Boulder Hospital Told Gay Staffer to Remove Rainbow Flag Screen Saver or Be Fired, So She Quit

[TexasTowelie]

Michelle Hurn, a former registered dietitian at Boulder Community Hospital in Colorado, was told to remove a rainbow flag screen saver from her computer or she would be fired.

So Hurn resigned instead.

Hurn, a lesbian, said she decided to start using the screen saver after the presidential election to show her support for the LGBTQ community, KMGH reports:

“I’m going to put the flag up. It’s a symbol to be of equality and, you know, of pride — especially for people who are marginalized,” said Hurn.

But one complaint from a co-worker prompted a call from her boss insisting that the image be deleted or she would be fired, Hurn said.

“I’m certainly not looking for special treatment or preferential treatment, but to say that a symbol of equality is offensive — I have a real problem with that and I just don’t feel good working for an organization that’s going to stand behind that,” said Hurn.

Hurn told Denver7 she spoke several times with hospital administrators, who each time refused to support her position.

“I was very surprised that HR, my boss, the director of our department, they all told me they like me, they think I’m a good dietitian, they think I do great work, but if I’m going to put the symbol back up, then they’re going to start the discipline process and that I was going to be fired,” said Hurn.

Read more: http://www.towleroad.com/2017/01/rainbow-flag-screen-saver-fired/

[metroins]

1. No unemployment benefits if she quit

Usually better to get fired.

Not sure if she'll have an EEOC claim or not under Colorado statutes. I don't think this is federally protected.

[RKP5637]

2. FFS! Yeah, nation of equality ... hmmmmmm. Boulder, surprising, I had thought

Boulder was pretty moderate. Just this place, I guess.

[Yo_Mama]

3. I entirely question this interpretation of the incident - this seems like a security concern, not

an image concern.

In almost all health facilities, and in every health facility that has even tried to comply with federal information security legislation, only approved software may be installed on the facility's computers. This includes screensavers (in the past, some have been used to deliver malware).

Hospitals have been the targets of hacking for some time now - the information in their databanks is extremely useful.

All I can say is that if the hospital DOES NOT have a policy that installing a screensaver of one's own choice or any program not on the approved list (many have policies that only IT may install any program) is forbidden, it may get audited by the Fed because it has a terrible gap in its policies and procedures.

In the required Information Security & HIPAA policies, it will say that a staffer who refuses to obey security and privacy rules must be let go. This would have been the basis for the requirement to remove the screensaver.

I would find it incredible that this would be about the rainbow screen saver and not about the installation of non-approved software. Just incredible. I don't believe this story at all, because it clearly is not accurately explaining what occurred.

[TexasTowelie]

5. If this is actually a security concern then I would agree with you.

The company that I worked for had a written policy of not allowing any type of screensaver, program or application on its system without receiving approval from the IT section. If management explained that was the issue with the screensaver and she refused to remove it then it would be grounds for dismissal. What I would be curious to know is whether any of the other employees have personal screensavers or photos of a relative, pet or vacation trip on display that aren't on an approved list.

Upon further research I found this article in the Boulder Daily Camera. It appears that there weren't any issues with other photos that she had used as wallpaper backgrounds. It doesn't appear that it was an issue with computer security--she even had a photo of her wife as wallpaper at one time, but rather the display of the LGBT flag (ETA: and that someone was offended by it).

BCH issued a statement on the situation Wednesday.

"An employee recently resigned from her position related to use of a shared workplace computer and a dispute with a coworker," the statement read. "The employee who resigned was never threatened with termination by any member of the management team or Human Resources Department at BCH. The employee was offered the opportunity to have formal or informal mediation with her coworker but declined that option and chose to resign."

Hurn, who has been with BCH as a clinical dietitian for a year and a half, said it all started about a month and a half ago. Her office is not in a public patient area and only a few people have access to that wing, but someone saw the screen saver through her office door and complained about it to Hurn's supervisors, who ordered her to delete it.

"It was really hard, and really terrible," Hurn said. "I never asked for any type of special treatment."

Hurn said eventually someone just went in on Hurn's day off and deleted the screen saver off her computer. Hurn said she pleaded with her supervisors and BCH's human resources department, but got nowhere. Finally, Hurn said, "I'm done. I felt like this has to stop."

http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_30704159/boulder-hospital-employee-resigns-after-being-told-delete

[Yo_Mama]

4. Checked further, this appears to be inaccurate, hospital statement

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/boulder-hospital-employee-quits-over-gay-pride-flag-screen-saver?autoplay=true

While BCH normally would not comment on specific personnel issues, important inaccuracies in a recent media report compel me to vary from that approach. An employee recently resigned from her position related to use of a shared workplace computer and a dispute with a coworker. The employee who resigned was never threatened with termination by any member of the management team or Human Resources Department at BCH. The employee was offered the opportunity to have formal or informal mediation with her coworker but declined that option and chose to resign.

The media report also stated that the gay pride flag was on a list of offensive images that are banned at BCH. There is not and never has been such a list. It is BCH practice that communications and images in shared workspaces be neutral. The purpose of this practice is to maintain a workplace that is focused on patient care. In this specific situation, the employee resigned rather than accept our content neutrality practice.

Unfortunately, American society is increasingly polarized and we in Boulder are not immune to that divisiveness. I am deeply saddened that this incident has caused members of our community to feel unwelcome at BCH. This is not who we are and does not represent our values.

[TexasTowelie]

6. I checked into the story also,

it does appear that the co-worker finally found an issue to complain about. The co-worker couldn't complain about the wallpaper showing a picture of her wife since it would be discriminatory to remove that picture, but allow other employees to have personal pictures as wallpaper.

Whether she has grounds to claim that she was in a hostile work environment is best left to attorneys the civil justice system. Her case would be stronger if she did try to settle it in mediation with the hospital. I do expect that the hospital will implement stronger policies not allowing any type of wallpaper photos or screensavers to be on their computer system because of the exposure to liability and media publicity.

[Yo_Mama]

7. You're required to use screensavers - but the content of them is usually specified by IT

Personal pics are one thing, but images and screensaver programs downloaded off the internet have harbored malware in the past.

[TexasTowelie]

8. Yes, I'm aware since I used to work for an IT company.

It would be interesting to know whether any other employees at the hospital were using non-approved screensavers. I doubt that the complaint against the dietitian was because the screensaver was not on the sanctioned list though.

From the various stories that I've read there was no mention of computer security as an issue I believe the complaint was a matter of the co-worker being offended by the symbolism of the rainbow flag and I wouldn't be surprised if the two employees had some animosity with each other.

It would also be interesting to know if the person that removed the rainbow flag screensaver was from the IT department or if it was removed by the co-worker that reported the incident. If there was a security concern then it should be removed by the IT department to check the computer (and network) for malware.

[Yo_Mama]

9. Yeah, hospital statement sounded like it was between the workers sharing the PC

I think the generally confused reporting is not helping us any - I'm guessing the screen saver was not an issue, but only the particular images, and that maybe it was the standard Windows screen saver with personalized images.