The Ends Don’t Justify the Means

Sex in the workplace is a risky proposition at best. Between employees with different status positions, sexual relations are even less wise. When unwelcome or coerced, workplace sex is also illegal. While there’s room to debate whether Tooke acted illegally or broke workplace rules (I don’t think he did) by having consensual sex with a subordinate and supporting her professional advancement, there’s no disagreement that doing so showed very poor judgment. Because Tooke hasn’t been Chief long enough to know whether he’d be missed, I’m ambivalent about his continued tenure.

I’m more concerned with the collateral damage the retired Southern regional forester has done to the government’s confidential system for resolving sexual harassment and other employee-related conflicts and complaints. Ten years ago, the regional forester was Tooke’s superior, as far above him as he was above the employee he was sleeping with. She learned the facts of the Tooke affair, including the disciplinary action taken (a verbal reprimand — not good enough in her view) in the course of her official duties. The fact that Tooke received a reprimand at all is a confidential personnel matter. The fact that the Forest Service investigated Tooke’s sexual activities is a confidential personnel matter. Personnel information of this type is protected by law from disclosure. Whether retired or not, the regional forester had no right to disclose this confidential information to a U.S. Senator. That she could face criminal prosecution or civil damages for doing so is her brief, not mine.

It’s not just Tooke who has been harmed by the regional forester’s zeal to punish a Forest Service bad boy. The “young lady” she expresses concern for has had her privacy violated, too. The “young lady” did not ask to be a pawn in the regional forester’s #metoo tell-all. The “young lady” did not seek to out her former lover, nor did she claim harassment or harm. The government, and its agents (whether retired or not), are barred statutorily and constitutionally (4th Amendment) from investigating her intimate sexual relations or disclosing those facts to a politician or news media.

In her zeal to get Tooke, the regional forester has damaged the cause she claims to believe in. She has impeached the credibility of the Forest Service’s solemn promise that every employee’s personal and confidential information will remain secret — not spread all over tabloid pages, the halls of Congress, or this blog.

I await willieboat007’s response.

12 thoughts on “The Ends Don’t Justify the Means”

    • I think most people agree on some things and disagree on other things. For reasons mostly associated with gaining power, there are those of us who would like to put us in camps where everyone agrees on everything. Progressives , Republicans, environmentalists, loggers and so on. I think that keeps us from seeing the richness and complexity of the human soul, experiences and values, and is absolutely and essentially bad for public policy. That’s why this blog is my resistance without the hashtag. PS apologies if that sounded pulpit-esque.

      Reply
      • Even though there was sarcasm in my response to Andy’s post, since I whole heartedly agree with him -this time, I appreciate your response too.

        Reply
  1. We can’t have something everyone agrees on …

    Balancing individual privacy and public right to know is always difficult, and personnel policies skew heavily towards privacy. But maybe now is a good time to reconsider policies that help perpetuate behavior that is no longer acceptable.

    We also all know of hiring decisions that were made for apparently or arguably “non-merit” reasons. In my experience, the Forest Service could do a better job of explaining both its policies and their application regarding what is “merit.” (This is a whole nuther topic, but there was some overlap here.)

    Reply
  2. Maybe part of the current problem is that the “vetting process” was not inclusive enough. Maybe administrations considering appointing Chiefs should have an anonymous place for folks to email serious issues about candidates. Maybe this should be the case for political appointees as well.

    Reply
  3. “I’m more concerned with the collateral damage the retired Southern regional forester has done to the government’s confidential system for resolving sexual harassment and other employee-related conflicts and complaints. Ten years ago, the regional forester was Tooke’s superior, as far above him as he was above the employee he was sleeping with. She learned the facts of the Tooke affair, including the disciplinary action taken (a verbal reprimand — not good enough in her view) in the course of her official duties. The fact that Tooke received a reprimand at all is a confidential personnel matter. The fact that the Forest Service investigated Tooke’s sexual activities is a confidential personnel matter. Personnel information of this type is protected by law from disclosure. Whether retired or not, the regional forester had no right to disclose this confidential information to a U.S. Senator. That she could face criminal prosecution or civil damages for doing so is her brief, not mine.”

    This statement is not supported by my simple read of the article “A U.S. Department of Agriculture spokesperson issued a statement denying the charges; the USFS is part of the USDA.“Tony Tooke has a clean personnel record and there is nothing in his employment record reflecting complaints against him of this nature.”” A verbal reprimand is not a disciplinary action and would not have been in a personnel record. Therefore

    Reply
  4. There are two threads relating to Tony Tooke’s misconduct. I wanted this response to be seen by all commenters and am posting it twice….

    I’m one of the many people who have known for years about what Tony Tooke did, and even though I’m now retired, I’m still reluctant to identify myself. We need look no further than the comments in this thread to understand why. There is only one person whose actions should be questioned, and that is Tony Tooke. The truth is that no confidential files existed; it was an open secret in the Region and Forest. It was women who finally broke the cycle of silence that Tooke counted on for years, and bravely came forward. As the Forest Service stated “No records exist.” The truth is there was never a complete investigation. There was never a formal disciplinary action. No file to be leaked. The whole thing was covered up and mishandled from the very beginning.

    Tony got multiple promotions, including the highest one, without ever answering for his misconduct. Meanwhile, the woman who was just starting out her career after the agency invested in her success? She is no longer with the agency. How many times have we seen that happen? How many times can at least half the workforce see the unfairness of this? Years after he left, employees on the forest remained disgusted and concerned about what happened. This was not just about a consensual relationship between two people; many more were affected. To have Tooke returned as the leader of the very region where he offended was shocking enough—to have him appointed as the Chief was a breaking point.

    Forest Service employees deserve a Chief who sets the highest moral standards for leadership, someone who can be trusted and held as an example. The Chief must be beyond reproach.

    In December Chief Tooke sent a memo to all the employees addressing: “…growing intolerance for unwanted, inappropriate sexual conduct and all forms of harassment….a critical opportunity is before us right now; we can move to permanently change our agency and accept nothing less than the full embrace of inclusion, equality and fair treatment for every individual. This accomplishment will create a safe, rewarding and resilient work environment for all employees and ensure our success in accomplishing our mission for the American people.” How is any employee going to respect his moral authority knowing that he himself was guilty of “inappropriate sexual conduct” and covered it up for years?

    I understand that Chief Tooke has addressed the National Leadership Council about his misconduct, but I’m waiting to hear what he has to say to his employees and retirees. I for one am thankful that one person, of the many who knew about it but kept silent, had the courage to come forward.

    Reply
    • “The Chief must be beyond reproach.” Hyperbole? I hope so. For who of us is beyond reproach?

      Ethics and morals are related, but different, concepts. All Forest Service employees, Chief included, must behave ethically; i.e., obey workplace rules imposed by their government employer.

      On the other hand, no government rules direct any specific code of moral behavior. For example, no rule bars extra-marital sex, although many most people regard such behavior as immoral. Nor bans homosexuality, although over one-third of Americans believe it is immoral.

      Can a Forest Service Chief be gay? An adulterer? Sexually promiscuous? All three?

      Should morality be the sine quo non by which senior agency bureaucrats are selected? If so, how and who should investigate the private behavior of Forest Service candidates for higher positions to make that determination?

      Is there an unwritten code of moral behavior to which aspirants for Forest Service leadership positions must adhere? If so, why not codify these expectations so that everyone knows the rules of advancement?

      Reply

Leave a Comment

Discover more from The Smokey Wire : National Forest News and Views

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading