PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND PRACTICES - COLUMN 161
A related question was asked by some of our younger members at the Annual Meeting in Santa Fe. Why is the Young Professional category limited to 3 years when most of the states which license geoscientists require 5 years of experi- ence?3 Should the YP category be made available for 5 years (or 60 months)? As with the Transitional category, should one be able to break one’s total YP time into different groups separated by a return to school for an advanced degree?
Should there be different status for mid-career Professional Members and CPGs who become unemployed as a result of one of the periodic industry downturns? Affording dues can be an issue for these mid-career professionals. Should a reduction in dues be available? I would very much appreciate receiving your thoughts on these questions.
Harassment,
Discrimination, and Bias
The Joint AGI/GSA Affiliated Societies meeting at the GSA Annual Meeting in Denver on September 26th focused on harassment in the geosciences. Although close relationship to the prohibited forms of discrimination and bias was acknowl- edged, “harassment” was defined as:4
Harassment due to a person’s sexual identity, gender, race, or other pro- tected class, consists of a single intense and severe act or of mul- tiple persistent or pervasive acts which are unwanted, unwelcome, demeaning, abusive, offensive, and/ or create a hostile professional or workplace environment. These acts may include epithets, slurs, or negative stereotyping; threatening, intimidating, or hostile acts; deni- grating jokes and display or circula- tion of written or graphic material that denigrates or shows hostility or aversion toward an individual or group identity. Sexual harass- ment, in addition, may include any unwanted and/or unwelcome sexual solicitation, physical advance, or
verbal or non-verbal conduct that is sexual in nature.
The focus of this meeting reflects a continuing number of incidents of harassment, discrimination, and bias in the geosciences. The problem is par- ticularly troubling at some field camps but exists in a variety of other ways. A fundamental solution to these problems will come when sufficient numbers of people will speak out about incidences of harassment, discrimination, and bias when they occur. By “people” I spe- cifically include those who witness the harassing, discriminatory, or biased act, not just the victim of the act. It may be that the offensive nature of a particular act or statement by the perpetrator is not fully recognized until the act or state- ment is challenged by witnesses of the act. In such cases, the challenge may lead to revised behavior, the desired goal. 5
Explicit statements opposing harass- ment, discrimination, and bias in societies’ codes of ethics are also rec- ommended. Such explicit statements are lacking from AIPG’s Code of Ethics although they fall under the provisions of Canon 4, “Obligations to Professional Colleagues: Members should respect the rights, interests, and contributions of their professional colleagues.” And Standard 4.1, “Members should respect and acknowledge the professional status and contributions of their colleagues.” Suggested amendments to the Code of Ethics on this issue are welcomed and will be considered.
The Joint AGI/GSA Affiliated Societies meeting proposed draft principles that state,
We oppose discrimination in scien- tific learning and practice based on factors such as ethnic origin, race, religion, citizenship, language, political or other opinion, sex, gen- der identity, sexual orientation, disability, age, or economic class. Discrimination and harassment reduces the quality, integrity, and pace of the advancement of sci- ence by marginalizing individuals
4. Based on the definition of the American Sociological Association.
5, It is argued that requiring the direct victim to report the harassment, discrimination, or bias constitutes re-victimization. Clearly, the reporting of serious cases can be traumatic, but the right of the accused to face the accuser is a fundamental part of our legal system. The victim of a robbery can feel very traumatized both at the time and at the trial of the robber, but the victim’s testimony is usually required. The focus of the September 26th meeting was on the actions that could be taken by witnesses, not the direct victim.
6. While murder differs from other types of assault or harassment, this doesn’t detract from the general discussion of all types of unwar- ranted behavior and potential solutions thereto. Also, “harassment” covers a wider range of unwarranted behavior than the subset of sexual harassment.
www.aipg.org
and communities. We affirm that harassment in any scientific setting is unacceptable.
The European Federation of Geologists (EFG) updated its Code of Ethics on December 6, 2016 to include the follow- ing statement:
A respectful and fruitful working environment is fundamental for maintaining a high level of profes- sionalism. Therefore, discrimina- tion or harassment, either sexual or of any other kind, is unacceptable because it offends the dignity of per- sons and seriously undermines the atmosphere of trust essential to the work of all geologists. Such actions should be denounced immediately to authorities. It is unprofessional and unethical to condone any kind of discrimination or harassment or to disregard complaints of harassment from colleagues or staff.
I prefer the tone of the EFG’s state- ment. I believe that either of the two statements above, or something very similar, could be added as a new Standard under Canon 4 or as a revi- sion and amplification of Standard 4.1. Which do you prefer? Should a definition of harassment, like the one quoted at the beginning of this topic, be included as well, perhaps as a footnote. Please let me know your thoughts on this proposal.
In addition, I believe that publica- tion of case histories may be the most effective way of illustrating the ways in which harassment, discrimination, or bias occur and solutions to the problem. Nancy Price’s “Field Safety—Revisited” Student’s Voice column in the May/Jun TPG provides some examples related to field safety. Price notes that her initial reflections on the topic responded to the murder of Alyssa Herberton-Morimoto, a graduate student doing field mapping in Colorado.6 Reflections on this mur- der may start along the lines of “should women be alone in the field?” But those reflections should quickly move beyond the gender-related “women alone” to the gender independent, “doing field
3. According to the State Matrix of November 2014 on
www.asbog.org, the required post-BA/BS work experience for licensure is 4 years in the ASBOG model bill, is commonly 5 years, and varies from 3 years for Missouri to 7 years for Arkansas and Maine.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56
