Can my boss really make me do that? Part I of II
Photo by Ketut Subiyanto from Pexels
I recently had a conversation with a wonderful activist who was doing double duty at their organization by also taking on some IT duties. Let’s call this person Bob. When Bob’s boss got a new laptop, Bob was asked to transfer all of the information from the old laptop to the new one. In undertaking this task, Bob was exposed to a library of pornographic materials that was on the old laptop. As most people would be, this activist was absolutely mortified to be exposed to this in the context of his job. Bob didn’t know what to do, who to tell, or if what his boss asked him to do was even legal. So, let’s explore that a little bit.
First and foremost - it is not ok! Not at all.
The vast majority of jurisdictions in developed countries have very clear laws that forbid this type of appalling conduct. The term that is most often applied to this is “poisoned work environment.” The essence of what that means is that no employee should be exposed to anything that is inappropriate. The actual definition of that term varies by jurisdiction (you can Google it for where you live!), but the definition that I like comes from The Alberta Human Rights Commission in Canada and says:
“A poisoned work environment is created when a workplace is hostile or unwelcoming because of insulting or degrading comments or offensive actions aimed at an employee or others.”
Simply Googling the phrase “poisoned work environment” will provide many examples in addition to the one that Bob experienced. It could be racist comments uttered by a colleague, it could be a culture of joke telling about religion, it could be comments on a conference call about sexual preferences and nationality. It is also important to note that in certain situations one such instance can constitute the creation of a poisoned work environment, while in other situations, it may need to be connected to a pattern of behaviour. In all cases, however, it is the organization's responsibility to proactively combat any such conduct.
So, going back to Bob, what should Bob have done? Well, while it depends, I always suggest that the first course of action, if possible, is to refuse to do the work. This is not easy. It can be uncomfortable, intimidating, and downright scary - and, to be clear, speaking up “there and then” is not a requirement. So, let’s say that Bob didn’t feel comfortable speaking up, and did the work he was asked to do. Now what?
Bob should document exactly what happened. He can document it on a piece of paper, a back of a napkin, or in a Word document - it really doesn’t matter - but he should write it all down as soon after it happened as he can. While the timing of writing it all down is important, Bob shouldn’t worry about spelling, grammar, or punctuation. He just needs to get it down in his own words.
The next step is for Bob to tell someone. If Bob’s organization has a policy for situations like this, the policy likely spells out the exact steps to take, and who Bob should speak to. Ideally the organization has specially trained people to deal with these kinds of situations who are named in the policy, and employees should have received training on how exactly such incidents can be reported. If Bob’s organization doesn’t, then he should go talk to someone in a leadership position. It can be literally anyone in leadership, or any member of the Board of Directors. The role of the Board of Directors is critical in these types of matters - fundamentally, the ‘buck stops with them’ (I have an upcoming blog about the roles of the Boards of Directors).
Photo by Edmond Dantès from Pexels
What should happen after Bob tells someone?
The first thing that the organization’s representative (a leader, a board member, etc.) should do is to thank Bob for coming forward. Good organizations would be mortified that anything like this was occurring and they would want to put a stop to it immediately. Next, they should ask Bob if he feels safe, and if he doesn't, they should work with Bob to ensure his safety until the matter can be resolved.
Next comes the hard part. Now that the organization has been ‘put on notice’, they have a legal and ethical obligation to investigate what occurred and take appropriate action. The reason this is the hard part is because investigating and taking action is not cut and dried, instead, it can run along a tremendous spectrum of possibilities in terms of complication and nuance, and also length and scope.
An investigation can be as simple as a representative of the organization meeting with Bob, and then Bob’s boss, or it can be as complicated as hiring a third party investigator to conduct an independent investigation. It may include interviewing witnesses, speaking to present and past employees, other stakeholders, and reviewing documentation and online usage. These types of things are situational and are impacted by many factors including whether this is the first time something like this has happened, or whether there is a pattern of behaviour, and if the organization can conduct the investigation on their own, or if they will bring in a third party to do so.
In all cases it is incumbent on the organization to carry this out very quickly.
So, what happens next? And what if Bob doesn’t agree?
Stay tuned for Part II.
I want to help to empower you to be the best activist you can be. Please reach out with any questions and I’ll try to answer them in future blogs, anonymously of course!
Always for the Animals,
Krista
References:
Two excellent policies regarding respectful workplaces that I have had the pleasure of helping to create and implement can be found below. If your organization does not have such a policy, you may wish to recommend that they do!
And, here is an excellent article regarding the roles of corporate boards and CEOs which can be applied to non-profit boards as well.
This blog series is provided for general information purposes only. It is not intended to provide legal advice or opinions of any kind. No one should act, or refrain from acting, based solely upon the materials provided on this website, any hypertext links or other general information without first seeking appropriate legal or other professional advice.
The intention of this blog is to promote the longevity and engagement level of the activist community within the Animal Advocacy Movement (AAM). The majority of the advice will be geared towards employees within the AAM in Canada and the United States, but may be applicable to other countries. All information provided assumes that the employee works within a non-unionized environment.
Krista spent the first 15 years of her career in human resources including as the Vice President of HR for one of the largest tech companies in the world. Krista then founded a boutique employment law firm in Toronto where she consulted to employers across Canada and the U.S. for a decade. To pursue her true passion, Krista sold her practice to lead Mercy For Animals in Canada where she led twelve undercover investigations into factory farms and slaughterhouses. Today Krista consults with animal protection organizations across North America on matters of organizational development. In addition to holding five degrees and designations in human resources, she is pursuing her doctorate focused on the employment experiences of animal rights activists.