UCI professor defies law on awareness training
posted at 8:08 am on November 7, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
UCI may lose a research professor who garners millions of dollars in grants for the university, thanks to a California law that requires him to undergo sexual harrassment prevention training. Alexander McPherson considers the requirement a “sham” and a personal insult, and now says he’d rather lose his job than acquiesce:
A prominent UC Irvine biologist who generates millions in research funding might be placed on an unpaid leave for refusing to take sexual harassment prevention training he calls a “sham” that offends his sensibilities and casts suspicion on his reputation.
UCI has already relieved Alexander McPherson of his duties supervising scientists in his lab, where he studies proteins, the “building blocks of life.” The campus also ordered that his teaching responsibilities be reassigned, but the order was rescinded.
Campus officials say McPherson, 64, could be placed on leave if he doesn’t attend a training course Nov. 12 to comply with Assembly Bill 1825. The state law, passed in 2004, requires businesses that regularly employ 50 or more people to have supervisors undergo sexual harassment prevention training.
The state passed the law in 2004. It applies to all businesses, in the private and the public sector, which overreaches. Why should the state dictate to private enterprise how they conduct their supervisory training? Does California propose requirements on training supervisors on other aspects of their jobs?
I’m not necessarily arguing that such training wouldn’t be beneficial, but that’s for the private businesses to decide on their own. Most of the sexual-harassment avoidance training I’ve seen in the corporate world has been a complete waste of time. Done well, it can be helpful to supervisors who aren’t inclined to abuse their authority already — but again, the business owners themselves should judge that, not the state.
McPherson has a different problem, however. He works for the state of California; UCI is a state university. I understand his objections, but as his employer, the state has the right to set the terms of his employment. If he finds that objectionable, McPherson should find a position elsewhere.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Good for him… As we saw from the Prop 8 vote in Kalifornia some sanity still exists there…
NRA Lifer on November 7, 2008 at 8:11 AM
Which he easily will, and that is the point. He is exercising his bargaining power to attempt to change a bad law. Good for him.
A philosophy of liberty is the way forward for the Republican party, I believe. As we prepare for the next CPAC, I urge everyone to check out Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty website. Now that the war in Iraq is swiftly becoming a non-issue due to our troops’ amazing success, I think it is time to bring Ron and his other ideas back into the fold.
joewm315 on November 7, 2008 at 8:14 AM
I am sure that there are lots of schools in other states that will happily take him in. Good luck Professor.
Dawnsblood on November 7, 2008 at 8:14 AM
He could always get a job working at WalMart, or he could work for Obama.
William2006 on November 7, 2008 at 8:15 AM
He needs to claim RAAAAACISM!!!!
Sugar Land on November 7, 2008 at 8:18 AM
First step toward the re-education camps Ayers was so fond of. His defiance is only a temporary victory; they will come for him too, eventually.
FalseProfit on November 7, 2008 at 8:19 AM
Kudos to him. Shine the light on stupid PC practices and expose them for the sham they are. I doubt he’ll have any trouble finding another position.
My company made us do this also, a 15 minute web “training” that offended my knowledge, sensibilities, and morals. I want my 15 minutes back.
Also, if I get one more email from the “Diversity & Inclusion Board” I’m gonna scream.
JoeAvg on November 7, 2008 at 8:19 AM
No safety glasses in the lab…..? But in all seriousness, this guy is awesome! I hope he leaves UCI, goes someplace else and does very well for himself, and UCI loses all that grant money that he brings in.
John on November 7, 2008 at 8:20 AM
Yeah, but he wouldn’t get paid…
loudmouth883 on November 7, 2008 at 8:21 AM
I’ve been urging my friends and acquintances in California and New York to abandon those states. Neither can be salvaged, and their votes can actually make a difference somewhere else. (It won’t make any difference whether California votes 60% Dem, or 90% Dem, but there are a lot of states elsewhere in the country that went Dem by just a few percentage points.)
Add to that the ever growing taxes in both states (they both recently announced substantial tax increases) and why would anyone capable of working for a living, want to stay. Just so that they can be taxed to support the non-working population.
MarkTheGreat on November 7, 2008 at 8:22 AM
Wow, California…. Someplace even more screwed up that Illinois.
John on November 7, 2008 at 8:22 AM
Good for him. More should resist these state reeducation camps.
rplat on November 7, 2008 at 8:22 AM
The primary purpose of govt is to transfer money from those who work for a living, to those who vote for a living.
The primary purpose of the legal system is to provide employment for lawyers.
MarkTheGreat on November 7, 2008 at 8:22 AM
Other professors should walk out in solidarity with him. Wait, wait… Never happen. Cowards and liberals.
Sloan Morganstern on November 7, 2008 at 8:23 AM
The instructor for the class was probably a hag, anyway.
Whoops, was that harassment?
Must go put my nose in the time-out corner.
Sorry.
kingsjester on November 7, 2008 at 8:25 AM
Professor, age 64, ready for post-academic career in the private sector, makes a valid point with some visible affect for public discussion. He wants to make a point, and is willing to suffer the consequences of proving this law inane.
This law is another form of well intended poorly executed socialism that effects reverse discrimination, implying that all involved with the required course are social perverts.
It is likely that his retirement package is secure.
Whatever biology research he does for the state university can be transferred to another entity if he so chooses. The state does not own the professor’s intellectual property.
maverick muse on November 7, 2008 at 8:27 AM
Good for him.
Brian Doyle Murray could play him in the made-for-TV movie.
tru2tx on November 7, 2008 at 8:28 AM
Even if it’s not the law, many companies still require their supervisors to attend sexual harassment training. It’s not to prevent sexual harassment but to prevent the liability of the companies in sexual harassment lawsuits.
Bill Scrunty on November 7, 2008 at 8:28 AM
Sounds like that is his intention.
There are various ways of making a point, however, and my gut reaction is McPherson’s is a good one. If he had left quietly and unceremoniously and if it were to become a trend, the reasons for Cal’s loss of grants and drop in stature would not be lost on the people of that state, nor could it be spun by those who were ultimately responsible for it.
Dusty on November 7, 2008 at 8:29 AM
WE ARE ALL CONSCIENSEIOUS OBJECTORS NOW!
RushBaby on November 7, 2008 at 8:29 AM
Me thinks,he has drawn a line in the sand,
and Alexander is perpared for that consequence!
I have a suggestion:
Maybe Alexander could approach (’Hopey’-the ‘0ne’) and
throw himself in front of HOPE,and ask for mercy and see
if Obama could alter or CHANGE his predictament!!
Out of curiousity,who will the new teacher be for the
sexual harrassment classes,the old femenazi chick’s,
or,
the new and improved hopey Changey new femenazi’
chicks from the up-coming sexual harrassment
mandatory re-education camps! (Snark!)
canopfor on November 7, 2008 at 8:30 AM
I work for a Wall Street firm, and the native New Yorkers were funny during the mandatory sexual harassment training. When the instructor would say that company policy was that a business meeting with a client could not be followed by a trip to a strip club together, the guys would come up with outlandish hypotheticals to justify it, saying in their New York accent stuff like “What if my sister worked at the club and I had to pick her up in an emergency and drive her home and didn’t have time to drop off the client?” or “What if the client I had the meeting with had a second job at the club and he was there for that job and I was there for myself?” or “What if he and I ended up there together by accident after the meeting was over because we both like that club? Would I have to leave?” and crap like that. They had endless funny variations on these scenarios. It obviously was short circuiting the instructor. They were trying to cut through the dreariness and boredom — sort of a Russian style black humor in the face of totalitarianism.
shazbat on November 7, 2008 at 8:31 AM
Who was it that said “every day Congress is in session, we lose a little bit more liberty”….
hippie_chucker on November 7, 2008 at 8:32 AM
What happened to federalism ed? Or do you only believe in it when you find it convenient? Let California waste its budget on this stupid crap and kneecap its businesses all it wants. I hope they go bankrupt. Well, even more bankrupt than they are.
Darth Executor on November 7, 2008 at 8:33 AM
That’s how NV, FL, NC and VA went for Obama. And GA is next.
People from NY and CA leave for conservative states to escape the liberal mess at home. Once in a new state, they elect the same people that ruined CA and NY. But they expect a different result. That is the definition of insanity is it not?
angryed on November 7, 2008 at 8:34 AM
Even if it’s not the law, many companies still require their supervisors to attend sexual harassment training. It’s not to prevent sexual harassment but to prevent the liability of the companies in sexual harassment lawsuits.–Bill Scrunty
Exactly.
Furthermore, taking the “training” course enables sexual predators better cover. They know exactly what to hide and utilize creativity in their sick penchant.
maverick muse on November 7, 2008 at 8:34 AM
What are the details of the sexual harrassment allegations?
Disturb the Universe on November 7, 2008 at 8:35 AM
I feel your pain. We have this required PC BS training here at the office every year which wastes 2-3 hours of my time given all the different training programs. To a commissioned sales force that time is lost money. I guess I’ll just have to wait for my check for The One…..whoops I make more than $5 an hour!
VikingGoneWild on November 7, 2008 at 8:36 AM
I can sympathize with McPherson. As a UC employee (at a different campus) this “training” is nothing more than a dog-and-pony show that’s a complete waste of time and money. The law that created this is another example of our legislature having too much time on its hands, leading them to push resume-padding bills (one Bay Area legislator proposed required state buildings to be built according to Feng Shui principles.), and of the need to reduce the legislature back to part-time status.
It would serve UCI and California right if McPherson were poached by another university.
irishspy on November 7, 2008 at 8:37 AM
He is so absolutely correct. Sexual harassment training is such a major waste of time. Everything in sexual harassment training is common sense. We waste the time of the 99% who would never think of conducting themselves in a fashion that makes a person of the opposite sex unconfortable, while the 1% that the training is targeted for will never get it. You’d have better luck changing the spots of a leopard.
Unfortunately, I don’t think the good professor is going to win this battle. Looks like UCI, which is just complying with the law (not sure what kind of teeth the law has) is between a rock and a hard place regardless how stupid the law is.
RedinPDRM on November 7, 2008 at 8:37 AM
Well, if he’s unemployed he can sign up for one of Obama’s several dozen corps!! And get pd in prepaid Visa cards. Maybe.
James on November 7, 2008 at 8:38 AM
Oh, McPherson, come on over to Texas and instill some common sense before the Californians take over.
James on November 7, 2008 at 8:38 AM
I love it!
Somebody finally stands up to mandatory ‘Reeducation’.
Why should anyone be forced to undergo liberal indoctrination?
The Rock on November 7, 2008 at 8:38 AM
Disturb, no charge; but he won’t take the sub-mental training.
maverick muse on November 7, 2008 at 8:38 AM
Bingo. In our large company everyone has to attend even if they work 1 hr a week. It isn’t taken as a slam because EVERYONE has to go. More inconvenient than anything, for the great majority who would never sexually harrass anyone, that is. If the occasional jerk ends up having to attend, all the bettah. :)
inviolet on November 7, 2008 at 8:40 AM
He might need to commit fraud or blow up a couple of people before he qualifies though.
Darth Executor on November 7, 2008 at 8:40 AM
In my “training” we were told that it is based on the perception of the the “victim”. That means that any whacko or person with an agenda can perceive an adverse situation, whether it exists or not, and you are screwed. There is no defense here.
DAT60A3 on November 7, 2008 at 8:40 AM
They know exactly what to hide and utilize creativity
in their sick penchant.
maverick muse on Nov 7,2008 at 8:34AM.
maverick muse: Goodmorning MM!
I give you exhibit ‘A’: The debaucherous Bill(Sexual
Predator)Clinton who B#sterdized the Oval Office!Haha:)
canopfor on November 7, 2008 at 8:41 AM
Dont worry he will be assigned to a Obama reeducation camp and all will be well
grapeknutz on November 7, 2008 at 8:43 AM
Wow. Thanks for the clarification. Gotta love Commiefornia.
Disturb the Universe on November 7, 2008 at 8:43 AM
Right there with you.
Ready and willing to, at my earliest able opportunity, bid this state adieu.
Hawkins1701 on November 7, 2008 at 8:45 AM
Unfortunately, sexual harassment is subjective.
Just like the Main Stream Media.
Jerks who attend these classes will still be jerks when the class is over with.
Those of us down here in the South that were raised correctly do not have a problem with this. Hence the term “Southern Gentleman”.
kingsjester on November 7, 2008 at 8:45 AM
irishspy
FENG SHUI!
Look out, America.
LOL. Talk about handing out government building contracts to friends. Pelosi will inspire Obama’s remodeling of the White House next. Why stop with changing the drapes and the bowling alley to a basketball court when FENG SHUI would do so much to improve the living environment. And environment matters more than people. We’ll all get jobs feng-shuiing America and live happily ever after.
maverick muse on November 7, 2008 at 8:46 AM
Tough being a white (strike one) principled man (strike two) in an Obama-like world. All that man voodoo needs to be processed out to protect all the overweight and manly dressed UCI women. Why not have all the women wear burkas?
Blame Obama!!!
Hening on November 7, 2008 at 8:48 AM
Money just facilitates transfers among people with disparate needs, avoiding the difficulty of matching them up. It is nothing more than a trade of equal worth, the various terms included.
Thinking about this some, I’d be curious to know whether UCI sought McPherson or visa versa. In the strict sense, if you want to use that phrase, it would have to be the latter — McPherson offering his services — and not the former — UCI offering their ‘money’.
Dusty on November 7, 2008 at 8:48 AM
I work for a California based company, but that has offices everywhere. We all had to take the California program regardless of what state we actually worked in. It was less than useless, but not worth getting fired over. I rate it several steps below the traffic class you have to take when you get a ticket.
McLovin on November 7, 2008 at 8:48 AM
Good for him. At the university where I work, the harassment policy is written in such a way that if the person complaining “feels” that s/he has been harassed, then they have. It’s absolutely insane. We’ve equated being offended with being harassed, and that’s a very dangerous equation to make. The only thing “training” can do is hand you piece of duct tape to put over your mouth.
ProfessorMiao on November 7, 2008 at 8:49 AM
Now he’s done it. He’s committed a hate crime.
Fletch54 on November 7, 2008 at 8:52 AM
Exactly.
And what came of the Nixon-phobia impeachment of Clinton?
NADA!
Actually, what came of the impeachment was proof positive that real predators always get off the hook scot-free.
So the bureaucracy enables the predators that is was foolishly “designed” to impede.
And everyone else bears the brunt of socialized indoctrination. Meanwhile, civic responsibilities are NOT part of elementary curriculum though sexual education and tolerance for the intolerant are strictly enforced.
maverick muse on November 7, 2008 at 8:54 AM
I’m forced to do this periodically by my employer as part of their general lawsuit avoidance program. When the instructor was going through the list of things I couldn’t say to a woman in the workplace I asked “Can I think it?”
So far that is apparently not a crime – but no one (except me) was amused!
Stephen Macklin on November 7, 2008 at 8:58 AM
Are there classes to teach people to not be so danged stupid as to think they are being sexually harassed when they are not?
Elizabetty on November 7, 2008 at 9:02 AM
It depends upon what the training is.
A simple “hey treat everyone else with common decency and respect” is fine. But some training programs are more along the lines brainwashing.
rbj on November 7, 2008 at 9:03 AM
He is 64. All he has to do is play rope-a-dope for a few more months and retire with dignity, then take the research grants with him somewhere else.
flyoverland on November 7, 2008 at 9:04 AM
Hope McPherson secures a lucrative position in the private sector.
Going back quite a few years, shortly after Clinton entered the White House, the feds announced mandatory “cultural diversity” training for all federal employees.
Imagine, if you will, a large group of professional intelligence officers, with a cumulative several hundred years living abroad, living with, working with, and dealing directly with hundreds if not thousands of people from many many cultures. Imagine these same officers being schooled either hands-on, or with prior years of living overseas, in intense hands-on efforts to utilize their understanding of foreign cultures to achieve the goal of recruiting foreign agents. Cultural diversity and awareness were an innate quality in all of us…we had to understand it or one could not get past that first meeting with a potential asset.
Then imagine taking these professional intelligence officers away from their assigned tasks for a week or more, many were required to leave foreign posts to TDY to DC for these “cultural diversity” classes. Overseas officers or those in DC ended up in several cases stopping on-going intelligence operations or postponing time-critical missions, so they could attend “cultural diversity” training run by professional Washington, DC, bureaucrats, most of who had never been farther than 100 miles of DC.
Add to that that attendance was mandatory and failure to complete the program would result in these officers not being considered for promotion or future assignments.
We had a near mutiny in my side of the intelligence house. We attended, reluctantly. Many of us asked pointed questions and challenged the dogma being presented as fact…did you know that some cultures eat different foods, follow non-Christian religions, and are matriarchal, and many residents in America do not have a good command of English? [I never knew that. /sarc ] Much to the angered consternation of the professional diversity trainers, they could answer few of our questions or challenges, and they could not “not certify” us as having completed the requirements since there were no requirements for “graduation” other than being “present” six hours a day for five or six days of “diversity training.”
In the end, the general conclusion was that we had checked off an imposed requirement on our personnel records…but gained little if anything from the experience. The cost to taxpayers? Astronomical. The result? Zip.
When the state demands, requires, individuals to submit themselves to forced “re-education” in the name of some sort of “it’ll make us all better” meme we have already stepped way beyond the entry point into a Brave New World…
Look for more of this sort of thing over the next four years.
coldwarrior on November 7, 2008 at 9:12 AM
Yeah, but what a great rack.
HerrMorgenholz on November 7, 2008 at 9:15 AM
Only ’til 21 January 2009, ol’ buddy.
oldleprechaun on November 7, 2008 at 9:15 AM
As bassakwards as these kind of absurd restrictions are, the above statement is correct. Even so, his mode of protest is his right and I salute him for it.
what’s the over/under on when people employed by the state of California (or whatever) also are required to submit to political sensitivity training? Racial sensetivity? Alternative Lifesyles sensetivity? When do they start pushing this into the private sector?
Not good.
Texas74 on November 7, 2008 at 9:16 AM
Sounds good but in reality this is an idiotic comment. The state has no right to impose thought control. Until Jan 20 at least this is still a free country. RESIST! do not submit
bill30097 on November 7, 2008 at 9:27 AM
Notice how they can get rid of an Educator like this for opposing some idiotic State reg but if he was plagiarizing someones papers making up history and making vitriolic statements the State and U would back him.
GunnyRet03 on November 7, 2008 at 9:29 AM
April 19, 1775 – the men of Lexington could have gone along. After all the troops just wanted to go to the next town, Concord. Appeasement never works. RESIST
bill30097 on November 7, 2008 at 9:29 AM
Hold the phone, we have a winnah.
Psst, it was the owner all along. A cert. that shows the owner (and the supervisors) don’t have an excuse is the object of the exercise.
As per usual its a law that lumps everybody together.
Speakup on November 7, 2008 at 9:35 AM
I went to safe church training, which consisted of trying to make the point that homosexuality is not related to pedophilia. Same sex pedophilia is not homosexuality according to this program. This was at an Episcopal church, so go figure.
I was sitting in a room with a number of teenage girls listening to child rape stories in the presentation. It was awful, useless and creepy.
Hening on November 7, 2008 at 9:37 AM
I had to go to one of these courses in the second job I had. It was given by the one of the higher tier heads in the HR department. It scared the crap out of me in that I avoided opening doors for women, never, ever complimented them and only engaged them “professionally” at every turn. There were ways around all the bs of course. But …
Found out later the instructor and the director of the department were having an affair. A couple of careers were ruined.
Hypocrites ….
BowHuntingTexas on November 7, 2008 at 9:38 AM
The state is being an asshole. Who determines what sexual harassment training consists of? It could merely consist of the dean telling him that sexual harassment won’t be tolerated and if he sees anyone sexual harassing anyone, tell them to knock it off. Done.
Initially, the purposes of these laws were to minimize liability in sexual harassment law suits.
Blake on November 7, 2008 at 9:38 AM
University of California Islam Ha Ha Ha Ha!
multiuseless on November 7, 2008 at 9:38 AM
Well now they have to fire him, he’s committed the unforgivable sin of questioning liberal principles in public. Just like Joe The Plumber, HE MUST BE PUNISHED. Welcome to the brave new world, comrades!
Socratease on November 7, 2008 at 9:51 AM
BRAVO, Prof! I hope your stand against PC re-education leads to a much more lucrative job elsewhere.
But, getting back to reality…
petefrt on November 7, 2008 at 9:51 AM
Yes, its PC bull, but its also a non-story. The military has been doing sexual harassment training for years. The Army has been doing it since the Aberdeen Proving Ground trainee sex scandal.
BohicaTwentyTwo on November 7, 2008 at 10:11 AM
I’m a manager and I’ve been through “harrassment” and “diversity” training. Both would have to improve by orders of magnitude to just reach the level of “waste of time.”
karl9000 on November 7, 2008 at 10:13 AM
Agreed.
whitetop on November 7, 2008 at 10:26 AM
Aren’t you supposed to self-report that?
Let’s roll.
ex-Democrat on November 7, 2008 at 10:26 AM
In my unit, we call it “sexual harassment training: an instructional how to,” because everyone already knows that sexual harassment is wrong, but lets those who still wish to engage in it know how to go about it and not get caught.
Seriously, I’m pretty sure that these are things that people are supposed to learn by age 10… Another hour of lost productivity at work (every year!) just to tell us, “Be nice, don’t be vulgar, and if you feel uncomfortable, speak up.” Your tax dollars at work with typical government efficiency.
Tremor on November 7, 2008 at 10:28 AM
I’m speechless.
Yes, I remember that training. What a huge waste of an entire day’s work and the money to pay our salaries. Every member of the Armed Forces at the taxpayers expense. It’s been a while, but I remember being taught the traffic light method of stopping sexual harrassment. You know, hey buddy, you’re at a yellow light; you better be careful… UGH, my kids’ preschool used the same method to stop the children from getting too loud. I hate being treated like I’m a child or worse, an idiot. On the other hand, we got to sit around and drink coffee all day and get paid for it. Fraud, waste, and abuse, if you ask me.
pannw on November 7, 2008 at 10:33 AM
Kind of like the government funded program around here “Dress for Success”. It basically tells people how to dress appropriately for job interviews.
What’s next? How to stay out of the rain?
As proven by this election, there are folks out there walking around without any “home trainin” as we say in the South.
kingsjester on November 7, 2008 at 10:37 AM
I disagree, Ed. Contrary to the phrasing of “states’ rights”, states do not have rights. They have powers. As the Declaration of Independence put it, the just powers of governments are derived from the rights of individuals. The distinction is fundamental to the founding philosophy of our nation.
Precisely because UCI is a state university, which is funded by tax money extracted under threat of force, the way that money is spent should be constrained in ways that private expenditures are not.
If UCI were to require all faculty members to watch Birth of a Nation, would you say the administration is within its “rights”?
The Monster on November 7, 2008 at 10:41 AM
My friends and I mocked the hell out of the traffic light method. And we harassed the hell out of each other (and our civilan-foreign teachers) with it too. A Marine in my class would always go “yellow light” when we were assigned homework. It was a monumental waste of time to us, and in all honesty, did diddly squat to prevent real abuses (which are going to happen no matter how many hours of “sensativity training” you force on people), and fostered quite a few false abuse claims.
Of course, it’s not just the sexual harassment training that’s a waste of gov’t time/money, at least for the military. Every month there’s something or other that you’re forced to attend, year after year. My faves were always the STD briefs. Good times, good times.
Good on this professor to stand up to the PC nonsense.
Anna on November 7, 2008 at 10:45 AM
I woke up Wednesday morning, my gas tank was NOT full, my bills were NOT paid!!!
What is obama waiting for?
DUDE, WHERE’S MY CHECK?
dinkyjackson on November 7, 2008 at 10:49 AM
Way to go, Prof! Stand up and don’t be bullied. Just go get a job somewhere else and let them lose all that grant money you get them.
t.ferg on November 7, 2008 at 11:01 AM
Hmm. I hate to say it but this professor’s crusade strikes me as quixotic at best.
I’m sympathetic—I resisted taking that course myself while on staff at a California university, but only because I was there only a brief time by design. (What were they gonna do, fire me two weeks before I quit? :-))
The training requirement is settled law, and within the Constitutional right of the state to impose. It sucks but it is legal. And his lone protest is going to fall on deaf ears.
mcg on November 7, 2008 at 11:04 AM
Hurray for him!
Here’s a quiz question: Another professor was relieved of her responsibility to sign a mandated loyalty to the US oath; why isn’t he afforded the same privilege?
Answer: Her loyalty oath was to the (bad) US. His loyalty oath was to (good) political correctness.
PattyJ on November 7, 2008 at 11:06 AM
And the dough he’d bring with him.
tgharris on November 7, 2008 at 11:08 AM
The only reason this gentleman can say “no” is because he has the ability to move on, and move quickly. How many supervisors are in that kind of position to be able to afford to give the politicos the finger?
Maybe California should consider legalizing knocking someones teeth out if they grab your ass.
Limerick on November 7, 2008 at 11:10 AM
typical government crap that treats all based on the lowest common denominator.
and it costs money too.
lawyers are soooo smart
and liberal lawyers are gods
Sonosam on November 7, 2008 at 11:23 AM
I think Ed misses the point. McPherson isn’t challenging the State’s right to make the law. He takes it as an insult and will refuse to put up with it. I consider that an honorable position. I’m sure he’s willing to take his wisdom and reputation elsewhere, for better money at that. He isn’t going to quit because he wants to fight. An angry Scot can be a substantial opponent. I wish him well.
rcl on November 7, 2008 at 11:25 AM
The overarching theme of all these corporate sex harassment and ethics and whatnot training is that white males are evil. I doubt that you will ever see a corporate training session that targets females as perpetrators of sexual harassment and trains you how to turn them in.
I watched an ethics training session on line a couple years ago, mandatory training from my corporation, which went through about ten scenarios where actors played them out. I couldn’t help but notice that the white male was the villian in each one. In every case, the ethical hero was a woman or minority or both. About all I got out of that training was “Don’t do wrong things” and “White males do wrong things.”
It’s pointless to complain about it because it’s everywhere. It’s like complaining about mosquitoes in a swamp. However, that’s why people like me are so cynical about corporations and the political correctness that infests them like VD.
Tantor on November 7, 2008 at 11:27 AM
Regardless of the intent of such training, anywhere I’ve seen it done has had an immediate uptick in baseless harassment complaints — causing many hours of investigation — and a significant degradation in workplace stress levels.
cthulhu on November 7, 2008 at 11:28 AM
I have a 40 year career as a corporate exec and can assure it is a waste of time. The course are so typically over the top that the part that might be useful gets lost in the idiocy. An ancillary effect is noted by cthulhu, immediately after there are numerous baseless claims. “he looks at me funny.” My mother taught me how to handle “harassment” before I was ten years old!
pgrossjr on November 7, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Once again, I think the point has been missed. The question is who is paying for the training? Is it a government program that employs people to do this? Is it a private company that provides the classes. Either way, it’s costing the state tax payers. If it’s government employee’s, you bet they’re over paid and get great benefits with little to show for their efforts, not to mention the added burden of perpetual entitlements i.e. retirement, health care etc… In the end, these aren’t private sector jobs growing the economy. They are government jobs taking away that piece of the pie. Isn’t California already 10 Billion dollars in debt? It’s no wonder!
Rushstang on November 7, 2008 at 11:36 AM
POSH (Prevention of Sexual Harassment) is a required class for us federal snivel servants annually. They’re all the wonderful things folks have mentioned above.
So, it was really wonderful to see the tv show NCIS have their annual POSH training —
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWZO_zehR9w
A good representation of a POSH presentation (I think they used the real one). And it’s funny.
Oh — for another way to resist — Lie on questionnaires. I get directions to go to web-site questionnaires regarding workplace issues (sensing/snivel sessions) once in a while, and I lie. (they’re “anonymous” — only ask my age group, sex, duty location, career field, and GS grade. At my workplace there’s only one person who fits. So I’m truly anonymous.) Anyway, I lie. I’ve been sexually harassed, discriminated against for what church I don’t attend, and a number of other terrible things.
But be sure to watch the POSH item on youtube.
Dan. on November 7, 2008 at 11:44 AM
Interesting that the California State University system does not enforce the state law that requires employees to take a loyalty oath. Recently they allowed an employee to modify the oath to their personal beliefs. Just more news on how some people will receive the full weight of the state while others will not. Equality before the law, not likely.
federale86 on November 7, 2008 at 11:46 AM
The problem is, California will then be coming to the federal government, with its hand out, looking for a multi-billion dollar bailout from taxpayers. Oh, wait . . . .
AZCoyote on November 7, 2008 at 11:46 AM
RE: MarkTheGreat on November 7, 2008 at 8:22 AM
Please don’t send any more of them to Utah. At present, we have 10,000 of thousands of recently relocated Californians doing their damndest to turn Utah into the place they just escaped from.
el rey on November 7, 2008 at 11:47 AM
From a “Management” point of view, the sexual harrassment trainings are to prevent lawsuits due to managers overstepping their bounds or not properly handling like issues when they come up. You get hit with a multi-million dollar lawsuit because of the mis-actions os some nitwit in a leadership role and it can pay for itself very quickly. One of the things that should be stressed is there are those out there that relish the idea of getting a “free ride” at the company’s expense, which underscores the importance of appropriate behavior. Like it, or not, that’s the way it is…
DL13 on November 7, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Hey, in Obama-land, you get to pick and choose which laws you’re going to obey, and which you’re not. Like Barry’s auntie, who’s been living illegally (in taxpayer-subsidized housing, no less) in Massachusetts for several years, despite an order of deportation requiring her to return to her native Kenya. We all know she’s never going to be deported by an Obama administration. If you have the “right” skin color, or are a member of the “right” minority group, and especially if you hate America, you can do whatever you want here, regardless of the law. Like FOO (Friend of Obama) Billy Ayers says: isn’t it a great country?
AZCoyote on November 7, 2008 at 11:54 AM
I have worked and managed in California over the last ten years and have participated in these before. Unless they are done correctly they are a waste of time. Done correctly, however, they provide some protection to the firm and managers. For people like myself, who worked overseas for many years, and others from foreign countries, it provides useful information on how to avoid career ending complaints and lawsuits over stupid things which are entirely avoidable. It also prevents managers from being intimidated by staff who make false claims and accusations unofficially. It also keeps EPL premiums down. Just do it… only takes a day or less.
lexhamfox on November 7, 2008 at 1:04 PM
Minority Report: Accuse First
Kini on November 7, 2008 at 1:08 PM
In the case of the traffic class, don’t you typically have to do something wrong to, you know, get the ticket that prompts you to get sent to the class?
This seems more like a case of an “assume that everyone is guilty first” approach.
VekTor on November 7, 2008 at 1:13 PM
Yes, these types of classes are a waste of time, but they also serve to condition you to obey The State. Very useful to politicians of every stripe.
PattyJ on November 7, 2008 at 1:25 PM
State mandated (re)education camps…hmmmmm.
Wyznowski on November 7, 2008 at 1:36 PM
Years ago I had to undergo Federally mandated sexual harassment training. Because of when I started work and when the year ended, I got it 3 times in 3 months.
The second time I asked for a clear, official definition of sexual harassment. They said it was unwanted communication regarding sexual topics. So the third time I came with a stack of complaints already filled out and signed. I informed the instructor and my manager – who had to be there too – that I didn’t want to be there due to the sexual nature of the presentation. Every time the instructor mentioned “Sex” I wrote down the time and handed it to my manager. After 6 witnessed and reported sexual harassment incidents, they were obligated (by their rules to suspend the instructor and do a complete review of her employment and assignment. I worked there another 12 years and never had to do that training again.
Ripper on November 7, 2008 at 1:50 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »