I hope Vergil Noble or someone else in the know will answer this one...
on a previous occasion I asked a series of simple questions that the voters
might need to know to make an informed decision. Here we go again.
I'll do my best...VENoble
How many complaints does the SOPA grievance coordinator handle per annum?
Answer: There is no typical year, and the workload varies considerably.
More complaints seem to come out of California and Texas in proportion to
their greater numbers of certified members. During the two years I was the
grievance coordinator, I probably received about 8 formal complaints in
writing, but I fielded dozens of informal telephone inquiries--often
several a week--from concerned individuals curious about whether something
might be a violation and what is necessary to bring a complaint. Some
merely wanted to give a "heads up" about dubious behavior, but SOPA is not
equipped to run investigations independent of a formal complaint. Others
said that they would monitor the suspect situation with an eye toward
developing a case (SOPA allows complaints to be brought any time within
three years of the alleged violation). Most of the written complaints I
received, as indicated in my earlier posting, could not be dealt with since
the accused were not certified. Had they been SOPA members, I would have
been much busier. Obviously if the goal of the ROPA initiative is to
increase the numbers of professionals subject to the Code of Ethics, one
would expect the workload to grow proportionate to the Registry--more
people subject to the process, more potential for complaints.
How many successful resolutions of said cases are there per annum?
Answer: Depends on what you mean by "successful." As I also indicated
earlier, in my view SOPA's greatest successes occur when a solution can be
worked out without the necessity of an investigation and formal hearing.
The Japanese, I believe, have a saying, "Fix the problem, not the blame."
If some kind of alleged deficiency, like a substandard report, can be
corrected by getting the parties in communication is it still neecssary to
bring the offender up on charges? Sometimes, the mere threat of a
grievance can move a well-intended, but perhaps professionally
irresponsible person to meet their obligations.
I should also point out that SOPA does not get involved if the alleged
problem is simply one of business ethics or cases that are properly within
the perview of civil or criminal courts. If someone is accused of double
billing on a contract, for example, that is not a violation of
archeological ethics--it is an illegal business practice and should be
prosecuted as such.
When problems are within SOPA's legitimate authority and cannot be settled
without a hearing, it is extremely unlikely that there will be general
satisfaction with the outcome, but success depends largely on the skill,
temperment, judgment, and attitude of the incumbent grievance coordinator.
Some cases could have been handled better, I suppose, but botching a case
is rare (bear in mind that grievance coordinators are not only human, they
are archeologists with full-time day jobs--not law school graduates). Of
course, if the accused is ultimately censured, admonished, or expelled, he
or she is bound to feel ill-used and doubtless will say that the system is
unsound. On the other hand, if the person isn't sent packing, SOPA may be
characterized as weak or ineffective by those who brought the complaint.
The fact is that not every offense merits expulsion; some offenses clearly
are more serious than others.
If you mean, "how many cases are closed," all but one of mine were
completed within my term of office. One pending case that came up near the
end of my term was turned over to my successor for the sake of ensuring
full attention to detail and continuity. By the way, if there is an
apparent conflict of interest where the grievance coordinator may be
perceived as being biased one way or another, the president appoints a
temporary GC to handle that particular case. I myself received such an
appointment several years ago when one of my predecessors recused himself
from considering the complaint.
How many individuals are kicked out of SOPA per annum for ethics violations?
Response: This beside the point, and the reasons should be clear from my
statements above. Only the most serious offenses merit exulsion, and if
none of that caliber are submitted in a year no one will be kicked out.
Again, in my view it is more desirable to work with the parties to find a
reasonable solution, perhaps educate those who own up to their misdeeds on
where they strayed from the path, and keep some measure of influence over
their future actions. After all, once someone is expelled from SOPA there
is virtually no way within the profession to touch them again, and since
SOPA certification is not generally required to do research no problem will
have been solved. Nevertheless, certain acts demand expulsion, and that
most severe disciplinary action has been used in at least three cases that
I can recall. Someone with a better memory and earlier connections with
SOPA (I've been a member only since 1984) may be able to correct me on this
point. Hester?
We the voters don't need more "speechifying" here just some cold statistics
on how big a problem ROPA is going to try and fix for all that money.
Speech: In the best of all possible worlds there would be no need for
ROPA--or SOPA, for that matter. But the fact is that all of us are
capable of acts that at least have the appearance of wrong doing.
Grievances are not only a means to discipline those who are truly culpable,
but also a means to absolve those who may be falsely accused or guilty of
nothing more than professional inexperience.
I believe that Twain also had something to say about "lies, damn lies, and
statistics." They can be used, I fear, to argue any side of an issue while
proving nothing but the ability to count. The ROPA proposal rests largely
on differences of philosophy and faith. If, at the end of the day, you
still think SOPA is misguided in purpose and ineffectual in practice, then
there probably is no earthly reason why you should think its potential
expansion under a new registry is a good idea. On the other hand, if you
have come to see SOPA in a more favorable light and agree with the ideals
it represents, then I should think that support for the ROPA proposal makes
sense. It would be entirely inconsistent for me to have worked so hard
these past two years in the cause of implementing the SOPA disciplinary
procedures only to reject their potential expansion now. My biases should
be clear to anyone, but I do not expect everyone to agree with me.
So how big is that elephant?
Not near big enough in my view.
"Get your facts first, then you can distort'm as you please." Mark Twain
Walk in Beauty... Terry
"Walk softy and carry a big stick." -- T. Roosevelt
|
