January/February 2004 Issue Number 55

Is a monthly electronic newsletter which links current events and issues to the daily challenges faced by fire and emergency services managers. Current topics in the areas of leadership development, workplace diversity, change management, and conflict resolution will be discussed.

We hope that you find the information here useful and provocative.
Let us know what you think! If you'd like to subscribe to the newsletter, please enter your email address in the box below.

Sign up for our free newsletter,
Consider This...

IAFF Human Relations Conference January 25-28, 2004, Santa Monica, CA. Linda Willing will be presenting a workshop at this conference. For more information, go to www.iaff.org.

Maryland Fire Rescue Staff and Command School March 17-24, 2004, Memphis, TN. Linda Willing will be teaching one segment of this seminar. See www.mfri.org for more information.  

Leadership Training Seminar , March 25-28, 2004, Miami, Florida. Go to www.wfsi.org for more information.  

The Cost of Workplace Conflict  

Creating a workplace where interpersonal conflict is well managed isn't just a nice thing to do. Ultimately, how conflict is handled affects the bottom line, productivity, and even safety.  

In a recent study by the Dale Carnegie Training firm, 63% of over 2,000 workers surveyed said that office politics were the biggest waste of time in the workplace. In particular, those surveyed said that gossip and other negative interpersonal behaviors wasted time and interfered with workplace productivity. In contrast, use of the Internet was chosen by only around 35% of those surveyed as the biggest time waster.  

The author of this study, Peter Handel, drew the following conclusion as a result of his findings: "Most companies are investing all their time and money on firewalls to keep employees from goofing off on the Web. What they should really be doing is trying to improve employee relationships so that people aren't wasting their energy gossiping about one another."  

But interpersonal conflict doesn't just lead to decreased productivity. In a different study published last year by the National Bureau of Economic Research, the authors theorize that the faulty tires manufactured in the 1990's by Bridgestone-Firestone (which led to a number of accidental deaths, primarily involving Ford Explorers) could have been directly linked to labor-management disputes that were taking place in the factory at the time. Management crackdowns on labor between 1994-1996 led to longer shifts, a longer workweek, low morale, pay cuts, and tense relationships with replacement workers. These dates exactly correlate to the period when the faulty tires were produced.  

The study does not speculate why these factors might have led to safety problems in the resulting products, simply that the timing of the two events matched. However, a memo from upper management during that period is telling. "While it was nice to share a good relationship with the union," the Firestone official wrote, "it was no longer in the company's interest to do so." After enormous lawsuits, many tragic deaths, and a 50% drop in valuation of the company, one hopes that this official realizes what is true; that it is always in the best interests of the organization to foster good working relationships, whether it be among individuals or employment groups. Positive working relationships lead to efficiency, increased productivity, and high morale and trust. And they can even contribute to saving lives.  

Sources: The New York Times, December 14, 2003 and December 28, 2003  

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has selected Joanne Hayes-White as the next chief of the San Francisco Fire Department.  Ms. Hayes-White, currently an assistant deputy chief assigned to training, is a 14 year department veteran.  Women were first hired by the SFFD in 1987.  Currently, 230 women serve on a department of 1800 members.
 
Source:  Associated Press, January 11, 2004

Mixed Motive Discrimination  

A recent Supreme Court case has clarified a complex aspect of the law related to Title VII discrimination and harassment cases, and made it easier for cases to be heard before a jury.  

The case concerned a woman, Catherina Costa, who was the only female warehouse and heavy equipment worker employed at the Desert Palace Hotel in Las Vegas. Ms. Costa, who claimed a long history of discrimination and sexual harassment at work, was fired after a physical confrontation with a male co-worker, an incident that resulted in only a short suspension for him. She sued, claiming sex discrimination in the firing. Her employer countered that Ms. Costa was a problem employee, and that her cumulative history was the reason for the more severe discipline.  

At issue was not so much who was right, but whether a jury should even be able to hear the case, and how it should be instructed to decide it. Previously, in so-called mixed motive cases, where both the plaintiff and the defendant may have legitimate claims and evidence, plaintiffs often lost out through the legal process. Some of these deficiencies were addressed and remedied in the 1991 amendments to Title VII of the 1964 Civil Right Act. One ambiguity remained however: defining what kind of evidence would counter a defendant's claims, allowing the plaintiff to proceed.  

The recent Supreme Court decision, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, clarifies that process through narrow interpretation of the amended statute. The law does not specify what kind of evidence is required for a case to proceed to a jury trial, but rather only that the plaintiff has demonstrated that "an employer used a forbidden consideration with respect to any employment practice." The legal reasoning is complicated, but the effect of this decision is quite simple: more discrimination cases that are ambiguous or lack "smoking gun" evidence may now go to trial. The decision, which was unanimous, is considered to be a victory for employee plaintiffs in discrimination cases.  

Sources: Desert Palace Inc. v. Costa, U.S. Supreme Court, 02-679
"A recent Supreme Court decision makes it easier for plaintiffs to proceed when discrimination is one motive, but not the only one" by Joanna Grossman on www.findlaw.com

© Linda F. Willing, 2003