Eugene Dillenburg Wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 23:31:06 EDT, David E. Haberstich <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> < snip>
>
>> On the other, recognition of the constitutional principle of
>> free speech should guarantee anyone the right to show a flag even when no one
>> else is doing so--either in a time of national crisis OR in a time of total
>> peace and tranquility.
>
> <snip>
>
>> I seriously doubt that anyone who displays a flag or allows their employees
>> to display flags is going to be liable for a discrimination lawsuit.  I think
>> it's more likely that an administrator who forbids people to show a flag
>> would risk a First Amendment violation.
>
> <snip>
>
> The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States applies only to
> the
> federal government, and not to private citizens, organizations, or
> institutions.  This
> is not to say that I agree with actions described; merely that the Director
> and the
> institution would seem to be within their rights.

RATS! Someone beat me to it!

I was just working on a post pointing out this same thing. In fact, while I
believe the employer in this example is behaving in a particularly petty
manner, I must stand up for the employer's right to make decisions of this
nature. After all, while an employee should be allowed a wide latitude to
express themselves, things that are on our office walls, on our desks, or on
our clothes, have an effect on the image the institution presents to the
public. I would also go so far to say that in many instances what personal
effects an employee displays can have an effect on the message the museum is
trying to communicate, be it the explicit message of our exhibits or
programs or the implicit message of "this is a professional work place" that
we want to project to the general public as well as large donors.
Statements, verbal or symbolic, made by staff at all levels are interpreted
by the public as reflecting the opinions of the institution.

As with all managerial decisions this "power" should be handled with the
utmost discretion and deliberation, preferably with the input of all stake
holders. But ultimately, if employees have on their desk or on their person,
especially those people and/or work areas in the public eye,  an item that
reflects negatively on the institution than the director or department head
is derelict in his/her duty not to do something about it. We may all agree
that the example currently under discussion is an abuse of this power, and
the timing particularly stinks. But would we all feel the same if it were a
Confederate Flag under consideration? An Afghanistan Flag? What about
buttons worn by docents of a sexually suggestive nature or seem to advocate
(nudge, nudge, wink, wink) drug or alcohol use or abuse? The Asterix and
Elvis dolls seem innocuous enough, but what about a vintage Little Black
Sambo doll or image? As a manager of floor staff I DO have the right, even
the responsibility, to tell my staff they cannot wear such things or post
them in public. Whether they are appropriate for a non-public office is a
matter for discussion for the whole staff, but the decision is ultimately
the supervisor's or Executive Director's.

I'll repeat: The example currently under consideration seems, as represented
on the list, to be an example of a very ill considered implementation of
this principle and even more poorly timed. But I must stand up for the
principle itself.


--
Matthew White
Director of Museums
Mount Washington Observatory
www.mountwashington.org

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).