AIBU? Was I complicit in institutional racism?

[User1736271537]

NC as this issue is pretty outing.

I would like some perspective on something which happened in my workplace. I'm a white, mid-30s woman working in a medium sized business run primarily by white women - probably about 70% of our staff are white women.

We have only had one person of colour in our staff and she worked in an administrative capacity. She was pleasant, intelligent and very skilled at her job. Let's call her A.

She was also deeply religious and belonged to a specific sect that advocates radically Christian views. This was something she only ever mentioned in passing initially but it became more and more apparent over time.

Much of our work puts us in direct contact with very vulnerable children and young adults usually lacking role models and critical thinking capabilities. We have all been instructed to avoid the big three - no politics, no sex and no religion- when engaging with service users as they can become very attached to staff and are easily led by their opinions.

A developed a friendship with a small group of service users who began attending church with her and voicing opinions that were not in-keeping with their usual discussions. A has a very distinct accent also and the service users also began to speak with the same accent.

This was fine but took a turn when some of the opinions expressed became distinctly xenophobic and prejudicial in tone. A had also begun trying to recruit staff to her church.

There were an additional 2 instances where A made public statements that she believed a certain way of life (can't specify) was against the word of God and disgusting.

Obviously any beliefs held by an individual are their own to have, but these opinions were stated in a work context and were echoed by the service users.

A received a warning for the first infraction and then was dismissed following the second.

I've begun reading critically about race relations and identify as having white privilege very openly; I'm happy to discuss race within that boundary and accept that people of colour are the people who need to lead those conversations as I cannot begin to conceive the ways in which I've benefited from another's oppression both directly and indirectly. I identify as actively anti racist and I'm.now starting to self analyse and wonder if this whole issue is racially charged.

If A had been a white woman I believe I would have been, in honesty, more confrontational directly with her. I would have challenged her. I didn't challenge A about her behaviour and discuss where this prejudice she expressed was coming from.

What is your perspective on this? Obviously would really appreciate POC perspective on this especially

Why would you have challenged her if she was white as opposition see to opting not to challenge her because she's a WOC?
It's not institutional racism because her conduct was against the terms of her employment and you weren't complicit in anything because the action taken by your organisation was different to your own actions
I'm a little confused by your post, what is you AIBU?

Opposed*

I am also white but here I think her race was secondary or inconsequential to her situation which was that her religious views became incompatible with her work, in a way that would have been noticeable and dismissable by a superior of any ethnicity working under the parameters you do.

You are seriously overthinking this. A had acted in a manner which her employer had specifically prohibited. As a result, she was dismissed. I am sorry but I do not see how her racial origin comes into the issue. Self analysis is not always a 100% accurate guide.

@Cognitive apologies, wrote this down in a rush.

I suppose I'm wondering if I was unreasonable to play a part in her dismissal by raising concerns alongside my colleagues.

I 've been trying to deconstruct why I felt uncomfortable speaking directly to A and I don't have an answer. I don't know if I felt it wasn't my place? It's confusing and difficult.

I’m mixed race but look white so not sure my opinion is necessarily from a PoC view, but this woman sounds like a dangerous fanatic and was deservedly sacked. The colour of her skins seems irrelevant to this situation. Not sure where the racism on your part comes in to it though?

Anyone can be a dick.

Is your problem that if she was white you would have in the first instance of anything asked her what she was playing at and to cop on to herself. But because she is a women of colour you chose to allow the formal process take over?

She crossed boundaries with service users and her stated views were incompatible with her employment.

The fact that she's a POC shouldn't have any relevance at all.

I stopped reading at she was recruiting them into her church. She obviously should not have been doing that - it’s an abuse of her power and their vulnerability. Race has nothing to do with it.

I can’t see that you’ve done anything wrong from the actual situation . Maybe there’s something else your feeling guilty about.... by the sounds of it maybe you pre judged based on colour or something? In your own words you would have acted differently if the woman was white,.

I think the OP is suggesting she may have treated A differently on racial grounds because if A had been white the OP would have challenged A's behaviour earlier and more openly, which might have been enough to make A check her behaviour and avoid the disciplinary action.

Babyshark on the information given I doubt if anything would have checked A's behaviour.

I don’t think you could have done anything to save her from losing her job. She already had a warning and continued her radical behaviour.

She was homophobic, I take it. And expressed homophobic views - and encouraged others to do so - in a work context.

That's unacceptable.

User, I get what you are saying. That's very insightful on your part. Very well done. I'd say you are right in your analysis. You probably unconsciously allowed her race to stop you front speaking to her directly and possibly even explaining to her why her behaviour was unacceptable. Perhaps you could have helped her understand that in the UK workplace, this is not tolerated.

We all have these biases and I dare say I too would feel more comfortable speaking/confronting someone I amore "familiar" with.

Race is a tricky issue to navigate and often times the fear of saying the wrong thing causes us to compound the discrimination faced by others.

Like you I'm currently looking at institutional racism and how easy it is to be complicit in unknowingly perpetuating injustice.

I'm reading this book "Why I no longer speak to white people about race". Really thought provoking and excellent.

I should add that when I first read your post I didn't understand what you were trying to get at but from your second post I got it. It has given me food for thought.

Ah these fanatical voodoo Christians... stay well away. It’s cult like.

No, you certainly were not. She is the one who was unprofessional and clearly abusing her position at work.

Yanbu, she was acting unprofessional way, recruiting vulnerable people to her church. Also a conflict of interest at work.

"A received a warning for the first infraction and then was dismissed following the second."
So, someone did tell her to stop, and warned her she could lose her job, and she continued so she lost her job. Not only that, but it was the person with the actual responsibility of/authority to do so who talked to her (I assume) in line with HR guidelines. So I don't know why the OP should feel guilty for not warning A that what she was doing was inappropriate as if in some way that led to A losing her job. Now, if you want to analyze whether, in all truth, your personal reactions were different based on her ethnicity then that is fine and maybe we all should do that sometimes. But you need to seperate it completely from any guilt at her losing her job (or even guilt at not having stopped her earlier) the right people dealt with it in a fir way and that is why hr policies exist.

No need to apologise! Your second post clarifies things. Her race is inconsequential to the situation but I think it's healthy to consider if somebody's race has been a reason that you have responded to things differently and think about whether unconscious bias has been at play. Only you can decipher why you felt that you would have approached her differently had she been white and why that might have been.

In a week where Linda Bellos has been prevented by white privilege from speaking to Lambeth Black Workers Group.

A black woman Rastafarian bus driver has been told - after 10 years in her job - that she can no longer wear her headwrap/colours or she'll be sacked -

It seems to me that as ever, although it's again becoming more blatant - what white privilege says goes so it's yet another thing to be mindful of and why I'm so very glad I'm self-employed.

Whilst I agree in your instance that 'religious recruitment' isn't on, that she was a black woman means trial by white privilege in that she'd have had no defence anyway. due to perception of her

Let's not talk TO her let's talk about her her and base our decisions not just on her actions, but on her race and stereotypical tropes about black women which make us 'afraid' to approach.

It doesn't seem to me her behaviour was nipped in the bud when noticed, rather that it was allowed to continue. Why wasn't it stopped earlier? I guess for reasons noted above

People are saying the colour of her skin has no relevance but of course it does, where it instigates bias.

The OP believes this person acted unprofessionally. The OP's question is more about why she felt unable to confront this person when she otherwise would if the person was white.

The OP believes this woman's race affected how she dealt with her. She believes she would have behaved differently if the person was white.

OP is not excusing the behaviour. Regardless of the race of the person, the OP thinks the behaviour is wrong. She is simply analysing how or whether her approach was affected by the race of her colleague.