You are correct. I should have said complaint. It was settled before a suit was filed. I am walking back my statement, and I don’t stand by the suit part.
Doesn’t change my point though.
Actually it should. A lawsuit suggests there might be something there. A $35,000 severance package is a clear indication that *nothing* happened.
Um... You need to reevaluate your point, then.
Your point was valid if he was party to a SUIT, which is a big event. The complaint is generally handed off to staffers from HR to keep the CEO from influencing the investigation. Likewise, he would not have been directly involved in any agreement to come out of a complaint determined to be unfounded.
To have the accused be involved in ANY WAY with the investigation and any pursuant agreements was fodder for automatic 6 or 7 figure winnings in lawsuit lotto against the company.
If there is any real evidence of impropriety, then it needs to be presented. Right now, you are trying to convict him based on innuendo. How liberal.