Decency is not something that can be decreed

Do you need at the University of Environmental Life Sciences anti-discrimination and  anti- mobbing measures and ones supporting equality?

– First of all, as a university, we have adopted the European The Charter for Researchers, therefore, all pro-equality actions and solutions are for us somewhat obvious. The Charter imposes a number of requirements on the universities that join it, including those concerning the prevention of discrimination, mobbing and harassment. The Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences has a number of legal solutions in this area, but we are still lacking in what we call good practices.

What does it mean ?

– I am talking about education in general. In fact, there has only been one biganti-mobbingtraining at our university, but we do not have any other activities or actions promoting good behaviour. What is more, we have it  guaranteed in our internal regulations that the university must guarantee gender balance, but at the same time the higher one goes in the broadly understood management and scientific structure hierarchy, the fewer women there are to be found. That is why several people came up with the idea of establishing the Commission for the Prevention of Discrimination.

And it was created at your request ?

– Yes, and I must stress that both the idea itself as well as  the commission's activities met with great enthusiasm and support from the entire Rector's body, headed by Professor Tadeusz Trziszka. Dr. Anna Serwotka-Suszczak, a very good scientist and a person who is extremely consistent and wise in her proposed ideas, became the chairperson. The Commission under her guidance is to develop the principles of the anti-discrimination standard at the university, and therefore to present proposals on anti-discrimination, violence and promotion of equal treatment, which would be included in the statute of the University of  Environmental and Life Sciences. And to a certain extent we have already done it. In the first chapter of the statute we have two very good recomendations, let me quote them now directly:

„guided by the beliefs of the inalienable, indivisible and universal human rights which at the same time constitute an effective tool for building a civil society, the university shall respect existing regulations upholding human rights, protecting against discrimination and violence, and strives to implement the highest standards in order to ensure equal treatment of everybody”
and
„in its personnel policy, the university shall be guided by the principles that are set out in the European Charter for Researchers, in particular, it aims to ensure representative gender balance in collegiate bodies and at managerial positions”

Equality is therefore guaranteed by the statute. Detailed solutions are still ahead of us, because in accordance with Act 2.0 we have a rather complicated electoral process ahead of us. Nevertheless, the indication is clear: all electoral bodies and committees will have to organize the electoral process in such a way that it is possible to ensure gender balance in the collegial bodies that we will choose.

Of course, this is not easy, it is a process, but I am convinced that we should achieve this balance, although looking at proportions, the most important thing is that among people with higher scientific qualifications there should be a greater number of women.

Gender parity?

– We're not talking about parities. Yes, we thought about them, but in the forums that discussed university regulations, they are arouse resistance so we have decided that we will not insist on them. Not only from observations of other countries, we know that the introduction of parity helps in equality policy. On the other hand, for example, in the Scandinavian countries that led the way in its introduction, until now, despite many years, no full parity could be achieved in the highest decision-making bodies.

Maybe the reason is the lack of a policy that would give women with a career path in science the opportunity to of realize themselves as mothers, too?

– This is definitely one of the reasons for this situation. Our committee's task is not only to work out its own solutions, but also to diagnose those situations  and areas where, speaking in colloquial terms, we are losing the statistics.

Which means?

– A woman -  scientist, at the level of an assistant professor, must decide how to organize her life, for example, how to divide time between family and academic career. This is a problem, however, associated with a certain family tradition and stereotypes, according to which the main person taking care of the child is the woman, and the man does not even know that he could also enter such a role.  I do not assume any bad will or reluctance here, it is simply a matter of the process that we as a society must go through. A process that is supposed to make us all aware that the work of a woman is just as valuable as that of a man. This is particularly important in Poland, where, as it turns out, the difference in the budgetary sphere between the labor of men and women is not so great, but the comparison of income from grants definitely falls to the detriment of women. Even more, research shows that grants are also easier to obtain for men. At the same time, in the European Union, we observe great care for compliance with the principle of gender equality, which sometimes results in the fact that a professor applying in a competition to enter a university body loses to a professor - because gender balance is important. This was the case of, for example, Professor Jarosław Bosy, who at the same time supported us very much in his efforts to introduce anti-discrimination points in the statute.

Let us return for a moment to those “discrepant’’ statistics.

– First of all, we wanted to identify situations that are critical for equality. One of them is undoubtedly the issue of internships and requirements for postdocs, and thus building a career path. These are very difficult matters, because the scientific career path when it comes to women is longer due to natural breaks for childbirth. We talked for a long time about what solutions to adopt. In our opinion, it is not possible to introduce uniform, rigid rules at the moment. The research department in its present shape and under Professor Jarosław Bosy is very supportive of the flexible approach to fulfilling the requirement of internship abroad by female scientists. This is because we agree on this fundamental issue: an internship abroad in our geopolitical reality is necessary to build an international scientific career. We are still too weak partners to build a career in one place.

Of course, the more internationalized we are, the more laboratories will be open to scientists from around the world, but this is still our goal, not reality. The statistics are conspicuous, our papers created in cooperation with  foreign partners are better cited for me, and this in turn translates into the ranking of faculties and the entire university. Therefore, we also realize that it is at this point of their professional career that we must support women. This support really means a change in mentality, also of their partners -  their  openness to the division of duties for instance. This is also support on the part of the university . The issue of creating workplace nurseries and kindergartens is still recurring. It would be good if they were finally established, although it is not so simple, and it would be even better if such a nursery or kindergarten was open until 8 p.m. , not 4 p.m. as usual – as it is  sometimes necessary to stay in a laboratory until evening hours.

A few weeks ago, a report was presented discussing the scale of mobbing and harassment at Polish universities. Its resonance is shocking.

– We have not yet talked about this report, but we all know that there are problems , and they are  serious ones. And they do not only concern Polish universities. I participate in meetings of the European Women Rectors Association (EWORA), during which women-rectors from all over Europe talk about gender balance, participation of women in  university management bodies, but also about all matters related to moral and ethical issues. I know that sexual harassment exists  even at best universities in the world. We should talk about it and prevent such abuses, and therefore it is so important to introduce a code of good practice. On the other hand, however, we both know that decency cannot be decreed.

We have the ethics committee at the university and anti-mobbing ordinance of the rector, is it not enough?

– Probably not. I will read an excerpt from the anti-discrimination standard:

“the impact of social standards seems to be particularly important, beliefs about what is right and wrong. Prejudices are expressed much more frequently in relation to social groups in communities that consent to them, which is why so important are clear messages of lack of consent  to unequal treatment, both by authorities and by all community members’’.

In fact, it is all about consent or lack of consent to certain behaviours. And this is one of the most important elements of building a decent community.

Can you imagine a situation in which  an eminent scientist loses his position as head of a cathedral or institute because he has harassed  his assistants or he is a mobber?

– At the moment it is extremely difficult, also because the process in which we can demonstrate that something bad has happened is very difficult and there is no one to turn to for help. In our university, if someone feels mobbed or discriminated, they can lodge a complaint with the rector. We have developed procedures of anti-mobbing proceedings, but what  I noticed is that we need to make the incident plausible and appoint witnesses. And we have also included in the anti-discrimination code something that is called the burden of proof:

“in the event of an accusation of discrimination, the defendant e.g. the university will be obliged to provide evidence, that there was no worse treatment took place’’

So we came to a shift in emphasis. It is not the complainant who has to provide evidence of unequal treatment, but the university is to explain that everything was legal. The principle of reversal of the burden of proof applies, which means that a person who has experienced discrimination is obliged to substantiate, and not prove, the breach of the principle of equal treatment. In practice, this “presenting it as probable’’ may consist in presenting a credible version of events, while proof would have to involve, for example, witness statements. You asked about mobbing - this is just one form of discrimination. There is a whole catalogue of discriminatory behaviors that are not mobbing, and which undoubtedly occur at universities. And now, returning to the question of whether such a person could be removed from university ... The thing is that we do not have mechanisms in place that would allow the injured person to claim his or her rights and to make it clear that something bad has happened. That is why at committee meetings we decided that there should be a person of public trust at the university. The mere fact of calling someone like him or her would be a signal to the environment and a deterrent for those who exceed the limits of decency.

And you have no fear that the activities of the committee will bring about negative emotions? In Łódź, after the establishment of such a body at one of the universities, its members experienced incredible amount of  hate.

“If someone speaks in public and makes a statement,
even jokingly, that is e.g. sexist or racist in tone you have to
react and clearly say, "I don't like it. I don’t like such behavour’’

– I don't have any concerns. Discrimination can affect anyone, both women and men. That is why balance is so important. We talked about this in meetings of a similar committee operating at the Lower Silesian Business Centre Club. Not only for scientists, but also for business, it is obvious that the balance of gender is necessary to make it work well. We have enough evidence that the presence of women on company boards is an added value that affects the quality of the work and therefore the performance of these companies. For me, however, the basic principle should be decency. If the environment shows that it is not appropriate to do something or speak about something, then it will be clear to everyone in the environment that certain things are just not right to be done. This principle is the only way to articulate it clearly and loudly. If someone speaks publicly about an issue, even as a joke, which, for example, in a sexist or racist tone, then it is necessary to react and speak clearly: "I do not like such behaviour. Speaking back of good manners, we will be able to say that the environment has managed to deal with the problem on its own.

This is called good education.

– Of course. Generally speaking, we see that changing standards of behaviour have a negative impact  on what we call good education. Therefore, there is  big acceptance on the part of  the rector's authorities and a very big understanding of the actions and measures that are inevitable to take place.

One could say that aspiring to the world's centers is forcing changes?

– We are a little bit idealizing these world centers. There is no Sevres model here, unfortunately. I mentioned the meetings of women rectors in which I participate. They talk about inequalities as well, about too few women in the management of universities, and about discrimination. In Europe there are also far fewer women among professors. Interestingly, however, there is no such a problem at all in 'young' universities - the people who create them simply know that gender balance is something obvious. As you can see, it is therefore a question of mentality and social context. And it is enough to realize that inequalities hamper the good development of society, regardless of whether we are dealing with academic circles or any other community. Hence our vision, in which the anti-discrimination standard should be introduced in the various fields of professional and social activity of each of us.

Katarzyna Kaczorowska

POWER at UPWR – comprehensive university development programme
Agreement No. POWR.03.05.00-00-Z082/17-00

Commission for the Prevention of Discrimination at Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences

Professor Anna Chełmońska-Soyta, Vice-Rector for Innovation and Business Cooperation:

– Equality policy is important not only at universities. Inequalities hamper the development of societies, and thus of science and the economy. That is why the Anti-Discrimination Commission was established at our university.

Since 2016 Vice-rector of the Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences. Since 2003, she has been working simultaneously at the Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Wrocław, where he heads the Laboratory of Reproductive Immunology. Member of the II Faculty of Biological and Agricultural Sciences; Committee of Veterinary Sciences and Reproductive Biology PAS. She has supervised six doctor al students to a successful completion.