BlogU

  • Ask the Administrator: Let's Go to the Videotape!

    By Dean Dad November 18, 2009 9:42 pm

    An occasional correspondent writes:

    At one of my adjunct gigs (where I teach just once a week) the HR department has sent me a 45 minute online training video about harassment in the workplace complete with a quiz I have to pass. Is this a reasonable thing to ask of a very part time employee? They tell me it's mandatory.

    None of my other jobs make me do this kinda thing. I mean if it was one video that would be one thing, but I have a sneaking suspicion that an HR department that does this once is liable to do it repeatedly.

    Plus I have this crazy theory that people can treat each other respectfully without 45 minute training videos.

    None of what follows is intended to dismiss the concept of harassment. It's intended to explain the choice of measures used against it.

    A few years ago I mentioned in passing that this sort of exercise is usually a preemptive strike against litigation. If a college doesn't have some sort of formal anti-harassment hoop it makes new hires jump through, and a new hire creates a hostile environment for somebody else, then that somebody else is in a stronger legal position than if there were some sort of hoop.

    That's true, as far as it goes, but I'd add a few more considerations now.

    Sometimes, it's a response to a case that actually happened. In the wake of a muddy case, I've seen colleges (and businesses) adopt measures like these as a sort of ritual penance. When that happens, the effectiveness of the program really isn't the point; going through it is the point. "Further, to ensure that any such misunderstandings do not occur in the future, the college agrees to..." While controlling every future act (and interpretation of every act) of every employee is obviously impossible, mandating workshops, quizzes, and videos is both possible and measurable. If something happens later, the employer can defend itself with "we took pro-active measures, including x hours of workshops and a quiz administered to every employee."

    There's also the symbolic communication value. I'll assume that you're a decent person who treats others decently, and would do so even without a video and quiz. I'll also assume that you can read between the lines. While we all know that everyday life doesn't live up to the elevated speech of mission and vision statements, it's still possible to draw inferences from noticing what a given college chooses to highlight. By making a point of condemning harassment, the college is saying something. Incumbent employees who have experienced a felt climate of intimidation may welcome the gesture, even knowing that, by itself, it's unlikely to accomplish much. At the very least, it puts the college on record as making the issue important.

    More subtly, it's usually the case that gestures like these aren't just stand-alone. They're parts of larger programs, often working to shift a long-ingrained culture. It's an annoying fact of life that measures like these are usually targeted at the people who didn't cause the problem, but so it goes.

    Finally, there's the George Costanza defense. In an episode of Seinfeld, George was fired for having sex with the cleaning lady on his desk. He tried to defend himself by saying nobody told him he couldn't have sex with the cleaning lady on his desk, so how was he supposed to know? Putting new employees through workshops and quizzes can defuse the "I didn't know" defense, which can make disciplinary action easier. Yes, there's an element of "but what kind of idiot doesn't know that?" to it, but as a manager of people, I'll just say that you'd be surprised what some people consider obvious.

    So I don't dispute that the videos can be kind of patronizing, and the hoops at hire can feel like wastes of time. That said, though, they serve larger purposes, even if they're largely ineffective on their own terms. And some of the larger purposes are worthy enough that I'd consider a bit of ritual worth the price.

    Wise and worldly readers -- what do you think?

    Have a question? Ask the Administrator at deandad (at) gmail (dot) com.

Advertisement

Comments on Ask the Administrator: Let's Go to the Videotape!

  • Hoop jumping 101
  • Posted by Dexter Alexander , Itnerant prof at Various on November 19, 2009 at 8:00am EST
  • After retiring from my full-time, mostly administrative, job of Making A Difference at a Kentucky community college, I began taking adjunct positions to do what I enjoy about postsecondary education: teach without the attendant administrative folderol and internal political bickering. I learned folderol is eternal within the academy. At one of my two schools I have to take an online harassment quiz and an online email etiquette quiz. The other college requires a FERPA quiz before they will issue an email account. Recognizing that both institutions require these quizzes as CYA for them, and risk shifting to me and futher realizing I do not get paid for the time I spend watching the videos and PowerPoints, I looked for ways to reduce the free time I donate so that the institutions can create a legal position that they did all they could to make me recognize my liability for inappropriate actions, I discovered that each institution has two versions of their quiz. The adjunct may take the quizzes until she achieves the passing score. The quizzes also helpfully provide the correct answer after one submits his abysmal first attempt. So, I do not watch the video or the PowerPoint. I take the test, choosing random answers, copy the correct answers, punch "submit" twice to rotate back to the quiz version I used and get a perfect grade. My approach reduces my time on task, and gives the institution the legal pass they want. Everyone is happy. I suspect others in the circuit riding academic world have a similar solution to HR and IT hoop jumping requirements. It is even possible that highly dedicated and oh so serious full-time faculty have arrived at the same problem solving approach.

  • Whining...
  • Posted by WML , HR on November 19, 2009 at 10:30am EST
  • Whether someone thinks that the harassment video or training is a waste of time is not the issue.

    First, to address the purpose of the video, while it does create some hope for protection in the case of a suit, it is not automatic protection. Besides, if everyone treated each other so nicely in the workplace, why haven't claims of harassment and discrimination gone down over the past 15 years? Yep...we all know we're not supposed to do this or say that, but we do it and say it anyway...we just do so knowingly.

    Second, on the point of whining about having to watch the video even as "just an adjunct", if you get a paycheck you are an employee and you are as big of a liability to the organization as the full time employee. Besides, if you want to do the job and keep it, and they have hoops to jump through, then just do it. No one is forcing you to work there.

  • If only everyone had common sense
  • Posted , Director of Human Resources on November 19, 2009 at 11:00am EST
  • Having been in an HR management position for nearly 30 years, 10 of those in higher education, I can only say that not everyone has the kind of common sense one would hope could be taken as a given. And it is not possible to identify those who do and those who do not in advance. I have learned that "possessing a PhD" is definitely not a predictor. My sense is that they may actually be negatively correlated (but no formal study conducted).

    I absolutely HATE having to provide written policies on how one should behave in a workplace or give "the sex talk" to new faculty and staff. I will admit, however, that it doesn't seem to deter stupid behavior . A few examples -- some as recent as last week.

    • An adjunct faculty member repeatedly tickling students in the classroom - "it helps break down barriers with first gen students"
    • A FT faculty member getting inebriated and fondling female students' breasts on an official class outing
    • A FT faculty member trying to block tenure for a colleague who "dated" a student who had broken off a previous relationship with her (no fury like...)
    • An adjunct faculty member casting his apparently not-so-talented undergraduate girlfriend for the lead for the college play (fellow cast members complained -- go figure)
    • Grades, graduate school recommendations, awards, performance ratings, salary increases, etc. in exhange for various sex acts by students or subordinate employees --- I could go on but you get the idea

    So, while it would be nice to assume educated people know how to act -- it just isn't always the case. And the human, legal and financial consequences are extreme. Thanks for the video idea, though. It would certainly be better than giving "the sex talk" every semester.

  • If you're bored with the same old training...
  • Posted by possible resource on November 19, 2009 at 12:45pm EST
  • I'd like to echo the comments above- sexual harassment laws are in place because people don't treat one another respectfully in the workplace, so the law requires workplaces to do something about it.

    If you hate the videos/trainings/giving the "sex talk", might I suggest an alternative? Contact the sexual violence support center (rape crisis center) in your area by calling 1-800-656-HOPE or going online to www.rainn.org. Many centers provide sexual harassment trainings in person that can be far more effective than a video. These organizations work in the field of sexual violence prevention (which includes sexual harassment), supporting victims and providing prevention education. They can be a great resource and may have some new ideas that can make what many people feel is a waste of time a little more bearable. People will always complain about having to do these kinds of trainings, but they happen for a good reason, like many of the examples given in the comments above.

  • Fear of Retribution
  • Posted by Bob at Gray on November 19, 2009 at 2:00pm EST
  • Having taken one of these courses many years ago, there is a repercussion that is generally overlooked--harassment rules encourage covert discrimination.

    The basic law is that harassment is in the eye of the beholder: if a person feels harassed, they have been.

    To me, this is truly frightening. Anyone could could accuse on any basis and basically tank your career, even if you were ultimately "acquitted" by the administration. This did and can cause all sorts of unintended behavior. For example, I scrupulously avoided working with colleagues who appeared to have a risky attitude--whether about gender, gender preference, or other dimensions of harassment. Just not worth the chance they would make a baseless claim that might takes months to refute.

  • Posted by Adjunct George on November 20, 2009 at 5:30am EST
  • If you make someone see a film, you should pay for their time. If it is important enough for everyone to view it, it is important enough to pay them for it. That would get rid of the unnecessary items very rapidly. To make someone sit through these indoctrination films without pay is a form of slavery.