heartharmony.com.au

In case you have been living under a rock for the past 24 hours, a simple skit on a television program with 6 everyday people performing in black face on a tongue in cheek talent show, has created almost as much press coverage around the world as the recent Tsunami’s and earthquakes.

As someone who was in Human Resources for over 20 years, and who specialised in employment equity for a number of them I feel I have to weigh into the debate.

You see – I am actually loving what has happened. I love that this issue is prompting debate and discussion in the workplaces as it is only through active discussion that sometimes hidden assumptions and beliefs can be reviewed and looked at.

So what were the essential facts of the case? The show in question had a very long run – they were on for 28 years which in TV time is as long as it gets. They then had a 10 year break and were brought back for 2 “reunion” shows – bringing back all the key performers from 28 years into the one show. One of the segments of the show is a very tongue in cheek “talent” show – where people embarrass themselves and generally the least talented who gets the biggest laugh along the way would win the show.

In the reunion show, a group of 6 performers reprised their “act” from about 20 years previously where they did a Jacksons tribute with what is termed “black face” – wearing dark makeup to make them appear as African American. They won with the skit the last time they performed. This time one of the judges (Harry Connick Jnr) was less than impressed and stated he was offended by the act – giving the act a zero score. A flurry of apologies ensued – both public and private.

That’s the essence of it … so what changed in 20 years and why was someone offended?

No one can deny that society changes – what is acceptable in one generation is not acceptable a few generations later. 20 years ago it was common practice to ask women at interview when they intended to leave and have babies. It was also common practice to refer to women as “girls” , “love”, “sweetie” and “honey” in the workplace. Patting the office girl on the butt as they walked past was a relatively common game.

20 years ago people still smoked in their workplaces, the boss was usually called “sir”. Girly calendars adorned the walls of many workplaces and the greatest joke was “hazing” the new apprentice – often quite violently at times.

Workplaces struggled with the changes – but today if you call a woman “love” you will often get a rather rude retort back. Women will tell you quite bluntly that they are not your love and they find that word offensive. Just look at the response by Tracy Grimshaw to the Gordon Ramsey comments for an example.

People smoke outside the buildings (10 metres from the nearest entry) thanks to people who were offended by breathing in the smoke from smokers.

Girly calendars are now out of sight in most workplaces – thanks to people who did not want to view near naked people while they worked.

New apprentices sometimes still get an initiation of sorts, but the old fashioned covering them in grease, and duct taping them to the wall has generally fallen out of favour.

You see, in the past 20 years people started to learn that sometimes things they did or said in fun could be taken a different way by other people. That what they did or said may cause offence. They started to learn to try and think from the other person’s viewpoint – to put themselves in the other person’s shoes. It was termed “political correctness” and copped a lot of flak along the way – but still the changes happened.

Managers realised that they had a legal requirement to provide a safe place of work – which included a place that was psychologically safe and free from harassment. They also realised that as a manager they could be held vicariously liable if someone in their workplace breached the rules and harassed someone else.

So … let’s look at the Jackson Jive issue. A behaviour from many years back was repeated … but the world had changed. African Americans started to gain positions of authority and started to speak up that they didn’t like to be made fun of just because of the way they looked. The Black and White Minstrel show disappeared the way of the dodo.

That’s why it was such a big thing when Obama was elected President. A black person in the highest office in the USA was un-thought of 20 years ago.

In Australia we haven’t quite made it that far. People of indigenous descent are still not very visible in Australia. They still face discrimination. We only apologised to the stolen generation when Kevin Rudd came to power – as before that there was  a belief there was nothing to be sorry for. People of indigenous descent were only allowed to vote from 1962 (1965 in QLD) and mandatory voting by people of indigenous descent only occurred in 1984, compared to 1924 for white Australians).

The different opinions that have been coming out of the Jackson Jive issue show in a very clear light what managers trying to do the right thing on harassment and bullying are up against. 50% of the population see things these sort of issues as a joke and without any malice.  They feel it is in fun – and “can’t people take a joke anymore”. 50% see the issue for what it is – the simple act of black face can cause offence to people of a black or indigenous background.

This is going to be the same in your workplace. Many people who bully or harass are unintentional – they think they are having a joke. The issue is that it is the person on the receiving end that defines whether or not they feel offended and it is doesn’t matter what the person intended. Unless people are aware that the world (and laws) have changed, then problems can and will occur.

As a manager – if you permit bullying or harassment, you are vicariously liable for that action. If it humiliates, intimidates or offends someone – you are liable. (You may want to read up on your legal responsibilities here). It doesn’t matter what you may personally feel – you have a legal responsibility to deal with that type of behaviour.

The flack that Harry Connick Jnr received about stating his offence at the skit is exactly the same that any whistleblower or person who makes a complaint receives. That person is often derided, their history combed for misdemeanors and their initial objections ignored or trivialised. Understand that this often stops people from speaking out. Also understand that you have a legal role in protecting people who make complaints in the workplace.

So what do you need to do about it? Well legally you need to ensure each and every employee is regularly trained in your policies on bullying, harassment and racial vilification (contact me if you need the name of some good trainers). You need to keep your policies up to date and you need to take action if your policies are breached.

Personally I would hate to be Channel 9 right now – they stuffed up as managers by letting the skit go to air and they will have an “interesting time” of it to come. But you as a manager need to learn from the issue. You need to get your own house in order. You need to read up on your responsibilities and you need to have this discussion with your work team.

OK – I’m getting off my soapbox now.

Ingrid Cliff

We put your business into words

Heart Harmony – Freelance writer