To report colleague who offered to buy my underwear

[Colleagueissue26]

NC for obvious reasons!

Work night out the weekend before last. There was a drunken/joking conversation between several of us about onlyfans. Consensus that no one would go the full way on there but selling clothing would be an acceptable way to make money. All lighthearted discussion of course.

One of the (male) colleagues involved in the discussion was on holiday last week.

At the weekend, I received a late night DM on social media from him along the lines of ‘if you were being serious about selling your underwear, I don’t mind paying. Our secret’

I ignored it. The next morning, he messaged to apologise and said his friend stole his phone and sent it as a dare.

I don’t believe him for a second.

Would you report to HR? He is younger, early 20’s.

Again, your facts are incorrect.

The text a week later came out of the blue and will be treated as a separate incident.

And she hasn’t said she is going to get her colleagues to collude on anything.

Edit: Oops another edit.

I'm not arguing with you. The incidents wouldn't be seen in isolation. They are linked.

The OP implied her colleagues would lie (which she would only know if she had asked them to) since she said they wouldn't collaborate (by which I think she meant corroborate) the facts i.e that she was involved in a discussion about selling her underwear.

You can either choose to believe that I'm an employment solicitor or not. I really don't care either way. I was simply outlining the consequences of the OP lying and trying to cover up the background.

No it won't be treated as a separate issue.

Retired senior HR manager. In my experience if the OP lies about where this started she would risk dismissal as the relationship of trust and confidence would be broken.

There was no texting history between them. She didn’t have any one to one interactions with him. The text message was not invited in anyway.

She didn’t imply her colleagues would lie at all.

I wouldn’t take anyone’s word on a chat forum, it’s not personal.

She didn’t say she would lie. She is reporting an inappropriate text. It’s not her job to do anythyng beyond that.

😂

Wouldn't the message that her junior colleague sent be some sort of evidence that she had behaved unprofessionally on their night out:

‘if you were being serious about selling your underwear, I don’t mind paying. Our secret’

She could argue that he made that bit up, but it would be a very odd thing for him to do and pretty machiavellian for a not-too-bright junior colleague.

Anyway, the whole point is that OP is going to lie about the selling underwear conversation and has asked her other female senior colleagues to corroborate her lie. That is unprofessional behaviour on her part.

She said this:

I wouldn’t need to relay that detail though - nothing was documented in terms of that conversation. I would frame it as an unsolicited message looking to exchange money for sexual favours. Which is documented.

How is that not lying, not only by omission, but by her intention to "frame it"?

She has said her colleagues will corroborate her story. Well, she said "collaborate" but used it in the sense of corroborate. So they will join her in lying about the circumstances that led this junior colleague to send that inappropriate text - ie, an inappropriate discussion where OP discussed maybe selling her used underwear on Only Fans.

How was it a solicited message?

Which part of OP’s post says that she asked her colleagues to message her if they want to buy her clothes?

I didn't say it was a solicited message.

Good to know you are fine with lies, and framing people.

My interpretation is that she and her colleagues all know what happened so her side will be corroborated.

You have chosen to interpret her post to assume she will lie.

There was no texting history between them. She didn’t have any one to one interactions with him. The text message was not invited in anyway.

Surely you can see that this is illogical? The fact that there was no texting history between them (which we actually don't know) would not conclusively mean that the text message was not invited in "any way."

So which part was the lie you refer to?

Good to know you are fine with lies, and framing people.

I’m looking at the facts as they are presented. I’ve never said I’m fine with lies and framing.

Can you not follow logic?

OP wrote, re leaving out the conversation that preceded his text:

I wouldn’t need to relay that detail though - nothing was documented in terms of that conversation. I would frame it as an unsolicited message looking to exchange money for sexual favours. Which is documented.

That is a lie of omission.

She’s right though. She is reporting a text. It’s not her job to document team events.

OP says nothing was documented which I believe means there is no texting history with this man either.

When she leaves that part out in her self-report to HR, and they interview him, it will not go well for her - even if you cannot see that.

If she goes ahead as stated on this thread, she is lying, colluding, and obfuscating. Not great for the career when it comes out, as it will.

Where is the lie of omission?

I’m not saying that if I were in OP’s shoes, I wouldn’t mention the team night out.

But I can see why OP feels a text sent a week after the team night out needs to be considered on its own.

But that's not a logical conclusion. She said nothing was documented in terms of that conversation.

Regardless, that was a minor aside to the main point: even if there is no texting history, that does not mean the text was not invited.

You will need to ask OP is there is a texting history.

From what I can see, the text was not invited.

OP: I received a late night DM on social media from him along the lines of ‘if you were being serious about selling your underwear, I don’t mind paying. Our secret’

So, not a text. And if she's going to show them the offensive message, she really is showing there was a previous conversation about it.

I hope he shows them the message. It rather puts her in it, with her intention to claim it came out of nowhere.

Yes you've made your opinion on that very clear, but the point is that this is the very question that HR will need to investigate. Did she, by having that conversation, "invite" that message - or rather, would a reasonable person have believed that the text message was "wanted" based on OP's statements/behaviour? If so, it cannot, by definition, be harassment.

The employer could decide it's inappropriate/against their company policy on acceptable conduct anyway, depending on the details, but as to the harassment point, the existence (and content) of the prior conversation is very, very relevant.

Text or message, it doesn’t matter. It was unsolicited.

It didn't come out of nowhere. There is a background. Which will come out.