One rotten apple can spoil the whole barrel, and when it comes to sexual misconduct, the design profession appears to have several rotten apples. As we are beginning to see, a single practitioner of rotten activities can ruin the name and even legacy of an entire firm.
I became interested in the topic of sexual misconduct when I was trying to understand why many women were dropping out of the design field within their first 10 years of practice. These were young and talented women who had excelled in architecture school. They were also vulnerable. Recent headlines have made it clear how prevalent sexual misconduct can be when powerful men hold the keys to a person’s career and advancement. There have been too few consequences and too much looking away.
Sexual misconduct encompasses a wide array of activities. Some are criminal behaviors, while others do not rise to the level of criminality, but are still legally actionable. Some behaviors are not actionable in and of themselves, but can contribute to a hostile work environment. However, none of these activities should be confused with issues relating to equity or discrimination.
The AIA Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct has a prohibition on discrimination, Rule 1.401: “Members shall not discriminate in their professional activities on the basis of race, religion, gender, national origin, age, disability, or sexual orientation.” In addition, the AIA has published a stream of statements referencing its Code of Ethics, denouncing sexual misconduct in the workplace, announcing the development of a guide for equitable practices, and outlining future actions to eliminate sexual misconduct in the profession.
Sexual misconduct is a men’s problem, and only the men can resolve it, because the men have the power—for now.
Sexual misconduct is a men’s problem, and only the men can resolve it, because the men have the power—for now.
I write about sexual misconduct as it is defined legally. It includes sexual assault and battery, which is against the law. It is a crime. You can go to jail. Sexual harassment is the basis of a lawsuit. Retaliation is against the law. If a firm retaliates against an individual, then the firm itself can be in trouble with the law.
I describe below how I would like the men of the AIA to respond.
First, the AIA should insert into its Code of Ethics a prohibition explicitly against specifically defined sexual misconducts—the term for the whole category of sexual misconducts—and add the specific legal definitions (see “Definitions of Sexual Misconducts” below) as some actions are crimes that could result in jail time or lead to lengthy litigation. It should be noted that each state has different regulations in their penal and labor codes, and federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) regulations add another layer of protection from harassment, discrimination, and retaliation.
Definitions of Sexual Misconducts
Sexual assault and battery encompasses willful and malicious acts made with the intent to cause fear, intimidation, or abuse. Actions may include rape, attempted rape, sexual comments, sexual banter, sexual exposures, sexual advances, stalking, requests for sexual favors, sexual touching. All are a crime and a basis for civil liability suit or prison time.
Sexual harassment occurs when the perpetrator uses power and position to coerce sexual favors in academic or workplace settings. In addition to incurring the potential for the criminal and civil claims above, federal and state EEO laws apply [1]. Laws provide redress against both managers and employers for allowing these activities to occur and or continue. Additionally, claims under employment law may apply.
Retaliation occurs when a perpetrator uses power and position to negatively impact an individualu2019s working conditions because of a complaint of assault or harassment. Both federal and state EEO laws [2] forbid retaliation when it comes to any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, transfers, other terms or conditions of employment, and reputational damage. Retaliation can include any defamation that hurts the character, reputation, or career of an employee who makes a complaint, including statements of disrespect, a dismissive attitude, and verbal and written debasing and denigrating attacks in social media or elsewhere. An employee or job applicant is protected by federal and state law from retaliation regardless of whether their underlying charges are proven true or false.
[1] Each of these Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) laws prohibits retaliation and related conduct: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), Title V of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act (Rehabilitation Act), the Equal Pay Act (EPA), and Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA).
[2]Supra.
Second, the AIA should explicitly outline the punishment for those found guilty of sexual misconduct. For example, it can require training, publicly censure architects, and strip them of all Institute honors and awards. If a crime is found to have been committed, the AIA should revoke membership and the use of AIA after one’s name.
Third, the AIA should define a process to adjudicate claims.
Fourth, the AIA should take the lead in urging the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) and all 54 state- and territorial-licensing boards to act on sexual misconduct. The AIA cannot revoke the license of an architect, but it has the ear of the organizations that can. NCARB and the licensing boards can also adopt statements prohibiting sexual misconduct, require training as part of maintaining licensure, institute a fine structure based on the severity or number of violations, or, in case of a crime, revoke the person’s license to practice architecture.
Finally, the AIA should encourage firms to find ways to not only stop sexual misconduct, but also to support and retain architects who have been affected by any form of sexual misconduct, including that by clients or contractors.
[M]any who have been the victim of sexual misconduct in the workplace do not want to draw attention to the situation.
As news accounts have confirmed, many who have been the victim of sexual misconduct in the workplace do not want to draw attention to the situation, file complaints, hire attorneys, make formal charges, or risk retaliation. So they opt to leave their firms and, in some cases, the profession, thus contributing to architecture’s pipeline problem.
Indeed, one rotten apple can create a toxic workplace culture of harassment and an atmosphere of discomfort and instability, increase employee attrition, and cause a firm reputational and financial harm. Sexual misconduct also hurts the public image of our entire profession.
Let’s get rid of the rotten apples.
Read the AIA’s response to this article, “Emily Grandstaff-Rice and the AIA on Sexual Misconduct in Architecture,” which appeared alongside this article in the June 2018 issue of ARCHITECT. Read the response by the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards’ CEO, Michael J. Armstrong, entitled “Here’s How Architectural Licensing Boards Can Uphold Ethical Practice.”
Editor’s note: We regularly publish opinion columns that we think would be of service to our readers. The views and conclusions from these authors are not necessarily those of ARCHITECT magazine nor of the American Institute of Architects.
