I disagree with Preponderance for philosophical and practical reasons, certainly as a uniform…

I interpret the definition I shared to mean that the severity and/or repetition of the act is already accounted for in order to constitute harassment.

I can’t summon an argument/motive to address your philosophical disagreement with “Preponderance of Evidence” as a standard, however, it is perfectly in line with how a court would evaluate a civil case over wrongful termination should the harasser choose to pursue such action.

Like what you read? Give Matt Trej Barr a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.