The last several months have involved a mad scramble over the issue of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI). As someone who has extensive experience in just about every imaginable aspect of DEI, over many years and in various positions in multiple civilian and military organizations, I welcome the opportunity to add my perspectives to these very critical conversations.

First, my personal and professional backgrounds. I am a married Caucasian man who grew up in a lower-middle-class environment, always surrounded by a significant number of friends and colleagues from across the entire spectrum of ethnicity. Over the years, I have been privileged to have three biological children, two adopted children and approximately 35 foster children — with a strong degree of ethnic diversity across all three categories, which has grown even greater with my wonderful grandchildren.

Professionally, I have held numerous supervisorial, management and executive positions, including specifically serving as the equal employment opportunity (EEO) officer of a major municipal police department. I have also served as the head of a large county law enforcement agency, the inspector general of a USMC major command, an ombudsperson for the U.S. Department of Defense and have participated in hundreds of administrative hearings, primarily as the chairperson. Instances and allegations of racism in the workplace have been a constant factor throughout my professional life. Not surprisingly, these experiences have shaped my opinions and perspectives on the topic of racism, and I see it as my responsibility to add those impressions to the current discourse.

Bias, discrimination and harassment are not limited to racism but also extend to other behaviors. However, because each of these related issues — such as sexism, harassment, sexual orientation and age-related concerns — has unique differences that require distinct approaches, I have chosen to focus solely on the topic of racism in this article.

Categories of allegations of racism

Years of experience and reflection have led me to categorize the issue of racism into three primary groups. Certainly, the lines are often blurred, but for the purposes of action and adjudication, I have found these major categories to be helpful in addressing and resolving allegations.

Clear and unmistaken racist behavior. While many, including myself, feel strongly that there are far fewer actual racist behaviors and actions than in past decades, the reality is that racism has not been completely eradicated from our communities and workplaces, and its impact remains devastating to both individuals and organizations. The consequences include hostility, favoritism, antagonism, inequities, indignities, deprivation of opportunities, lack of productivity, distrust, emotional and physical stress, and anxiety, just to name some of the adverse effects.

While penalties and adjudicated consequences are not the focus of this article, I feel compelled to share a strong belief based on years of experience in cases where true racism was a factor. In my opinion, the last few decades have been pivotal and largely successful in eradicating racism from our society. With this reality in mind, any person who continues to hold racist ideologies is, again in my opinion, a very troubled individual who should not be in our workplace. It is our responsibility, not only to the aggrieved parties but to all employees, to create a positive workplace that is not tainted by racism. Typically, most racially troubling comments or actions fall more into the immature or impulsive category and are best addressed with minor discipline and remedial instruction. However, it has been my experience that deep-seated racist behavior must be dealt with decisively, as minor discipline and counseling are seldom effective. When confronted with such deep-seated racism, termination is the most appropriate course of action.

Perceived racist behavior. This is the category that creates the greatest difficulties in adjudications, resolutions and determinations, and is most often strongly subjective to all involved parties. The factors often follow a common script: the aggrieved party or parties allege that certain statements or actions were the result of racist attitudes and behaviors, while the alleged instigator or instigators are equally adamant that the statements or actions either did not occur or were misunderstood. Resolutions are typically based on a preponderance of evidence, primarily drawn from witness statements.

Although it took me several years to arrive at an accurate view, I have come to believe that in an appreciable percentage of sincere (believed accurate) allegations of racism, racism is not truly a factor. This belief is based on years of experience, coupled with the recognition that some individuals often attribute their misfortunes and mistakes to causes other than their own behaviors. I cannot count the number of very perplexing situations where a person from an underrepresented group has been adamant that adverse consequences were the result of racism, when it was abundantly clear that such was not the case. I know that some will disagree, but I have come to strongly believe that in many cases of alleged racism, the aggrieved parties “have their antennas extended a bit too high” and are seeing racist evils that do not exist. From my continued participation in the human resource arena, I am aware that many others share this same perception.

False or exaggerated allegations of racist behavior. False and exaggerated allegations are just as devastating to innocent individuals as legitimate situations are to aggrieved persons, and in my judgment, they have been a major factor in the recent demise of many DEI programs. The average person is just sick and tired of years of increased misuse of allegations of racism. It is seemingly applied automatically in any litigation involving a person from a minority group and, in prominent cases, often triggers appearances by well-known attorneys and clergy in theatrical performances disguised as press conferences, always with the intent of securing financial awards or settlements. It is my opinion, and likely that of many others, that the widespread proliferation of false allegations has badly diluted the credibility of racist allegations overall, thereby harming those who are legitimate victims of racist behavior.

Equally troubling is the emotional devastation that those who have been falsely accused often suffer. Unfortunately, allegations of racism have, in far too many instances, evolved over the years into claims that are recklessly made and often left unresolved. The long-term consequences usually include workplaces and relationships disrupted and disposed of without any consideration of the damage done to those who were falsely accused.

Resolution considerations

First and foremost are the credibility and personal integrity of those who investigate allegations of racism, followed by their writing and investigative skills. Objectivity and balance are essential. The end product must be an investigation that all parties see as credible (to the extent humanly possible).

Secondly, there should be a subject-matter expert who possesses those same qualities, serving as a resource to both the investigators and the aggrieved person, who makes the final adjudication. Despite the best of intentions, many executive-level employees are not trained in, or do not possess, skills for handling these types of matters or investigations. The absence of such an expert has proven to be a factor in what has often been seen as flawed investigations, particularly in the military, where untrained investigators provide incomplete or inadequate findings to untrained command personnel, resulting in investigations that are widely perceived as neither thorough nor credible.

Finally, organizations need to do an overall better job of healing the trauma associated with false allegations. Workplace issues associated with racism are painful for all involved, and most employers are anxious to resolve cases as quickly as possible and move on. However, a case should not be considered closed until and unless those who were questionably or falsely accused are conspicuously exonerated.

Summary

This article is not and should not be seen as an exhaustive assessment of this very critical topic, but rather an examination of several key components by someone with considerable experience and scar tissue in the equal employment opportunity and workplace harassment arenas. I hope this information is received as intended: a contribution to an ongoing, critical and evolving conversation.