Oct./Nov. 1999 Issue Number 4

Is a monthly electronic newsletter which links current events and issues to the daily challenges faced by fire and emergency services managers. Current topics in the area of sexual harassment, diversity management and conflict resolution will be discussed.

We hope that you find the information here useful and provocative.
Let us know what you think!

Leadership Training Seminar, April 28-30, 2000, Madison, Wisconsin. For more information, contact Women in the Fire Service www.wfsi.org.

Several years ago, Shirley Ferrill was hired by a telemarketing group to make get-out-the-vote calls for the upcoming Alabama governor's race. Ms. Ferrill, who is black, was hired specifically to make calls to black voters, as the company believed that the same-race connection would enhance the caller's effectiveness. Ms. Ferrill did not see it that way, and sued the company for race-based discrimination, citing the company for segregating callers by race and by work location and developing different scripts for black and white voters. In February, the federal appeals court in Atlanta ruled in her favor.

Few organizations create race-based jobs intending to discriminate. For most, it just makes good marketing sense to have minority representatives work with minority customers. As the lawyer for the defendant in the aforementioned suit said, "The race-of-the-interviewer effect is well established" in face-to face and telephone interviews. Clarence O. Smith, president of Essence Communications Inc. commented that Essence "wouldn't be in business if there wasn't a need for targeting the minority market."

When does minority targeting cross the line into discrimination? Are you supporting practices, in good faith, that might be perceived as discriminatory? Consider the following:

The legal guidelines in this area are not firm. Law from the 1970's has made it clear that customer preference cannot be used to justify unlawful discrimination. Beyond that, a key component of a potential discrimination claim seems to be whether the employee is working in the particular position willingly. Some fire departments with few women or minority members use tactics that border on coercion when choosing members of special teams. One woman who was assigned to a recruitment team against her will commented, "As a new firefighter, what am I supposed to say when the chief comes and personally asks me to do this?"

Does this mean you should not use minority members in recruitment and other specific jobs? Not at all. It is tremendously helpful in your recruitment efforts to have your team represent every type of firefighter you hope to recruit. But do not force department members into these positions, just because of their gender or race. Make sure each team member is genuinely committed to the recruitment effort, not just there because of how they look. Be careful about how you make station assignments, especially if you have some stations that are traditionally all white, or all black, or all male. Avoid pigeonholing your department members by any trait, whether it is race, gender, or simply personality. Encourage all department members to consider the options in your workplace, and foster an organizational culture that is committed to bringing out the best, and the unexpected, in everyone.

Source: Wall Street Journal, September 10, 1999

The Boeing Corporation has settled a class action race discrimination lawsuit for $14.2 million. The suit was filed by African-American employees who claimed they were routinely harassed on the job and passed over for promotions. The settlement calls for $6.5 million to be paid to the plaintiffs, $4.05 million in plaintiff legal fees, and $3.65 million to be spent on workplace diversity programs.

Source: Reuters News Service, September 30, 1999

Sexual harassment law is clear in saying that retaliation is an illegal practice in the workplace. What is not so clear is exactly what retaliation is. One sexual harassment guidebook defines retaliation as "something done as a punishment or to gain revenge." Although this works as a general definition of the term, it is not entirely useful when dealing with specific cases. What kinds of behaviors are included? Does it matter who is doing it?

Retaliation in sexual harassment cases can take many forms. A supervisor can give someone undesirable job assignments if he/she refuses sexual advances. Workers may shun a person who filed a sexual harassment complaint. A person who complains about harassing behavior might be demoted or fired for "not being a team player."

Retaliation is illegal in sexual harassment cases, and is most noticeable and egregious when it involves direct job action against the complaining employee-- being fired, demoted, or unwillingly reassigned in the aftermath of a complaint. Other forms of supervisory retaliation can include writing a poor performance review due to the complaint, denying job development opportunities to the complaining employee, or requiring only the complaining employee to go to some type of intervention, such as counseling.

Supervisors are not the only ones capable of retaliation. Coworkers may shun a person who files a sexual harassment complaint. Other city employees may spread malicious gossip about the incident. The effect of retaliation is to silence those being victimized by sexual harassment. Few people will choose to address a problem if the cure seems worse than the disease.

It is every supervisor's responsibility to prevent, recognize, and stop any retaliation that takes place following a sexual harassment incident or complaint. Department leaders must set the standard in this area and address any problems immediately. Watch out for the following practices which could be perceived or intended as retaliation: