UCI professor defies law on awareness training
posted at 8:08 am on November 7, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
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 The campus also ordered that his teaching responsibilities be reassigned, but the order was rescinded.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: « Previous 1 2
I hate these classes; my former employer also had ‘business conduct’ programmes you had to do, which set up scenarios where an employee was violating non-disclosures or whatever. The training scenarios were ridiculous and just convoluted, and this was targeted at the regular employee and not management, some of whom had relatives or friends working in companies that got multi-million dollar contracts. What a total waste.
I resented it all because it assumes, on some level, that I am only periodically a decent person, and I have latent badness that they think they can expunge. Sort of like another Democrat favourite- you’re too selfish to give to causes they think you should give to, so they raise taxes so they can spread the wealth as they see fit according to THEIR priorities.
linlithgow on November 7, 2008 at 1:51 PM
I agree with Bill’s point:
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.
I looked up his scientific publications, which happen to be in an area where I have expertise. This guy is near retirement. He’s just making a stink before he goes out the door.
I’ve worked in the UC system. The “training” to which he is objecting is no big deal — it’s very basic training. Annoying? Yes. But frankly, having sat on faculty search committees, admissions committees, and doctoral committees with other faculty, it is absolutely necessary that they go through some sort of training. Sexism and sexual discrimination is still alive and well in academe, particularly in the sciences. Faculty members are notoriously bad about HR practices — they need training just as any managers at a company need training. I’m sure we all have heard stories about monkey business with female grad students — I personally know of many instances.
This guy is no hero. He’s an old faculty member who is throwing a temper tantrum.
Y-not on November 7, 2008 at 3:01 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2