This content was adapted from English materials prepared by The Bunny Association.
https://sites.google.com/view/the-bunny-association/first-hand-sources-library/2024-08-15-employee-b-instagram-post

🔗 2024-08-15 Female Employee B Instagram Post

Hello. I am B, a former employee of ADOR, who is sincerely outraged by the continued false claims and new defamatory statements from CEO Min Hee-jin, which are causing ongoing secondary harm.

She has not addressed any of my points regarding her breach of neutrality as a CEO, her verbal abuse toward me, or her deception. Instead, as I expected, she is selectively explaining, covering up the essence of the issue with claims of my poor performance and salary reduction, and muddling the narrative. I urge her to clearly address, correct, and apologize for the three points I raised at the end of my statement. I will diligently point out her diversionary tactics and the baseless, low claim of labeling me a low performer.

#MinHeeJin #HYBE

Image 1

Hello. I am B, a former employee of ADOR, sincerely outraged by the continuous secondary harm caused by CEO Min Hee-jin’s ongoing false claims and new defamatory statements.

The way she selectively explains, obscures the essence of the issue, and shifts focus with claims of my underperformance and salary reduction, as I had anticipated, is exactly as expected. I urge her to accurately address, correct, and apologize for the three points I raised at the end of my statement. I will diligently point out her diversionary tactics and the despicable false claim of labeling me as an underperformer.

<1> Regarding the claim that the case was closed as “not guilty” and that she was not biased

CEO Min Hee-jin: (After the investigation was closed as not guilty, when the resignation process was underway) “I felt uneasy upon B’s contact, but I wanted to hear B’s side of the story. Since the case was closed, from my perspective, it was something I didn’t need to do.”

CEO Min Hee-jin, “something I didn’t need to do”? The obligation and responsibility to investigate and handle workplace harassment and sexual harassment cases lie with you, CEO Min Hee-jin, as the CEO of ADOR, where I worked. In other words, while ADOR could delegate the investigation to HYBE HR, the final disciplinary decision is legally and procedurally your responsibility as the CEO.

Therefore, maintaining neutrality and mediating as CEO is something you were legally required to do from the start. That is precisely the job of a highly paid CEO.

Furthermore, please address and explain your efforts to ensure Executive A was cleared of charges and your biased actions in refusing even a warning as the final decision-maker.

Why do you keep pretending not to know and lying when, as the final decision-maker, you insisted on Executive A’s innocence and refused to issue even a warning? Based on the Labor Standards Act, I will take legal action against the improper handling of workplace harassment reports.

Image 2

<2> The claim of a retaliatory false report

What falsehoods are there in my report?

Please stop spreading false information and diverting the issue, CEO Min Hee-jin.

My seven reports of workplace harassment and one report of sexual harassment were all filed with sufficient evidence. In particular, regarding the most controversial sexual harassment report, Executive A already admitted fault and apologized in a KakaoTalk conversation with you. There are no falsehoods in my reports. HYBE has stated they will reinvestigate, and I have submitted 11 additional reports with supporting evidence. I will also seek investigations through external agencies. For reference, as you seem to be confused about my reports, I have attached the full text of my reports below.

<3> Public disclosure of my salary and a 40% salary reduction (a drastic pay cut)

CEO Min Hee-jin: “The high salary applied to B was my decision as a fellow woman.” “40% salary reduction.”

Publicly disclosing an employee’s salary, arbitrarily reducing it by 40%, and disclosing the reasons without my consent are all illegal acts. I was not surprised by CEO Min Hee-jin’s response, as it was exactly as I expected, but her actions of recklessly disclosing my salary, the unilateral reduction, and the reasons for it to the public with specific figures are not only legally unacceptable but also outrageously rude and arrogant, leaving me speechless. Throughout my career, I have always given my best at every workplace and received high evaluations at all the companies I worked for. Three years ago, I was already earning more than the salary I received at ADOR, excluding incentives, and I received job offers from other companies at the same salary level. Regarding the salary reduction, arbitrarily cutting an employee’s salary without a legitimate disciplinary process or prior notice is illegal. Even when salary reductions are made through disciplinary measures, there are legally defined limits. Common sense dictates that a 40% salary cut, nearly halving my pay, is tantamount to forcing me to resign.

Image 3

<4> Performance and probationary period evaluation results

CEO Min Hee-jin: “Due to these issues, B’s evaluation results at the end of the probationary period were poor… The leaders determined that continued employment was difficult.”

In my six-month probationary evaluation, five people participated, and except for Executive A, who worked with me for only a month, all gave me final evaluations of ‘Highly Recommended’ and ‘Recommended.’ Executive A alone gave me the worst evaluation of ‘Not Recommended.’ I don’t understand why you are distorting documented facts.

Meanwhile, CEO Min Hee-jin worked from home most of the time and rarely came to the office. Even as her direct staff, I only saw her face a handful of times—three or four times during my entire tenure, briefly during external meetings. Can a CEO who is disinterested in the workplace atmosphere and situation, and doesn’t even come to the office, fairly and thoroughly evaluate individual employees’ performance? Absolutely not.

Would so many people I worked with sympathize with my situation and send me messages of support if I truly performed ‘terribly’? Would clients who worked with ADOR send me messages of encouragement for standing up to CEO Min Hee-jin?

You portrayed me as some kind of business leader, but when was I ever given the authority of a leader? I was a mere staff member with no team members under me. I was someone who, after arranging a lunch meeting with an important advertiser, was berated for hours with profanity-laced scolding, asking, “Where did you learn such habits?” and continued to face relentless verbal abuse afterward. The business team leader at ADOR was another deputy CEO, not me.

It’s absurd to the point of laughter that CEO Min Hee-jin pointed out my alleged poor performance with claims of typos and unfamiliarity with tasks. To think that my salary was cut by 40% and I was expected to endure harassment just because I sought cooperation and assistance from colleagues to perform better in an advertising task I was abruptly assigned is outrageous.

Image 4

The essence of the issue is CEO Min Hee-jin’s cover-up of workplace harassment, deception of the public through lies and selective editing, and defamation through the unauthorized disclosure and edited context of KakaoTalk messages.

CEO Min Hee-jin’s lengthy explanations are entirely detached from the core issue, but I have responded to the key points. Now, please stop with selective explanations and answer my questions.

On March 15, while investigating my reports of workplace harassment and sexual harassment, did you insult me with terms like “psycho,” “mentally ill,” “btch,” and “let her eat sht” in a conversation with Executive A, while defending and supporting them?

Is such behavior a neutral stance for a CEO to take in the process of handling workplace harassment and sexual harassment reports?

On July 31, when disclosing my KakaoTalk messages under the pretext of addressing your allegations, did you ever seek my apology or consent?

Whether I performed well or poorly, how much salary I earned, or even what wrongdoings Executive A committed are not the core issues. If Executive A makes different claims from my reports, does that immediately render my reports baseless and false? Is it acceptable for me to be labeled to the world as an incompetent, vengeful, crazy woman filing false reports?

All I wanted was the correction of lies and a public apology. I didn’t ask you to turn yourself in to the police, step down as CEO, or pay me money. For powerless employees like me, who are unfairly criticized, you can’t even offer a simple apology—something we are forced to say dozens or hundreds of times without complaint. Yet, you’ve gone so far as to disclose KakaoTalk messages, claim underperformance, and reveal my salary and forced salary reduction (!)—it’s coercion. What employee would voluntarily agree to a 40% salary cut? I look forward to seeing you in court and at the Labor Office. As you boldly claimed, I hope you crush me with a false accusation charge. And if you have any sense of shame, please refrain from speaking as a lecturer to the public.

Image 5

Facts of the sexual harassment report (Full text of the report)

In the full text of my report, I never raised an issue about the dinner on February 15. The issue I reported was the inappropriate, sexist remarks made by Executive A on February 5 to make me attend the dinner.

However, CEO Min Hee-jin consistently explains how problem-free the February 15 dinner was. I didn’t ask about that.

I never reported the circumstances of the dinner itself, so please stop confusing my report with someone else’s and check the email again.

(Screenshot)

1. Sexual harassment report

Summary of the situation: [Executive A] requested my attendance at a dinner with [Advertiser] that involved alcohol, which I did not want to attend. I stated that my attendance seemed unnecessary, but they insisted, citing that I was a “young female” staff member. As a result, I attended the dinner with [Advertiser] in Cheongdam-dong on February 15.

Perpetrator: Executive A

Nature of the act: Using workplace authority, exceeding appropriate business boundaries, sexual harassment

Location of the act: HYBE Yongsan office, 16th floor lounge (sofa), February 5, Monday, from 5:40 PM to 6:10 PM

Details of the act:

Background: [Advertiser] is a key strategic partner and one of ADOR’s major advertisers. [Description of the advertiser]

Although [Executive A] and I work on the same floor, our desks are 3–4 spaces apart, so we sometimes communicate via KakaoTalk for work.

On February 5 at 5:43 PM, [Executive A] > me, personal KakaoTalk: “I’m planning to have dinner with [Advertiser] Kang. Would you like to join?”

On February 5 at 5:58 PM, me > [Executive A], personal KakaoTalk: “I’m available, but I think it might be awkward and not quite appropriate for me to join. I believe it’s better for the two of you to have dinner.” (Expressing my intent to decline)

On February 5 at 5:59 PM, [Executive A] > me, personal KakaoTalk: “I think it’s better if you join. Can we talk for 5 minutes?”

From around 6:00 PM to 6:10 PM on February 5, at the Yongsan office 16th floor lounge, [Executive A] explained the purpose of arranging the dinner with [Advertiser] and why they thought I should join.

During this conversation, in a low and quiet voice, [Executive A] said to me: “[B], honestly, it’s better to have a young woman at the dinner than just two men. It makes the atmosphere nicer and the conversation smoother.”

In the verbal discussion, I explained why I felt it was unnecessary to attend: “The CEO instructed us to avoid unnecessary dinners, and there was a big issue about this before.” However, my opinion was not accepted. [Executive A]’s comment that a dinner with two men and a young woman would create a better atmosphere than just two men shocked and offended me. However, due to [Executive A]’s high-handed behavior and the intimidating atmosphere created by their position, which made it difficult to refuse (as described in points 2, 3, and 4), I felt powerless and had no choice but to comply.

The subsequent content pertains entirely to workplace harassment.