Cat Okita made the following keystrokes:
 >On Fri, 25 May 2012, [email protected] wrote:
 >> 1. Cool, this is someplace that is prepared, safe, .... or
 >> 2. I wonder what happened that they needed to spend how much time to come 
 >> up with this?
 >> I'd fall into group 2.  How bad were things that pushed this into existance?
 >
 >I'd like to turn that queston around.  Why is it that you'd automatically
 >presume that having an anti-harassment policy means that there must have
 >been problems in the past?

As I just posted in another reply, policy isn't created in a vacuum.  I'll 
agree that you can be proactive in creating policy that react to existing
larger social issues, but again is there really a need to have one here?
In many cases places create local policy that they could easily just
point to existing local/state/federal laws that will be enforced at
their facility.


I'm not saying to sweep the problem under the rug.  I'm saying to open
your eyes to what already exists and make use of that.

Take a look at what states already have in place.  IANAL but a quick search
turns this up and several others regarding harrassment, stalking, etc.

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=2266&ChapterID=64
----clip
    Sec. 1-102. Declaration of Policy. It is the public policy of this State:
    (A) Freedom from Unlawful Discrimination. To secure for all individuals 
within Illinois the freedom from discrimination against any individual because 
of his or her race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, age, order 
of protection status, marital status, physical or mental disability, military 
status, sexual orientation, or unfavorable discharge from military service in 
connection with employment, real estate transactions, access to financial 
credit, and the availability of public accommodations.
    (B) Freedom from Sexual Harassment-Employment and Elementary, Secondary, 
and Higher Education. To prevent sexual harassment in employment and sexual 
harassment in elementary, secondary, and higher education. 
----clip


 >> Chances are that in most locations where events take place, they already
 >> have a code of conduct for what happens.  They don't want their facility
 >> to become known as the place where problems are allowed to occur without
 >> ramifications.
 >
 >That's not actually the case, and it's also functionally saying "Oh, well,
 >things like this really aren't _my_ issue, somebody else has doubtless
 >already dealt with it", which is definitely not taking responsibility for
 >ourselves as an organizaton or a profession.

Again, I'm not saying that it's not my issue, but I don't feel the need to
pile onto something that is already handled in many situations.  
Taking it to the extreeme, you don't see places needing to write policy
about murder.  There are laws already in place for that.  I'm saying the
same is probably true here as well if people would look.


 >
 >> Also, I think the Code-Of-Ethics really covers things.
 >>  Professionalism
 >>    I will maintain professional conduct in the workplace, and will not
 >>    allow personal feelings or beliefs to cause me to treat people
 >>    unfairly or unprofessionally.
 >>   Ethical Responsibility
 >>    I will strive to build and maintain a safe, healthy, and productive 
 >> workplace.
 >>    ...
 >>    I will lead by example, maintaining a high ethical standard and degree of
 >>    professionalism in the performance of all my duties. I will support 
 >> colleagues
 >>    and co-workers in following this code of ethics.
 >>
 >> Members need to lead by example.  Allowing harrassment to happen and 
 >> not taking action is a failure to lead or strive to maintain professional 
 >> conduct.
 >
 >You're presuming that harassment or allowing harassment is a failure to
 >lead, or maintain professional conduct -- and based on past history (not
 >for LOPSA in particular, but in general), that's not a universally held
 >belief.

I'm not presuming, I'm stating my feelings, and apparently the feelings of
many others.  People supporting the items in the policy are basicly stating
that this is against what is considered safe, healthy, professional and/or
ethical conduct.  They are just writting it down to restate the issue.

 >
 >> If you are at a conference of LOPSA event, chances are you have a name
 >> badge on that indicates your name and where you work.  Even if it doesn't
 >> have your employeer you are mingling with others in a professional setting.
 >> Act professional. Chances are if you work for a company they have a code-of-
 >> conduct you should be following.  If nothing else, if someone is causing 
 >> problems
 >> in this space at a conference, maybe it should be reported back to their HR
 >> department.  They are acting as a company rep to some degree.  Do you want
 >> your company name pulled throught the muck?
 >
 >Once again, that sounds like "I don't want to deal with this, it should be
 >somebody elses problem".  What's so problematic about stepping up, leading 
 >by example, and saying "No, harassment is not okay!"?
Again, the action of saying harassment is not okay is different that feeling
the need to specify that according to LOPSA policy it's not OK.    
It's not OK as per the Code of Ethics.  It's not OK according to State Law.
There are even Federal laws that state it's not OK.  My question is why
does LOPSA feel the need to create something special instead of just 
following the Code of Ethics and enforcing what is already there?

 >Have you, yourself experienced sexual harassment or discrimination based
 >on your race, color, ancestry, national origin, religion, age, gender 
 >or sexual orientation?
 >
 >It's very easy to dismiss concerns that aren't often (or ever) an issue
 >for you personally as unimportant.

I don't need to experience them personally.  Most people don't.  What I advocate
is making use of what is there to stop the situation.  We already have things
we can point to to stop this.  In the case of activities at an event, if it
really is an issue, you are going to need to get law enforcement involved to
handle the matter anyway.  They are going to act on the law, not some policy
made by an organization that really has no standing in a public facility
as far as they are conerned anyway.

--Gene

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
 http://lopsa.org/

Reply via email to