Professional duties

[quatona]

I´d like to see the question raised in the "Gays vs. Christians" thread discussed without the partisanry the OP already started the discussion with.

I have mixed feelings on the subject.
On one hand I am all for preventing and prohibiting discrimination.
On the other hand I see a justified interest of everyone not to be forced to do something that goes against their conscience just because they are being payed for it.
Actually, don´t like the idea that people are expected and obliged to abandon their conscience "because it´s a job".
There are definitely a couple of things I would like to reserve the right not to support or help promoting, be it privately or professionally.

 

[stan1980]

I've just had a quick revise through of the situation and this is what I think...

If you are a freelancer, I think you should have the right to turn down business for whatever reason you wish.

If you own a firm or business that employs one or more persons, then I think discriminatory laws should come into affect. You shouldn't be allowed to turn away business on the basis of sex, race, religion, sexuality or disabilities (except if you're not equipped to cope with disabilities).

The reason I think this, is that as soon as you start employing people and are still discriminating, then you are forcing your views on your employees, which I don't feel is right.

Feel free to pick holes, this is just what I've quickly come up with.

 

[quatona]

I've just had a quick revise through of the situation and this is what I think...

If you are a freelancer, I think you should have the right to turn down business for whatever reason you wish.

If you own a firm or business that employs one or more persons, then I think discriminatory laws should come into affect. You shouldn't be allowed to turn away business on the basis of sex, race, religion, sexuality or disabilities (except if you're not equipped to cope with disabilities).

The reason I think this, is that as soon as you start employing people and are still discriminating, then you are forcing your views on your employees, which I don't feel is right.

Feel free to pick holes, this is just what I've quickly come up with.

Thanks. I do agree that this distinction is of relevance.

What about the employees? Do their conscience and their convictions play any part, or do we expect them to just do their job (as long as what they are asked is not against the laws, that is)?

 

[stan1980]

Thanks. I do agree that this distinction is of relevance.

What about the employees? Do their conscience and their convictions play any part, or do we expect them to just do their job (as long as what they are asked is not against the laws, that is)?

Well the employees are free to hand in their notice if they are asked to work at a gay marriage for instance, or represent a paedophile in a court case. If they don't want to do the task at hand I would say this is grounds for dismissal. In any case you should have a good idea of your job description and what you might be asked to do before taking a job, and if you can imagine a scenario which might go against your morals then I suggest not taking the job.

Say for example you take a job where you are going to be looking after assets for various companies. You have to imagine, that some of these companies might be animal testing or oil companies or anything under the sun really. You might not like it, but if you don't want to do it, then you're probably in the wrong career.

The thing is, when you join a firm, you have to expect that you might be working with black people, white people, gay people, straight people, males, females anyway. I don't think there is any room for discrimination in the workplace.

 

[quatona]

Well the employees are free to hand in their notice if they are asked to work at a gay marriage for instance, or represent a paedophile in a court case. If they don't want to do the task at hand I would say this is grounds for dismissal. In any case you should have a good idea of your job description and what you might be asked to do before taking a job, and if you can imagine a scenario which might go against your morals then I suggest not taking the job.

Say for example you take a job where you are going to be looking after assets for various companies. You have to imagine, that some of these companies might be animal testing or oil companies or anything under the sun really. You might not like it, but if you don't want to do it, then you're probably in the wrong career.

Thanks for your reply!
(There´s a reason why have never worked as an employee. )

The thing is, when you join a firm, you have to expect that you might be working with black people, white people, gay people, straight people, males, females anyway. I don't think there is any room for discrimination in the workplace.

Allow me two remarks/requests:

If possible, I would like to keep the term "discrimination" out of the discussion (or at least not focus too much on it). It´s too loaded, too subjective.

My question is not about which persons you work with, but which ideas you work for.

 

[cantata]

I think it's wise to choose a career in which you will not be required by act against your principles. I also think it's a good idea to choose your battles. I worked in a major UK department store for two years, and part of my job description was to do the hard sell on the store credit card (and card insurance). I hated doing it, but I was contractually obliged to sell one or two extortionate credit cards a week, and to push for the insurance sale on top of that whenever I could.

Because of my experiences, I certainly wouldn't want to work again for a company which forced me to betray my principles in that way. It taught me a valuable lesson, in that respect. But refusing to do it would have been a waste of my time.

I tend to fall on the side of having rules about equal treatment of minorities in business and the workplace. Not to have such rules would be a step backwards. I suppose it matters less for freelancers, and it also matters more or less depending on the product or service. (We'd have a problem if Tesco decided not to serve gay people, for example, but less of a problem if an individual freelance web designer refused to do so.)

The only other thing I'd add is that there's a difference between promoting something you disagree with and simply selling goods or services to people with whom you disagree on some particular issue. A web designer could, I think, legitimately refuse to set up a website promoting a gay bar, if she objected to it, but I think we're on hazier ground if she refused to set up a website promoting someone's ice cream shop because that person happened to be gay.

 

[sidhe]

I'm in a different position, being a government employee. Also, working in telemarketing for two years stripped away my humanity.

Seriously, though, my professional code of conduct doesn't really say anything about how to treat patrons, other than to be polite. My primary concern is the information available and the freedom of access to it, as well as the archival responsibilities. I'm the primary circulation desk worker (there are, currently, three full-time workers in our branch - the manager, the technical repair and supply ordering guy, and me on circulation), and I'm concerned about getting patrons the information they need, not what they personally believe. Our system is flawed, so there's information I can't provide, but I don't care if you're Christian, Muslim, Teh Ghey, used to spend time in Plato's Lounge, a mime, sword-swallower, prostitute, or a tattoo artist, I'll try to get you your information, assuming that you try to treat me with the respect due a professional[sup]1[/sup]. Please return your materials in the condition in which you received them. We do notice when you break a DVD in half and clumsily glue it to a blank CD to make it look like it isn't broken.






[sup]1[/sup] I am not, technically, a "professional" by the standards of the professional community. I'm a semi-professional, with more professional training than the remaining staff, about two years out from being a fully certified professional (and five from being a clinically insane Ph.D. of Information Science). Which is why I'm the one on the front line. I can find things with minimal background because I know how to search down information and terminate it with extreme prejudice. I can write complex Boolean equations. I refuse to learn the sequence of the Left Behind series, though. There's something like 5,000,000 books in the series, and they're all badly written - almost as badly written as The DaVinci Code. Seriously. Read some Umberto Eco if you want crazy conspiracies - his at least are entertaining and rooted in legitimate history. Foucault's Pendulum should be required study for anyone doing anything of interest.

 

[wanderingone]

I believe that if you have have a business that is open to the public you should be obligated to provide your services or your products to all who are paying your price and not be allowed to discriminate against customers.

I believe if you are an organization that gets public funding through grants or contracts you should be required to provide all legally available products or services and to serve all persons without discrimination or make that product or service IMMEDIATELY available from an alternative vendor or you should not be provided with that public money.

I believe a private practitioner who publicly advertises and takes customers, clients, patients etc.. via public referrals (from insurance companies etc..) who does not provide products or services that are legally available and generally provided by someone in their profession or who refuse to provide those services to specific groups of people should be required to post such information where people seeking those products or services will be aware of it- including in their public ads.

I believe an individual employee who is required to perform specific tasks that are legal and are part of their job, but offensive to the individual because of personal beliefs has no right to that job unless the only reason they are being asked to perform those tasks is to create a hostile work environment by those who want to discriminate or harass them because of their beliefs.

 

[stan1980]

I believe that if you have have a business that is open to the public you should be obligated to provide your services or your products to all who are paying your price and not be allowed to discriminate against customers.

The only problem I'd have with this, is say I print leaflets or business cards etc. I'd like to know I can turn away business from say a cult, a political party or an anti-lets not have sex campaign or anything else I might not like to promote.

I think maybe certain products, you should be allowed a little leeway over who you can refuse business... such as anything that involves having to customise the product for a specific need. So you can't refuse business if you sell oranges for a living, but you can if you produce art or something. It's a little ambiguous and I'm sure I could word that better, but you catch my drift.

 

[wanderingone]

The only problem I'd have with this, is say I print leaflets or business cards etc. I'd like to know I can turn away business from say a cult, a political party or an anti-lets not have sex campaign or anything else I might not like to promote.

I think maybe certain products, you should be allowed a little leeway over who you can refuse business... such as anything that involves having to customise the product for a specific need. So you can't refuse business if you sell oranges for a living, but you can if you produce art or something. It's a little ambiguous and I'm sure I could word that better, but you catch my drift.

It depends on what you are refusing. If you are refusing to provide legally available services to someone because of their religion, complexion, ethnicity, national origin, gender, age or orientation that's not acceptable, if you refuse to create a specific object that would be refused no matter who produced it then you're on legitimate ground. In other words when Fred Phelps come to you to have some brochures printed you aren't turning him down because he's a christian, you're turning him down because he is requesting something you don't provide to anyone... flyers that say god hates____

The photographer who won't photograph weddings is refusing to photograph something that is the same event that they photograph a million times a year. The only reason they are refusing to take the pictures is the customers orientation. For someone who WANTS to discriminate there are options-- sure it means less customers when you can't run your wedding photography ads.. but you get to stick to your "values"

 

[stan1980]

It depends on what you are refusing. If you are refusing to provide legally available services to someone because of their religion, complexion, ethnicity, national origin, gender, age or orientation that's not acceptable, if you refuse to create a specific object that would be refused no matter who produced it then you're on legitimate ground. In other words when Fred Phelps come to you to have some brochures printed you aren't turning him down because he's a christian, you're turning him down because he is requesting something you don't provide to anyone... flyers that say god hates____

The photographer who won't photograph weddings is refusing to photograph something that is the same event that they photograph a million times a year. The only reason they are refusing to take the pictures is the customers orientation. For someone who WANTS to discriminate there are options-- sure it means less customers when you can't run your wedding photography ads.. but you get to stick to your "values"

Yeah, I'd go along with most of this. Except what happens if a cult comes to me and says they'd like me to take pictures of their premises for leaflets. Can I turn them down? Can I turn down a 'legitimate' church? Who decides what is a 'legitimate religion' and what isn't?

 

[cantata]

That's exactly it, wanderingone - it's acceptable to refuse to produce things you don't want to produce, but not acceptable to refuse to serve people you don't like.

 

[SughaNSpice]

I think it's wise to choose a career in which you will not be required by act against your principles. I also think it's a good idea to choose your battles. I worked in a major UK department store for two years, and part of my job description was to do the hard sell on the store credit card (and card insurance). I hated doing it, but I was contractually obliged to sell one or two extortionate credit cards a week, and to push for the insurance sale on top of that whenever I could.

Because of my experiences, I certainly wouldn't want to work again for a company which forced me to betray my principles in that way. It taught me a valuable lesson, in that respect. But refusing to do it would have been a waste of my time.

I tend to fall on the side of having rules about equal treatment of minorities in business and the workplace. Not to have such rules would be a step backwards. I suppose it matters less for freelancers, and it also matters more or less depending on the product or service. (We'd have a problem if Tesco decided not to serve gay people, for example, but less of a problem if an individual freelance web designer refused to do so.)

The only other thing I'd add is that there's a difference between promoting something you disagree with and simply selling goods or services to people with whom you disagree on some particular issue. A web designer could, I think, legitimately refuse to set up a website promoting a gay bar, if she objected to it, but I think we're on hazier ground if she refused to set up a website promoting someone's ice cream shop because that person happened to be gay.

I guess I don’t understand what difference the size of the business makes…one person or 100,000…you’re saying its bad if Tesco (whoever they are) discriminates but it is not bad when Joe Web, freelance web designer does the same thing…and yes I know you didn’t want to call it discrimination…but that is what it is…

Why is it OK for small companies but not large ones?

So what size does a business have to be before discrimination becomes a bad thing?

 

[wanderingone]

Yeah, I'd go along with most of this. Except what happens if a cult comes to me and says they'd like me to take pictures of their premises for leaflets. Can I turn them down? Can I turn down a 'legitimate' church? Who decides what is a 'legitimate religion' and what isn't?

Personally I would not be thrilled to photograph a building for say scientologists. But if I am a photographer and the only thing being asked of me is to take a picture, not to promote scientology I believe I would be discriminating if I refused to provide the service simply because I don't like their beliefs. When it comes to content though the person creating it has a degree of control over its subsequent use as well as the implication by an organization that something like providing a service constitutes a recommendation or support of the particular person, organization etc..

If I take pictures I can do so with a contract that controls the re-use. I can stipulate that the organization can not use my name to promote themselves. If I create flyers or signage I can stipulate the works are to be used for the specific event they are created for and the graphics, design, art etc.. is not to be re-used for other purposes.

 

[stan1980]

Personally I would not be thrilled to photograph a building for say scientologists. But if I am a photographer and the only thing being asked of me is to take a picture, not to promote scientology I believe I would be discriminating if I refused to provide the service simply because I don't like their beliefs. When it comes to content though the person creating it has a degree of control over its subsequent use as well as the implication by an organization that something like providing a service constitutes a recommendation or support of the particular person, organization etc..

If I take pictures I can do so with a contract that controls the re-use. I can stipulate that the organization can not use my name to promote themselves. If I create flyers or signage I can stipulate the works are to be used for the specific event they are created for and the graphics, design, art etc.. is not to be re-used for other purposes.

Fair enough, as long as you are consistent. In the UK we have a political party that has blatantly racist and homophobic agendas, which has worryingly grown in support the last few years. If they asked you to snap pictures of say an Afro-Caribbean area of London, knowing full well they will use it for racist propaganda, you still wouldn't turn them down?

 

[wanderingone]

Fair enough, as long as you are consistent. In the UK we have a political party that has blatantly racist and homophobic agendas, which has worryingly grown in support the last few years. If they asked you to snap pictures of say an Afro-Caribbean area of London, knowing full well they will use it for racist propaganda, you still wouldn't turn them down?

I think I could, depending on who they presented themselves to be, what they requested and what I was contracted to provide. Political beliefs generally aren't protected (in the US at least)

 

[stan1980]

I think I could, depending on who they presented themselves to be, what they requested and what I was contracted to provide. Political beliefs generally aren't protected (in the US at least)

Okay, so what if a church, who have been very vocal of their hatred of gays asks you to go along to snap pictures of an area where there are a lot of gay people hanging out, holding hands, kissing in public. Knowing this will be used for homophobic propaganda, are you in your rights to turn them down?

 

[scraparcs]

It depends on what you are refusing. If you are refusing to provide legally available services to someone because of their religion, complexion, ethnicity, national origin, gender, age or orientation that's not acceptable, if you refuse to create a specific object that would be refused no matter who produced it then you're on legitimate ground. In other words when Fred Phelps come to you to have some brochures printed you aren't turning him down because he's a christian, you're turning him down because he is requesting something you don't provide to anyone... flyers that say god hates____

The photographer who won't photograph weddings is refusing to photograph something that is the same event that they photograph a million times a year. The only reason they are refusing to take the pictures is the customers orientation. For someone who WANTS to discriminate there are options-- sure it means less customers when you can't run your wedding photography ads.. but you get to stick to your "values"

That's exactly it, wanderingone - it's acceptable to refuse to produce things you don't want to produce, but not acceptable to refuse to serve people you don't like.

In this case all the photographer has to do is say she doesn't take photos of same-sex couples.

 

[wanderingone]

Okay, so what if a church, who have been very vocal of their hatred of gays asks you to go along to snap pictures of an area where there are a lot of gay people hanging out, holding hands, kissing in public. Knowing this will be used for homophobic propaganda, are you in your rights to turn them down?

How many examples are you going to give me? I can't turn the church down because they are Christians, I can turn them down if they refuse the conditions under which I allow my work to be used.

 

[Crazy Liz]

That's exactly it, wanderingone - it's acceptable to refuse to produce things you don't want to produce, but not acceptable to refuse to serve people you don't like.

A photography is producing works of art, so by that standard, what would you think of saying, "I don't want to produce a picture of two women kissing or holding hands?"