|
|
Did you provide training for the parties? What types of training? Who did it?
|
|
Angel Alderete
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Question: Tell me a little bit about this human relations training that was
done with the community.
Answer: Okay. It would start off -- and this is the Native American group -- it
would start off with them presenting a historical account of that particular Native American
group and their concerns. They would really deal with all of the harshness that they've been
treated with all of these years from the United States Army that came through there, from the
state militia that came through there. Then, of course, when law enforcement was the sole group
that enforced the law, they had to endure abuse from them as well. It's a fact that the
US Army and the state militia did treat these people not only harshly, but criminally back in the
old
days. It was a fact that the sheriff's department had treated them criminally, though no one had
ever really been taken to court and found guilty for this kind of activity. They have a distinct
distrust of the US Army, even though they've been heroes in the army. The state militia no
longer exists because of what happened to them. So that was part of the training.
The other part was helping the deputies understand some of the cultural traits that present
themselves during a confrontation with them. One of them, of course, was, "The reason that we
get very defensive is because of all of the things that I have spoken to you about regarding the
way we've been treated. We hope that you understand that when you come up to us, and you tell
us to roll down the window, and you come on with your voice of command, saying, 'Open the
window;
let's see your license,' that we are going to respond in kind. There are better ways of approaching
us because we're not going to hurt you." They say, "Obviously, we understand that you have to
use caution, and you have to be concerned when you approach an automobile," because most of
the stops made up there are dealing with drunk driving, and you're going to have to be careful.
"But at some point you have to understand that we're not going to do anything to you, and that
therefore you
ought to be able to treat us better."
They also sat their deputies down amongst themselves, because maybe in the training there
would be three people. They would sit them amongst themselves and have them discuss some
ideas about how things could be improved, and these folks would go around the table, sitting
down with them and exchanging ideas about whatever it was that they were discussing at that
table. Then in
the end, there would be a bringing together of everything that they had talked about.
Angel Alderete
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Question: Did this training that you were talking about have any significant
effect? Were you able to see any changes in behavior in the deputies that went through it?
Answer: Not so much that. {Angel Alderete) Where it had some effect -- and it wasn't great,
but it had some effect -- was the sheriff saying, "I'm going to meet with these folks." So he gave
them an equal footing with the white business people. He was readily meeting with white
business people. But since the African Americans and the other minority groups didn't have
those kinds of capabilities, it was good for them to be able to sit down and talk to the sheriff.
And you saw the deputies, as soon as they saw the boss sit down and talk with people that had
been complaining against them, they pulled back a little bit. I doubt the training had any
significant impact.
Leo Cardenas
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Let me switch gears for just a minute
and
ask if you ever provided technical assistance or trained the parties?
Answer: All of the time.
Question: What kind?
Answer: We provided technical assistance to law enforcement, to teachers, and similar groups. It's
generally very basic conflict resolution methods.
Question: So you did that independent of cases. You just trained minorities and tried to make them
mediators?
Answer: Typically, when groups had state conferences, or national conferences, we would provide
that mediation training. Or, someone would know about our training and come and make the
request.
Question: With what sort of organizations?
Answer: Again, minority organizations. The Urban League, NAACP, LULAC, GI Forum, to name a
few.
Question: So you'd actually go to the national conference and provide dispute resolution?
Answer: Yes.
Nancy
Ferrell
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Question: You mentioned coaching. Did you coach everybody
together, or did you coach some groups individually?
Answer: In the initial contacts, part of that would occur with the individual groups, talking to them
about what's going to happen. Certainly you have some rage, certainly you have some interest in
sharing that feeling that you have. But what is it going to get you? You need to be very clear
about what your concerns are and they need to be definable. They need to be stated in a way that
they can be resolved. Saying you're angry at the administration because they're not responding to
you, doesn't tell the administration anything and there's nothing they can do to respond to that.
So coaching them to really clarify what their concern is. That's definable, something you can
respond to. Not being treated fairly in student government is a valid concern, but what does that
mean? You can't be elected because it's always at large, so you can't have representation at
student government, that's specific. So I coached them in being prepared to sit at the table. I
think that's always a big part of it. Not diminishing someone, is making sure they are prepared
for what's going to happen. If you put somebody there and they're not ready, then they feel like
they've been put down by the other parties that can talk more easily. The other party is more
prepared with the response, then you haven't done them any favors. My coaching there would be
getting them ready to come to the table and feel confident. The student had as much power at
that table as the vice president of student affairs. There was no power and no rank. And that was
part of my process, my responsibility. And everybody had to agree to that, the tenured faculty
included. They had no more influence on the group than a student did.
Question: Did you do any coaching of the faculty or the administration?
Answer: Yes, the same kind of thing. Sometimes from a different perspective of being able to hear
and listen to the students or listen to the other group without becoming defensive. It was that
whole issue of helping people understand that being defensive is not helpful and it doesn't help
resolve problems. It just entrenches people. So the coaching may be different, sometimes not.
Generally it was more from that side of, you do have the power, but what's going to happen to
you if you don't have the students. What's going to happen to you if the community believes that
you are this kind of institution. You're more likely to be appealing to their public relations image
than anything. Coaching them in that sense would be more geared toward listening and not being
defensive. It was hard for an administration or an institutional mind set to listen to things that
they believe to be completely contrary to what they were doing. They believed that they were
doing the right thing. For somebody to attack them with the opposite, it was hard for them to
hear that. I could coach them in saying that community or the student's perception is that they're
treated unfairly. Now if that's not true, don't you have an interest in helping them understand
why that's not true? If it is true, then you should have an interest in helping them figure out how
to change that. So either way there's a response. I never went in and tried to get an institution to
say they were wrong. That would just be wasting time for one thing, and I didn't have to get
them to say that. The only thing I had to get them to say was that things could be better. That's
another one of those little keys, that if you go into an institution, or a minority group for that
matter, and say, "Your system is deplorable, and if law enforcement people came in here they'd
take you to court and everything's terrible." If you go in there like that, why should they listen to
you? Why should they come to the table with you? But if you go in there and say, "this is what
the community believes, this is how they feel about it, now if that's not correct, then you have an
opportunity to help correct that perception. But even if some of it's correct, can your institution
do better?" I've never had anybody say they couldn't do any better. And it's amazing what that
one little thing will do for any kind of mediation. If you try to make the respondent say, "I was
wrong," then it's a hurdle you may never get over. But if you can get them to say, "Well sure, we
can all do better," then I can help you. So that was the dance to me. It's moving with them,
where they are, and not trying to drag them somewhere. You dance them into the place where
you want them to be, but if you don't keep the rhythm, then you're pulling and dragging, and
they're not ever there in good faith.
Nancy Ferrell
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Part of the end of each meeting was generally, what do we need to
report back to our constituency groups? So there was reporting back. Part of that is keeping the
constituency groups with you. One of the things that is a real danger, is that the group comes up
with a solution, but all the constituency groups are still out here fighting and they don't buy into
the solution. So part of the real process is keeping the constituency groups informed, and feeling
like they're part of what's happening. That's part of the coaching too, helping them understand
the value of that, making sure you report back to the group, get input from them on what they
think. "Here are some things we're working on. Do you have any suggestions? What do you think
we could do to make this work?” Keep that dialogue going so you really have all of them
coming to the table.
Nancy Ferrell
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Question: Let's talk about training. Did you use
training as an intervention technique?
Answer: A lot. We used it a lot with police departments, partly as an intervention and also as a
courtesy to the departments. We would go in and do a review of the polices and procedures for
compliance and then do training on excessive use of force. So the police officers would
understand what that meant and how it related to the policy. Sometimes there were no policies.
Sometimes there was a policy, but nobody knew about it. Sometimes there were policies people
knew about and they chose not to abide by it. One of the interesting dynamics in the law, which
affected police departments, were the deep pockets where the municipality could be sued and
become liable for a police officer's action. As soon as that was discovered, the number of suits
against municipality skyrocketed. It didn't change the number of incidences of abuse, it just
changed the legal response to it because it became lucrative for attorneys to consider taking it on.
So all of a sudden, the cities were saying, "You're going to have to do this differently." The
pressure came from the legal system and the municipal government to the police departments,
where it had never been there before. They were saying, "You are bankrupting us." And
literally, several small communities were bankrupt by these kind of suits. There was the custom
and practice of the department, and then there was written policy and procedure, and many times
they were completely opposite. They did not match. And that was one of the training pieces.
There has to be integrity between policy and procedure, and the custom and practice. If you end
up in trouble they're going to look at custom and practice and you are going to be held
accountable, regardless of what's written down. So we had that kind of discussion with
administration, and then we did the orientation and training with police officers about their
liabilities. We'd explain that the department wasn't going to back them up anymore because they
are going to become liable. It was an interesting dynamic. One of the real hard struggles for
police officers now was that if they get in trouble, they may not have even done it, and it may be
false. But the department, all of a sudden, had its own interest, separate and apart from the police
officer. So the police officers became very isolated and I think that it created some really
difficult times. Community policing though, has helped bring back together the interests of the
community, the administration, and the police officers. They don't see each other as
adversaries.
Nancy Ferrell
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Question: Did you go after an incident, or did you do it pro-actively?
Answer: If we were in an area and there were time and resources available, I would do it as a
pro-active response if they were interested in it. If the department specifically called and asked,
we would try very hard to do that. Anytime I was in a community, it was a service that I offered
to the department. The training was pretty set and we could spend half a day. It was good public
relations for them. The excessive use of force training was one of them. Principles of good
policing was another, and it talked about some of the things I just talked about. Another really
important piece was their mission statement. The police department's described mission whether
it's protect and serve or law enforcement and arrest. That reflected throughout the department,
one way or the other. Sometimes, there was inconsistency and one group believed it was protect
and serve, but another group believed it was kick butt and take names. They all acted out in
different ways, depending on who their field supervisor was. That in itself created conflict in the
community, in how they interacted with the department. So one of the things we stressed a lot
was to make a clear statement of what the mission is. That needs to be done in cooperation with
the community. That way, the community and the police department choose the cooperative
relationship between the two. That became part of our brochure that we did on commending and
complaining about police officers. The first thing on there was the department's mission
statement. Then, reviewing every police procedure that you have, or that you ever had, to see
whether it enhances that mission statement or detracts from it. That became the benchmark.
Does this policy enhance our mission statement? If it doesn't, we need to change the policy. If it
does, then it's a good policy. That gave us a tool to be pro-active with the department and be a
consulting resource to them.
Question: Did you do other kinds of training beyond police departments?
Answer: We did some training with housing authority people. One in particular, we would bring in
teams from different community housing authorities, and we would do problem-solving and
team-building and to respond to civil rights issues. Civil rights is our mandate, but they could
use these skills in any situation. It was a problem-solving, team-building approach. I did the
multi-culturalism diversity training with different groups, university students and faculty. A lot
of the training was on the job. Often, I felt more like I was coaching and mentoring, being real
careful to make sure I was modeling the skills of consensus-building and protecting interests.
Those things were critical to every encounter and every community. That probably was the
ongoing coaching, mentoring relationship. We did a lot of internal training.
Question: You mean within CRS?
Answer: Within CRS, in the last five or six years. There hadn't been a whole lot before that. One of
the things that was a mission of that training was to create an environment where the veteran staff
was honored and valued for what they contributed. They became coaches for the younger staff
rather than it becoming competitive. That was successful. John Chase was kind of the dean of
that group and there were about eight of us that were faculty for that effort. I felt good about it, I
felt like we really were moving away from competing with each other to being a team and
supporting and working with each other. I don't know what the situation is now.
Silke Hansen
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Question: Let's talk a little bit more about the issue of power disparity between the parties, and CRS's
role as a neutral. Even though you say you are a neutral, you also, in a sense, try to empower the
low-power group, do you not? How do you balance that?
Answer: If you mean how do I justify that, let's start with that piece first. Very easily, because I don't
think I can do an effective job of mediating between two parties if there isn't some balance there.
So unless I help bring about that balance, mediation won't work. Of course, you can't necessarily
assume that because one side is a minority community that it's the powerless community. That's
another issue. But let's assume that, in fact, there is a power imbalance. Unless I can help balance
that, and empower each party to effectively participate at the mediation table, we're not going to
have an effective, successful mediation. So I explain that to the institution and I offer pre-
mediation training to both sides. I also use that as a way to help each of the parties identify what
their interests and concerns are, and what they hope to get out of this process.
Sometimes, that's particularly important for the institution, because they often start out from the
perspective of, "Okay, how much do they want, and how much of that are we going to give
them?" They rarely think in terms of, "What do we want, and how much of that are we going to
get?" The reality is that they usually do want something from the community, so this helps them
become aware of that. This is another trust-building mechanism as well because I'm
acknowledging that, "You need things too! What is it that you want? What is it that you're
looking for?" I want to make sure that both sides are heard and that we can talk about how each
side's needs can be met. I also let the institution know that it's in their best interests to have a
well-trained, capable party on the other side because it will be easier to deal with and negotiate
with them if they are capable. Part of what the institution is afraid of is that they will have a
group of ranting, raving maniacs on the other side that they can't communicate with.
So part of what I'm providing is some security, some format which is reasonable from their
perspective. I may say to the institution, "Now, you understand that party A is angry and they're
going to need to express that. But trust me, we're going to get beyond that, and get to problem-
solving." So I lay the groundwork for there being some anger. I hate to call it "venting," because
to me "venting" sounds too patronizing. I don't want to be allowed an opportunity to vent; I want
to be allowed an opportunity to be heard. So, even though the term "venting" might apply, I
avoid that word because it does sound patronizing to me. It has undercurrents of, "They're just
spouting off, and they really have nothing to say." In most cases they have a lot to say, but
they've never been allowed to say it and be heard before.
Once both parties understand this process and it's really part of the ground rules or at least the
"ground expectations" that's going to make the process much more effective. If I explain this to
the institution, they'll understand that. They also understand that it's going to take less time to
train a police department to come to the table as a team than it does the community (with a police
department, it's easy, they just look to the chief if the chief says it's okay, it's okay, even
though they're there as a team.) In terms of a community, they require a lot more ground rules, a
lot more preparation, in terms of how they're going to operate at the table.
If there isn't a clear leader, sometimes, I try to split up the leadership role. I try to have different
people on the community team take responsibility for leading negotiations around certain issues,
so that everyone is head-honcho for a while. But doing that, and helping them to identify their
interests and needs, is going to take longer than it does with a police department or a school
district. But the institution recognizes that when they're at the table, their time is going to be
better-spent and there'll be less time wasted if we do it this way. So they're not worried about the
time the fact that I might spend three times as much time with the community as I do with the
institution. They understand that it all helps to lay better groundwork for the process at the table.
The other thing that I have found and at first, I was surprised, but I've gotten now to where I
almost expect it is that when I have those initial meetings with the community, I get a lot of
that venting. I hear a lot of the anger. To some extent, it is almost directed at me. But I know it
isn't really it's just that I happen to be there at the time, and they're saying, "Well, you're an
official, so why can't you fix it?" I can see that there are some very angry, frustrated people there,
and I usually say, "Look, I hear the anger, but I want to make sure that you can express that anger
to the institution and help them understand why you're angry."
Then, when we get to the table, all of that anger has already dissipated to some extent. I can
recall at least one case where I actually called a caucus because the community was so calm, and
said, "Wait a minute. You were chewing my butt yesterday and you were ranting and raving.
What's going on here?" I almost had to remind them of the points that they wanted to bring to the
table. Now that they were actually at the table and communicating that was such a big
achievement already that the rest of their issues almost didn't matter anymore. My concern
wasn't to advocate for the community, but if those issues weren't brought to the table, that would
undermine the effectiveness of any agreement. So I thought it was important for an effective
agreement to make sure that all of that was on the table.
The preparation I did with them was important too. It gave them some confidence at the table
they knew they were prepared, they had an agenda, they knew who was going to cover what, and
they trusted me and the process, at least to some extent. The same was true for the institution:
they knew that I was going to control the process, they trusted me to keep the discussions on
track. That's empowering for both sides. The fact that they really are talking to each other as
equals is very, very important for making that process work.
Martin Walsh
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Sometimes we provide training or technical assistance
where, basically, one group is taking the lead role in creating change.
Question: What does training and technical assistance involve?
Answer: We do a lot of training with police departments related to issues that are affecting their
relations with the community. It can be from hate crimes to police-community relations to
multi-cultural training. The training will sometimes be our response to an incident. This can be
part of or independent of their meeting with the community. For example, we had a racial
profiling complaint, but we could not get the people who filed the complaint to meet with the
police to work it out. We wanted them and the NAACP in a meeting. The chief was willing to
meet with people who felt they were victimized, but they did not want to meet. They just wanted
to file the complaint and get a response to it. I think they may have wanted to file a suit. So we
met with the chief and he was willing to take the next step. He said, "It would be good for us,
good for the community to know that we are going to have a training program with you guys on
how to avoid these types of problems in the future." It was a response to the situation or
problem, but it didn't entail mediation or even the involvement of the community in the
resolution process.
Stephen Thom
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Do you provide that training?
Answer: Yes. There's a school district right over here in Inglewood. This school had riots at one
particular high school for seven straight years. And the last one became so overt that police had
to come in and kids ran into the streets and went to the downtown area and broke windows and
vandalized stores. The city came down and the superintendent was appalled, and the media
attention was just overwhelming. So the superintendent asked CRS to come in. What we did
with this school, was to partner with a local mediation service, Centinela Valley Juvenile
Diversion Project, to provide mediation training to every school in that school district. We wrote
our own curriculum and we trained. It's a real tight curriculum, that we train students for four
hours a day for three days.
Stephen Thom
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
In formal mediation and in more informal processes, are you
doing a lot of explicit training as you go? Do you teach communication skills, negotiation skills
as you go in a direct kind of way?
Answer: I would say no. When you get into the mediation you are issue oriented. Certainly we are
reminding them of ground rules and process, but we are only conveying that in terms of their
behavior to the issues. The issues dominate everything that you are bringing forth in the
mediation process. I think you can remind them of the process and the ground rules and that we
need you to convey that information clearly, but I wouldn't say that I would be teaching anything.
It is very impractical, to teach basic skills in mediation.
| Will Reed
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Did you provide any training?
Answer: Of course. I provided training all the time. If you look up here, you'll find some of my
books and some
of my work where I provided training, especially in police departments. Go to the Boermont
County jail
and find out what training programs they're using for new officers. I started with Rosa in the area
of
training in the institutions. And then I got them to train every time there's a new class coming in,
in
community relations. Not only community relations, but conflict resolution. In the jail, the riots
in that
county jail have decreased about 85% since I started the program eighteen years ago. I did the
first
training program at the Boermont Jail. They needed some training, the Division of Corrections
had told
them that they really needed to get training, so I set up a training program for them for seventeen
years.
And then the Philips County Jail down here, they used to have riots all the time. But the riots
have been cut to a minimum because they now have an adequate training program. I say
adequate
because they didn't have anything before. Nothing in the area of conflict resolution. It took me
eighteen,
nineteen years to put all of this together.
Question: Before you were able to put it all together in a nice training session,
did you
provided any type of training for the parties who were in conflict, like immediate training?
Sitting down with
them, saying, "This is the way mediation works?"
Answer: I did that several times. I don't know how effective it turned out to be, because you have
new officials,
things turn over, sometimes people may not want to embrace what you've done. And then there's
other
times, someone may say, "Hey, this is a good idea. We may want to keep this."
Silke Hansen
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
I try to coach them to be clear, to present their needs, and to state their position. I start with, "What do you think is important for the other party to know? Who's going to say that? Who's going to present that?" I also tell both sides that part of my role as mediator is to control the process, and that I'm not going to let it get out of control. They also need to understand that there are some emotions here and there is some anger here and that is part of what we're here for, but to trust me, that I'll keep it under control. So far I've been able to do that. It's more than just coaching on how to be calm participants. It's an approach that they themselves pick up and use. Again I've not always seen that happen. I've seen it enough times to sort of almost marvel at the change in presentation. It's not a change in outlook, but it's a change in presentation. I think probably they're wanting to be seen as people who are sincere and wanting to work this out, so they believe that they need to appear to be reasonable, controlled and organized in making their presentation. So yes, I do some preparation towards that, but it's more than that, it's more than just good pre-mediation training.
Martin Walsh
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Did you do anything to prepare the teams or coach them before
they came to mediation?
Answer: I think we did coaching. In one sense we really didn't have to work through the demand
process -- one thing we do in a lot of our cases. We didn't have to do that. Alerting them to what
the process was, and how it would work, yes, in both groups. And whom we thought should be
at the table. That was part of our effort. And going over the general ground rules. Other than
that it was more informal communication back and forth, of knowing in general that the students
are going to have X numbers, and these are the issues, and talking with both sides, sharing with
them just a sense of a reality framework to clarify what they were thinking so that the sessions
themselves could be productive. A lot of information had to go out to the students. We hoped
they would read all of it because the administration prepared a lot of information about what they
were doing and trying to do, what some of the past practices were, a lot of information. The
whole informal communication process was important. Also, we had good relations right from
the beginning with the student leader who represented them and was an excellent leader.
| Angel Alderete
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
We can provide the money to get you trained -- that is, the
transportation per diem, to the training site, as long as you're willing to provide the fees for
training your team." He said that was fine. So then we paid for their way and the Department of
Corrections paid for their training. I was also there at the training. I participated as a
correctional officer and also provided some of the input that George couldn't provide in terms of
CRS's interests.
CRS's interests were that this program had to go beyond today.
Let's just say that when you're getting all the training, and we get back and six months
go by, the training should still mean something.
Angel Alderete
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
What we had to do was have them select
the group of people that they wanted to train, and there ended up being about twenty of them.
At the same time, we got the Department of Corrections to involve
these people in their training in conflict resolution. We did that for two reasons. One is that
thought I had about the teachers and the correctional officers, their having the same thing going.
The other reason was that hopefully, in discussing at lunch or dinner or
what not, having a beer, the corrections officers might pick up some techniques and ideas from
the
teachers. In the end, the whole deal worked out pretty well -- they found that they did have a lot
in common with one another, and everybody gained some insight.
Bob Hughes
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Did you offer any type of training to various parties that were involved in conflict?
Answer: Well, I would talk about mediation and explain the guidelines. I might also expound on how
they might comply with these or fulfill these, or react to these in the mediation. But I know that
for some mediators before mediation starts they'll have training sessions with one of the other
parties on how to negotiate, and I've never done that. I felt like it could be difficult to my image
of impartiality. I would always try to do the same thing to both sides, and let each of them know
that I was doing this. We have had cases that would eventually be taken through a process
where you ended up in a training session, but that's a little bit different from what you were
asking.
Question: We talked yesterday about the training that was given to police officers. How did that come
about?
Answer: Well, we arranged for that. You didn't ask this question but I'll answer it anyway. When
you
have a minority group that has limited resources and had problems with, for example an
institution that has a lot of resources. When you get down to the point of fashioning an
agreement, the last thing you want is for one side (it's usually the institution) to commit itself to
doing all the things and the other party not committing itself to doing anything. So when you
have this situation where your minority resources are limited it taxes the brains of everybody
when they're trying to fashion an agreement and think in terms of each other. What can we work
out that would help you, where you could help us do these things. Cross-cultural training was an
area that seemed to fit into this, so that you know that is one area. Another one was the idea of
promotion of careers in say, the criminal justice area. The minority community might be
alienated especially by the conflict they are dealing with and would not entertain such thoughts.
But if you have leadership that are urging people to get into this area and we will help you fill
out an application for employment or maybe they could generate a scholarship or that sort of
thing, it's a way of trying to balance the commitments.
Question: I just realized when you spoke with us before I was misinterpreting the term promotion, I
was
thinking about moving up in rank.
Answer: That too, well in the area of affirmative action. I was referring to both the recruiting and
promotions of the existing officers so they have a model they can see that it's that there is a
future. It's important for them to be able to see this.
Question: But the other sense of the word was that the minority community would try to get people to
come into police work.
Answer: Promote careers in that professional vocational area.
Question: When you provided typical assistance to one group did you always inform the other group
that you were providing technical assistance to the other group?
Answer: Yes, I tried to be open and equal in how I would treat each of the parties. I don't remember
any obvious instances where I either did this unintentionally or was accused of that sort of
thing.
Wallace Warfield
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Question: Right. How much do you involve
the parties in designing the process?
Answer: Well it depends. CRS’s broad conciliation work really falls into technical assistance; CRS
had a huge technical assistance capacity. So when CRS was doing long-range kinds of trainings
with police departments and citizens, or they would be doing work in.... I think one of the
interventions that I was most proud of was the intervention we did in Syracuse, New York, to
assist the school desegregation process. That was just a terrific and wonderful piece because it
involved so many different parts of the agency. It was a conciliation effort, it was technical
assistance resource, it was problem-solving workshops, there was on-the-spot dispute settlement
taking place, and it was televised, with part of it done on public television. One of them was just
before I came down to Washington. It was about ‘76 or ‘77, and it was a terrific case.....what
was my point? My point was that in the process of doing that, we actually had a committee
formed in the community composed of residents and educators who actually formed a kind of
advisory team, as I recall, that we worked with throughout this process. And there were a lot of
CRS cases, particularly the ones from the ‘70s, that had that kind of flavor. Silke did a lot of
work like that I recall.
Question: This is the first time I've ever heard anybody talk about problem-solving workshops. It
might be because even though other people did it, they didn't use the same term. Tell me how
that changed things and how it was carried on.
Answer: Well, I think that in the case of Syracuse, there was a series of them, this was an initiative
that lasted over a period of several months. Much of it was planning, and then there was a week
or two of specific sessions, of all the different types, and one of them was working with
educators around specific issues involved in going from a so-called segregated school system to a
desegregated one that involved pupil transfers, curriculum development work, school climate
analysis.....we did a force-field analysis with them there.
Nancy Ferrell
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Question: What about in the context of the case? Do you do any training, especially with a
minority group, in order to somewhat level the playing field?
Answer: I would talk to the establishment and the minority group about learning how to clarify issues,
and begin to strategize. I'll coach and train them. I'll sit in private with them, in kind of a
teaching mode, and explain to them how to respond to a system and get what you need in a
productive way. If you're going to do some destructive things, you can do that on your own. If
you want to be productive, then I want to help you with that. A lot of the coaching, teaching, and
technical assistance was not behind the scenes because I made sure everyone knew I was doing
that. It wasn't undercover, I wasn't sneaking around and helping. Some of the establishment
people weren't any more sophisticated about the issue than the community groups were, so I'd do
the same thing for them.
Generally, the issues were being generated out of the community because the
establishment says they don't have any problems. The teaching and the coaching on the
establishment side was to help them understand the dynamic of perception. I didn't feel like I had
to make them fess up and say, "Yeah, we violated this rule," or, "We've not done all we can do."
If you have to get them to confess, you're not going to get them to the table. If I could get them
to say, "Sure, we could do better," then that's what I was after. My next goal is to help them
emphasize and say, "We're not doing that. But, if they believe we're doing it, I understand why
they're so frustrated." That was my next indication that we were moving in the right direction.
| Silke Hansen
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
But as a result of this incident, we helped create a community monitoring program in each of the schools. And we developed a tension assessment instrument and trained school staff in what to look for in schools to decide whether or not there were tensions brewing that might, in fact, result in violence. Plus we formed bi-racial parent councils. These were court-ordered. In Boston the schools really didn't do a whole lot, at this point, unless it was ordered by the court -- which made the court real popular!
| Angel Alderete
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
The Navy allowed us to use their training
facility, and since this particular university was already using their training equipment,
classrooms
and so forth, we were allowed the same privileges. The Navy
even provided us with video technicians to record our training. So we did that. We trained them
for
forty hours in conflict resolution. It really came out well, because they came back and did their
thing, and I think it lasted about two years before fading away.
Angel Alderete
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
But to answer your question, a couple of them. One is in Pomona
where I worked with a group of Mexican Americans and a group of African Americans, getting
them to come together, and that's tough to do.
Julian Klugman
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Timing is a big part, if something's going to happen. I
don't believe in training where there are no problems. For example, if you don't have any racial
problems, that's fine; that's the end of the discussion. But, then if we talk a little more, maybe
there are a few racial problems. That's one of the ingredients, you have to admit you've got
problems. If you think you don't have problems, forget it, you're not going to go anywhere.
Question: But it sounds like what you're saying is that you're willing to kind of talk for a while to
convince them they have problems. They don't just say, "No we don't have problems," then you
leave immediately.
Answer: Oh, I will. I don't have time to waste. You're a superintendent and you want me to come in
a
train your people because there might be problems? Because race relations are a good idea?
That's not me. I'll give you the names of ten people who can do that. Five of them will be black,
five of them will be Hispanic, eight of them will be women and they'll come in and train your
people in race relations. And what will it mean? Absolutely nothing. Because look, you have to
admit you've got problems, number one. Number two, you can do something about the
problems. "Well it's the fault of the families, it's all in the home." Forget it. I can't go into your
home, but I sure as hell can do something with the kids in school and with the teachers and with
the principal and so on. We can do something about it. Number three, if you're willing to let
people in, it's going to be a cooperative effort. We're not going to do it for people. You don't do
it for people, you do with people because, otherwise, training won't work. Number four, it's tied
into the system. It's not separate. It's not a separate race relations program. There are things
going on during the day at the school. It's 40 hours; you've got to become part of that 40 hours.
You have to be planned into it. "We don't have time." You have to make time. If you don't
have time to do it, then nothing's going to happen. It's tied into a system of reward and
punishment, because if you don't reward or punish people for the behavior you want, nothing
will happen.
Harry Truman integrated the U.S. army which was still happening when I was in the army in
1955. He said, "We're going to integrate." It took years to do it, but they did it. They did
something very simple that changed everything. They said, "You cannot get promoted from
second lieutenant to first lieutenant if you have racial problems and you're not dealing with it."
It is a priority thing in the army and you won't get your promotion. That made all the difference
in the world. Out of that came the Armed Forces Institute, because when people are motivated,
then the training means something.
Efrain Martinez
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
In fact I'm doing a training of a police department out of Houston,
another county. But I'm using one of the trainers a Houston
police officer. There's an excellent trainer at the academy on
cross-cultural communications processes. Although we have
different backgrounds, how do we, as a human being's receive
information and process it fairly? We use screens that let in
what we want to let in, and then we react that. What you sent
this way was not necessarily what I received. He's really good
at describing this and through role playing and discussion he's
very good at imparting that, so we used him in community problems
between the African American community and Vietnamese store
owners. And, it goes beyond cultural training, and cultural awareness, it's the
next level I guess. Just us as human beings. How can we better
relate to each other? No matter where we came from and no matter
what path we took because it's basics that we all relate to. We
all have arms, heads, and faces that's common for all of us. But
there's a lot of other things that aren't common too.
Question: How does this come about?
Answer: Oh, because we wanted to teach this course they do at the
academy to rookies and others. But we wanted to do it in a
community setting to help the community, the residents, and the
store owners be better able to understand each other, and
hopefully by understanding each other they would be more
cooperative. This was to lessen the opportunities for violence,
for thefts, and for problems. Of the seven stores that we
targeted through this program we brought this training in because
it empowered the strategic plans that we helped put together, the
training's part of it. There have been no incidents, no
robberies, no thefts, no vandalism, and no shootings in those
seven targeted stores.
Efrain Martinez
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Have you done other kinds of
training?
Answer: Well, we do a hate crimes training in conjunction with
other agencies.
Question: Training who?
Answer: Right now we're training a lot of police officers and police chiefs.
We trained thirty-five chiefs in the Houston area at their
request. They were members of the Harris County Police Chief's
Association. We used the F.B.I., the district attorney, the U.S.
attorney, the Houston police, and then we had a part in designing
the program. We adjusted it to fit. It's an actual program by
the Department of Justice. In every federal judicial district they have
a vehicle to conduct this kind of training. It can be done in
different ways but we chose to do it in the Houston area having
all these components represented in imparting their particular expertise to local
police officers.
This included how to gather evidence of hate crimes, how to
preserve evidence, how to talk to witnesses, how to look at the
investigation and what other components you would not normally do
when you're investigating a regular crime. If you think it's a
hate crime or indication of a hate crime, what other things are
helpful to present the best case you can to prosecutors. It also
goes into getting accurate data. Some communities reported no
hate crimes, some states, one or two hate crimes. Others
reported two or three hundred. It's not that one state or city
is more hateful than another, but it's just that they see what's
happening differently. And now they're capturing the information
better. So whenever you do something like this, it may result in
the rise of the statistics. It's not necessarily the rise of
incidents, but just in the rise of statistics. Because now you
know you're doing it better. So that's one objective, more
reliable data to get officers to become more expert at what they
do.
Manuel Salinas
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
The outcome was, finally, that they felt that the university could
carry on a training program for the police department. So the community contacted a Hispanic
professor at the university, and he put a program together on human relations and they then
presented that to the police department. And the police department, after review, accepted
that.
In the meantime we brought in also some consultants to assist in the training. So the
university, and I think there were two people from our department that assisted too. We
provided ongoing training for the police department over a period of six month's time. That's
all we were able to do. The community was happy with that because they were involved in the
development of the training. They thought that was something very worthwhile.
Manuel Salinas
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
But the I thought the training that the university put together with
the human relations office, was well done. What I liked about it was that we were getting a lot
of response from the officers and our recruits. In some human relations training, the officers
don't really take part in it. I don't know whether they feel uncomfortable, or they don't believe
you, or they say "I'm forced to be here," or "I don't pay attention anyway because I know my
job." That's it. They feel that they know their job, and you don't know my job, you're not here
everyday with me, you don't see what I see, I don't believe that you have much to tell me that I
don't know. It is true. We don't see what officers see everyday. But by the same token, they
have to open their eyes a little bit more and be more compassionate and try to understand what
is being presented, so that maybe they become even better officers.
Ozell Sutton
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Got the police a body of training at which I was the
main lecturer.
Question: When you were providing this technical assistance, did you use
community resources, other consultants? How did you know who you should include in your
training?
Answer: Well, you gotta know that. That's the part of your body of knowledge in a sense. I pulled
together the black leadership that was concerned about this issue and we drafted. I already had
the plan ready when the crisis developed. I had already pulled a body together of black
leaders and we had to come up with who could assist us, and who did we need to bring in. We
brought in two people from this agency and one person from the F.B.I. We didn't want any
local F.B.I. And we brought in five people who helped us design that plan and then helped us
in the training process.
Nancy Ferrell
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
Q - Did you ever stay involved in any of the
structures that were created after the settlement?
A - No. And I don't know how that could ever be appropriate. Again, because it's their deal.
They may call for consultation, they may call for some coaching, and I would do that, but it
would be technical assistance, it wouldn't be anything beyond coaching.
Silke Hansen
[Full Interview] [Topic Top]
From there on, a lot of our focus was on working with, supporting, and providing some training to those biracial councils, not just in South Boston, but in other schools as well. South Boston was my major assignment, partly because I was the white on staff, but in many ways, South Boston kind of became the standard against which to measure what we were doing in other schools as well. We also continued working with police, and tried to get our local organizations to participate as monitors, in an effort to get them involved in a positive way, even if they weren't interested in being advocates or anything.
|
|
|
|
|