Red Cross says 23 staff left over sexual misconduct since 2015

[rooster59]

Red Cross says 23 staff left over sexual misconduct since 2015

 

A flag is pictured on the headquarters of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Geneva, Switzerland, June 2, 2017. REUTERS/Denis Balibouse/Files

 

ZURICH (Reuters) - The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said 23 staff members had left since 2015 over sexual misconduct, making it the latest humanitarian organisation to be affected by abuse allegations shaking the aid sector.

 

"Since 2015 we've identified 21 staff members who were either dismissed for paying for sexual services or resigned during an internal enquiry. Another two staff members suspected of sexual misconduct did not have their contracts renewed," ICRC Director-General Yves Daccord said in a statement published on Friday.

 

"I am deeply saddened to report these numbers," Daccord said in the statement, adding the ICRC was taking action to make sure all incidents would be reported and handled properly.

 

The ICRC, which has more than 17,000 staff worldwide, bans its staff from paying for sexual services even in countries where prostitution is legal, it said.

 

The aid sector has been shaken by a wave of allegations of sexual misconduct. Earlier this week, British charity Oxfam's country director in Haiti admitted to using prostitutes at his residence during a relief mission.

 

The United Nations' peacekeeping missions, agencies, funds and programmes as well as implementing partners have also been embroiled in sexual exploitation and abuse allegations, with the deputy head of the U.N. agency for HIV/AIDS becoming the latest official to leave.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-02-25

[KiChakayan]

Glad I've never worked for these m...s. They must be rule by a bunch of dried out spinsters..

 

As far as I am concerned as long as my conduct and performance at work are spotless what I do after work belongs to my private sphere, period.

 

Welcome back Inquisition.

 

[sanemax]

6 minutes ago, KiChakayan said:

As far as I am concerned as long as my conduct and performance at work are spotless what I do after work belongs to my private sphere, period.

Although this story isnt about you .

[BobBKK]

What is happening to our world?  PC this and PC that. We are spinning back to puritanical days and there WILL be a reaction. 

 

It is none of their business what consenting adults do outside of work which includes sex, dope or anything else that harms none. Humans have the right to freedom of choice and don't tell me girls don't have the choice to exchange whatever they freely want to for financial reward.

[sanemax]

4 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

What is happening to our world?  PC this and PC that. We are spinning back to puritanical days and there WILL be a reaction. 

 

It is none of their business what consenting adults do outside of work which includes sex, dope or anything else that harms none. Humans have the right to freedom of choice and don't tell me girls don't have the choice to exchange whatever they freely want to for financial reward.

This issue isnt about prostitution in Pattaya or prostitution in general .

This is about foreign men going to another Country where there has been a disaster in the disguise of helping them . helping destitute people and then having sex with them , possible in exchange for aid .

   There is the distinct possibility that pedos have been going to disaster areas to abuse orphans

[sanemax]

56 minutes ago, KiChakayan said:

As far as I am concerned as long as my conduct and performance at work are spotless what I do after work belongs to my private sphere, period.

Aid workers salaries are dependent on donations .

Prostitution is dependent on payment , you have every right to spend your money how you want , in the same way that people have every right to make a donation or not .

   If donators decide they dont want to give their money to a Charity(who will give that money to Men who will use it to pay for sex abroad) , then the money will stop and the aid workers will not be able to pay for sex .

   Its your money to do what you want , and its the donators money to do what they want 

[KiChakayan]

3 hours ago, sanemax said:

This issue isnt about prostitution in Pattaya or prostitution in general .

This is about foreign men going to another Country where there has been a disaster in the disguise of helping them . helping destitute people and then having sex with them , possible in exchange for aid .

   There is the distinct possibility that pedos have been going to disaster areas to abuse orphans

You are extrapolating here.

 

I quote the original post:  "Since 2015 we've identified 21 staff members who were either dismissed for paying for sexual services or resigned during an internal enquiry. Another two staff members suspected of sexual misconduct did not have their contracts renewed," ICRC Director-General Yves Daccord said in a statement published on Friday." 

 

So, ICRC makes "internal enquiries" on private lives of its staff members, who as consequence are being sacked because they pay for pleasure. Further, they did not renew contracts simply on the base of suspicion!! What happened to the basic rights we used to enjoy.

 

I am sensitive to this issue as a former UN staff, who could have been sacked 500 times if this kind of measure had been applied across the board, in UN and NGOs.

 

Edited February 25, 2018 by KiChakayan

[CharlesSwann]

I'd like to see the clause in their contracts that relates to this matter and see how unambiguous it is.

 

Personally I wouldn't want to work for any organisation that was actively imposing itself on personal activities that everyone knows is human nature. Such an organisation wouldn't scruple to bug your emails or go through your desk drawer when you weren't around.

 

I'm still waiting for ordinary men to stand up for normative male behaviour, but so far no one has the balls.

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, rooster59 said:

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said 23 staff members had left since 2015 over sexual misconduct, making it the latest humanitarian organisation to be affected by abuse allegations shaking the aid sector.

That should read

23 staff members had left since 2015 over doing things which are none of anyone else's business, making it the latest humanitarian organisation to be affected by made up hysteria promulgated by wowsers.

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

41 minutes ago, CharlesSwann said:

I'd like to see the clause in their contracts that relates to this matter and see how unambiguous it is.

 

Personally I wouldn't want to work for any organisation that was actively imposing itself on personal activities that everyone knows is human nature. Such an organisation wouldn't scruple to bug your emails or go through your desk drawer when you weren't around.

 

I'm still waiting for ordinary men to stand up for normative male behaviour, but so far no one has the balls.

Don't expect any politicians to stand up for normative male behaviour, as they have been cowed by PC, IMO.

[thaibeachlovers]

From some of the posts on this and other similar threads, it is apparent to me that some look at the world from the viewpoint of helping those in need, while still behaving like normal human beings and looking for a little love in the chaos, while others look at the world and see only evil intentions.

[farcanell]

9 hours ago, KiChakayan said:

Glad I've never worked for these m...s. They must be rule by a bunch of dried out spinsters..

 

As far as I am concerned as long as my conduct and performance at work are spotless what I do after work belongs to my private sphere, period.

 

Welcome back Inquisition.

 

Company “reputation” is becoming a driving force in any companies core value policy.... those that damage this, should be held accountable, not unlike stealing as a servant, as both hurt the parent in one way or another (given this fall out, I’m sure the Red Cross or Oxfam would have preferred dealing with a few thieves)

 

these core values are well published, and should be followed by all personnel, who wish to be a part of that company or organization.... especially when these personnel end up being “trust” figures

 

generally speaking, workers abroad represent their company, when ever they are abroad (esp if in a country that they are giving aid too... trust figures), and must act accordingly during this time ( this included on the plane to and from the destination country)

 

when a person is not representing others (as in not in a third world country on assignment, but rather, back at home with the wife and kids), then he or she can play around with a certain degree of acceptance.... but perhaps not those high higher ups, who must still be seen to as whiter than white.

[KiChakayan]

10 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Company “reputation” is becoming a driving force in any companies core value policy.... those that damage this, should be held accountable, not unlike stealing as a servant, as both hurt the parent in one way or another (given this fall out, I’m sure the Red Cross or Oxfam would have preferred dealing with a few thieves)

 

these core values are well published, and should be followed by all personnel, who wish to be a part of that company or organization.... especially when these personnel end up being “trust” figures

 

generally speaking, workers abroad represent their company, when ever they are abroad (esp if in a country that they are giving aid too... trust figures), and must act accordingly during this time ( this included on the plane to and from the destination country)

 

when a person is not representing others (as in not in a third world country on assignment, but rather, back at home with the wife and kids), then he or she can play around with a certain degree of acceptance.... but perhaps not those high higher ups, who must still be seen to as whiter than white.

So let's imagine a situation I am somewhat familiar with. I am out on mission in country x, for the implementation of one of my organisation's treaties. As part of the PR duties I am invited by some of the local departments heads to a nice place not unsimilar to "The lord". Of course we consume of course the local products.

 

Who on earth is going to complain? in what way to I tarnish the organisation's image? But if I had been working for ICRC I could have been sacked. Preposterous!

[manarak]

Quote

Since 2015 we've identified 21 staff members who were either dismissed for paying for sexual services

WHAT ???

 

members of the Red Cross are forbidden to pay for sex ???

[farcanell]

23 minutes ago, KiChakayan said:

So let's imagine a situation I am somewhat familiar with. I am out on mission in country x, for the implementation of one of my organisation's treaties. As part of the PR duties I am invited by some of the local departments heads to a nice place not unsimilar to "The lord". Of course we consume of course the local products.

 

Who on earth is going to complain? in what way to I tarnish the organisation's image? But if I had been working for ICRC I could have been sacked. Preposterous!

If you broke your agreement with your employer, you should be fired.

 

if you suggest that PR work (for an aid agency, in particular) involves sexual payoffs... and agree to this ethos... you should be fired

 

if you take unfair advantage of those you profess to help... you should be fired.

 

lets imagine a situation I’m familiar with... you get drunk whilst representing your company, no one is harmed ( except the company who may have to bail you out of jail)... if it’s contrary to company rules... you should be fired... so let’s not make up scenarios to support unacceptable behavior ( they signed a contract... they knew it was unacceptable]

 

if you can’t keep your pecker correctly packaged, whilst in a foreign country, under the guise of assisting those souls, whilst in a position of trust, in both your employers eyes, and those otherwise trusting you, you should not be trusted with that task.

 

this needs no dressing up.... the government knows that a wrong was done... the companies know that a wrong was done... the folk fired know that a wrong was done ( some left pre verdict, because they knew they did wrong)..... yet you wish to argue differently, which is of course, your right.

 

 

 

[farcanell]

38 minutes ago, manarak said:

WHAT ???

 

members of the Red Cross are forbidden to pay for sex ???

 

10 hours ago, rooster59 said:

The ICRC, which has more than 17,000 staff worldwide, bans its staff from paying for sexual services even in countries where prostitution is legal, it said.

Apparently..... but the good news is that this only applies to employees who sign a contract to work for them.

 

options include perhaps working for a reconstruction company, that probably won’t make such moralistic requirements of its workers. (Who aren’t in trust position)

[Air Smiles]

41 minutes ago, KiChakayan said:

So let's imagine a situation I am somewhat familiar with. I am out on mission in country x, for the implementation of one of my organisation's treaties. As part of the PR duties I am invited by some of the local departments heads to a nice place not unsimilar to "The lord". Of course we consume of course the local products.

 

Who on earth is going to complain? in what way to I tarnish the organisation's image?

 

So when back at the office in your home country you would be happy send round an email or post pictures on company website of your time at The Lord paid for by your company.

 

Who on earth is going to complain right?

[KiChakayan]

40 minutes ago, Air Smiles said:

 

So when back at the office in your home country you would be happy send round an email or post pictures on company website of your time at The Lord paid for by your company.

 

Who on earth is going to complain right?

What on earth are you taking about?

[Air Smiles]

14 minutes ago, KiChakayan said:

What on earth are you taking about?

Did you not read the post I quoted and replied to?

 

Don't worry, we'll take your feigned obtuseness as a sign you're conceding the point

Edited February 25, 2018 by Air Smiles

[KiChakayan]

6 minutes ago, Air Smiles said:

Did you not read the post I quoted and replied to?

 

Don't worry, we'll stake your feigned obtuseness as a sign you're conceding the point

"Conceding the point" ?? , I may be obtuse but you are childish. 

 

[Air Smiles]

2 minutes ago, KiChakayan said:

"Conceding the point" ?? , I may be obtuse but you are childish. 

 

 

Adults make points in discussions ...nothing childish about that!

[manarak]

1 hour ago, Air Smiles said:

 

So when back at the office in your home country you would be happy send round an email or post pictures on company website of your time at The Lord paid for by your company.

 

Who on earth is going to complain right?

jealous bigots, of which there are many, are going to complain.

what is not acceptable, is that in a modern society jealous bigots force their views on everyone.

 

I can understand that employees with a PR role can be restricted (of course they should be compensated for this restriction), but I also think it's not ok for the media to report on people's private lives.

[Air Smiles]

12 minutes ago, manarak said:

jealous bigots, of which there are many, are going to complain.

what is not acceptable, is that in a modern society jealous bigots force their views on everyone.

 

 

I don't think the owners, exec, directors and shareholders etc will be complaining out of jealousy....when the photos of PR KiChakayan at a brothel on company time go public.

Edited February 25, 2018 by Air Smiles

[farcanell]

44 minutes ago, manarak said:

jealous bigots, of which there are many, are going to complain.

what is not acceptable, is that in a modern society jealous bigots force their views on everyone.

 

I can understand that employees with a PR role can be restricted (of course they should be compensated for this restriction), but I also think it's not ok for the media to report on people's private lives.

Jealous bigots???

 

that takes a whole bunch of effort to get ones head around.... maybe calling someone a hypocrite would be easier to understand.

 

anyway.... jealous bigots and hypocrites do not, imho, make for caring, sharing, giving, compassionate, moral and responsible aid workers, and should not apply for such work.... work... vocation even

 

And.... the media is free to report on any news worthy items, such as Red Cross people breaching their agreements, or princess di getting squished... its a part of life in this new age... Hell... your phone probably tells the world all about you anyway.

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

21 hours ago, farcanell said:

If you broke your agreement with your employer, you should be fired.

 

if you suggest that PR work (for an aid agency, in particular) involves sexual payoffs... and agree to this ethos... you should be fired

 

if you take unfair advantage of those you profess to help... you should be fired.

 

lets imagine a situation I’m familiar with... you get drunk whilst representing your company, no one is harmed ( except the company who may have to bail you out of jail)... if it’s contrary to company rules... you should be fired... so let’s not make up scenarios to support unacceptable behavior ( they signed a contract... they knew it was unacceptable]

 

if you can’t keep your pecker correctly packaged, whilst in a foreign country, under the guise of assisting those souls, whilst in a position of trust, in both your employers eyes, and those otherwise trusting you, you should not be trusted with that task.

 

this needs no dressing up.... the government knows that a wrong was done... the companies know that a wrong was done... the folk fired know that a wrong was done ( some left pre verdict, because they knew they did wrong)..... yet you wish to argue differently, which is of course, your right.

 

 

 

No "wrong" has been proven, so your scenario is unproven.

 

How about the hundreds of US military that have R & R in Pattaya after an exercise? We all know that they ain't spending their time in the temples.

 

 

Edited February 26, 2018 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, farcanell said:

Jealous bigots???

 

that takes a whole bunch of effort to get ones head around.... maybe calling someone a hypocrite would be easier to understand.

 

anyway.... jealous bigots and hypocrites do not, imho, make for caring, sharing, giving, compassionate, moral and responsible aid workers, and should not apply for such work.... work... vocation even

 

And.... the media is free to report on any news worthy items, such as Red Cross people breaching their agreements, or princess di getting squished... its a part of life in this new age... Hell... your phone probably tells the world all about you anyway.

 

 

Just where do you think all those caring, sharing, giving, compassionate, moral and responsible aid workers prepared to risk their lives to work in disaster areas are?

Saints are in short supply in this world.

Real men work in disaster areas; wowsers hide in offices because they can't actually save anyone due to being weak and useless.

[thaibeachlovers]

19 hours ago, Air Smiles said:

 

I don't think the owners, exec, directors and shareholders etc will be complaining out of jealousy....when the photos of PR KiChakayan at a brothel on company time go public.

Typical deflection. If someone is bonking on company time they should get sacked, but we are discussing what people do in their own time.

[thaibeachlovers]

21 hours ago, farcanell said:

 

Apparently..... but the good news is that this only applies to employees who sign a contract to work for them.

 

options include perhaps working for a reconstruction company, that probably won’t make such moralistic requirements of its workers. (Who aren’t in trust position)

I'd expect then, that the Red Cross employees are mainly management and supervisors, rather than rough men.

I'd be interested if it was management that got the boot, or if they were forcing contract companies to sack contractor staff.

[farcanell]

18 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No "wrong" has been proven, so your scenario is unproven.

 

If there was a huge earthquake in New Zealand and the Red Cross fronted up there to assist, should a Red Cross worker be fired for paying for sex in a brothel?

NB, In NZ brothels are legal.

 

How about the hundreds of US military that have R & R in Pattaya after an exercise? We all know that they ain't spending their time in the temples.

 

If the Red Cross are saying to their workers they can't even buy sex where it's legal to do so, I would say to their management <deleted> <deleted>.

What chew talkin bout?

 

Paragraph one

21 people dismissed or resigned during or after investigation... One can only assume this means case proven (or about to be)

 

2 only contracts not renewed due to suspicion

 

paragraph two

if there was a disaster in un zud, then its a disaster zone... aid organizations are very clear about the conduct of its personnel in a disaster zone... this is a conduct issue (involving sex)

 

no matter where the disaster/ emergency is, sexual exploitation is recognized as a real issue, and this is the driver behind Red Cross resolutions (32 I think), which, for its employees, removes any grey areas

 

paragraph three

military people on RnR are not Red Cross representatives, nor are they bound by Red Cross employee guidelines (rules)... their conduct is a matter for their command structure (and their own morales)

 

paragraph four

the policy is known, and as such, every person engaged by the Red Cross, is bound by this... if they don’t like it, they need not agree to it... in which case, they don’t get the job

 

regards what you would say to management... well... you wouldn’t have the option, because you wouldn’t be given the job, as you obviously disagree with what the Red Cross holds dear.

 

paragraph five

oh... you stopped... ?????

 

 

Edited February 26, 2018 by farcanell

[Berkshire]

From the article:

 

[The ICRC, which has more than 17,000 staff worldwide, bans its staff from paying for sexual services even in countries where prostitution is legal, it said.]

 

So if that's "company policy," those who got sacked shouldn't be surprised.  And while those living in Thailand (Pattaya in particular) may be shocked that this rule even exist, I'm pretty sure that prostitution is illegal in your home countries....so it shouldn't be all that earth-shattering.