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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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?

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.

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

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 . . . .

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.

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.

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.

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.

and it costs money too.

lawyers are soooo smart

and liberal lawyers are gods

Maybe California should consider legalizing knocking someones teeth out if they grab your ass.

I am sure that there are lots of schools in other states that will happily take him in…..

Dawnsblood on November 7, 2008 at 8:14 AM

And the dough he’d bring with 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.