Perhaps THIS is the reason Andrew Cuomo chose today to announce his resignation.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/andrew-cuomos-war-against-a-federal-prosecutorI suspect if the truth ever comes out, we'll find the timing of today's resignation had nothing to do with sexual harassment allegations. The above New Yorker piece was published online BEFORE Cuomo's announcement. The story itemizes a variety of cases where he bullied staff and perceived opponents alike not about sexual harassment but about ripple effects from a state level commission Cuomo himself created to investigate political corruption within New York State only to shut it down when it began digging up information on Cuomo's dark money donors and his dealings. Andrew Cuomo even called Valerie Jarret in the Obama White House in 2014 ranting about the conduct of Preet Bharara. Bharara was the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) and issued orders for commission participants to preserve material gathered by the commission after Cuomo shut the commission down.
Attempting to call in a favor to push a US Attorney out of their post while they are potentially investigating you is kind of a big deal with people who enforce laws. If the events reported in this New Yorker story pan out, Cuomo's legal problems are going to be far more significant than a workplace sexual harassment charge or two or three or eleven.
Which brings me to the brown M&Ms.
I have a theory...
Sexual harassment laws are becoming the legal equivalent of the infamous "Brown M&Ms" clauses in Van Halen tour contracts.
Hear me out...
After the band Van Halen started filling arenas and stadiums in the early 1980s, a copy of the band's boilerplate contract was leaked and generated scorn when people learned a clause buried WAAAAAY in the back of the contract demanded that a large bowl of M&Ms was to be made available in the dressing room prior to each show and that all brown M&Ms should be removed from the bowl. If brown M&Ms were present, the band wouldn't play, the promoter would forfeit the ticket sales to the band and they would fly to the next city.
Most people hearing of this clause jumped to the conclusion that this was just an example of arrogant rock stars (they were...) being, um.... jerks (they were...). HOWEVER, the actual purpose of this clause was to provide an instant confirmation to the band if the local promoter had READ the entire contract and ACTED upon what they read in the contract. To the letter. Even on the less important stuff. Cuz if the promoter cannot be trusted to do the easy stuff like picking out the brown M&Ms from the bowl, can the band trust the promoter on the BIG stuff like flying 5,000 pounds of PA speakers above the stage without them crashing down on the band?
Sexual harassment rules are a lot more important than removing brown M&Ms from a bowl but they seem to have a similar effect in corporate and public life.
Most of the rules aren't even that complicated.
Don't call anyone "honey."
Avoid any contact beyond a handshake or a covid-era elbow bump.
Keep "it" inside at all times.
Don't even talk about "it."
Don't display or discuss pornography at work.
Pretty simple stuff, right? If you cannot be trusted to follow even simple rules like these whose impacts provide a more equitable work environment for everyone, you probably cannot be trusted to control the police, the courts, schools, public safety, etc. And we don't even bury these rules on page 39 of a 48 page contract to find as an Easter egg. We summarize them all together and make you watch them in a 10 minute video on your HR department's internal training web site, often during your first week on the job.
And it's the damndest thing... There seems to be a nearly perfect correlation between Neanderthals who cannot follow these simple sexual harassment rules and Neanderthals who refuse to follow other important rules. The kinds of rules geared towards preventing much larger problems for much larger groups of people.
WTH
