Noose Hung in Long Island, NY Police Station

Looks like the dreaded noose is on a roll. The latest noose incident involves a noose that was found hanging in a Long Island, NY police station. The police station is one of the most diverse police departments in the state, prompting claims that such a despicable act is “out of character” for the community.

No one is sure why the noose was hung. However, there are two theories. The first theory is that the noose was hung in response to a Black man being recently promoted to deputy chief. The second theory is that someone is angry about a push to recruit more minorities to the force. Whatever the reason, the noose was found hanging in the men’s locker room. Only police officers have access to the room.

So, a member of law enforcement, responsible for protecting those in his community (including many Blacks), is bold enough to commit a hate crime at his place of work. No word of what—if any—evidence was collected at the scene of the noose hanging.

Source: NY Daily News

ISSUES IN THE WORKPLACE: Racial Provocateurs Can Cause Tension and Future Problems in the Office

Outright racists can cause a lot of problems in the workplace. But, there are other types of people that can initiate race-based problems in the workplace. And, these individuals sometimes present more of a challenge, when it comes to proving allegations of race-based misconduct/bias. I’m referring to racial provocateurs in the workplace.

The problem, as I’ve witnessed it, is that far too many people don’t think about what they are saying in the workplace. The problem also includes far too many people who are intentionally provocative and going out of their way to push race-related hot buttons at work. There are a lot of so-called “innocent” comments made that cause a whole lot of race-related tensions to jump off in the office.

I’m not sure how often White workers really give deep thought to the racially loaded things they say to their Black coworkers, as well as the racially loaded questions they ask. And, don’t get me started on racially-laced comments that some Whites will openly make about their Black coworkers. I have often been amazed at how freely some Whites will make comments in the workplace, which have racial overtones. Their comments can be very provocative (a.k.a. insulting, incendiary, confrontational, etc.)

Racial provocateurs are the types of individuals, who while they haven’t done anything blatantly racist, may have said certain things that tap dance along the line of what is racist and what is not. These individuals continuously say things that are slightly or moderately troublesome to Black workers, but that won’t raise any suspicions among Whites. As a result, these are the types of White coworkers, supervisors/managers or executives that will prompt the defensive response, “Oh, I don’t think he/she is like that” following a complaint from a Black worker.

The reality is that some Whites know how to work and manipulate that borderline better than others. While some outrights racists are so full of loathing for Blacks that they don’t take any precautions in trying to hide their motivation for denying a promotion, recommending a suspension, etc., others are more savvy and covert. In fact, they can even throw off many of their Black coworkers. The racial provocateur is often artful at dodging the label of an outright racist.

Nevertheless, these individuals are capable of initiating a chain of events that quickly take on a prominent race-based tone and that can spiral into a race-based issue that impacts one staffer, an entire segment of a department or even larger numbers of employees.

When Black workers must have a continued relationship with Whites who REPEATEDLY make racially incendiary comments, tension often builds and an environment of suspicion can begin to develop. The Black worker rightly or wrongly may perceive this person as a closet racist and the person very may well be. However, there isn’t any explicit proof that will be acted upon by an HR department or supervisor because many of their comments will be explained away or the Black worker will be labeled as hypersensitive and overreacting to their White coworker. And, often, the White worker presents a reasonable pretext to explain away any racial intent or harm caused by their words or actions.

Here are real examples that I’ve seen or heard about causing tensions to rise between Black and White coworkers or within a department:

-- A white mid-level manager walks into a room, where only Black low-level workers are present, and says, “I came to crack the whip.” The White manager even flicks her wrist and makes a cracking noise after she makes the comment. She then laughs. When Blacks complain, the White manager says that it’s just an “expression.” There’s an attempt to downplay the historical context and to downplay that everyone in the room was Black. However, after hearing of the complaint from Black staff, this same White manager CONTINUES to make this remark solely to the same Black workers—and never to Whites (although it is supposedly one of her common expressions). Why? What is the purpose of repeating something that has negatively impacted your coworkers? Repeating remarks, which you don’t feel are offensive, but have been told are offensive is a very provocative action.

-- A white coworker walks up to a Black coworker, who wears dreadlocs, and reaches out (without permission) and grabs one of the locs, sneers her face, and asks, “Eww! What is this? Can you wash it?” The “Eww!” and “What is this?” are clearly an offensive way of reacting to an ethnic hairstyle. The Black worker is almost forced into a defensive reaction regarding the hairstyle. Following the exchange, the White worker makes it a point to openly stare and frown at the hairstyle and to stand an exaggerated distance away from the Black worker—as if she is too disgusted by her to dare go any closer. The comment and behavior after the exchange are very incendiary and will have served the point of creating the perception that this White person has issues with Black culture, and, therefore, Black people. The comment about hair combined with the negative reaction will serve as a piece of background noise in future exchanges between these individuals.


-- When Black workers complain about the manner in which they are given an assignment, a White mid-level manager comments that she doesn’t understand the problem because the Black workers are only doing “monkey work.” Obviously, this remark doesn’t go over well to a group of Black people. Blacks have lived with the comparison to apes, monkeys, and other primates. Go and look at the early depictions of Blacks in cartoons and other visual mediums. Blacks have long had their intelligence questioned by Whites with a superiority complex. So, any monkey remark is going to bring appearance and intellect into question—regardless of the so-called intent of the person making the comment. To compare work solely being done by Blacks as “monkey work” is not cool and is likely going to cause problems in future interactions between the people involved.

In each of these examples, the individuals involved began to have issues working together and the issues often escalated in nature. The White worker never apologized and often became defensive about the implication that they made a racist or insensitive remark. They wouldn’t take ownership of the issue and actually began to behave in a very indignant manner. The Black workers often figured they had the White person begged as a closet racist and began to see and hear racist actions and comments with more and more frequency. One thoughtless comment and a reaction that adds fuel to the fire or marginalizes any damage caused by careless remarks can send everyone down the path of future race-based confrontations.

That's why employers must be vigilant in policing their workforce and they must be truly vigilant, when listening to and addressing complaints from employees. Something that sounds "petty" can spark a much bigger problem in the future. Racially insenstive remarks aren't usually forgotten--at least by Black workers. Employers must not marginalize racially-loaded language. They must reinforce that they do not tolerate racist behavior or comments and must take action if someone persists in being racially provocative.

Unfortunately, dealing with racially provocative comments from intentionally and unintentionally ignorant coworkers is just one more issue—and distraction—that Blacks must deal with in the workplace.

TELL US ABOUT IT: Has a White coworker made a comment with racial overtones that derailed your relationship or caused you to be suspicious of this person’s perceptions and attitudes towards Blacks? If so, tell us about it. Post a comment or send an email to blackonthejob@yahoo.com.

The "Jena 6" - How Race-Related Harassment Sprials Out of Control with an Inadequate Response

The “Jena 6” of Jena, Louisiana. You’ve probably heard of them by now. The “Jena 6” are six Black, male teens (all football players) who were arrested for beating up one of their fellow high school students—White. The catalyst to all of the racial tension at Jena High School developed, when Black students asked to sit under a tree that apparently was reserved for their White counterparts. The next day, when Blacks sat under the tree, they found nooses hanging from the branches.

Three White students were accused of hanging the nooses and were suspended. However, the attitude of the top school officials was that the actions of the White students amounted to nothing more than a prank. They also implied that the noose might not have had anything to do with race, but might have been a way to tease the school’s opponents at a football game. After the nooses were hung, there were continued racial skirmishes between Black and White students. When Whites instigated the fights…nothing was done to them. But, then Black students beat up a White student…and the next thing you know…six Black students are arrested. The alleged Black “ringleader,” Mychal Bell, was charged as an adult and was charged with attempted murder. All of the students face serious charges.

In the past week, Mychal Bell’s conviction was thrown out by an appeals court, which said that Mychal Bell should have been dealt with in juvenile court. However, Mychal Bell is still rotting in jail right now. There’s been no rationale provided for keeping him incarcerated. The treatment of the six Black teens has reminded many Blacks of old-school southern justice—one sets of laws and rules for Blacks and one set of laws and rules for Whites. Regardless of which rule applies, southern justice assured that Blacks would come out on the losing end of any issues with Whites. In fact, comments by Jena’s District Attorney have fed fuel to the fire. He’s made remarks saying he could destroy the lives of the Black students with the stroke of his pen. And, then we got the heavy-handed criminal charges.

Today, thousands of Blacks flooded Jena, Louisiana to protest the arrest of the six students and to demand the release of Mychal Bell. Now, here’s what I want to address in this blog…

The way the school administration handled the noose issue is an example of how an insufficient response to a very serious issue can allow racial tensions and problems to spiral out of control. I have had posts on this site about Black workers finding nooses hanging in their lockers, etc. I even had one post that described how a Black male worker (at a warehouse) had a White coworker attempt to lasso him with a noose. This White coworker was so intent on putting this Black man in a noose that he perched himself high up on some boxes to give himself a good trajectory form which to hang this Black man.

In Jena, by saying that the Whites were engaged in a “prank” the school administrators were silently issuing a statement—to Whites and Blacks—that they didn’t consider the noose issue to be of any real significance. It was just kids being kids. They didn’t get the significance of what they’d done. But, to believe that…you’d have to believe the three White students to be stupid—which is a possibility. However, even the stupid in this country know full well what a noose symbolizes to Blacks and they know the threat and intimidation that is conveyed. Of all the things they could have hung in that tree, it is no accident that they choose nooses.

Just as it wasn’t an accident in Jena, it’s not an accident when nooses are hung in the workplace.

Federal courts have already rendered decisions, which state that images of or actual nooses and burning crosses are two examples of ISOLATED INCIDENTS that are so egregious that they rise to the level of Civil Rights violations. Historically, the noose and burning cross have been used as part of domestic terrorism against Blacks. That is why one instance of using these visual symbols of racism, terrorism, harassment/hostility, intimidation, and physical threats can bring huge liability issues against an employer.

The visual power of a noose and its impact on Blacks of any age is a fact that isn’t lost on anyone, including the White students of Jena. The response to the hanging nooses should have been as extreme as the act of intentionally harassing and terrorizing fellow students in a race and hate-filled manner.

The question in all of this is…why weren’t any charges brought up against the White students? Why didnt the White D.A. use his pen against "his own"?

I will be writing more about this issue in future posts.

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE “JENA 6”? Do you think protesters should have descended on the town of Jena, Louisiana?

Don't Use "Bullying" as a Catch-all Term

When people are under attack at work it’s common to find that they refer to their mistreatment as “bullying.” There’s only one problem with that… only about 13 states have anti-bullying legislation pending. However, not a single bill has been signed into law. Bullying isn’t officially legislated, which makes it harder to seek legal remedy.

African Americans, like women and other groups, are considered a protected class. There are laws we can look to, when we encounter racists at work, who may use bullying as a tactic to cause harm to a coworker or subordinate.

Much of the typical behavior of bullies would fall under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination against protected groups of people. Part of the anti-discrimination codes for the workplace is a prohibition against harassment and retaliation. Connected to harassment is language that states that it is illegal to subject an employee to a hostile and offensive work environment, which is the goal of a bully. A bully wants to make to make their victim feel miserable, isolated, and threatened or intimidated. A bully also wants to make it difficult for a coworker or subordinate to fulfill the requirements of their job.

If bullying is a tactic being used against you by a racist on the job, you should stay away from the term “bully” and focus more on the actual consequences of the mistreatment. As stated above, you should focus on discussing the specifics of the hostile work environment and provide examples of your mistreatment and how it is preventing you from doing your job.

So, you would want to mention, for example, that you are being subjected to verbal and physical threats, you are being yelled at in front of coworkers, you are called by racial epithets, you are being subjected to stare down contests, you are having your space encroached upon as a method of physically intimidating you, your emails and voice mails are not returned and it is preventing you from doing your job, and that your are completely ignored in one-on-one meetings and group meetings. Again, these are examples.

Most importantly, you must show that this mistreatment is race-related in order to be covered by Federal statutes prohibiting the discrimination and harassment of a member of a protected class. You can do this by showing that the excuses provided by the harasser (bully) are nothing more than a pretext to hide their real motive—racism. You can show that you are treated differently than similarly situated employees, such as coworkers in the same job of another race.

You can point out that you were subjected to heightened scrutiny (observation), unlike similarly situated employees or employees of any class within your unit or the company, as a whole. You can also show how your performance reviews contained surprise negative feedback that was contradictory to the positive feedback you received throughout the year or you can describe how you were falsely labeled as having performance deficiencies. You must build a case that shows that there is no reasonable justification for why you were targeted except race.

By connecting the so-called bullying behavior to active racism, you can demonstrate that a coworker or supervisor or other member of authority violated your rights under Federal law. Remember, focus on specifics. Don’t rely on the term bullying as a catch-all phrase. Bullying will make it seem like there was a simple personality problem between two employees. So, if you have a race-based issue at work…that is how you should refer to it. Don’t water down your case by referring to bullying instead of active racism, discrimination, and harassment.

The NAACP Funeral for the N-Word

The NAACP is symbolically holding a funeral for the n-word today. According to Julian Bond, the Chairman of the NAACP, the initiative is being spearheaded by “seven young people” on the board of directors and is not an action being prompted by older members of the organization.

The symbolic burial will be part of the 98th annual NAACP convention, which kicked off yesterday in Detroit. During the “burial” supporters will march from the Detroit convention center to a downtown plaza. At that time, they’ll read a eulogy for the n-word.

In addition to burying the n-word, the NAACP has been in discussions with rappers and other entertainers to discuss removing the word from their music.

To read more about the n-word funeral, click on the following link: http://www.naacp.org/events/convention/98th/funeral/index.htm.

Where do you stand on the issue of the n-word? Do you use it? Are you offended by it? Is it ever okay to use the word? Under what specific circumstances? Let us know what you think! Post a comment.

Life's a Beach!

Many White people act as though Blacks are always crying wolf about unequal treatment (read: experiencing racism in our day-to-day lives). Yet, there is always evidence that racism is as prevalent today as it has been in the past.

From shopping in stores (and being followed by security), to trying to catch a cab (and having the cab driver pretend to be off-duty and ignoring your waving hand), to moving into a predominately White neighborhood (and having your neighbors make it perfectly clear that you supposedly don’t belong), Blacks have to deal with racism in many aspects of our lives.

Now, let’s add going to the beach to that list.

Yes, going to the beach.

Snooty White homeowners near Brooklyn’s Manhattan Beach are trying to have the beach privatized in order to stop “thugs” (read: minorities) from going to the beach. How do they plan to do this? They plan on making it very difficult and unpleasant to come to the beach by:

-- charging people a fee to enter the beach area;
-- closing the beach at a moment’s notice, whenever “thugs” start to arrive;
-- creating a single entrance to the beach and having metal detectors there; and
-- by adding more cops and surveillance cameras.

The issue is that many minority high-school and college students like to go to Manhattan Beach and the homeowners don’t like it. So, they’ve gone as far as fabricating a shooting incident to justify the changes they want to make. People on the beach said there wasn’t a single serious incident at the beach. When pushed on the subject, one of the homeowners had to admit that there wasn’t a shooting incident (read: it was a lie). But, the homeowners thought everyone would accept the lie because everyone knew they were referring to minorities, when they spoke about alleged shootings.

Why am I writing about this? Because people like this work somewhere! So, I ask…

How do you think they perceive the Blacks they work with, if they don’t find Blacks (and other minorities) worthy of going to “their” beach?

You see, this open-minded society we live in is nothing more than a fabrication. There is still more to strive for regarding the dream Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke of. We must stop pretending we are all one big happy family and that racism has gone the way of the dinosaurs.

Again, these people—who are bold and stupid enough to be obvious bigots—are someone’s employer, supervisor or coworker.

Can they give fair performance evaluations? Can they decide a Black, Hispanic or Asian employee has earned a promotion? Will they sign off on the training classes that will help a minority employee gain valuable knowledge and skills that will make them more competitive with other coworkers (read: White coworkers)?

The answer is…You can’t turn racism on and off! These stories are directly linked to racists in the workplace. The people that engage in this behavior off the work site will also engage in the behavior on the work site.

LEGAL BRIEFS: Iron Workers to Receive $800k payout!

According to the EEOC, the International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers Local 580 in Manhattan will pay $800,000 to 45 Black and Hispanic members. The penalty is for refusing to refer minority journeymen to jobs between September 1992 and August 2004. Payments to the members will range from $2,000 to $47,000.

Reader Comments: Defamation by Conduct

Here’s some information that was sent to me by a reader. I’ve concealed the identities of those involved, but this is still a powerful example of how a person can have their reputation destroyed by colleagues and managers. It’s also an example of how defamation/slander, etc. can cost a person their job!

The Reader wrote...

Employers either don’t realize, don’t care, or don’t see it as a serious of issue, but slander, libel and defamation of character are illegal and the employer can be penalized. Here's what happened to me:

Coworker X knew the accusations she made against me were lies, yet she repeated them to Coworker Y, Coworker Z, and Manager A; Manager A then “confirmed” Coworker X’s statements through Coworker Y and Coworker Z, who admitted to Manager A that they were only repeating what they had heard from Coworker X. Neither Manager A nor HR had proof of the accusations, they didn’t make an attempt to find the truth, and based on HR’s comments, HR only judged me guilty because one person made the accusations but the accusations were “confirmed” by “many/several” people. Manager A judged me guilty because according to her “many/several people said the exact same thing and they couldn’t all be wrong.” Uh yeah, and she’s actually a member of management. Go figure.

Coworker X knew she was making false statements against me therefore, her actions were defamatory; Manager A/the company’s actions may show defamation by conduct as their actions showed a “reckless disregard for the truth.”

I was suspended based on these lies! The stipulations in a Final Written Notice I received was that if any employee construed or perceived me to have violated the terms of the suspension or the Final Written Notice, it was grounds for my immediate termination. Well, how and why would any employee be privy to the terms of my disciplinary action? Did Manager A tell staff that if I rolled my eyes to come tell her? Or if they heard me talking about her (as was reported by Coworker X on March 8) or if I didn’t greet them or gesticulated excessively, to inform her? Obviously, the way that Manager A drafted my Final Written Notice which was approved by HR, and the language used regarding grounds for immediate termination implies that staff were privy to information that was not their business and may prove that Manager A/my employer informed my coworkers of my disciplinary action although my coworkers didn’t have a legitimate right to know. This is illegal and grounds for a lawsuit.

If an employee knowingly makes and then spreads false statements about a person/people in the workplace, and the statements negatively impact this person/people, i.e., staff no longer associate with them, advancement/job opportunities are lost, the employer can be accused of defamation by conduct.

Manager A and my employer are guilty of defamation by conduct by “publishing” the Final Written Notice included in my personnel file. The Final Written Notice automatically prevents me from being rehired at my employer because the accusations against me violate their code of ethics. But the accusations aren’t true and that should prove detrimental to my employer’s argument that they did “everything by the book” regarding the actions they took against me.

I was subjected to a reduction in force action/laid off due to my job being designated as no longer necessary. But, I was told that I could reapply for a job at the same company. I pointed out to HR that the language of the Final Written Notice was slanderous and extremely harsh and that my chances of being rehired at my employer were null. She said the Final Written Notice would not be removed – well that was fine with me since it proves my defamation claim. My employer’s conduct in relation to their “investigation” and the Final Written Notice is questionable because the “evidence” they used to judge me guilty were the statements made by Coworker X and confirmed by Coworker Y and Coworker Z – but Coworker Y and Coworker Z admitted to HR and Manager A that they were only repeating what they heard from Coworker X.

Something that may prove detrimental to my employer – Manager A informed some staff that some of us were being laid off (and she named us) before notifying the laid-off coworkers. And, she informed them that we were being let go but new staff were being hired. So how did she justify letting us go?

And, when I called the Director of Labor, Employee Relations and Compliance and informed him of: Coworker X’s actions; another baseless accusation being made against me in an effort to defame my character; and that I continue to question the motivations of Coworker X and Manager A (and I used this exact language), he had the opportunity to investigate the situation right then and there. But he did absolutely nothing. My phone call put him on notice that I was being slandered and maligned yet again, and he did nothing. I am pursuing action in this matter!

What happened to me may also serve as defamation by conduct and courts are starting to take this very seriously. Here are some links that may be helpful:

http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Sep/1/127684.html

http://www.uslaw.com/library/article/carel8DefamatoryAction.html?area_id=43

Thanks, reader, for sharing your horror story!

DO YOU HAVE ANY EXAMPLES OF WORKPLACE DEFAMATION, ETC. THAT YOU’D LIKE TO SHARE? POST A COMMENT OR SEND AN EMAIL TO BLACKONTHEJOB@YAHOO.COM!

Don't Let Whites In The Workplace Tell You How You Should Feel!

In the workplace, some Whites feel it is their moral obligation to tell Black coworkers how they should feel about to certain incidents, comments or actions.

This isn’t about opinion. No, this is about White workers literally telling a Black person they should or shouldn’t feel a certain way about racially insensitive comments, actions, etc. For instance, let’s say a White worker makes a racist and insensitive comment. Black workers complain and are told by Whites that they, “…shouldn’t feel that way (or take it that way).” Or, they may be told outright, to “not be so sensitive.” This completely disregards the feelings of the Black workers and actually marginalizes the workers with the assumption that they aren’t even smart enough to interpret routine day-to-day communication, standard English (normally their first language), and racist insults or actions.

I’ve experienced this myself—more than once. For instance, I’ve been told (by an HR rep and 2 supervisors) that the only reason I took racist actions “that way” was because I was an emotional person and that I was overreacting to the situation based on my “state.” I was also told that I had a high level of stress. I was told that my stress—and not the actions—were causing problems for EVERYONE at work.

So, not only was I being told that I couldn’t I understand how I felt, but I was told my feelings were faulty from the get go! Not only that, but my feelings were causing issues for Whites throughout the company! I even received the lowest ratings on my performance evaluation for upsetting the chain of command with my alleged hysterics.

Well, that trick only works on the weak minded. I know how I feel. I know that I’m not a sensitive person. I know that I wasn’t jumping to any conclusions. And, I know that an initial probe of my allegations, by an outside State agency, revealed at least 2 incidents of illegal misconduct against me. The investigation is still currently ongoing.

So, my advice to every Black reader is to remember that YOU KNOW WHEN YOU ARE EXPERIENCING RACISM! So, don’t let other people tell you how you should feel about:

--being called by a racial slur;
--being compared to a jungle beast or some other creature;
--being on the receiving end of racially insensitive remarks or comments;
--being disrespected, demeaned and ignored or marginalized based on race or race-based stereotypes;
--receiving extra scrutiny and criticism because of your race; or
-- having someone White using employment actions to harass you and to create a hostile work environment because of your race.

Some people come right out and say what's on their minds--no matter how negative or offensive the comments are. But, others are more covert. Nevertheless, your powers of observation, your listening skills, and your life experiences let you know when a person is behaving a certain way—universally (regardless of race)—and when they only behave a certain way, when dealing with Black workers. For instance, there may be a White worker that is only extremely rude and demeaning, when they must work with Blacks. Any other time, this person is the post card version of a socially acceptable and professional employee.

Or, you have a manager that goes out of their way to get training opportunities for White subordinates, to fight for great assignments for White subordinates, to fight for promotions for White subordinates, and to fight for big salary increases for White subordinates. The only problem is that this same White manager will do NONE of those things for their Black subordinates. In fact, this manager may go out of his/her way to criticize their Black subordinates, to keep them performing the same work at the same responsibility level, etc. The only employees this White manager champions for are those that are the same race as him/her! And, in this example, that’s all you would need to know to see there’s an issue on your job.

And, that gets back to my point. You know how a comment or action makes you feel, how it has changed your work environment, how it has impacted your career, salary, etc. So, don’t let people impose a false reality on you. Don’t allow someone to tell you what you must think or must feel about something. Your feelings may be dead on and this person may be simply trying to protect themselves, a coworker, a person in authority or the company—as a whole.

Everyone thinks in lawsuit terms these days. Unfortunately, many White workers will defend a White perpetrator, will say they don’t know anything about an incident to avoid involvement, may lie to protect the company or engage in other behavior that serves to protect their own interests. People have families. They are usually not going to lay down their careers for someone, especially someone of another race. That can be said about many of us!

I just want to drill home the point that a White coworker could have any number of motives for trying to dictate how you should feel about a race-based incident (company loyalty, sympathizing with the perpetrator, seeking reward/benefit for their actions, etc.)

When a White person is telling you how you should feel, what is it really based on? They haven’t experienced the trials and tribulations of being Black in America. They can relate to you as a person, with certain general and shared experiences, but they can’t relate to you on race. So, how can a White person dictate to you how you should feel or respond to a race-based incident? They can’t!! Whether they agree with your position about racism at work or not isn’t the issue. They can empathize with you, but a White person can never cry your tears or feel your pain because of race-based trauma caused at work.

So, don’t enable a White person to potentially talk you out of pursuing a race-based issue at work. I don’t care how cool this White person seems to be, I don’t care if they date Blacks or other minorities, I don’t care if they have Black adopted siblings, if they seem to have your best interests at heart/seem sincere, etc. You shouldn’t be getting input on how you should feel about a race-based issue—one way or another—from someone White! But, if you do have that conversation, keep it in proper perspective.

Don’t let someone cover up possibly illegal behavior. If you want to ignore an incident or comment or personnel action, that’s up to you. Just don’t pretend it’s not what it is!

You’re an adult. You’ve been Black all your life. Your red flags will go up, when you’re dealing with suspected race-based issues. Don’t ignore the cues. Racists at work only continue with their behavior because so many Black workers will allow some White worker or manager to talk us out of our legitimate feelings, will tell us we’re overreacting, will tell us we are sensitive, will convince us to ignore warning signs or will tell us they’ll deal with an issue “behind the scenes” or will speak to the racist individual “privately.”

You know how you feel. But, you should also know the guidelines in the personnel manual for employee conduct and for preventing and correcting problem behavior—active racism being one of them. You should also stay informed about Federal laws regarding misconduct, discrimination, harassment, etc. Only by knowing your rights will you know whether your feelings are signs of a much bigger issue at work!

Who Can Say (or ask) What in the Workplace?

Ever since the Don Imus incident, White people are acting like they’re completely clueless, when it comes to knowing what is and isn’t okay to say to and about Black people.

Articles and news segments featured titles like, Who Can Say What? As if there was some possible scenario by which Don Imus and company could call Black women Jiggaboos, nappy-headed hos, and hardcore hos. Let me be perfectly clear, there was never such a scenario. And, all of this feigned desired to really understand what’s okay to say to and about Black people is starting to really get on my nerves.

It’s almost as if the issue is about Blacks being so-called ultra-sensitive and not about the crude remarks that were made. People are acting like Blacks blew the racist comments out of proportion. Oh, can’t you people take a joke?

But, isn’t that one of our age-old stereotypes? Yes, Blacks have long been painted as hypersensitive. On top of that, we’ve also been painted as child-like and intellectually inferior. Therefore, when you combine that nasty triad of stereotypes, you can see how some White people are convinced that Blacks—and not Don Imus and his cronies—are the issue to be addressed.

And, so we now have this huge focus on rap music. However, the natural offshoot of the Don Imus incident would have been to target other radio personalities like Rush Limbaugh, etc. No, Whites weren’t going to have another White person fall on their sword, like Don Imus. So, they did the bait and switch and Blacks fell for it. Whether rap music deserves to be cleaned up or not—and I think it does—that was not the logical discussion to have following the Don Imus incident. The logical discussion was to continue to discuss these so-called shock-jocks and to clean up that “business” FIRST!!

I’ve said it before, Don Imus WAS AT WORK, when he made his comments. He had a job. He wasn’t just sitting on the airwaves completely freelancing. Don Imus had an employer. Too many Whites are acting like he was a rogue personality with no responsibilities to anyone else—or to society, as a whole.

I believe 100% that the termination of Don Imus is being greeted with this passive aggressive retaliation from many Whites. It’s like their attitude is “You took down one of ours, now we’re going to take down some of yours!” Rap music is the new target of Whites and the excuse is that rap music is misogynistic and degrades Black women. Oh, that’s what really has Whites riled up, huh? Degrading Black women in rap music, which led to Don Imus being terminated? Really? At least 80% of rap/hip-hop is purchased by Whites, but now that Don Imus is temporarily out of job, it’s a problem!

But, that’s how some Whites deal with racism in the workplace—and that’s where it happened with Don Imus. Some Whites will come up with any defense, when another White person (or some other non-Black person) is accused of making racially insensitive comments, using racial epithets or engaging in discriminatory or other race-based illegal behavior.

Who can say what?

Well, there’s a recent news story in New York where several NYPD sergeants and police officers called 4 Black female cops “nappy-headed hos” and told them to “stand up hos” at the police roll call. This is after Don Imus and his crew made the comments and after the subsequent fallout. So, I ask…is there really a question as to who can say what? REALLY?

Is the issue possibly that people sometimes WANT to say racist, demeaning, degrading, and other nasty things in the workplace, simply because they CHOOSE to and not because they so-called thought it was funny? That’s how people try to get away with offensive comments. They think if they pretend it was a joke, the person the joke was on is somehow supposed to be at fault for finding no humor in the remark. It’s an old technique, but it’s still used in the workplace. “I didn’t mean it that way!” “She’s/he’s just sensitive.” “She/he can’t take a joke.”

Can anyone be that stupid? No! Most times these aren’t harmless remarks. People know exactly what they are saying. They may be shocked that a person challenges their remarks and confronts them about exactly what they meant, but the person making racist or degrading comments knows full well the intent of their remarks. But, some people in the workplace continue to pretend that the issue is just sensitive Black folks.

Who can say what? Let me break down the workplace answer for White folks…

Blacks don’t come to work just dying to deal with your race-based jokes and ignorant race-based questions and comments. We’re not chomping at the bit waiting for you to ask us about Kwanzaa, Malcolm X, the “ghetto,” single parenthood, welfare, hair texture, pig feet and “soul food,” hair grease, teen pregnancy rates, etc.

If all you can do is approach Blacks with race-based commentary, please recognize your issue. Why can’t you speak to us like the humans that we are? Why do some White coworkers have to make everything about our race? We don’t come to work for that bulls*it! And, we don’t come as the spokespersons for all Black people. We have different viewpoints and opinions.

Who can say what or ask what? Not even dealing with discriminatory actions and just speech, here are some common sense tips:

-- Don’t express extreme shock, when your Black coworkers don’t fall into your ignorant stereotypes! Don’t marvel at a Black coworker being articulate or writing well or having a college degree, etc. There is no reason for your amazement at these things!

-- Don’t force your stereotypical beliefs onto Black coworkers. Don’t automatically go for racially-loaded language—that you wouldn’t use to describe a White coworker showing the same behavior or making the same comments as Black coworkers. Don’t be in a rush to call a Black worker lazy, angry, defensive, rude, mean, stupid, etc. Blacks have not cornered the market on any of that. If you mainly use reserve your nastiest remarks for Black coworkers, you have issues.

-- Don’t sing rap or R&B songs ONLY when you are approaching a Black coworker or are working in their office. We are not going to think you are “cool” because you know the words to “Black music.” If you don’t do this to White coworkers, don’t do it to us.

--Don’t ask ignorant questions! You know what’s ignorant. Don’t pretend to be stupid. Why do you have to ask Black coworkers if their silk is real silk, if their leather is real leather, if they can get a tan, if they’ve been shot at, if they know any rappers, etc?

-- Don’t walk into an office or conference room predominated by Blacks and say that you “came to crack the whip!” And, don’t make the actual whip-cracking sound.

-- Don’t ask Black coworkers if they’ve ever seen someone get shot, killed or if they were ever caught in a drive-by shooting!

-- Don’t ask Black coworkers if they have a father. Doesn’t everyone?

-- Don’t ask Black coworkers if they “live in a nice neighborhood.” Clearly, you’d be making negative assumptions!

-- Don’t ask Black coworkers to denounce Black public figures, leaders or celebrities. We don’t have to tell you what we think about O.J. Simpson or anyone else!

-- Don’t ask Black coworkers why Blacks “can’t get over slavery.” What a dumb question. And, it’s a completely inappropriate discussion for the workplace.

The list of who go on and on! But, let’s see what you have to say. Post your comments.

What do you think about “Who Can Say What?” and what do you think is off-limits in the workplace regarding race-based conversations, etc.?

ISSUES IN THE WORKPLACE: COLOR-BASED ATTACKS STILL OCCUR

Yes, I am beating the Don Imus horse to death! But, there is one more thing I have to say about the issue. We all focus on race-based discrimination, but there is also color based discrimination and prejudice. Don Imus talked about specific Black women in a vile and vicious way. And, if you look at the women on the basketball team, the color issue is very obvious to see.

I’ve heard that Don Imus one laughed, when one of his cronies said that Serena and Venus Williams should be in National Geographic. Again, look at the color issue. These darker Black women were mocked as reminiscent of some sort of jungle creatures. That’s what the fool meant! The comments made about the Rutgers basketball team were said with the same sentiment!

Don Imus and his crew didn’t attack girls that looked like Alicia Keyes. No, Don Imus and his cronies attacked specific Black women of specific complexions. They didn't attack Black celebrities that are considered to be acceptable and pretty and/or beautiful according to White standards!

Color was under attack. Color was what was ugly. Color was used by the code word “nappy-headed!” Color was used by the code word “Jiggaboo.” Color is what made these girls look “exactly like the Toronto Raptors.” This was a race and color based attack through and through! Is it any wonder that little Black girls still like to play with White dolls? Even the children get it!

Color is still a major issue in the workplace. At my job, EVERY Black woman that was ever told that she had “a bad attitude” or that she was “angry” or “defensive” or “snooty” or “moody,” etc. was a brown-skin or dark-skin woman—without exception. Every race-based issue at my job involved a White person (always a White woman) and a Black woman with “distinctly” African American features and color.

And, in every case, the prevailing White mentality was to side with the White person making the complaint. It didn’t matter that examples of the alleged negative behaviors of the Black women often couldn’t be provided or that, when they were, you never heard about the “White half” of the conversations. The White women always left out what they said and how they said it.

People need to think about something…sometimes you get a rude response from a person because you’ve been rude yourself. The person isn’t just being “angry” for the sake of being angry. If you are being demeaning, disrespectful, sarcastic, bullying, rude, etc., then you may receive an in-kind response. Some people will give back the energy they receive, regardless of color.

But, at my job, the onus for any work-related issues always fell on the darker Black women. The White women were always victims, not the instigators that the White women I WORKED WITH often were. My workplace tolerated racial intolerance, discrimination, etc. And, this mindset was manifested in the behaviors and actions of some staff. They had a license to kill or to act like they owned certain people and they ran with it!

Black women at my former company were subjected to Whites making remarks about our complexions, asking us offensive questions about our hair, and making wild accusations about our behavior—accusations that were easily attributable to their overactive and racist imaginations.

That’s the way it is in some workplaces. Race can be an issue. But, color can be another issue that we often overlook. In my case, I worked with a racist VP that was perfectly fine working with a light-skinned Black coworker and her light-skinned Black secretary, but she hated me—only after seeing me in person (She worked in another state.) A senior executive at the company told his secretary that her problem with me was “this.” When he said “this,” he ran his hand across his cheek to reference my skin tone.

The level of obvious Blackness can be a catalyst that sparks an outright or closet racist to engage in discriminatory or harassing behavior. This is just another issue for Blacks to contend with in the workplace—and in life, as Don Imus showed us all!

If you are dealing with race-based issues in the workplace, don’t forget to examine color as a potential issue in your case. If you believe color is an issue, it should be argued in your internal or external complaint.

Whites are Always Supposed to Keep Their Jobs in Race-Related Matters, huh?

This whole Don Imus issue is really interesting for me because I see a lot of parallels with the arguments being used to defend his comments and the tactics used in the workplace. But, the most interesting part for me is how feverishly some Whites are willing to defend a man, who’s admitted (for whatever reasons) that HE WAS WRONG! But, that doesn’t matter. Many Whites, and some Blacks, do not feel that Don Imus deserved the ultimate punishment—termination.

These people seem to be forgetting one major point. Don Imus was not a freelancer. Don Imus worked for someone. The “someone” was CBS and NBC. He had an employer. There are standards that govern the workplace—shock jock or not! Don Imus ultimately answered to his employers. I don't care why they finally decided to fire him. They fired him! Any anger should be directed at Don Imus, for starting the whole thing with his big mouth, and/or at his employers, for getting rid of him. You don't blame the victims. And, you don't begin to attack the culture, lifestyles, etc. of the racial group categorized with the victims--African Americans.

If you listen to some White people, who are defending Don Imus, he seems to be perceived as having some sort of God given right to employment at CBS and NBC. Some Whites are out-of-control with anger that another White man (Remember Al Campanis and Jimmy the Greek?) lost his job for criticizing Blacks. In fact, the anger is so palpable that some Imus Morning Show fans have sent hate mail and/or death threats to the Rutgers women’s basketball team. Rev. Al Sharpton has also received several serious death threats.

So, to the White people, who are sending this hate mail and these death threats, here are a few words to consider: The very fact that you can only defend Don Imus by threatening someone’s life or by sending mail as vicious and hateful as the comments that were originally made just goes to show that you are a complete and utter loser. Period! A death threat and hate mail just prove the point that Don Imus should have been fired. So, the “support” you’re showing for the man just continues to reflect badly on his already soured public image. Even Don Imus had the good sense to pretend to be contrite. But, on to another point…

I am shocked at how the White bandwagon defense of Don Imus and his crew has blossomed into a national debate on rap music! You can hardly turn on a TV program or radio program and not hear a White person, commentator, or guest continue to defend Don Imus’s comments by comparing his comments to the lyrics of rappers. In fact, a major NY publication had a 2 page spread, this weekend, containing the pictures and lyrics of some of the most offensive rappers—as far as sexually explicit lyrics, “ho” references, etc.

None of that has anything to do with 3 White men calling a group of Black students “whores,” “Jiggaboos,” and saying they looked like the men playing for the Toronto Raptors. There isn’t a single link whatsoever. Are we to believe that Don Imus and company were taking their cues from rap music because they were such devoted followers of the music? Please! For this defense to be credible, damn near every White person, that has heard any amount rap music, should be walking around calling random Black people “my ni**a!” But, they don’t because most White people realize they’ll be knocked out cold by the time the words spill from their lips!

But, it’s a rap thing, right? No, it’s not. There’s an issue of “hypocrisy,” right? Only from White people, who are always trying to hold someone to accountability—until one of their own gets caught in a race-related typhoon of controversy. Former Virginia Senator George Allen called an Indian-American “macaca” a Turkish reference to a “monkey” or a term used for those from the so-called ghetto. And, he had defenders that tried to antagonize the young man he made the vicious comment about. No White person is supposed to be liable for degrading, demeaning, marginalizing, etc. any Black person or person of color. When Whites are put in a position (read: forced into a position) where they must penalize one of their own, they will likely engage in a tit-for-tat with Blacks. That’s otherwise known as retaliation.

And, that takes us back to the workplace. The people using the rap defense and talking about Black hypocrisy are tying to hide two true issues. And, it’s the same two true issues that creep up in the workplace, whenever any racial issue crops up on the job…(drum roll)

ISSUE #1: White people don’t like to have a White person criticized by someone Black or by Blacks as a whole. I don’t care what that White person did or said, there will often be some more White people that will rally around that person. And, in the Don Imus case, he just said something about some ugly ni**ers, right? He said something vile, but rappers say the same thing, right? Rappers are the new standard for socially acceptable behavior, right?

Many White people in the workplace don’t want anyone Black saying sh*t about them or one of their own, but they feel they can say darn near anything they want about Black people, Black culture, etc.—in the workplace. No question is too offensive.

Whites will make offensive comments or ask crazy questions about Black people’s skin tone, hair texture, music, culture, food, political leaders, religious leaders, etc. And, then they will often act like the Black coworker is “sensitive” for calling them out on it!

ISSUE #2: White people don’t like to punish each other based on an incident involving a Black person. I guess it feels like being a race traitor or something. I can’t explain it. All I know is I’ve witnessed a number of incidents in the workplace that were race-related—some of which led to outside investigations and legal action.

And, in every case, not a single White person was punished by White management or ostracized by White employees for what they were known to have done to someone Black or to a group of Black employees. In fact, the Blacks became the pariahs at work and had to carry the burden of shame. And, in 3 incidents I can think of off the top of my head, the Black workers were the victims of constructive termination. They were forced to resign. Meanwhile, the Whites remained gainfully employed and some were even promoted.

So, the whole Don Imus incident is really putting a microscope to the dynamics about how people justify racially insensitive behavior and outright racist actions. A defense can be applied to any comment or action, no matter how disgusting and blatantly racist the comment or action is. Whites can criticize another White person in one breath, but—in the next breath—turn around and make the Black person or people seem to have brought the issue on themselves.

In my race-based incident at work, I was told that I was a great employee in one breath. But, when a White manager went after me, I was told her racist attack against me was wrong. But, I was also told a “business decision” was going to have to be made to decide what was best for the company. And, as an afterthought, “what is best for you.” I was told that the incident was horrible, but that “no one is going to be fired for this.” After that, I had White people coming out of the woodwork to make up lies about me to force me out of my job. It’s the piling on defense. If everyone says it, that makes it true.

I don’t care how many White people say that Don Imus should have been given leeway because he supposedly said something that is said by rappers. That does not make it true. Not today and not tomorrow. Why anyone would choose to defend Don Imus is beyond me. However, I can imagine a scenario where someone would question the penalty—his termination. But, the real argument isn’t being focused on whether or not Don Imus should have been fired. The real issue has morphed into the so-called rap music connection and into questions of why the incident was being “blown out of proportion” by Blacks.

Suddenly, Rev. Sharpton and Rev. Jackson are the issues and not Don Imus, Brian McGuirk or Sid Rosenberg. Even reasonable White people are allowing themselves to focus on Who Can Say What? That’s the upcoming headline of national weekly news magazine. Who Can Say What? The question is asked as if there is a shred of plausibility in the argument that Don Imus could have and should have been allowed to get away with his remarks. So, let me clarify this point for anyone that still doesn’t get it…

DON IMUS HAD NO RIGHT TO MAKE THOSE COMMENTS.

BRIAN MCGUIRK HAD NO RIGHT TO MAKE THOSE COMMENTS.

SID ROSENBERG HAD NO RIGHT TO MAKE THOSE COMMENTS.

Don Imus has bragged that he will be back bigger and better AND WITH MORE MONEY! Don’t cry for him, America!

Don Imus and the Rap Music Defense

Well, NBC and CBS actually canned Don Imus. On Wednesday night, Don Imus was fired from NBC/MSNBC and on Thursday morning, CBS followed suit.

I’m shocked AND AMAZED at the ridiculous argument being presented by many Whites…that Don Imus “only” used the same language frequently used by rappers to describe Black women, the word “ho.”

Well, that just makes it okay, huh?

Is that the best defense of Don Imus that some Whites can come up with? Well, it’s similar to the workplace tactics that some Whites use to defend other Whites that have made racist remarks or denied Blacks promotions without merit or have engaged in some other discriminatory action. It becomes a bait and switch issue. Whites in the workplace will often bait Blacks into a new “discussion”—on some topic other than race—which allows them to effectively switch from addressing race-related problems, often permanently.

So, Blacks can go into a meeting expecting to have a serious discussion about a race-related complaint they’ve made, but end up discussing or defending an entirely different issue—usually directly at them, the victim! For instance, I attended a meeting to talk about race-based discrimination and retaliation by my supervisor, only to be told that EVERY MANAGER I worked with was suddenly making complaints about my availability to support their projects. This was a total lie and everyone making the claim knew that it was. But, it was the bait and switch. I was lured into a “conversation” about a serious issue, only to have White management switch the topic and to attack me with falsehoods.

The false “rap defense” of Don Imus is ludicrous and I’m not referring to the rapper. Don Imus is now suddenly akin to members of the rap and hip hop communities? Don Imus has some of the heaviest hitters in U.S. politics appearing on or calling into his radio show.

So, my question is…when did 50 Cent sit down for a chat with a Senator or member of the House of Representatives to discuss issues that are important in America, such as the war in Iraq or healthcare or immigration?

When any reasonable person listens to the totality of comments made on the Don Imus Morning Show about the Rutgers University basketball team, it becomes quite clear that this wasn’t a “rap-related” incident. You can’t isolate one word in order to defend the entire point being made by Imus and his cronies. The point they were making was that the Black women on the Rutgers basketball team were UGLY, MAN-LIKE WHORES! Their words were easy to understand.

Don Imus, his producer, Brian McGuirk, and guest commentator and raging idiot, Sid Rosenberg, called these young women:

-- “nappy-headed hos”;
-- “hardcore hos”;
-- “Jiggaboos”; and
-- stated that the women (THE BLACK WOMEN ON THE TEAM) looked “exactly like the Toronto Raptors.”

Do you know what these comments reflected? They reflected an attack on these players simply based on the COLOR OF THEIR SKIN!

Some White people are trying to isolate the “ho” comments as a way to make a connection to rap music and hip hop culture, but this argument only goes to show how indefensible Don Imus and his team are. Don Imus and his team were talking about specific Black women—the Black young ladies playing for Rutgers.

Don Imus and his team were calling THOSE YOUNG LADIES ugly whores! They were called Jiggaboos! They might as well have been called darkies!

So, here are some questions that any White person can answer for me (post in comments section or email blackonthejob@yahoo.com)

1) How is it reasonable that the Black basketball players went from playing in a national championship basketball game to being called ugly whores? That is exactly what Don Imus meant, when he used the word “nappy-headed.” That was his way of calling them ugly—from the hair down! Where is the natural progression from playing in a game to being called an ugly whore? Where did the comment come from? There had to be an inherent belief that these young ladies fit that description! It was completely left-field.

2) Did you notice that all of the Black players on the team were brown-skin to dark-skin in complexion? Are you comfortable with these women being called “nappy-headed hos”?

3) Why exactly is it and was it okay for Don Imus and his team to call these women out with racially insensitive names and sexist remarks? Answer without bringing up rap music or hip hop culture!

4) Did you know that most rap and hip hop music is purchased by White youths? Well, if you don’t know, now you know! So, all of the pondering about why Blacks aren’t fired, losing recording contracts, etc. for promoting certain stereotypes, misogyny, etc. in music can be boomeranged right back to White folks. Why don’t you stop your sons and daughters from purchasing this music? The real purchasing power is coming from your people! Why not boycott the music? Don’t talk out of both sides of your neck about the horrible rap and hip hop music, all while defending a White man whose saying the same thing that many of you or your children are buying on a regular basis.

5) Did you ever stop to think about the legacy of slavery with these comments by Don Imus and company? Why not? During slavery, White men were using Black women for their sexual pleasure for hundreds of years and then had the gall to saddle us with the lasting stereotype that we are sexually promiscuous. They couldn’t keep theirs hands off of us! Do you know how many Black families can trace White blood in their heritage thanks to the rape culture of American slavery? Taken in that prism, can you get why the “nappy-headed hos” comment touched raw nerves, especially because the comments were coming from White men?

6) Is it or would it be okay for me to call your daughters, sisters, etc. “White hos”? Or, “Cracka hos”? Didn’t think so!

In an interesting note, on his radio show yesterday (his last CBS broadcast), Don Imus blasted Former Rep. Harold Ford, Jr. for not “supporting him.” According to Mr. Imus, “I received death threats for supporting his campaign.”

So, he had one Negro to call out on his farewell show. It’s all Harold Ford, Jr.’s fault. If he had just spoken up…

Don Imus Will Be Off the Air for 2 Weeks!

Starting April 16th, The Don Imus Morning Show will be off the air for 2 weeks. The suspension comes nearly 5 days after Don Imus, his producer, and a guest commentator made racially derogatory remarks about the nearly all Black Rutgers University basketball players. The delay in the suspension is to accommodate a prescheduled radiothon charity event on the program.

Yesterday, Rev. Al Sharpton tore Mr. Imus a new behind, when Mr. Imus appeared on Rev. Sharpton’s radio program and tried to defend his ignorant remarks. Rev. Sharpton is still seeking the ultimate penalty, termination, for Don Imus. The National Association of Black Journalists is still seeking termination, as well. In addition, sponsors and high-profile guests will be pressured by Rev. Sharpton, the NABJ, and the Rev. Jesse Jackson to stop making appearances on the Don Imus Morning Show.

Former Rep. Harold Ford of Tennessee (Black), a frequent guest on the radio show, will hopefully discontinue appearing on the show. But, there are many others that need to stop making appearances on the Don Imus show, including credible journalists like as Tim Russert, Chris Matthews, etc.

Boycotts are also being threatened, if Mr. Imus is not terminated.

I would urge everyone to continue to write CBS radio/WFAN, MSNBC, and the Don Imus Morning show to air their feelings and to request strict conditions and penalties (read: not tolerating this behavior in the future), should Mr. Imus continue his employment with their networks. See the links in the initial post on the Don Imus comments.

It's Easy to Signal that Racist "Chatter" Isn't a Big Deal!

I was in a business meeting, a few years ago, where a White VP stated that she was surprised to read a recent research study that found that—more than White parents—Black parents warned their children and teenagers to stay away from drugs and alcohol and not to smoke (including warnings not to smoke marijuana). The White VP asked, “Can you believe that? I didn’t think Black parents would care. Can you believe they actually warn their kids about drugs? I didn’t think they did that in the ghetto!”

She was so shocked by the research study that her voice became shrill and more annoying than usual. She was so shocked that she couldn’t hear the absolute silence in the room. So, she continued to talk about how amazing it was that Black parents didn’t want their children using drugs.

There was senior Black and minority staff in the room making 6 figure salaries or close to 6 figure salaries. One of these Black staff was actually an executive and the boss of the VP making the remarks. I looked over at all the senior staff. I was an entry level staff person and expected they would address the VP—on the spot. They each looked at the table, while a dead silence loomed over the room. The VP continued to drone on about her surprise.

I grabbed my note pad, my pen, and walked out of the meeting, looking at my White manager and visually daring her to ask me to sit down and participate in the meeting. She was extremely uncomfortable, but didn’t say a word or make any motions. I went to my desk, where I sat unconcerned about continuing my employment.

I wasn’t reprimanded. In fact, no one made mention of what was said. Everyone pretended the comments weren’t made and the questions weren’t asked. When I tried to bring it up, someone would quickly change the subject.

And that just goes to show you how easily racist “chatter” and seemingly random comments can be ignored and brushed off—all the while showing a tolerance for such crude and ignorant behavior. The VP should have been reprimanded, if not terminated. I was working at a government contracting company. We were being paid with taxpayer money. And, that money was being used to pay an obvious racist, who went on to have numerous problems with Black and Hispanic/Latino staff. This VP sat in on norming sessions, employee by employee discussion meetings, to determine staff promotions, performance evaluations, etc. How fair was she to Black staff? You should have heard some of her comments that were passed on from staff that broke the confidentiality of these meetings. She was as racist as expected, never thinking a promotion was justified for minority staff.

Employers are rightly held to account, when they refuse to ignore the warning signs regarding racist and insensitive staff in the workplace. Only by speaking up and making complaints can we, as a race, make sure employers accept their fair share of the liability for the hostile and offensive working conditions that some Blacks are subjected to.

"NAPPY-HEADED HO'S..."

Sorry for missing a few updates last week. I’ve been interviewing and I’m starting a new job on Monday!

Anyway, I finally got a chance to catch up on the news. I heard about radio host Don Imus calling the nearly all Black Rutgers University women’s basketball players a bunch of “nappy-headed ho’s.”

For those that haven’t heard of him, Don Imus has a daily program on WFAN radio that is also broadcasted live on cable on MSNBC in the mornings. Well, that was the forum Don Imus used to make racially insulting remarks to a team of student athletes that had reached the Final Four in basketball. Not surprisingly, Don Imus waited more than 24 hours to apologize for his remarks. In addition to saying they were “nappy-headed ho’s,” Mr. Imus also called the players “rough looking girls.”

So, we have a dried-up and crusty looking White man calling beautiful young Black women ugly hos. That’s pretty much what it boils down to!!

One of the show’s producers, Bernard McGuirk, chimed in that looking at the Rutgers University players compared to the ladies on the Tennessee squad was like looking at “The Jigaboos vs. The Wannabes” a reference to the light-skin (or White) vs. dark-skin issue from Spike Lee’s Movie, School Daze (wrongly referred as Do the Right Thing on the program). Mr. McGuirk also called the young ladies, “hardcore hos.”

A guest commentator, Sid Rosenberg, said, “The more I look at Rutgers, the more they look exactly like the Toronto Raptors.”

Yes, these 3 White men went to the old stereotype of Black women being ugly (according to White standards of beauty), promiscuous, and threw in the bit about us being masculine—which is commonly heard about all Black, female athletes (e.g., the Williams sisters in tennis, track and field athletes, etc.)

The National Association of Black Journalists is demanding more than the lame apology offered by Mr. Imus. They feel that, at the very least, he should reach out to personally contact the women to offer his apologies for the vicious and insulting comments. They also want Mr. Imus to be fired! MSNBC is trying to distance itself from his comments, but hasn’t taken any action against him.

In the past, it’s been reported that Mr. Imus has referred to Gwen Iffil (of the News Hour and Washington Week programs) as a “cleaning woman.” And, he also referred to a Black reporter for the NY Times as a “quota hire.”

Al Sharpton has said that if Mr. Imus is not fired by Friday the 13th, he plans to picket outside the studio headquarters. MSNBC says they are “reviewing the situation.” That simply means they want to know if there will be a public commotion about the comments or if the public will disregard the remarks. Just Blacks complaining about the comments won’t be enough. There has to be some indication of White outrage or disgust AND there has to be extensive media coverage/pressure before there is any hope that Mr. Imus will be fired. I just don’t see that outcome happening, but it’s worth a shot!!

I’ve already written to Mr. Imus and the others listed below. My question to Mr. Imus was: Don’t you have enough White “hos” to talk about? And, then I named some.

To write to the producers, anchors, and hosts of the Don Imus morning show email: imus@msnbc.com

To write a general letter to MSNBC TV email: viewerservices@msnbc.com

To write to WFAN radio (www.wfan.com) email: fanmail@wfan.com (Business Office)

WHY I HATE BLACKS! (An article in AsianWeek)

The article, described below, shows how easy it is for Blacks to come across people in the workplace who have a mindset and racially ignorant beliefs that would strongly contribute to race-based problems in the workplace. Each person brings their own dysfunctions and racial perspectives to every job they work at. Far too often, some people feel the need to express those negative points of view and to wrongly lash out against other races, etc. It cannot be reasonably argued that people who can say and write such negative things about another race will not and would not hold those people to different standards of expectation (performance evaluations, day-to-day duties, etc.) and would not act out against those individuals—if the opportunity presented itself. Very few people have that sort of impulse control that would allow them to fight such strong and negative views of another race. Having given my preamble, please read on:

The editor of San Franciso-based weekly newspaper, AsianWeek, has had to issue an apology because one of his contributing writers, Kenneth Eng, did a piece called, WHY I HATE BLACKS!

Mr. Eng’s reasons for hating Black people include:

--They were enslaved for more than 300 years! What took them so long to fight back?
--They are easy to coerce!
--Blacks hate us [Asians]. He alleges we hurl racial slurs at Asians all the time.

AsianWeek issued a statement regretting "any offense caused by the one opinion piece," and stated, “What this controversy points out is the lack of community leadership in addressing the critical and difficult issues of race relations, particularly between Asian Pacific Americans and African Americans.” The paper plans to co-sponsor a town hall-style meeting with the Willie L. Brown Jr. Institute on Politics & Public Service.

I guess that’s their version of social rehab, which is similar to what Isaiah Washington was forced to do by the producers of Grey’s Anatomy.

Many Asian organizations came out and condemned the article. An Asian scholar (retired) at UC Berkeley has said that Asian American gains have come thanks to the efforts of African Americans.

For the record: AsianWeek calls itself “The voice of Asian America.”

The writer, Kenneth Eng, has also done a piece called, Why I Hate Asians. Someone get him to Oprah or Dr. Phil!

The AsianWeek web site took down the article, but the content can be found at: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/02/27/MNGTCOBI921.DTL

Sources: Diversityinc.org and San Francisco Chronicle