A sad but often true reality of governments is that “nothing is fixed until it becomes so serious that there is no alternative.” This saying could have been written based on the manner in which the honorable intentions of affirmative action spun horribly out of control. Those measures sometimes evolved into a haven for problematic employees, job security for hordes of attorneys, and administrative hammers for not-so-great leaders. The result was the emergence of retaliatory tools of choice in many instances; financially damaging to many municipalities, and workplace graveyards for some people whose minor counselling-level indiscretions marked the end of their careers.
I honestly do not know of any person in my very wide circle of leaders who is not absolutely committed to a workplace that generally reflects the complexion of the municipality and a workplace that is free of any form of discrimination or bias. In this same wide circle, nor do I know of anyone who is saddened at the demise of DEI programs! As someone who has served at the executive levels in numerous civilian and military organizations, I am not alone in my years of frustration and consternation. We have witnessed and experienced the drama, damage and organizational paralysis resulting from: (a) false and exaggerated allegations; (b) troublesome employees who use the race-gender-orientation for a retaliatory defense when their poor performance comes into workplace scrutiny, (c) and the very difficult task of managing a workplace where the majority of fine employees witness the injustice of poor employees who successfully game the system for personal benefit or advancement, or both.
In my discussion of this subject, I want to add several points and share several impressions. First, genuine harassment and discrimination certainly does occur and must be dealt with promptly and professionally. Based on years of experience and scores of cases, it is my opinion that about half of the situations that I have dealt with fall into the “legitimate” category and are neither fabricated nor exaggerated. The adverse impact of DEI types of allegations on workplaces, because of the often near-hysterical obsession with anything related to this arena, is as significant as distractions and consternations detracting from production and performance. In law enforcement organizations the result is less attention to public safety, while in military organizations, there is a decrease in readiness.
The absolute key to resolution and prevention is courageous confrontation at the first indication of inappropriate conduct, as damages almost always results from multiple unaddressed occurrences. On a related note, I am always puzzled at police officer or military “victims” who are trained and inclined to engage in combat and use deadly force but who allegedly are incapable of verbally telling another person to cease whatever behavior is perceived as offensive. It strikes me as odd that a person can shoot someone but is somehow unable to verbalize to another person that their behavior is troubling or unwanted.
Of note is the recent “me too” movement where those who emerged as “victims” many years after alleged incidents are heralded as brave and heroic. I think just the opposite — those terms should apply to people who addressed and resolved the troublesome conflict at the time of occurrence. I have difficulty using the brave and heroic terms for someone standing behind a bevy of microphones in an attorney’s office, at an orchestrated press conference and who is describing the alleged injuries of years past from a written script! Again, mentioning my circle of colleagues, I cannot think of anyone who sees these theatrical performances as anything other mad dashes for cash artfully orchestrated by the law firms who specialize in this cottage industry.
Years of false and exaggerated allegations have been harmful in addressing genuine problematic behavior, as there is much skepticism because of the rampant abuse and financial windfalls that the DEI industry has produced. A few representative examples of abusive situations which have contributed to the widespread skepticism and now elimination of DEI (in some circles) are worthy of mention: The classic cases of a clearly less qualified persons being selected over clearly more qualified persons for a key positions and where all involved in process insist that the selectees obtained the position through a meritorious process. The selection of persons who had the desire to perform a highly specialized task over persons who has already mastered the requisite skills. The administrate movement out of works places of supervisors whose only sins were attempting to improve the weak performance of marginal employees, who then accused the supervisors of discrimination. The terribly unjustified monetary awards to well-recognized problem employees whose greatly exaggerated description of an innocent comments by coworkers was translated by skilled attorneys into alleged emotional devastation. The class action awards to groups of coworkers who essentially conspired in exaggerated efforts to describe still-developing supervisors as racist homophobe and the workplaces as the evil empire. As just about any tenured human resources manager can attest, the aforementioned situations are not isolated examples, but rather examples of the types of challenges that they faced during their tenure.
It is significant to acknowledge the residual damage done to the staff, command and supervisory credibility by the survival-related acquiescence of clearly bad decisions based on false claims of competence and qualifications. Among the very highest expectations of those in leadership positions is the expectation of truth and honesty – except in dealing with DEI issues. We appropriately terminate peace officers for Brady violations (such as false testimony), while at the same time have a de facto expectation of these troubling behaviors by those in leadership positions. While the concept of DEI is dead, at least conceptually at the federal level, it does not mean that the honorable efforts to eliminate various forms of discrimination and hostility should cease. I have long believed that the most appropriate manner to make our workplaces better places and to improve the overall skills of our people is not in leveling the playing field downward through DEI types of strategies, but to elevate all our people upward through the exercise of solid leadership.
Keith Bushey retired from the Los Angeles Police Department as a commander, from the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department as a deputy chief, and from the United States Marine Corps Reserve as a Colonel . Other law enforcement experience includes having served as a Los Angeles County deputy sheriff, a State of California deputy game warden, and as the Marshal of San Bernardino County. He is an instructor emeritus for the FBI Law Enforcement Executive Development Association and has lectured and written extensively in the areas of leadership, management and ethics. His entire eight booklet Leadership Series is in the public domain and may be downloaded without cost from KeithBushey.com.