Re: Have a little think
I had a little think and I'll start with bully is bad and needs to stopped but does a poorly done report help in anyway? People who do not care will just pick apart the report and dismiss it.
I am not dismissing the report I just have some problems with it, they need to do better if the problems are going to be face and with some work progress can be made to sorting it out. Sorry if I word it badly but I am a little dyslexics, so while I know what I want to say it may come out wrongly.
>>In a survey carried out by the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS) last year of over 650 people in the field, 44% of respondents had suffered bullying and harassment in the workplace within the preceding 12 months.
Sounds very bad but just how many people responded to the survey. When I see percentage rather than numbers I am suspicious to how many did respond and how representative the survey is. It could be a true picture of how it is, the number who responded could be low due to people seeing it a being a pointless exercise and not worth their time so it could be even worse.
Key initial findings show:
Disabled, and Black and minority ethnic astronomers and geophysicists are 40% more likely to be bullied than their non-disabled and White colleagues respectively.
Either this is an odd grouping of people in which case it should be two points not one and if it is two different group I find it odd they both have the same bullied ratio.
Would it be better to be clear and say:
Disabled astronomers and geophysicists are 40% more likely to be bullied than their non-disabled colleagues.
Black and minority ethnic astronomers and geophysicists are 40% more likely to be bullied than their White colleagues.
Or could it be that what they are saying is:
Black and minority ethnic astronomers and geophysicists who are disabled are 40% more likely to be bullied than their non-disabled and White colleagues.
Women and non-binary people in the field are 50% more likely than men to be bullied and harassed.
Women and non-binary people a rather odd grouping or where they grouped together to make the numbers look even worse, but given that the total of the two groups is 50% then if they where listed individually then the number would still be high. Or it it that group is made up largely of non-binary and that does not fit what O’Brien says later in the report.
50% of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer astronomers and geophysicists were bullied in the last 12 months, and 12% of bisexual astronomers reported being bullied at least once a week.
How many astronomers and geophysicists who are not on that list where bullied in the last 12 months.
O’Brien said: “This is the first time data like these have been collected in our field. It’s bleak, sadly somewhat unsurprising, but is unequivocal evidence to show we need to improve the workplace culture in academia. We have a well-reported diversity problem in STEM and this does nothing to help. Women and minorities are feeling pushed out.”
While the data does indicate that Women and minorities and the point that is not made that they are compared bulling between different groups and white men for their to be a percentage increase there has to be some bulling of white men and quite a lot of it consider how many white men are in this field. I would say that " We have a well-reported diversity problem in STEM and this does nothing to help. Women and minorities are feeling pushed out.” Should rather be "We have a well-reported bulling problem in STEM and we need to stop this. People are not being protected and are being pushed out.”
The tone of the report for me is bullies are all able bodied white men, would have it been hard for them to indicate who is bulling who?