XPost: humanities.misc, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sac.politics   
   XPost: rec.arts.tv   
   From: drooler@gmail.com   
      
   Amnesty International has a culture of white privilege with incidents of   
   overt racism including senior staff using the N-word and micro-aggressive   
   behaviour such as the touching of black colleagues’ hair, according to an   
   internal review into its secretariat.   
      
   It came as eight current and former employees of Amnesty International UK   
   (AIUK) described their own experiences of racial discrimination and issued   
   a statement calling on senior figures to stand down.   
      
   One of the whistleblowers, Katherine Odukoya, said: “We joined Amnesty   
   hoping to campaign against human rights abuses but were instead let down   
   through realising that the organisation actually helped perpetuate them.”   
      
   Representatives of both arms of the UK-based human rights organisation   
   apologised and pledged to make changes, with the director of AIUK citing   
   “the uncomfortable fact that we have not been good enough”.   
      
   The internal review at Amnesty’s international secretariat, commissioned   
   following the Black Lives Matter movement, recorded multiple examples of   
   workers reporting alleged racism including:   
      
    Senior staff using the N-word and P-word, with colleagues labelled over-   
   sensitive if they complained.   
      
    Systemic bias including the capability of black staff being questioned   
   consistently and without justification, and minority ethnic staff feeling   
   disempowered and sidelined on projects.   
      
    A lack of awareness or sensitivity to religious practices resulting in   
   problematic comments and behaviour.   
      
    Aggressive and dismissive behaviour, particularly over email and often   
   directed towards staff in offices in the global south.   
      
   In June last year the international board of Amnesty International sent an   
   email to staff addressing the Black Lives Matter movement and racism.   
   Citing the killing of George Floyd, it said racism was encoded into the   
   “very organisational model” of the human rights body, which had been   
   shaped by the “colonial power dynamics and borders” that were “fresh” at   
   the time of its founding in 1961.   
      
   It continued: “Despite some notable and hard-won changes in recent years,   
   control and influence over our resources, decision-making … has remained   
   overwhelmingly in the hands of … people from the white majority Global   
   North.”   
      
   It said there had been bias and insensitivity in the way some people were   
   treated at the international secretariat – the arm of the organisation   
   which sets policy and hires researchers from hubs across the world, with   
   headquarters in London.   
      
   The board went on to inform staff that an independent review would take   
   place. Over the next few months, workplace experts from the consultancy   
   Howlett Brown conducted a “temperature check”. They were given access to   
   staff surveys and carried out six focus groups made up of 51 staff   
   including two exclusively attended by black staff.   
      
   Published in October 2020 but not press released, the 46-page internal   
   report by Howlett Brown, focused on Amnesty’s international secretariat,   
   summarised: “Remarks (in the focus groups) were consistently shared that   
   the external face of Amnesty (International Secretariat) is very different   
   to its internal face.” The experts recommended that to resolve issues   
   there would need to be a recognition of the “systemic privileges that   
   exist”.   
      
   A statement released alongside the report by the Amnesty International   
   coalition leadership team said it was “sobered” by the findings, adding:   
   “It is a timely reminder that discrimination, racism and anti-Black racism   
   exist in our organisation. It has highlighted both the extent and   
   systematic nature of racism and indicates we must address white privilege   
   wherever it exists.”   
      
   Separately, staff at AIUK, which is also based in London but has a   
   separate employment structure from the international secretariat, made   
   claims of racial discrimination, telling the Guardian there were   
   similarities between their experiences and the culture at the   
   international secretariat.   
      
   They described feeling “dehumanised” over their race and ethnicity over a   
   number of years, with some reporting official grievances.   
      
   In a joint statement, two current and six former employees of AIUK called   
   for the director, senior management team and board to resign, claiming the   
   leadership “knowingly upheld racism and actively harmed staff from ethnic   
   minority backgrounds”.   
      
   Odukoya, who worked within the campaigns and community organising teams at   
   AIUK, said that as a black woman she was constantly mentally exhausted   
   navigating an environment that was “hostile to blackness”. “There’s a   
   hegemonic white middle-class culture that seemed to be protected and   
   reproduced. White privilege was pervasive,” she said.   
      
   Odukoya described colleagues at AIUK commenting on her hair and requesting   
   to touch it, making negative references to her “urban” accent and   
   referring to her as the “black girl”.   
      
   In 2019 she raised a grievance concerning racial and gender   
   discrimination, alleging that she had been manipulated into working above   
   her pay grade without the correct remuneration. AIUK did not uphold the   
   claim but reached a settlement with Odukoya in May last year.   
      
   Kieran Aldred, who worked for AIUK as an advocacy officer for three years   
   until 2018 and is now head of policy at the gay rights charity Stonewall,   
   alleged along with the other current and former employees that AIUK’s   
   leadership was actively harmful to staff from minority ethnic backgrounds.   
      
   Aldred, 31, claimed that minority ethnic staff were overlooked for   
   promotions, with pay reviews consistently favouring high-earning white   
   senior leaders. He said the leadership had exonerated themselves of   
   wrongdoing.   
      
   “Working for AIUK destroyed my self-confidence, my belief in my   
   capabilities. I didn’t think I was skilled enough to do my job, that any   
   organisation would ever hire me, let alone promote me, and I suffered from   
   ongoing depression and anxiety,” said Aldred.   
      
   Kate Allen, the director of AIUK, apologised, saying these were serious   
   and challenging concerns and, although she could not discuss individual   
   cases, the allegations of discrimination would be taken seriously and   
   investigated. “We know that institutional racism exists in the UK and,   
   like any other organisation, we aren’t immune to this very real problem,”   
   she said.   
      
   “We recognise that we have not done enough to ensure that our organisation   
   is a truly inclusive one where everyone receives the same level of respect   
   and opportunity, is valued equally and is able to be heard. We are   
   reckoning with the uncomfortable fact that we have not been good enough   
   and from this, we understand that we must change to become better.”   
      
   In response to the Howlett Brown report, Allen said the international   
   secretariat had also taken significant measures to act on its findings.   
   While the report did not look at AIUK, Allen recognised that it must also   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)