Hot News!
• Tea Party leader gets grilled by NAACP membership
On today's date in The Beacon archives, we published:
•Smitherman still saying the issue is about a “streetcar” (2009)•More on Amy Goodman’s Arrest and the Struggle for a Free Media (2008)
•Journalist Amy Goodman Unlawfully Arrested At RNC (2008)
•Seizing Illegal Guns—Thinking About 2% (2007)
•Information or Advertisements? (2007)
•Nick Lachey: “I have never supported George W. Bush.” (2007)
Contact Us
v mail: (513) 685-0678
e mail: click here
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Religion and Work: Questions about use of time at CMHA
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Photo courtesy of here.
Is it news to find out that an employee for a City agency is sending religious emails on the company dime? Is that appropriate use of time funded by tax dollars? Recently, an employee with the Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority (CMHA) sent an email blast to everyone she knew, calling for a boycott of dollar coins. Why might someone demand a boycott of currency? She thought the new coins did not say the phrase “In God We Trust.”
Later, this employee went to Snopes, and discovered that the whole story was an urban legend—so she sent out another email ending the boycott. One must wonder if this employee was on Snopes during company time, too.
See a full size of the email here.
In the interest of fairness, we decided to redact the sender’s name. As you can see, though, she sent this through her CMHA account to her Yahoo! account, presumably carbon copying her network—one of whom did not appreciate the apparent misuse of time and forwarded the message until it ended up at The Cincinnati Beacon.
On the one hand, perhaps everyone has sent an email while at work. On the other, the religious content of the message highlights and parallels the frenzied pitch religion has struck in our culture with the upcoming presidential primaries—with people basing their votes on how candidates respond to the question of evolution, or whether the Bible is literal fact.
Another strange aspect of this story is the idea of calling for a boycott of currency. Undoubtedly, there are people who received this email, believed it, and didn’t follow up through Snopes. These people may actually be out in the world boycotting coins.
What might that do to the economy, if it were to happen on a wide scale?
• Share This Article! | Listen to this article |
|  |
Register
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.
If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.
30 Dec 2007 at 11:10 am | #
Maybe you haven’t had the misfortune to check in at any of UC Medical Center departments but anyone that has can confirm this. Upon taking a seat at many of the check-in appointment booths, including the Barrett Cancer Center, in no matter what direction you look, you will be inundated with multiple Christian religious prayers, artifacts, proclamations, crosses, sayings, pictures, calendars, declaring the (often bored and surley) clerk’s personal religious viewpoints. One clerk displays an open Bible at her elbow. These can be offensive for a number of reasons but especially for those that may be dealing with terminal illness and don’t want to be confronted with judgmental, subjective religious condemnations at this point in their lives. Since this has gone unchecked for years it must have approval from top supervisory levels. Despite complaints, there’s been no clean-up.
30 Dec 2007 at 11:41 am | #
Surely you don’t mean to suggest that clerks cannot decorate their workspace?
Shall we ban pictures of children, too? Anything that demonstrates a personality or a life to the employee?
What a stark and inhuman workplace you would foist upon your fellow brothers and sisters, cincysue. I had no idea you were the kind of person to force your worldview on others.
Now, if these same clerks were funded by taxpayers and evangelizing on the clock, we may have a story.
30 Dec 2007 at 11:44 am | #
BTW, I would consider “evangelizing” something other than decorations. I remember, for example, when we first bought insurance for our house. Our agent was great on the phone. Never talked about religion. Was very helpful.
When we got to her office, she had a crucifix, and picture of the Virgin, and so forth.
She never mentioned it.
She continued to be a good insurance agent.
What is your point?
Now, if she included religious messages in her email signatures, maybe I would have found a new agent; if she tried to tell me about Jesus when I just wanted car insurance, maybe I’d have a problem. But should I really discriminate against someone for having a religion?
What’s next, cincysue? Would you ban women from wearing crosses on their necklaces?
Can people have religious tattoos?
30 Dec 2007 at 12:14 pm | #
You know my point. It’s no different than yours. And I believe that since UC Medical Center treats the uninsured and indigent they are the recipients of tax dollars. In fact, the messages I refer to reaches many more people than the e-mail you write about. At least that employee had a targeted audience of probably people he/she knew personally. Your complaint is about using the company e-mail and mine is about using company space. And yes, personal religious items are inappropriate in a work environment that is set up for the sole purpose of servicing the public, many of whom may have differing viewpoints. I would love to post an anti-war message or my 3 x 3 foot Impeach Bush poster in my office. But, my company and every other company that I have ever worked for, has a clear policy prohibiting exhibiting religious, political and sexually oriented materials in public view on company property. I’d be booted out on my ass. It’s no different than posting a Playboy foldout which would be offensive to women. At least the e-mail was private.
What kind of a person are you Dean? How do you know that the poor city worker had a computer at home she could use to post her personal messages from? What a stark and inhumane person you are to limit use of the internet only to the rich. She didn’t send the e-mail to you did she so why are you butting in her business and trying to ruin her life? Maybe she sent her messages on her breaks or lunch. Most companies allow that. The appointment check-in booths can’t be avoided if you want to utilize the services of the organization. You have to go digging to access somebody’s e-mail. Totally different. I have a point. You don’t.
30 Dec 2007 at 12:19 pm | #
Two things:
First, you will see the woman had a Yahoo! account. She could have used that and not the CMHA email service.
Second, she could still access the internet, for personal use, before work, after work, or during her lunches, if she really couldn’t do it at home—and with that internet she could have used her Yahoo! mail, which brings me right back to the first point.
Lastly, please tell me the rule for decorating workspace you would like to see implemented at the hospital. Be specific. Thank you.
30 Dec 2007 at 03:15 pm | #
Dean, this is a wider, deeper matter than the clerk at a desk. It goes through agencies and departments thoughout our governmental systems.
SEPARATION of church and state is NOT encouraged or adhered to in many agencies as the faith based movement’s entrenchment is wide and getting deeper. Gothard is not your only cloaked demon. Politicians, Agency heads, Department management are afraid they will be viewed as not being supportive of their staff. They do not want to be perceived as NOT BEING CHRISTIAN or capping personal beliefs. This goes for any governmental or associated agency. The tide of fear-mongering people under threat of God is reaching greater proportions than this story indicated on a personal time use issue…..on company/governmental time. The fervency goes deeper than we are prepared to believe.
Those persons asking for separation are viewed skeptically in as small a matter as starting a meeting WITHOUT prayer, a moderate matter such as REFRAINING from religious supplications during governmental retreats to foster better team building or in larger sanctuarues where God becomes a lobbyist’s best friend when making deals.
While such governmental entities are admonished and admonish others to refrain from speaking of any of their POLITICAL views or bringing them into their workplace, the demand for religious cessation IS NOT asked or adhered to.
Our friend against the jail sales tax and traffic cameras, Chris Finney, is one of the most helpful sources for people making changes. Chris is a gem, even after years being Heim(lich)strung. However, Chris helped launch a matter called OneCity that spawned CityLink where the evangelical monied powers fueling a mega social services mall got a quick zoning sign off (cobbling together bits and pieces from manufacturing zone codes to make it look like MFG)from very Christian evangelical insiders at city hall. No notice to the affiliated neighborhoods to have communities vote, just the aftermath of insiders’ misdeeds chosen political & religious collusive misdeeds. No concern for the neighborhoods of CUF, Camp Washington, OTR or the West End. Just collusive politicos allied with heavy religious leaning people inside federal and local agencies recieving a variety of governmental dollars(Empowerment Zone, Planning), their feelings? “If Crossroads/CityLink heard the calling from God, and they have millions, must be a good thing. After all, Uncle Carl and his kids are pushing this through, and we all know Carl sets on the right hand of Power.”
Dean, it is further and deeper than losing time at a desk supporting something you believe in. It goes to the top of the hierarchy and HOW THE TOP interprets HOW THEY NEED to manage their employees. It goes to the separation of church and state, at a local level, that you have chosen to help us address.
Recent changes in CMHA’s Board add strong timbers like Arnie Barnett, Dan Driehaus, Jr. and a new member, LaMont Taylor, along with the ‘retirement’ of Don Troendle, makes for changes that add stable structure for the whole system. Changes afoot in management assignments even as you have written. CMHA became a political camp for various political factions within both major parties years ago, rewarding loyalists in such gated communities with jobs, appointments and other patronage. Smaller segregation components within broader segregated streams. The board may be the venue to ask, not just on this topic, but bigger scope of CMHA what their changes are to be and where they stand on particular issues.
I do not always agree with cincysue in matters, but the flagrant posting and demonstration, usually coming from a person trying to be nice, goes into religious overdrive at UC Hospital and many 501(c)3 agencies that receive local, state and federal funding. If you say anything, or ask to sidestep the religious overtones, you become the heathen.
UC receives federal and state funding for multiple tasks.
They do a great job. But if the mixture of religion travelling the e-mail route is as open to scrutiny for your purpose here…...it is equally open to scrutiny by sue’s observations. Thank you both for the dialogue this AM.
30 Dec 2007 at 04:54 pm | #
I just think using office communication equipment to spread religious messages is different than decorating your workspace.
What about religious jewelry? Are you saying that should be off limits?
Where, precisely, is the line?
30 Dec 2007 at 05:04 pm | #
Simple. I told you. Nothing of a political, religious or sexual nature, in non-private work areas, or areas that serve the public and may impact business operations and create a hostile work or business environment. This is the stated policy of most major corporations for the protection of the employer as well as the employee. Interacting at the appointment booths is necessary in order to access the business, so it’s a captive audience, the clerk’s personal religious beliefs can’t be avoided as part of the business experience because they’re posted on the counter and on the backs of computers a few inches from the noses of the patient checking in. Messages that those with different viewpoints will be subject to hellfire and damnation shouldn’t be allowed.
30 Dec 2007 at 08:13 pm | #
Thank you River Wide. You’re very smart. The Dean always disagrees with me for the sake of disagreement, simply because it’s me. I thought my response was in support of, not contrary to his position of taking exception with employees using company time/resources for personal reasons, so was surprised at his reaction.
30 Dec 2007 at 10:17 pm | #
If the property - computer, wall, desk, cubicle - with taxpayer funds (in whole or in part) then a religious message does not belong there.
If it is upon their person , well, I know a guy who has “bad mother fucker” tatooed on his neck - just because it’s on his “person” shouldn’t escape the test of religious, sexual, racist, offensive—should it.
As to the CHMA, she should be fired. There should be absolutely no tolerance for goofing off at work or using a company computer for personal business whether on break, lunch, etc.
30 Dec 2007 at 10:25 pm | #
.
With the dollar dropping like a rocket, perhaps the world would prefer the removal of In God we Trust ?
Everyone prefers the Euro, so, Long Live the Queen ?
.
31 Dec 2007 at 10:30 am | #
You can holler “separation” all you want, but I have worked with people like this. One, in particular, is near and dear. She did not mean people harm, she was trying to help. She possessed only a high school degree and had rarely been outside of her small, conservative hometown. That said, she had performed much wonderful service for her organization for several decades.
We had a discussion about “In God We Trust” once. She told me that money no! longer! had! that! phrase!
I was like, OK, so what…lots of religions want to give to Caesar what’s Caesars, and keep God’s name out of it. She said, “But this is just another example of how ‘They’ are taking away our heritage!” WHAT heritage, I begged? The one where my great-grandfather escaped to the U.S. so people wouldn’t lock him up for being Jewish? Um, no, the heritage of having words on money. “It’s always been this way!” was her final straw-grasp.
It was getting heated, and it was a discussion I really did not want to be having. Suddenly, an intern piped up from a cubicle. “It didn’t appear on paper money until 1957.” “Really?” Um, yeah. Score one for interns and Wikipedia!
31 Dec 2007 at 10:32 am | #
Hey, at least he’s honest! Wouldn’t you rather know who you’re dealing with up front (especially in a gov’t office)? I’d say “Thanks for the tip” and proceed with business, with caution.
02 Jan 2008 at 01:36 am | #
I’m not sure what the big deal is about posting something on your cubicle wall. I happen to agree with The Dean on this one. Cincysuz, if you don’t like what you see then big deal, forget about it and move on. Don’t look at it. There are all kinds of things in the world that you will encounter that are of differing opinions and ideas than what you believe in. That’s what is great about this country. This blog is an example. I think that in an effort to not offend anybody we all too often try and make it impossible for people to share their beliefs and have opinions.
02 Jan 2008 at 06:31 pm | #
It seems silly to get too bent out of shape about stuff like this. Sure, sending out personal or religious email is generally against any company or government policy…and this is probably a violation.
This individual should probably receive a warning that this sort of thing is against policy and that’s that. I don’t see a problem with individuals displaying their beliefs…the law of the land is generally considered to be “freedom of religion” not “freedom from religion.” as long as there are no policies or actions against people displaying artifacts from other religions, i can’t see a problem with someone having an open bible…unless it prevents them from doing their job.
03 Jan 2008 at 09:31 pm | #
Do you see a problem with the clerk displaying an open porn magazine on the counter where you have to do paperwork in order to see your doctor? Or a swastika? How about a “Kill ‘em all and Let God Sort it Out” poster of middle eastern children? What about playing rap music calling women bitches and ho’s? Or a loaded gun? I find displaying the offensive saying “The Wages of Sin is Death” just as, if not more offensive than any of the other things I’ve just mentioned.
If that same clerk sends an e-mail to her friends, it’s nothing to me if I don’t have to read it.
04 Jan 2008 at 12:37 am | #
cincysuz,
Interesting… Let me consider each in turn…
I’m not certain, but it is probably not legal to have porn out in the open. I mean, if you have to be a certain age to see it, surely you can’t just have it displayed in public. I have no idea about the laws governing porn display.
I would never go to a place that allowed employees to do such things.
Now, I am aware of what you said in regards to the hospital getting tax dollars. So, before I consider further whether a place should get tax dollars without putting such restrictions on employees, let me seek some further clarification. Should no place receive tax dollars that allows employees to have an opinion? What if the place itself inherently has an opinion?
In other words, if you do not want some place receiving tax funds because employees all have Jesus propaganda everywhere, I figure you would never want funds given to a Jesus propaganda ministry.
But think of all the things that go against someone’s personal beliefs. (I am not trying to argue with you about who has better personal beliefs—but just to find out whether offending someone’s political position means they should not receive funds.)
I’d be interested in your responses (and explanations) to the following:
Should Planned Parenthood receive tax funds? (Many people oppose abortion.)
Should adoption agencies receive tax funds? (Bill Gothard thinks that abortion is bad.)
I could go on, but let me just see your response to the first two, to start.
04 Jan 2008 at 12:38 am | #
*that should read “Bill Gothard thinks adoption is bad.” He also thinks abortion is bad, along with the ROCK BEAT.
04 Jan 2008 at 08:34 am | #
The stated purpose of Planned Parenthood is to provide birth control. Anything posted, that promotes the mission of the organization would probably be appropriate and expected by those that utilitze the services. Same with any other business be it retail or manufacturining, adoption agencies or churches. The reasonable expectation is to see advertising and information related to the business. Many of those are developed by advertising agencies and meant to persude as well as inform.
Promoting religion is not the mission of UC Medical Center. It’s not the business of city or county offices. It’s not the business of the public library. But it’s also not the business of non-tax funded businesses and rules still apply there. The business of UC Medical Center is to provide health care. Materials appropriate to that are appropriately posted. Doctors wear pink ribbons also in align with the mission. An argument could be made that religious hospitals have leeway on this, though they too are now for-profit and I bet you would be hard pressed to find any that don’t utilize tax payer money be it in research or funding care for underinsured.
Are you not aware of creating a hostile work environment? Even if you thinlt it’s okay to bombard clients/patients with the personal and judgmental beliefs of the worker (and I’ve said time and again these aren’t on a back wall. They’re taped to the counter, the subject of the calendar patients need to refer to, and on the backs of computers, not where the clerk can see them, but facing the patient) you must realize that another employee, working within a group with a publicly stated religious bias, that often effectively condemns them to an eternity of burning in hell, may question, legitimately, the fairness of the workplace. Believe me, they would have a personnel action on that one. I’m sure that since the overtone is so heavy, other employees would not object for fear of retailiation.
People have homes in which to display items that may be controversial or compromise the mission of the business or the ability of others to use services. Just like you point out that they have e-mails to spread their personal beliefs. This has never been about private areas and is no different than the push for prayer in school and display of the ten commandments. Radical religious beliefs, the kind you’ve been hounding about in your Gothard/Heimlich posts, being forced on the public.