The recent news of Oxfam troubles over the behaviour of some
staff in Haiti should come as no surprise to those who have worked in the
poorer parts of the world. I don’t think
this is an issue about charities per se.
Instead it about standards, and about how anybody who finds themselves in
foreign cultures applies them.
Beyond more times than I can recall, I have seen examples of bad behaviour by Europeans (including British) and North Americans while working in poorer societies. Use of either prostitution or having a local girlfriend while in country is commonplace. In the early 2000s, I did one particular job in Kazakhstan for a month, which involved regular rotation work for many colleagues. The temptations there were incredible. I stayed a month and refused further work because if I had returned I am certain that I would have been unable to hold my marriage together. Divorce is indeed the fate that befell most of my married colleagues: out of forty guys who were on month-on-month-off rotation, by the end of two years (by which time the contract ended) thirty-eight of them were divorced. Some of them came away with new partners, others required courses of medication.
It can be argued that in this case there was no moral leadership, which is perfectly true. In fact, there is often a large degree of peer-pressure to get people “dirty”, so that they are not going to blab when they go home. “What happens in the field stays in the field” is an old saying that is still honoured. It can be argued that charities are engaged in noble work and should be held to higher standards than a bunch of rig-pigs. In reality though, standards to which any person operates are the ones that they carry with them. When back in the UK (or wherever home is), one is held to certain standards, the social norms. It is quite common for a man to leave his own society and, finding himself in a new society whose norms he is unaware of but is offered easy access to sex, drugs and alcohol. The newcomer has a vast amount of spending power compared to locals and a proportion of those local folk not only want that cash but are willing to deliver pretty much anything in order to get it. The newcomer is basically entering a moral vacuum where there are few external boundaries. If that person does not carry moral standards within him or herself (and no, that is not me being politically correct – one former colleague said she enjoyed working in Angola because of all the “uncomplicated sex”) then they are capable of living out their wildest fantasies. Abuse is only possible because the power is so one-sided. Kazakhstan is a society that has become a lot richer over the past two decades and, as economic power has equalised, the desperate excesses of the late 1990s are no more.
Beyond more times than I can recall, I have seen examples of bad behaviour by Europeans (including British) and North Americans while working in poorer societies. Use of either prostitution or having a local girlfriend while in country is commonplace. In the early 2000s, I did one particular job in Kazakhstan for a month, which involved regular rotation work for many colleagues. The temptations there were incredible. I stayed a month and refused further work because if I had returned I am certain that I would have been unable to hold my marriage together. Divorce is indeed the fate that befell most of my married colleagues: out of forty guys who were on month-on-month-off rotation, by the end of two years (by which time the contract ended) thirty-eight of them were divorced. Some of them came away with new partners, others required courses of medication.
It can be argued that in this case there was no moral leadership, which is perfectly true. In fact, there is often a large degree of peer-pressure to get people “dirty”, so that they are not going to blab when they go home. “What happens in the field stays in the field” is an old saying that is still honoured. It can be argued that charities are engaged in noble work and should be held to higher standards than a bunch of rig-pigs. In reality though, standards to which any person operates are the ones that they carry with them. When back in the UK (or wherever home is), one is held to certain standards, the social norms. It is quite common for a man to leave his own society and, finding himself in a new society whose norms he is unaware of but is offered easy access to sex, drugs and alcohol. The newcomer has a vast amount of spending power compared to locals and a proportion of those local folk not only want that cash but are willing to deliver pretty much anything in order to get it. The newcomer is basically entering a moral vacuum where there are few external boundaries. If that person does not carry moral standards within him or herself (and no, that is not me being politically correct – one former colleague said she enjoyed working in Angola because of all the “uncomplicated sex”) then they are capable of living out their wildest fantasies. Abuse is only possible because the power is so one-sided. Kazakhstan is a society that has become a lot richer over the past two decades and, as economic power has equalised, the desperate excesses of the late 1990s are no more.
Corporations are very aware of the perils of this lifestyle
and nowadays try to control the situation by overworking employees. That may
include long shifts, seven-day-a-week working and no leaving of the hotel or
staff house. Some even have tried to introduce a strict policy of no alcohol
while on rotation, that even includes airports and flights. Such extreme measures, in all, make a
complete misery of foreign working and takes any joy out of the proceedings. What
is the use of being in a country when one is not able to visit any site of
interest or culture? By the same reasoning of course, it keeps others out of
the fleshpots. Many of the senior executives know the perils of course, because
while they were in the field they were often the worst offenders.
It may be possible to keep oil workers away from the public
but charity works, by definition, involves public contact and being part of
the fabric of the host society. It will be a lot harder to enforce a moral
standard as isolation is not possible. Before I continue, I don’t want to cast aspersions
on everybody. For example, I came across a brilliant team of American doctors
and nurses in Mauritania who had given up a month of their time to provide free
operations and medical care to local people. Another good example I encountered
was a UN conference in Kampala on refugees and stateless people. Much good is
being done, so please do not get the idea that all foreign charity work is a
waste of time. It isn’t. There are bad examples though. In West Africa, the UN
workers were often derided for being in place to stop the exploitation of women
while being themselves regular clients of sex workers. Some of the most unpleasant individuals I have
ever met have been diplomats attached to various embassies - although I have
not encountered misbehaviour from any UK staff.
When it comes down to how to solve such problems, it is difficult. Cultural awareness must be one key. I don’t know what courses are available to charity workers before they are shipped out to remote parts of the world, but I don’t recall much training on this being offered in industry. Leadership in field is another imperative. If the leader is a sleaze, the team is left to their own personal standards. In fact, as I stated above, bad conduct is often encouraged from those indulging in it.
Perhaps the worst examples though are not failures in individual behaviour but extravagance in operations. Both the following examples come from former colleagues and both involve Oxfam. Both are also historical: at least twenty years old. The first one concerns a colleague comes backing from West Africa and, unexpectedly, he is upgraded to business class. Next to him is some guy and, as the flight goes on, they fall into conversation.
“Who do you work for?”
“Oxfam.”
The engineer expresses surprise that he is travelling business class.
When it comes down to how to solve such problems, it is difficult. Cultural awareness must be one key. I don’t know what courses are available to charity workers before they are shipped out to remote parts of the world, but I don’t recall much training on this being offered in industry. Leadership in field is another imperative. If the leader is a sleaze, the team is left to their own personal standards. In fact, as I stated above, bad conduct is often encouraged from those indulging in it.
Perhaps the worst examples though are not failures in individual behaviour but extravagance in operations. Both the following examples come from former colleagues and both involve Oxfam. Both are also historical: at least twenty years old. The first one concerns a colleague comes backing from West Africa and, unexpectedly, he is upgraded to business class. Next to him is some guy and, as the flight goes on, they fall into conversation.
“Who do you work for?”
“Oxfam.”
The engineer expresses surprise that he is travelling business class.
“Oh, I don’t work directly for Oxfam. My company are being
hired on a consultancy basis.”
The second example was another friend who, as engineer-in-charge, was running an operation out of Port Hardcourt in Nigeria. The house that the company was renting could sleep ten and was often used for crews coming and going to rigs and arriving in country. One day the landlord comes to the engineer and gives notice, unless more than double the rent can be provided.
“That’s crazy!” says my friend. The landlord says calmly that he already has an alternative tenant lined up on these terms.
“Who is it?”
“Oxfam.”
“That must be a huge team that they are moving in.”
“Oh no, it’s just for one person.”
The second example was another friend who, as engineer-in-charge, was running an operation out of Port Hardcourt in Nigeria. The house that the company was renting could sleep ten and was often used for crews coming and going to rigs and arriving in country. One day the landlord comes to the engineer and gives notice, unless more than double the rent can be provided.
“That’s crazy!” says my friend. The landlord says calmly that he already has an alternative tenant lined up on these terms.
“Who is it?”
“Oxfam.”
“That must be a huge team that they are moving in.”
“Oh no, it’s just for one person.”
3 comments:
Good, thoughtful post. I've often thought folks who have to work away from home must have it kind of harsh sometimes trying to maintain one's moral compass.
Interesting, Martin. I relate to much of what you write. Humanitarian work is extremely stressful and draining. During the day, at is worst, people may be choosing who lives and who dies. As a consequence, often these people live hard and play hard. I too have stories like yours. And it is a job, with training, qualifications,pension payments, management structures etc. Development work is different as there people may live in the country for years. It brings its own issues. I don't think volunteering is the answer, for all sorts of reasons. DfID staff are v good but they have to work through other organisations. The need is there - it how best to fulfil it. The irony is that in many parts of the world European colonisers have drained countries of resources, introduced slavery and settlers to help them to do this and are now returning to deal with some of the problems they caused in the first place. Writing my own post. You beat me to it!
This article from the New York Times suggest that problems are not restricted to field workers, and that women working at the United Nations are facing problems of harassment (or worse) at all levels. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/world/united-nations-sexual-assault.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Feurope&action=click&contentCollection=europe®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront
Post a Comment