Off Duty Professional Etiquette.

[K&D]

the thing is it just seems like personal censorship, i think the rule of thumb should be not how someone might respond but on personal choice, of wether one would want to talk about there private life but if they do, then i don't see a problem with it.

i just think too often do we make decisions based on what is "right" to say according to society and what is wrong.

as far as dor's example goes, thats a personal choice, based on how others might precievie you, personally i wouldn't give a fuck because your drinking and talking to gentleman, doesn't make you a bad landlord or a bad person for that matter, but i respect that that was your decisions, as you are the ones who will have to pay for the consequences...but to say that one shouldn't, thats where i draw the line, i think one should do whatever they want to do and not feel that they have to hide it if they don't want to....as long as its not directly effecting others involved in a negative way and even then theres some grey area to be moved around in. i'm not sure if the posistion of authority had to be held up by your acting like an outstanding citizen legaly you had a right to collect rent...but thats beside the point...

anyways so yeah personal choice....thats all...

and zlako, why did you leave from your teaching job? is that too personal a question? i think you made a bit of a implication or something in your post. you post was hard to understand, very long sentence....i had to read it a couple times...and where do you find such funny words?

[Doreen Peri]

Well, K&D.... I guess you just had to have been there. I didn't only collect rent. I was the resident property manager. I gave a good example about how partying with one of my employees caused him to commit an act of insubordination. Had I partied with tenants, I don't think they'd stop paying their rent, but I KNOW they would have not been receptive to me telling them to hold down the partying because it was disturbing the other residents. etc. I had one supervisor who knew of my rather open, partying lifestyle and requested that I do it in another town. I listened to that sound advice.

It definitely wasn't a matter of personal choice. It was a matter of the necessity of a professional demeanor even during my off time in order to continue effectively doing my job.

Later, when you graduate from college, you will have jobs. If you ever find yourself in a position of authority, remember this thread.

[Zlatko Waterman]

I left my teaching job because I retired, which I allude to in my post.

You know, K and D, it's an old joke:

English majors talk funny . . .

They write funny, too . . .

The funny words come from the dictionary.

Those other funny words, like "grok" and "granfalloon", come from modern literature.



--Z

[mnaz]

Your own time is your own business. You should be free to pursue pastimes of your choosing if they are legal and aren't detrimental to others in your vicinity and if you do not abuse your position of authority. Illegal activities are trickier, to be pursued strictly at one's own risk. In the case of drugs, or even high-level boozing for that matter, I would say that highly-skilled professionals to whom people entrust their lives should abstain. As to what should and shouldn't be 'illegal', well, that's a whole other discussion. If you work with children, do not socialize with them. Just don't do it.

That's basically it. My take on it, at least.

[K&D]

"if you work with children, do not socialize with them"

wow that seems a bit much...i am glad for those who socialized with me when i was a child.

[knip]

i definitely grokked your grok


share water, brother

[mnaz]

Yeah, K&D, it is a bit much. I actually agree with you. I kind of just threw that in without comment. It's just that our society is so hyper-sensitive to this sort of thing. Perhaps I should have used the word "fraternize" instead of "socialize". For example, for teachers to fraternize with their students, one on one particularly, just seems like asking for trouble.

[Lightning Rod]

mnaz,

Your discussion brings to mind the question of what is a critical occupation. They make airline pilots abstain from alcohol for a certain number of hours before flying. If some doctor is going to be operating on my brain, I would prefer that he is not hopped up on demerol.

Suppose you are to have a case decided before a judge and his wife wouldn't lay him last night and he's in a bad mood. Of course 'off duty' life affects how a person performs his job. It's unavoidable.

If you get stopped by a cop who is having hemorrhoid problems, you are much more likely to get a ticket.

But the first lesson I learned about journalism is that all a writer has is his credibility. Of course nobody blinks twice if a writer ties one on at a party and gets rowdy or argumentative. It's almost an occupational expectation. But if what he writes the next morning is gibberish, then he begins to lose his audience and his credibility.

Reminds me of the Winston Churchill quote when he was accused of being drunk. He said, "Yes madame, I'm drunk and you are ugly. But when I wake up tomorrow morning, I will be sober, but you will still be ugly."

[mnaz]

I love that Churchill quote. Genius. For the ages.

Ultimately, everything affects most everything else in some way. But some things affect others in more potentially disastrous ways in particularly critical endeavors. Mind-altering substances and piloting, or brain surgery, are good examples.

Definitely....

[Rat Bag]

Well, I knew you people rocked and this proves it.

Thanks, this has turned into a good discussion.

Knip: I'm in Australia. We are pretty open over here, generally, but in leiu of this convo I think I'm adopting the slightly guarded front suggested repeatedly.

Zlatko: I was looking forward to your comments.

I like your scenarios. We looked through a number of such cases while doing the code of conduct and student protection seminars. Looked at some more in another class and recently I did an education law subject for the beginning teacher. There were some cases that showed "the clandestine nature of the peadophile" and the due process that schools have or have not followed to their own benefit or detriment, respectively. Like I expressed in the thread about nubile beauty that you alluded to, I have no desire to mess with young'ns like that and besides, state legislation says that I can't even date a chick who is a student of the state ed system, even if she is in a completely different school to me and even if she's like 19, it would still be a conflict of interest.

Anyway, I wasn't really thinking along the lines of abuse of power/position of authority thing, as I agree, no such thing as wrong or right withstanding, such an act is dispicable. Detestable, as the courts would call it. Repugnant.

Judih: Thanks for returning. So that's how it's done, eh? Ever ambiguous.

Hmmm, to instil ways of thinking. I've heard that one too, but which ways of thinking, pray tell, are those that are valued? Narrow-minded mainstream views or free-minded eccentric views?

K & D brought up an interesting point. Sure, teachers have a professional obligation not to warp kids minds too much in school time (though I revelled in getting this one kid -- too smart for his own good -- tripping out all afternoon on the geometrical significance of x to the power of 4. It was funny as hell), but do such professionals relinquish this responsibility to the youth as soon as they get home and log on? I suppose it is the parents' responsibility by that time to monitor their kid's online viewing, but it's something to think about.

Actually, it's definitely worth thinking about. Like Dor talked about how she discourages Rod from posting about previous drug addictions etc. I actually value such open sharing very much. I think that kind of sharing is very important if we as a world are to move forward in our thinking. For too long has all this stuff been swept under the carpet and not talked about. Shit needs to be talked about, seriously.

Rod: You said "seducing or allowing a seduction". That's really pertinent because, as the legal cases I mentioned above illustrated, the authority (i.e. principal) of such offenders is often held accountable also for failing to take reasonable steps to ensure student safety (i.e. in effect, allowing a seduction).

No, you are right, it's not okay for a teacher to date a student outside of hours. Like I stated above, that's a conflict of interest. Well, that goes for state schools, like, probably independent schools too, up until the end of high school y'know, but would probably be different in tertiary institutions.

But what are you saying? Are you saying that because a doctor is never really off duty it would be objectively immoral for him to frequent a brothel?

K & D: I'm very much with you on this trail of thought. Complete free and open communication about anything and everything. Amen. But I don't think it's really feasible, given the (prejudices of the) populus.

Dor: Your landlording stories relate nicely. Power relations, such magnificent dynamics, no?

It's kinda weird, isn't it, in a weird way, that one must go a few towns away to party so as to uphold an image, but somehow your stories portray the necessity of this.

Ok, Mnaz: Nice throw in -- "If you work with children, do not socialize with them".

Good advice, no doubt, and somewhat common sense. Not like I'd go looking to hang out with students, it just wouldn't be kosha. But your injection of the alternate word "fraternise" brings in some interesting dynamics. Like I said, of course I wouldn't socialise. In the unlikely event that some adolescent students said, "Hey Mr T, Amanda's having her 18th on Saturday. You are a cool teacher so we thought we'd invite you along".

Hmmm, at first I was going to say I'd flat out turn it down, but now I'm starting to think that why shouldn't a teacher drop in just to express congratulations. Of course it would easily turn into a conflict of interest if one were to stick around and get pissed but I really think a drop in would be good for morale and relations building.

That's what I'd consider socialising. Then there's how I understand the term fraternising, and a related scenario:

Say I'm walking my dog down to the shops and when I get to the shops some kids from my class are hanging around and they strike up a convo. That would be fraternising, no? Are you suggesting that this would be less than professional conduct? That one should make their hasty goodbyes and fuck off like fish?

I dunno, I'd be tempted to stand around and chat, build up rapport and all that. Of course, I wouldn't go back to their pad for bongs, that wouldn't be kosha. But to fraternise? I see no problem.

Well, you did say "one on one particularly" and that makes sense. In this age of accountability and litigation it would be silly to find oneself in a one on one situation, especially in the classroom, but I feel this is drifting from the topic.

Well, I think I've addressed most of the points brought up. If I've missed something then please bring it up again.

Lots of food for thought here though, thanks all for the input.

[mnaz]

Interesting scenarios, RB...

I took "fraternize" to be stronger and less 'disciplined' than 'socialize'. I see nothing wrong with conversation and building rapport. I would call that "socializing". Drinking with a student, or students, I would call "fraternizing".... risky business, indeed.

It's probably just a cross-continental semantics sort of thing, I would guess....

[Lightning Rod]

When I was in college I lived in a commune in a big ancient house just off campus. It became a solon of sorts and there was usually a party in progress.

Some of the professors used to sneak over there and hang out. On occasion they would indulge in whatever hash or opium or pot smoking that was going on. I don't think that they lost credibility or respect by participating in these activities. It was simply an expression of the fact that a teacher can also learn from his student.

I still correspond with my English prof after thirty years. We still learn from one another.

[Zlatko Waterman]

A quote to go with your Churchill gem is one of my favorite Oscar Wilde chestnuts:


"We are all lying in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars . . ."

(to Lord Darlington on the occasion of OW's morals being questioned.)

[abcrystcats]

This is kind of an interesting thread, and even though I am getting in on it very late in the game, I can't help adding a few comments.

The world's getting VERY stuffy.

I agree about the illegal activities. If you're going to be breaking the law in your off-hours, keep it to yourself. That's just common sense. Don't even DO those illegal activities, if you can avoid them.

As for the rest, my policy in life has been something like this: don't keep it a secret and don't volunteer it. It's nobody's business what I do in my off-hours, but if someone sees me doing it, I'm not going to freak out. I've paid the PRICE for having this attitude, I admit, but I'm still not sorry that I didn't skulk around and try to hide it. If I do something, I TRY to do it with a clear conscience. In the end, it doesn't always end up that my conscience is clear, but I've never been sorry that other people found out. Not really.

I could never skulk. Not for a job. Not for nothing or nobody. Well, hmmm. If I LOVED someone and wanted to protect them from being hurt, I could skulk. But there hasn't ever been a job, no matter how well paid it was, that made me want to be ashamed of my off-work agenda.

Teaching is TEACHING. You impart knowledge, and it's usually knowledge of a specific type. Unless you're teaching MORALITY and that morality includes injunctions AGAINST things that you happen to be doing in your spare time, what's the problem? You teach math to third graders and someone sees you at a strip joint. Big whoop. Going to strip joints isn't illegal and it doesn't affect your ability to teach math. You teach English. Someone sees you drunk and slurring your speech in a bar. Does your drunkenness in the bar inhibit your ability to teach English?

Just try to avoid doing the illegal things with untrustworthy witnesses present. Getting high in front of your fellow workers is a bad idea. How do you know one of them doesn't have an eye on your job? How do you know one of them doesn't need an excuse not to do THEIR job?

My maxim is: illegal is bad. Immoral is relative.

You can bluff with the immoral things. You can (better yet) come to your OWN conclusions and then act on them with aplomb. With the illegal things, there's no getting away. You better hide those things from anyone and everyone that you have the slightest reason to distrust. The best is not doing the illegal things at all.

[K&D]

my whole thing is that lets face it, advertisements and people are getting to students from the time that they can talk...why not descuss things, its not like students won't be getting an unbiased report.

so are all of you guys saying that if i were a student of yourse that you wouldn't say the things that you say on this bored infront of me? is there an age cut off, i don't even think there should be an age cut off due to the statement above.

i think not talking is another way of allowing indoctronation.