[ BrownMan sent this letter to ER about HR's incompetent verdict ]
Linda,
This is with regard to our
last meeting on 9/2. You conveyed me basically what HR had conveyed me earlier -
that there is NO prejudice and I should continue reporting to my current manager.Since you were coming from Employee Relations group linked to Brian Fay I was expecting that your group will do independent and more thorough investigation than what "one person team" called HR business partner i.e Christine Eckert did. My concerns were focused on lack of transparency in their method of investigation and lack of objectivity in analyzing the results.
These were highlighted in my second letter to HR. One persons integrity and ethics itself can dictate the outcome, the process is flawed. When asked about this you said Employee Relations is a Corporate-wide body and it has no direct knowledge of what happens at various work groups; so it relies solely on findings by HR business partner and there is no alternative infrastructure in place. If that is the case then my statement about lack of transparency and objectivity is unchanged. The latter is a very big concern.
Since you are a ER person I will presume your intellect is superior than a typical HR person. So I am going to elevate the discussion that we had verbally in writing , consider this as dialog.
I asked about whether you have a HR panel of advisors I can talk to. You replied in the negative. There in lies a huge problem. JP Morgan Chase is a global firm employing diverse group of employees. My complaint is a diversity issue since I am not a white man. As I said in my 2nd letter Houston IT workforce is about 50% Indian origin and 90% of them practice to various degree
Hindu way of life. There is significant percentage of people of India origin in NY and other US locations also. Considering this there is no due representation in the HR entity which decides what is wrong, what is right, what is fair and such in an equitable manner. Under this condition the perspective is flawed. The composition of a HR panel should be representative of different colors/races as it can practically be implemented. Not just all white men and women. There should be people of other color, religion etc., so that HR can equip itself to handle all kinds of diversity issues. IBM has such a system in place. My point is you can never ever feel the exact kind of pain of the victim unless you belong to victim’s race/color/religion depending on the nature of complaint. In other words
my complaint is diversity issue but there is no diversity panel in HR to investigate this impartially. Please read the diversity statement very carefully, can you tell me what is wrong?
“Building a workplace where differences are respected and valued is critical to our future. We have an amazing opportunity in front of us to build the best financial services company in the world. Achieving this depends on having the best people doing their best work. For us, the business case is simple: JPMorgan Chase is a place for talented people from all backgrounds and nationalities. Gender, race, sexual orientation, age and physical ability are just some of the kinds of differences that make people unique — and give us the diversity of perspective that will set us apart. We’re committed to ensuring that diversity remains a key priority...our collective diversity is our strength.” – Jamie Dimon, Chairman and CEO, JPMorgan Chase
No, it's fine, it's perfect the way it is stated. But there is a problem in applying and practicing the section in
italics when it comes to HR.
Just like company's workforce need to be diverse to give us the diversity of perspective in other matters it's important that HR which is a subset of such workforce need to be diverse too to give the firm the diversity of perspective in HR related matters. Lacking diverse workforce within HR is a failure of the system. Later on in the statement you see "diversity remains a key priority". May be it's not a key priority within HR. Then again it's a failure of the system.
So in summary, Currently JPMC HR is lacking effective mechanism to deal with diversity issues in an equitable manner. It cannot comprehend the complaint and grasp the details that go with it. JPMC HR has not kept pace with diversity and globalization. You would agree that justice delivered now is justice delivered with Eurocentric lens which means it’s far from perfect. History is evidence to that statement.
Please read this scholarly article,
Dialog on Whiteness Studies, it’s a must read if you sincerely plan to be an effective HR person. It's a must read for every HR person, one day you will thank me for this. As I said in my 2nd letter White man practices “
Eurocentrism” either consciously or subconsciously. They are not even aware of practicing this simply because their yardstick is their own and not with reference to something that is decentralized and which is the ideal one.
About your other statements:
Defending Greg in a summed up response to incidents 1 and 2 you said -
“I believe there is a certain level of inquisitive nature there in Houston. You guys celebrate Black History month and such”That sounds like sanctimonious pontification from the ivory tower of New York City. I can’t speak for blacks but Yes we do as it is “celebrated” everywhere. What’s the point in "celebrating” after the damage is done. Slavery should not have happened in the first place. Same with
original Americans who are being “celebrated” with sports mascots.
Anyway, back to your statement, you expect a lot of reasonableness and generosity from me there while you try to "sweep under the rug" 2 major incidents that are the crux of my complaint
without considering the circumstances when they happened. I have already written in detail about these 2 incidents in my
2nd letter to HR and posed questions which still remain unanswered.
It’s odd that you used the word inquisitive which also means – “unduly or inappropriately curious; prying”. Did you know? That exact nature led to Inquisition which caused the genocide of Hindus in India once upon a time. Here's a paragraph about this.
The Goan inquisition is regarded by all contemporary portrayals as the most violent inquisition ever executed by the Portuguese Catholic Church. It lasted from 1560 to 1812. The inquisition was set as a tribunal, headed by a judge, sent to Goa from Portugal and was assisted by two judicial henchmen. The judge was answerable to no one except to Lisbon and handed down punishments as he saw fit. The Inquisition Laws filled 230 pages and the palace where the Inquisition was conducted was known as the Big House and the Inquisition proceedings were always conducted behind closed shutters and closed doors. The screams of agony of the culprits (men, women, and children) could be heard in the streets, in the stillness of the night, as they were brutally interrogated, flogged, and slowly dismembered in front of their relatives. Eyelids were sliced off and extremities were amputated carefully, a person could remain conscious even though the only thing that remained was his torso and a head.
Anyway, you can read more about it
here and
here and
here. Note that the first detailed account was written by a Christian historian, Dr. T. R. de Souza
Honestly, in contradiction to your statement Greg was NOT new to Indians at all as there were few people already working with him at the time I joined. So you cannot sweep it under the carpet as "inquisitiveness". Definitely NOT inquisitiveness considering the circumstances.
You said - “
people have different levels of tolerance”
What is your meaning of tolerance? I am amazed how many times this comes up. It's as if you want to totally ignore what I say. Denial in action? This is what HR earlier said to which
I have responded in detail.
Tolerance is a two way street. The issue is about Greg’s level of Intolerance. Though I don't need any pat on the back regarding my virtues does it help to strengthen my argument anymore if I say I have received appreciation from a white IBM executive for my level of tolerance and
my ability to indulge in cross cultural dialog. By default Indians especially Hindus are one of the most tolerant of all in the world (Probably Buddhists are a step ahead and Jains two steps ahead in this noblest virtue). Hindus were so tolerant and forgiving that it was construed as weakness. That is one reason why we were
raped and ravaged by the Mughals and
plundered and pillaged by the Europeans for 1000 years. That is 10 centuries. Think about it, historians have termed it as the longest genocide in the history of mankind so far. All because we were tolerant and expected others were likewise. I had to state all those facts to impress upon you the fact that I am a product of a civilization that is 5000 years old and one of the most civilized on this planet. Tolerance is one of the primary tenets of following
Sanathana dharma, but not at the cost of Intolerance directed against it.
Now you are telling me that I need to be tolerant? OR I am not tolerant enough and need to be more tolerant to handle prejudice and racism in direct and subtle forms? OR Need to be more tolerant to handle prejudice and racism in direct and subtle forms when other Indians or other colored folks endure in the US or elsewhere without complaining? Please don't.
Also if you read that
article I mentioned above you wouldn’t talk about this again. The burden of tolerance rests with people of all colors and races and not just with non-white people. That is one of the signs of being civilized. Also don’t expect tolerance to tolerate Intolerance.
You said – “
we have addressed Greg appropriately”
I know that he was summoned to be in NY on 25th and 26th of August but it’s not transparent how this was addressed. If HR maintains that I need to continue reporting to him I don’t know how this makes sense.
Throughout our discussion
you were repeatedly mentioning the incidents as “allegations” despite the proof with details provided. Why?
For incident 1 your reply is different than Christine. You said – “
Sadath had no recollection of the incident”. Let’s call him again in my presence. If he can’t recollect it’s bad though it’s vivid in my memory.
About “plad” calling it has potential to have negative connotations. One black employee enlightened me on this fact that I was not even aware of. When I narrated the incident he immediately sensed discomfort. “plad” is very close to “lad” which means “boy”. “Boy” is a racist and a derogatory term used by Whites for a black man. Calling a black man a “boy” is one step short of calling him a “nigger”.
Here is
a recent incident in which a Republican senator called Obama a “boy” and later apologized.
Dear Senator Obama:
On Saturday night I gave a speech in which I used a poor choice of words when discussing the national security policy positions of the Presidential candidates. I was quoted as saying "That boy's finger does not need to be on the button."
My poor choice of words is regrettable and was in no way meant to impugn you or your integrity. I offer my sincere apology to you and ask for your forgiveness.
Though we may disagree on many issues, I know that we share the goal of a prosperous, secure future for our nation. My comment has detracted from the dialogue that we should all be having on legitimate policy differences and in no way reflects the personal and professional respect I have for you.
Sincerely
Geoff Davis
You said - "
We have considered your complaint seriously because it can pose threat to our reputation"
That's exactly why I complained fearing no reprisal. Apart from Greg causing damage to me rotten apples of his kind will forever damage the reputation of our firm from inside by not adhering to the stated Diversity values of our firm, an exceptional statement coming from our CEO. But what good is it if it's just a showpiece, preached but not practiced. Please see final paragraphs of my
2nd letter to HR echoing this sentiment. Considering Indians particularly Hindus are significant in terms of demographics within the firm these incidents will definitely threaten the reputation of our firm amongst this section, if not all.
At the end of our discussion you said – “
There is nowhere you can be moved, so you have to continue to report to Greg”
Let's not put the cart before the horse. Lack of a solution should not be an excuse for not solving the problem, at least not this one. Worse it should not influence the analysis of the problem either. Everything should be based on the merits and nature and the gravity of my complaint. JPMC is a huge organization that in terms of mobility anything is possible.
Then you said – “
If you don’t report to him it will become a performance issue”
Now, that's clearly an absurd statement. This one simply does not make sense to me. In fact reporting to him will directly affect my performance, both in terms of reality and in perception. In reality from my side - because I will never be at peace with a person who is morally discredited, fallen and to whom I have zero respect. In perception from his side - because he being prejudiced will always view my performance with prejudiced lens only to "build a case" against me.
Is JPMC an equal opportunity employer as it says it is? Some people I have spoken to are of the opinion that since it’s in the business of making money with money, a pure financial firm, it can never truly be on par with GE, IBM, PG and such heavyweights when it comes to Diversity Empowerment and practicing stated Diversity Values. Making money and practicing values do not go together is their thought. I do not believe so.
Please respond. I have not received a single response to my letters to HR so far.
Regards,
BrownMan
“Building a workplace where differences are respected and valued is critical to our future. We have an amazing opportunity in front of us to build the best financial services company in the world. Achieving this depends on having the best people doing their best work. For us, the business case is simple: JPMorgan Chase is a place for talented people from all backgrounds and nationalities. Gender, race, sexual orientation, age and physical ability are just some of the kinds of differences that make people unique — and give us the diversity of perspective that will set us apart. We’re committed to ensuring that diversity remains a key priority...our collective diversity is our strength.” – Jamie Dimon, Chairman and CEO, JPMorgan Chase
