happened.

Gruffalux

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

I think you may be taking this a little too seriously... especially for a thing that likely never happened.

His friend might be Jeffrey Toobin.

Gruffalux

Gruffalux wrote: »

His friend might be Jeffrey Toobin.

Charlie Runkle.

sbsquarepants

Wasn't there some student caught riding during a zoom class the other day (from maynooth i think?) camera was off but the mic was on, lecturer was telling him to turn his mic off:D

Sardonicat

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Wasn't there some student caught riding during a zoom class the other day (from maynooth i think?) camera was off but the mic was on, lecturer was telling him to turn his mic off:D

Hope it wasn't one of the clerical students!:p

BrianD3

I thought of this thread when I saw the TV ad for 3 - the one where a corporate blonde points her pen at people and talks about minutes and getting over the line.

Yeah, give me a few minutes and I'll be over the line.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Two problems with that:

1)Once Mork from Morkeshing can control his orgasm face.

A guy like "Mork" permanently looks like his orgasming.

Deebles McBeebles

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Wasn't there some student caught riding during a zoom class the other day (from maynooth i think?) camera was off but the mic was on, lecturer was telling him to turn his mic off:D

An entertaining if slightly disturbing video. Hope they were doing it through a sheet at least.

Mr Burny

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058121072/should-i-report-naughty-friend

Was this deviant ever captured and caged?

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/114892054#Comment_114892054

What is the world coming to? God knows.

But in the OP's buddy's case, it appears to be photos of his zoom colleagues.

Mr Disco

this was peak disgustancy lock down behaviour !