Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: This is totally inappropriate for this listserve..

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
There are some points made in this thread about the improprieties being
revealed in the White House which, when coupled with the recent calls in
other threads to "get involved", relate not too inappropriately to
California P.E. interests and advocacies. The incident involved high-placed
people in the Calif Board of Registration for Professional Engineers and
Land Surveyors only a few years ago. And comparable excesses of self-serving
power are as easily engaged in today.
__________________
>25 years later, I remain an embarrassed American with what is going on in
Washington.                 >Bill Allen

> We don't really know if he ever inhaled and/or inserted, so who are we to
judge?                      >Stan Caldwell

> Personally, what and with whom he does (it) while on his own time and with
his own equipment is none of my concern      >Dennis Wish

>In my personal opinion, I believe the office of the Presidency should also
exhibit some degree of honor            > Bill Allen

> Why not set high standards for high jobs?      >Jim Warne
__________________

In 1991 and 1992 it became widely rumored among those who followed the
doings of the Calif Board of Registration that three of the male Board
Members were engaged in close personal relationships of the private sort
with three of the leading, supervisory female staff employees. The three
Board Members had all been Presidents of the Board. Various opinions along
the lines of those quoted above were voiced, but nobody wanted to do
anything. It was very clearly unthinkable that any professional association
would be willing to take a stand on such an issue. It was equally apparent
that no Board Member would upset the superficial pleasantries among one
another by objecting. 

Meanwhile pieces of evidence accumulated that supported the substance of the
rumors. And intentional efforts were made to see if after-hours activities
unrelated to Board business were taking place. They were.

There had already occurred bitter disputes among factions of Board members,
one faction including the three believed to be in relationships with
staffers, and the other faction not so favored. The disputes concerned
regrading on appeal of the 1989 and 1991 Calif. Land Surveyors Exam. The
Land Surveyor Board member's efforts to get credit belatedly given for
correct answers was opposed by Board staff, whose exam contractor had at
first blundered, and later was intentionally misled by staff as to the basis
for the appeal, so that a revised grading plan would not happen. 

The Land Surveyor Member found out and pulled no punches. The Board Members
associated with the staffers rushed to the ladies' defense, and the scene
got worse until the Department of Consumer Affairs conducted a full-blown,
year-long internal investigation using professional investigators. It
supported the position of the Land Surveyor Board Member.

An opportunity to go public about the Board Member/Staffer relationships
came up in May of 1992, when the Department of Consumer Affairs held all-day
public hearings where any person could speak to all the top people in the
department, plus the Agency chief above, on any matter under the
department's purview. And that's where the beans got spilled. It did take a
follow-up document to explain in terms of  conflict-of-interest why the
alleged relationships if true should not be condoned or tolerated.

To the credit of then-Director Jim Conran, the allegations were looked into,
and apparently what was verified mattered some, because the three career
staffers were all working elsewhere before December of that year. A new
Executive Officer was installed. The balance of factions among Board Members
abruptly changed as well. (Only one Board member from that time remains on
the Board, and the present regime is different yet.) 

The part I remain convinced of is that no amount of consensus building in
any professional society would ever have resulted in any official action by
that group. Talking about it on the listserve would result in more people
knowing something about it, just as the gossip in 1991 did. But it will
always remain to a few individuals among those who find out, and who are
bothered enough, to do the things that make the difference.  

Charles O. Greenlaw, S.E.  Sacramento CA