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

Tbh only you can answer that question. If someone said a similar sentence against A would you have had the same reaction or would you explain it away.
I have seen a lot of people who are quick to jump on homophobic behaviour but have ignored racist behaviour or comments as they weren’t as obvious. As recently as yesterday I saw it happen, someone had to deal with a jokey accusation of a family member being into criminal behaviour which is strangely only said to a PoC. I’m cross with myself for not challenging it at the time.

MistressDee I get it. I get what what the OP is saying.

So you think you'd have tackled a white person more directly, informally, earlier? Maybe.

Had they also been likewise strongly religious - and proseltysing - would you have expected them to listen to you? I would see that as enough of a cultural and ideological difference that I would not expect the sort of informal chat I could have with a 'person like me' to carry any weight at all.

She had a formal warning and that didn't stop her. It seems very unlikely that an informal chat would have done so.

Stuff like this is hilarious, how easily SJWs tie themselves in knots.

So, setting aside the arguments about whether or not white privilege came into play here...

How is it institutionally racist for the op not to have personally sought to circumvent the organisation's management processes to try to protect this person from the consequences of their actions?

Does the organisation have a corrupt culture whereby white employees are not dealt with under the same disciplinary processes and are shielded by colleagues? Are there white employees currently abusing their position of power over vulnerable people without facing any disciplinary consequences?

Is that what you're saying?

If you're uncomfortable about your own actions, why have you decided that makes your whole organisation institutionally racist? What have you missed out of your post?

Or were you just more comfortable typing "complicit in institutional racism"?

Religious freedom doesn't confer the right to exploit vulnerable people or spread bigotry. Personally, I would have escalated concerns I had about any colleague behaving in the way described here. It's far too serious to take on informally as a colleague rather than raising with management. I'm shocked anybody would just leave that.

I wouldn’t have done anything differently

I don’t see what you could possibly have done

I don’t think you’re racist

POC here

Mind you, I’m not terribly fond of the term POC

It seems this person was acting in contravention of a number of clear workplace policies. It doesn’t become your responsibility to protect somebody from the consequences of such actions, whatever their ethnicity. You have a responsibility to your (vulnerable) service users. But I’ll confess I don’t know what you mean by ‘this prejudice she expressed’ - what prejudice? If others were not breaking these rules, and therefore not getting sanctioned it doesn’t matter if they are all white, red or purple - colour doesn’t come into it.

Why wasn't it stopped earlier?

At times it's best to give someone enough rope to hang themselves with.

I don't think you are racist OP - but I see this kind of thing a lot - not what took place in your workplace but white women/people standing by the sidelines feeling trepid about engaging but then when it's all over they want a pat on the back or reassurance that they aren't/weren't racist. Then the world continues to turn and we can all sleep happily at night.

In this instance your ex-colleague was so far out of bounds she of course should have been dismissed but your post reeks of what I explained above.

Nothing to do with race.

Employer has rules
Employer broke rules
Employee gets fired.

Fuck should have said employee broke rules!

I don’t see any institutional racism for you to be complicit in
The institution just treated her according to the rules which would have applied to any employee

Not got much to say but as a mixed race person I don't really like being called a 'person of colour'

I stopped at the title. I see Lefty is sending out the same memo on both sides of the Atlantic.

Institutional Racism! Anything to divide and conquer.

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

Even where an OP says herself that she viewed and treated a work colleague differently because of her race, some people refuse to see the reality. Take off the blinkers. Whether she should have been sacked, or not - she's a work colleague and view as such, not that she's black and therefore 'different'.

I would also like to know an exact definition of PoC as in 2018 I'm seeing this term everywhere.

Thanks so very much for feedback on This!

1. First of all, apologies to those who dislike POC/WOC terminology; it's the term I've been instructed to use as it could be used more broadly. If you have any other preferred terms please do let me know!

1. Okay, so in terms of 'institutional racism'; I wasn't explicitly calling myself and my workplace racist. I was trying to dissect whether my and colleagues actions were unwittingly party to our own unrecognised racism/cultural ignorance.

1. A did get warning. The first incident and the second incident were almost a year apart.

4.I think what makes me feel conflicted is that I prioritised one group (the one she expressed disgust with) over another (people from diverse racial backgrounds). I felt truly uncomfortable working with someone who held quite extremist views and I would usually have tried to engage in a debate and opened up a discussion with a colleague but I didn't with A. The reasons were numerous in reflection- she wasn't a colleague I worked with directly and we didn't socialise together at lunch or outside work - but I don't know if I did her a disservice in not discussing it with her.

I just heard the stark statements without considering her personal experience and what led her there.

5.What she did was professionally unacceptable for sure and I don't understand why she continued with this behaviour.

@Vladimir this is what I was getting at I suppose. I am not afraid to challenge things I feel are unfair and have whistle blown on racism in the past in previous workplaces.

Im sorry if this is confusing at all - the more i think about this the more confused I Get!

I'm BAME and first of all, I think it's poor that you have only one BAME member of staff, unless you are in an extremely undiverse area.

Secondly, you must know you did the right thing so I don't understand all this hand-wringing. There seems to be a faux naivete at work here and a need for a pat on the head.

I think your business should have training on unconscious bias and try and work out why you only had one member of staff that is BAME.

You're making a false comparison because you're so determined to see race through a lens of disadvantage and identity politics.

I prioritised one group (the one she expressed disgust with) over another (people from diverse racial backgrounds)

No-one was expressing disgust with, or demonstrating discrimination against anyone from any 'diverse background'. Someone was breaking company policy and quite possibly causing real harm by expressing disgust with a group of people / behaviour common to many people, and doing so to vulnerable clients, some of whom will have, or will go on to behave in this way / adopt this identity.

Your priority should have been (and as far as I can tell was, I do see this is only restrospective naval gazing) your clients. At all times.

For that reason, my only concern here is that she could and perhaps should have been stopped earlier but that you and perhaps other colleagues let her utterly unnacceptable behaviour go on, because 'culture'. We know where that leads - Rochdale, FGM etc. A rule is a rule. Human Rights are human rights - they don't apply selectively because you're squeamish about challenging or reporting someone you don't know very well and perceive as different from you.

For that reason, extending your own familiarity and ease with a more diverse community would be beneficial, so you don't feel so constrained and prissy about dealing with people who don't look like you in future.

You seem dangerously close to seeing yourself as having a personal duty to enact positive discrimination on behalf of your employer, rather than leaving such policy and practical decisions to management. (I can't help Claire in the Community from coming to mind here, sorry!).

You have taken and misused the term institution racism, where I think you mean structural or perhaps societal racism. Institutional racism is real and serious. You trivilialise the term and sow confusion when you misuse it like this.

If your duty had been to work with, so to some extent understand a client from a similar background to your colleague, behaving in similar ways with other clients, then perhaps you would have had the conflict of interest you describe - to some degree. The need to understand them in order to work with them, perhaps. No need to tolerate their behaviour towards other people though. Belief is personal. When it encroaches on other people, their rights and wellbeing count.

Anyway, sounds like perhaps she was allowed to go on for long enough that some souls were saved here, so that's lovely! (Though I do look forward to the autobiography in 20 years time from the former client who believes that being saved via your colleague was the turning point in his/her life...)

Mixed race for mixed race people.
Black for black people.
Asian for Asian people.

Etc. Etc.

People of colour is a hideous term. If you can name a race that does not have a colour, I will accept being referred to as a PoC. Until then, we are all people of colour. I am no more coloured than the next person.

You have done nothing wrong OP.

Some people just love to find things to be offended by.

And one thing that was used quite regularly a year ago is suddenly SO offensive.

It's hard to keep up when people constantly find new things to be offended about every single fucking week.

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

ODFOD 🙄

I don't think you acted in a racist way.

Your self-identified reluctance to speak to her and any guilt, shows your racial bias.

(Everyone has racial bias.
We need to be open to that, so we as individuals make sure we catch it and don't let it affect our actions.)
I'm mixed ethnicity.

Why would it be your job to challenge her directly? That conversation could have gone horribly wrong and you could have ended up getting embroiled in a disciplinary. Even if I were her line manager I would have consulted HR before approaching her. She was putting service users at risk. That is very serious. Even had she been a close friend, I doubt I would have spoken to her personally. Regardless of a person's religion, colour etc. If they are putting service users (and vulnerable ones at that) at risk it needs to be documented appropriately as these things rarely end well.

Ethnicity is often associated.with cultural practices which are resistant to change. Many people are hesitant to criticise these practices or beliefs for fear they are being racist. When any cultural practice or belief leads to a breach of human rights or the laws of ts country then the latter must take precedence.
If as in this case the person is a POC then that should be irrelevant. She was treated according to the regulations and received a warning. If she received more favourable treatment than other employees purely because she was a POC, then that could be regarded as racism.
Social workers have excused blatant child abuse in the past because they thought it was “cultural” and thereby failing to protect the vulnerable (and branding others unfairly of being abusers by virtue of their race).
It sounds OP as though A would not have taken kindly to any advice you may have offered because of the strength of her religious beliefs and so it was better come from her managers. In fact she may have thought you were harassing her!

I see virtue signalling is still alive and well.