The Gong Show contestants responsible for running the city of Lewisburg, including the pound, have drawn up a nifty little document for would-be shelter volunteers. Anyone who wants to do the city workers’ jobs for free must sign away their civil rights in advance:
Volunteers shall not publicly criticize or ridicule the City of Lewisburg[.]
Here is my favorite:
Volunteers shall respect the dignity of all persons and not engage in behaviors that are intended to belittle, ridicule, or embarrass another person or employee. Volunteers shall be courteous to the public and other personnel. Volunteers shall be tactful, control their tempers, exercise patience and discretion and shall not engage in argumentative discussions, even in the face of provocation.
Impatient? You’re fired. Less than tactful? Fired. Someone on staff at the shelter jacks you up against the wall and spits in your face while screaming about how yo mama is a whore and you reply, “Not so, sir”? Fired.
I hope no one signs this rag and the city gets sued. What a bunch of schmucks. Gee, I’m glad I didn’t sign.
(Thank you Jacki Moss for posting this document online.)
I have been told that Granville Co., NC makes volunteers sign an agreement as well. I’m not sure exactly what it says, but it has some sort of “confidentiality” clause in it.
These are the general restrictions placed on behaviour in a paid position, and I would not consider them to be onerous.
We rely on volunteers to act as watchdogs and, if need be, whistleblowers at shelters because too often, those in the paid positions refuse to speak for the pets at the pound.
CAA in Baton Rouge has you sign something similar. The one that sticks out is how you can be fired as a volunteer for saying anything negative about them on “social media” sites. This must be becoming standard practice everywhere *sigh*
Nothing invites ridicule like trying to shut down ridicule with a release form. That goes double for City councils. Just sayin’.
Mostly unenforceable. Volunteers also are necessary to provide the actual care and affection to the shelter animals. Funny how they don’t ask anything parallel of their paid employees.
Shirley, I’m wondering what Nathan’s take is on conditions like this, being the attorney that he is. Legality aside, there’s nothing quite like gaining cooperation through silence. I wonder if volunteers are issued a complimentary role of duct tape to tape their mouths shut? I’m told it has 101 uses. Or 1,001. Something like that.
Nathan has published an article on this: http://www.nathanwinograd.com/?p=728
Thanks for posting the link!
I’m pretty sure that this is all a way for the city to say, we asked for volunteers and nobody volunteered. I disagree with those who think that this kind of clause is a normal and acceptable practice in public management. It’s not. It would far better serve the city to draft a whistleblower protection clause into its volunteer contracts, as well as its employee policies. That tells the public that the city cares about accountability and continuous improvement. If a city employee is breaking the law or reflecting poorly upon the city, the city manager and the city council should encourage the reporting of those incidents so that they can be corrected. If they don’t want to correct problems in their organization, they should be replaced by people who do.
Agree – if they are so fearful of being criticized or “outed” then they better have a good look at what they are doing that they are afraid the public will find out about.
Nothing more than CYA by those who have something to hide.
MCACC (Maricopa County Animal Care and Control in Phoenix) has volunteers sign agreements like the above. I am no longer a volunteer because I refused to sign, and feel that my right to speak about prior incidents as a volunteer are more important than helping a continually failing organization with a high kill rate.
Claudia, now would be a really good time to take your concerns to the media, as all five Maricopa County Supervisor seats are up for election this fall.
Nobody in their right mind would sign such a stupid piece of paper. Why don’t they just set up store mannequins and a tape player with the proper ”responses” all ready to go…Meshugginahs….
When we pulled two dogs from a NY shelter (nameless) a couple of months ago, we had to sign that we would NOT badmouth the hi kill shelter in any way in order to save the dogs. Needless to say, we saved the dogs, and I am sure that if we have a reason to break the “contract”, we would win on the basis of the 1st amendment.
Over and over again you hear shelters crying about how they need more help. They can not seem to figure out that they can not get more people to help when they treat them like this. :(
I would suggest that the guidelines could also meant to be addressed to how volunteers interact with the public and potential adopters as well. I’ve had people get in my face after they were denied adoptions for whatever reason. People have gotten unnecessarily hostile. Many volunteers at shelters are much better with animals than people, and some have responded to these situations in inappropriate ways.
Joel just gave away that he hasn’t been keeping up on the Lewisburg pound story. That’s 20 seconds in the penalty box for you Joel.
Sometimes I have to do real life stuff. I’m only responding to this blog entry. I can’t always follow a multi-day narrative.
I understand. That’s one of the reasons I provide links in posts – to allow those interested in larger context to read more.
I post shelter dogs to try to bring them to the attention of potential adopters, rescues or fosters through rescues. In viewing hundreds of shelter dogs everyday over the Net and over the U.S., I see neglect, abuse, and facilities that are killing dogs in inhumane ways and even before a person who has spoken for them can get to the shelter to pick them up. I see beautiful, healthy dogs euthanized at an alarming rate. Sometimes these facilities only need to exercise common sense to save these dogs, but as they say, “there is no cure for stupid”. There is plenty of “stupid” out there, and without volunteers being able to see and report these atrocities, what hope do the dogs have. We are their voice.
There are many public shelters in California that require volunteers to sign non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements and/or agreements not to discuss anything with the media without prior written consent, or similar “agreement”.
If they’re operating as well as they publicly claim to be, it seems they’d want their volunteers to telly everyone about all the wonderful things they see going on in their facilities.
Nothing throws up a red flag quite like being sworn to secrecy!
Couldnt agree more. I also agree with the “is this even legal?” sentiment as well. In general, I do agree that volunteers should be respectful of the employees/supervisors and such, and vice versa, but I do not agree in not having a Whistleblower Protection type of cluase.
Is this legal?
Would this be enforceable if you were considered a whistleblower? It is my understanding that there is a Whistleblower Protection Act. I do not know if you would be protected if you are a volunteer and not an employee. I guess we need an attorney to figure this one out!
” Volunteers shall not publicly criticize or ridicule the City of Lewisburg[.]
Volunteers shall respect the dignity of all persons and not engage in behaviors that are intended to belittle, ridicule, or embarrass another person or employee. Volunteers shall be courteous to the public and other personnel. Volunteers shall be tactful, control their tempers, exercise patience and discretion and shall not engage in argumentative discussions, even in the face of provocation.”
This is too subjective- I, however, would sign it and do whatever I thought was necessary to make sure the animals were advocated for. of course it would make my tenure as a volunteer very short lived I am afraid. I just don’t think what they are doing is legal.
Here is our break down of the city meeting that occurred last night and a breakdown of the volunteer contract. http://www.pbatn.org/?p=1072
Why jump to any conclusions? Why would officials even let volunteers into that shelter if they intended to hide anything? It seems to me that they are welcoming volunteers to help them support for the animals… Going in with a suspicious, critical attitudes can’t be good!