dealing with volunteers who have been really offensive?
does any shop have a process for dealing with volunteers who have stepped far over the line? to the point that the volunteer had to take a break from the shop? and then the volunteer wanted to come back?
let's say that this volunteer, although a very dependable one, makes other shop participants feel so uncomfortable that they avoid coming to the shop when they know that this volunteer will be there.
how do you reconcile your politics with your feelings when that volunteer personally wronged you repeatedly in and outside of the shop?
two wheels good, rachael
We're sort of dealing with something similar like that right now though we aren't beyond finding a reasonable solution. We considered getting an external mediator but instead are having someone familiar with but not closely involved in our collective try to moderate and come to a clear undertanding about expectations for behaviour and attitudes.
Graham
rachael spiewak wrote:
does any shop have a process for dealing with volunteers who have stepped far over the line? to the point that the volunteer had to take a break from the shop? and then the volunteer wanted to come back?
let's say that this volunteer, although a very dependable one, makes other shop participants feel so uncomfortable that they avoid coming to the shop when they know that this volunteer will be there.
how do you reconcile your politics with your feelings when that volunteer personally wronged you repeatedly in and outside of the shop?
two wheels good, rachael
Thethinktank mailing list Thethinktank@lists.bikecollectives.org http://lists.bikecollectives.org/listinfo.cgi/thethinktank-bikecollectives.o...
Dear All,
I think that it's great have a mediator with your volunteer as Graham suggested. On the whole, though, we are trying to make sure that we have clear expectations before anyone starts as a volunteer. This may seem overly bureaucratic to many of you, but if your agency gets to be a certain size then the people helping out won't just be from your close circle of friends or acquaintances. At NBW we have eventually attracted people with whom we have a hard time communicating or who can't behave in a way that is appropriate for the program. The best thing is to be well prepared.
Have clear volunteer job descriptions, that spell out in detail how to do things, what is required and, if necessary, what volunteers should not do. This last part is important because many of your volunteers will be highly motivated and smart people who might take the initiative in ways that could ultimately be harmful to your program. Volunteers should be aware that if they have a great idea that we are always ready and willing to talk to them about it before they do it.
Provide orientation and training
Provide a written volunteer manual. We do this, but we don't yet have a code of conduct for people to sign... we soon will. This is especially important for youth programs. Rachael mentioned people that have "stepped far over the line." A volunteer manual can show people exactly where "the line" is. If someone isn't working out it doesn't become something personal between any of your staff members or any particular volunteer and the person who is behaving unacceptably.
A thing I always tell people is that NBW is a particular context, and it's not that I have a moral objection to certain behaviors (drinking alcohol and swearing, for instance) but that in this context it's not OK because we want the place to be welcoming and safe for everyone including children and their parents. What I'm saying is that although we don't have a written procedure for working with volunteers who are troublesome, the thing I always try to do is move discussion away from personalities to what is good for the agency.
Here is one of our fave links
http://www.energizeinc.com/art.html
Good luck!
Andy
Graham Stewart wrote:
We're sort of dealing with something similar like that right now though we aren't beyond finding a reasonable solution. We considered getting an external mediator but instead are having someone familiar with but not closely involved in our collective try to moderate and come to a clear undertanding about expectations for behaviour and attitudes.
Graham
rachael spiewak wrote:
does any shop have a process for dealing with volunteers who have stepped far over the line? to the point that the volunteer had to take a break from the shop? and then the volunteer wanted to come back?
let's say that this volunteer, although a very dependable one, makes other shop participants feel so uncomfortable that they avoid coming to the shop when they know that this volunteer will be there.
how do you reconcile your politics with your feelings when that volunteer personally wronged you repeatedly in and outside of the shop?
two wheels good, rachael
I can't speak for everyone on our collective, but I've personally experienced a fair range of unacceptable behavior from our volunteers and shop users.
For collective members, we have an internal process written into our bylaws for discussion removal if all else fails - http://www.austinyellowbike.org/about_ybp.htm (see link at bottom of page, currently not functioning though...). The only problems I remember us dealing with are unfriendliness of shop coordinators and the resale of donated bikes and parts for personal profit.
The "policies" below are very informal as we haven't finalized our shop manual:
The minor problems I have experienced with volunteers are them mis-informing other shop users on aspects of bicycle maintenance, use of facilities without donating time or money in return or not finishing up personal bike repairs within shop hours and causing shop coordinator to stay late. In these cases, we let the volunteer know that there is a problem with their behavior and if it happens repeatedly, they are banned from the shop for a month (by collective consensus) and can only return if they come to the next collective meeting after the ban expires and promises not to repeat their problem behavior. If it still continues, they are banned indefinitely.
Another minor issue is the misuse of shop time by community service volunteers. We can't supervise them the whole time, so we let them know that we are a laid back place to do community service hours, better than most, but if they abuse that by not working we will not sign off on their hours at the end of the shop. This is quite effective.
The major problems I have seen are sexual harassment, threats of violence, panhandling, theft from the shop or use of the shop by known bike thieves. None of these behaviors are tolerated and shop coordinators are free to remove and ban indefinitely anyone doing this. We try to keep a photographic record of these offenders to display in our shops.
Simon Yellow Bike Project, Austin, TX http://www.austinyellowbike.org
rachael spiewak wrote:
does any shop have a process for dealing with volunteers who have stepped far over the line? to the point that the volunteer had to take a break from the shop? and then the volunteer wanted to come back?
let's say that this volunteer, although a very dependable one, makes other shop participants feel so uncomfortable that they avoid coming to the shop when they know that this volunteer will be there.
how do you reconcile your politics with your feelings when that volunteer personally wronged you repeatedly in and outside of the shop?
two wheels good, rachael
Thethinktank mailing list Thethinktank@lists.bikecollectives.org http://lists.bikecollectives.org/listinfo.cgi/thethinktank-bikecollectives.o...
Two questions: Why is panhandling a major problem? How do you decide if someone is a bike thief?
Graham
Simon Z wrote:
The major problems I have seen are sexual harassment, threats of violence, panhandling, theft from the shop or use of the shop by known bike thieves. None of these behaviors are tolerated and shop coordinators are free to remove and ban indefinitely anyone doing this. We try to keep a photographic record of these offenders to display in our shops.
Josh Muir here from the bike church in Santa Cruz on conflict-
Primarily, the first step has got to be for the collective to discuss
the behavior that's making folks feel uncomfortable. communication
can either create the clarity for people to adjust their behavior and
their experience of the (offensive) behavior, or it can trigger what
I think of as being the actual conflict. People have a hard time
delivering and receiving criticism. With practice, groups that go
through the process of sharing criticism and even experience the
"conflict" process i think get better at it. I have learned to let
go of some amount of dread of conflicts, and have learned a lot about
my own reactions in that situation. When the strain is too much for
the org. and attempts to discuss issues and establish goals for
understanding and mutual trust only lead to dead-end or hurtful
discussions, seek outside mediation. generally the sooner the better
cause collectives can get quite disrupted by such events.
despite our wealth of of experience with interpersonal conflict
within the collective, we are still not as prepared with a mediation/
conflict resolution process as we could be (which I believe to be
really important). We had 3-year conflict during which time power
was too concentrated and finally outside hired mediators gave a
growing collective the clarity and strength to make hard choices
(kick out an offending member who was carrying 75% of the collective
work load). More recently, conflicts have simmered and then
exploded- the collective members offered whatever they were willing
to share about the issue and set in motion steps for in -house and
then outside mediation if needed- the result has been the departure
of one of the parties (in one case a core member who over-stepped
his bounds left on his own(left town), and in another one party in a
conflict left rather than go through processing with the group)
It is something that we all deal with- how to be diverse and get
along- how to communicate without pushing buttons and how to not
react to your buttons being pushed. I have found that if people are
encouraged to feel empowered and speak clearly to each other without
imposing themselves, growth actually happens for those who stick it
out (and i suppose, those who are invited to stick it out, because it
is the collective's prerogative to decide who they're to work with)
It is super stressful. it's important.
and how DO you decide if someone's a thief? or even harder, how do
you feel empowered to make that decision and keep someone out of the
shop, especially when your only one mechanic working one day/wk in a
twelve member collective?
On Aug 24, 2007, at 1:24 PM, Graham Stewart wrote:
Two questions: Why is panhandling a major problem? How do you decide if someone is a bike thief?
Graham
Simon Z wrote:
The major problems I have seen are sexual harassment, threats of violence, panhandling, theft from the shop or use of the shop by
known bike thieves. None of these behaviors are tolerated and shop coordinators are free to remove and ban indefinitely anyone doing this. We try to keep a photographic record of these offenders to display in our shops.
Thethinktank mailing list Thethinktank@lists.bikecollectives.org http://lists.bikecollectives.org/listinfo.cgi/thethinktank- bikecollectives.org
Joshua Muir joshua@santacruzhub.org
Frances Cycles -- francescycles.com Handbuilt cycling framesets Touring, Track, Raod,Cross, and cycletrucks for hauling any distance
The Bicycle Church Collective Community Self-Service Cycle Repair 3pm to 7pm everyday except Sunday 703 Pacific Ave (enter on Spruce St) Santa Cruz, CA 95060 (831) 425-2453
Hi All,
I'd answer this by saying that it's clear that panhandling is seen as a problem at Simon's program. I'd like to see this list be about us helping solve problems for each other rather than implying expectations of a particular moral or political stance. I'd rather hear you say "My program likes panhandlers because..." because then you'd be enlightening me, I dare say all of us have known people who have stolen bikes, and we all know how we knew they had stolen a bike. I think it's OK for people to keep out thieves, and I'd go as far as to say that if we were to keep out someone who isn't a thief now and again it could still be best. As Mr. Spock once said, "sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one."
Peace,
Andy
Graham Stewart wrote:
Two questions: Why is panhandling a major problem? How do you decide if someone is a bike thief?
Graham
Simon Z wrote:
The major problems I have seen are sexual harassment, threats of violence, panhandling, theft from the shop or use of the shop by known bike thieves. None of these behaviors are tolerated and shop coordinators are free to remove and ban indefinitely anyone doing this. We try to keep a photographic record of these offenders to display in our shops.
Thethinktank mailing list Thethinktank@lists.bikecollectives.org http://lists.bikecollectives.org/listinfo.cgi/thethinktank-bikecollectives.o...
interesting points. I feel like I should answer about theft and begging in the context of my experiences at YBP in Austin. Panhandling is a major problem at one of our shops due to it's location. On one level, panhandling takes up our time, volunteer's time, disrupts shops, makes shop users feel uneasy, pressured and in some cases threatened. On another level our project is not a charity. We don't give anything away for free - volunteers donate their time in return for learning skills or earning a bike because we believe in empowering people to help themselves - this is the solidarity not charity model:
*Solidarity Not Charity *(from http://www.treasurecitythrift.org)*
Charity alleviates the symptoms caused by an unjust system but doesn't challenge the root problems, and it often puts those providing the charity in a position of power OVER those who it 'helps' with benevolence or feeling good for helping out.
Solidarity, on the other hand, implies that our struggles are intertwined. I support you because we all benefit from it and I hope that you will support me also. Solidarity can challenge the current systems while still providing essential service work.
So for example: we can feed the homeless (which is important) or we challenge the economic, political, and social systems that cause homelessness through real education, real jobs or real job training, and decent housing, or we can do both at the same time.
Charity and solidarity are NOT mutually exclusive concepts. It really comes down to the analysis and how you administer the programs. In the 1960's churches had fed people for years, but when the Black Panther Party, the Young Lords, or the Brown Berets began similar programs combined with their analysis and actions that challenged the systems, the service work became deeper in solidarity with those who were historically marginalized in our society.
Charity alone is a relief valve for guilt from not having to challenge oppression. Solidarity says we must challenge this system and provide for people so we can make the world a better place for all.
As for the question "how do you know who's a bike thief?", the simple answer is that those we ban are people who have been seen or caught by us stealing bicycles around town, sometimes multiple times. These aren't criminal masterminds but opportunity thieves, transient drug addicts who roam the neighborhoods begging and scoping out houses for stuff to steal. The next question I anticipate is "Why don't you call the police?". Well, if we can get bikes back, we do so ourselves, but most of the bikes are sold quickly on the street or traded for drugs. Calling the police is pointless, it's not high priority and jail time unlikely for a single bike etc, etc. We don't have a solution, but we know from experience that the police are not that solution. You won't find many Austin cyclists with good police-related experiences.
Simon
Yellow Bike Project
Andy Dyson wrote:
Hi All,
I'd answer this by saying that it's clear that panhandling is seen as a problem at Simon's program. I'd like to see this list be about us helping solve problems for each other rather than implying
expectations of a particular moral or political stance. I'd rather hear you say "My program likes panhandlers because..." because then you'd be enlightening me, I dare say all of us have known people who have stolen bikes, and we all know how we knew they had stolen a bike. I think it's OK for people to keep out thieves, and I'd go as far as to say that if we were to keep out someone who isn't a thief now and again it could still be best. As Mr. Spock once said, "sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one."Peace,
Andy
Graham Stewart wrote:
Two questions: Why is panhandling a major problem? How do you decide if someone is a bike thief?
Graham
Simon Z wrote:
The major problems I have seen are sexual harassment, threats of violence, panhandling, theft from the shop or use of the shop by known bike thieves. None of these behaviors are tolerated and shop coordinators are free to remove and ban indefinitely anyone doing this. We try to keep a photographic record of these offenders to display in our shops.
Thethinktank mailing list Thethinktank@lists.bikecollectives.org http://lists.bikecollectives.org/listinfo.cgi/thethinktank-bikecollectives.o...
-- Andrew C. Dyson Executive Director Neighborhood Bike Works Increasing opportunities for youth through bicycling
Check our Web Site: http://www.neighborhoodbikeworks.org
Neighborhood Bike Works 3916 Locust Walk, Philadelphia, PA 19104
Office: (215) 386-0316 Cell: (215) 873-6695 FAX: (215) 386-7288
Thethinktank mailing list Thethinktank@lists.bikecollectives.org http://lists.bikecollectives.org/listinfo.cgi/thethinktank-bikecollectives.o...
participants (5)
-
Andy Dyson -
Graham Stewart -
joshua -
rachael spiewak -
Simon Z