Purpose, Mission, and Vocation: The Foundation of a Catholic University Workplace Community

By Gary Miller, Director, HR Process Transformation and Integration, DePaul University

“Purpose is that sense that we are part of something bigger than ourselves, that we are needed, that we have something better ahead to work for. Purpose is what creates true happiness. “To keep our society moving forward, we have a generational challenge — to not only create new jobs but create a renewed sense of purpose.” — Excerpts from Mark Zuckerberg’s HarvardCommencement Speech, 2017

Zuckerberg’s comments convey the recently heightened awareness of many American business leaders: Purpose matters. In fact, John Mackey and Raj Sisodia, in their book Conscious Capitalism, which launched the growing movement by the same name in 2014, argues that having a higher purpose energizes companies, aligns the interest of all stakeholders, and helps companies discover how to best serve. The authors note that many CEOs have discovered that purpose matters, even citing Jeff Bezos, who advises leaders to “choose a mission that is bigger than the company.”1

Despite this increasing awareness of the importance of purpose, Gallup’s research has found that “though leaders are skilled at creating value through process improvements, they have much to learn about creating value by aligning the mission and purpose of their company with business strategies, culture, brand, and performance measures.” Without this alignment, employees are less likely to personally connect to the mission. The end result: a strong mission statement, efficient processes, but many staff who are indifferent to the long-term success of their employer and uninterested in going the extra mile to make a difference.

Building a Connection Culture

The key to meaningful and purposeful work, then, is not merely a strong and inspiring mission, but also a consciously developed culture in which people connect with that mission and with one another. This connection culture,2 at one time a given at Catholic colleges and universities can no longer be taken for granted. While there was a time when a high percentage of faculty and staff were priests and religious brothers and sisters conveying a strong sense of mission by their very presence, this is no longer the case. Today, especially in urban settings, many courses are taught by adjuncts who may teach at multiple universities, secular and Catholic. For many of the staff, their university employment may be one in a long string of jobs.

Given this, the creation of a workplace environment and campus community where staff and faculty are inspired by the mission must be part of a conscious effort. While many strategies may be pursued to improve engagement with the mission and increase camaraderie among faculty, staff, and students, purposely building a connection culture may be the most important, being consistent with a workplace identity of community,3 as well as key social teachings of the Church. Additionally, such an emphasis is fundamentally Catholic.

From Calling to Community

For centuries, the Church has recognized the importance of persons discerning their higher calling and committing to it. Traditionally, the faithful were instructed to discern a vocation, especially to consecrated life, the priesthood, or marriage — to find one’s role in the community through which to serve God, others, and the common good and to grow in holiness. Yet the idea of vocation is much broader. The Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of the laity as having a special vocation of engaging in temporal affairs and directing them to God’s will.

In Laborem Exercens, St. John Paul II described work as a vocation in which we not only serve but also achieve fulfillment: “Work is a good thing for man — good for his humanity — because through work man not only transforms nature, adapting it to his own needs, but he also achieves fulfillment as a human being and indeed, in a sense, becomes ‘more a human being.”4

Building on the idea of work as a vocation, the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, in The Vocation of the Business Leader, discusses the nature of vocation for those who work in business: “Businesspeople have been given great resources and the Lord asks them to do great things. This is your vocation. In this century alone, many businesses have already brought forth marvelous innovations which have cured disease, brought people closer together through technology, and created prosperity in countless ways.”5

The Vocation of the Business Leader provides a particularly useful insight about vocation. It notes that a higher calling isn’t necessarily something that’s discovered, so much as a recognition of how one might effectively serve in the role she or he currently holds and the importance of that service to the greater good. As with business, those who work in Catholic colleges and universities have a higher calling — to serve the mission and through this service, contribute to the good of individuals, families, and society. In a recent Harvard Business Review article, John Coleman argues, “In achieving a professional purpose, most of us have to focus as much on making our work meaningful as in taking meaning from it. Put differently, the purpose is the thing you build, not a thing you find.” Mother Teresa put it more succinctly: “Wherever God has put you, that is your vocation.”

A connection culture involves ensuring that every faculty and staff member not only understands the mission, but also is empowered to make important contributions to it. Such a workplace culture would be characterized by managers as coaches who listen and recognize each person’s contributions and provides the tools and training so that people can do their work effectively. Additionally a connection culture emphasizes strong peer mentoring relationships among faculty and staff with an emphasis on helping each member of the community find and use their strengths in their daily work, as well as help grow their strengths through development opportunities and career advancement.6 Such a workplace culture across the the university would facilitate an authentically Catholic college community identity that delivers that experience to its stakeholders, including students and their families.

In his Harvard commencement speech, Zuckerberg shared a story about John F. Kennedy’s visit to the NASA Space Center. Seeing a man carrying a broom, Kennedy “walked over and asked what he was doing. The janitor responded: ‘Mr. President, I’m helping put a man on the moon.’” Being a great place to work means more than just having an important organizational purpose. It also means being a place where employees understand their role with regard to the mission and are empowered to use and develop their strengths to make real and meaningful contributions.

Endnotes
1 Mackey, J., & Sisodia, R. Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business (Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 2014). For the authors’ discussion on the role of purpose, see pp. 41– 67. See p. 42 for Bezos’s comments.
2 The term “connection culture” is borrowed from Prinitha Govender who used it to describe Costco’s workplace culture. Costco has not only gotten the first part of the equation right with a clear and meaningful mission statement, but has also created an environment in which employees are valued, are engaged, and feel connected to their co-workers and to the mission. This strong employee connection reflects the priorities of co-founder James Sinegal, who knew the importance of treating employees like family. This culture has resulted in Costco beating out Google in 2017 as the “best place in America to work.” 
3 In past columns, Craig Mousin and I have suggested that “community” is one of those attributes of Catholic higher education that is core to its identity. It resonates with our students and their families; as such, attributes of it should be consciously woven into the fabric of our workplace cultures. In recent columns, we’ve explored how respect and collegiality among faculty, staff, and students are important in building a healthy workplace, spilling over to the entire university community. We have suggested that raising the workplace awareness of the issues that face our students, such as DACA, is yet another aspect of building a healthy workplace and campus community. In the summer 2017 issue of Update, Mariella Palacios discussed how human resources can help a university contribute to the broader community through inclusive recruitment outreach to all, especially the underserved, in seeking qualified applicants.
 4 St. John Paul II (1981). On human work: Encyclical Laborem exercens. See Part II, Work and Man, Section 9. 
5 The Vocation of the Business Leader: A Reflection. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace (PCJP). The document grew out of a seminar sponsored by the John A. Ryan Institute at the University of St. Thomas (MN) and the PCJP, held in February 2011, called “The Logic of Gift and the Meaning of Business.” See the first paragraph. 
6 Many of the ideas in this paragraph are derived from (1) Gallup employee engagement research (summary of the research); and (2) Google management effectiveness research (summary of research)

Rescinding DACA: More than Just the Dreamers

By Rev. Craig B. Mousin, university ombudsman, DePaul University

For the academy, it is more than just the DREAMERs.  The DREAMERs belong to a much larger community that has suffered under recent federal immigration policies. Much needed attention has already focused on the DREAMERS, individuals who were brought to this nation at a young age who were unable to become Lawful Permanent Residents (LPR) or citizens.  The Obama administration established the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program that enabled eligible youth the opportunity to remain in the United States under color of law until Congress considered opportunities for citizenship.    The Department of Justice recently announced it will rescind DACA eliminating the status that allowed such young adults to pursue education and employment.  Our institutions welcomed DREAMERS and have graduated many since its inception.  Many, such as the President of DePaul University, have issued statements opposing rescission and offering support to the DREAMERS as members of our communities.

In previous issues of Update, Gary Miller and Mariella Palacios discussed the importance of building a productive workplace community based on collaboration and dedication to a mission that reflects the values of the institution built through a recognition of the dignity of each individual.  They noted that Catholic Social Thought (CST), while sustaining their point, merged the workplace and the greater community.  Miller cited Centesimus Annus highlighting that each of us works for the needs of our families, community, nation, and “ultimately all humanity.” (Section 43).  If we seek to build ethical and productive workplaces, consistent with our mission, we cannot ignore the greater community. 

As we gather for another academic year, we must address the tragedies of the greater community that will be brought to our campuses.  As the DREAMERS return to our campuses fearing loss of work authorization and facing deportation, our academic community confronts even greater challenges given new immigration enforcement policies.  Bishop Joe S. Vásquez, Chair of the USCCB Committee on Migration, warned last February that two new Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policies threatened our communities.  Although almost ten million persons reside here without authorized immigration status, most experts agree that DHS has the infrastructure to deport about 400,000 persons each year.  Thus, as a matter of effective law enforcement, the Obama administration established enforcement priorities that focused on persons previously deported or those with criminal convictions.  DHS eliminated those previous priorities placing anyone out of status at risk of deportation.  Bishop Vásquez also challenged the policy that expanded the relationship between federal immigration authorities and local law enforcement.  Bishop Vásquez wrote that these new policies “will harm public safety rather than enhance it”  and will “needlessly separate families, upend peaceful communities, endanger the lives and safety of the most vulnerable among us, breakdown the trust that currently exists between many police departments and immigrant communities, and sow great fear in those communities.” 

Those sown seeds of fear have now germinated.  One news story of a deported person may cause a moment of sympathy, but one needs to view the cumulative impact of the many ways Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)’s tactics disrupt our communities by infiltrating our homes, cars, parishes and community places where we gather.   This new enforcement regime has threatened not just unauthorized persons, but the many citizens and LPRs that constitute their families, parishes, and communities.  Our students, staff, and faculty live within complex family relationships of citizens, LPRs, unauthorized persons, asylum applicants, and others seeking diverse immigration remedies.  Most Catholic institutions proclaim their mission of welcoming immigrants and educating first generation children as they have built their campuses in immigrant neighborhoods. The tension and fear produced by enhanced enforcement policies leaves no one untouched. 

            ICE’s abandonment of enforcement priorities targets not just the ten million, but all those connected by bonds of family and neighbors.  When ICE enters homes or approaches churches and seizes unauthorized persons and citizens suspected of being unauthorized, it casts a blanket of fear throughout our communities.  When some of those family and community members attend our institutions, they bring that fear and heartache with them.

            In the name of law and order, ICE’s tactics spread disorder and dis-ease.  Pastors and lay leaders are seized and removed from parishes.   Mothers and children are detained in private for-profit prisons, enriching corporations by limiting health care and proper nutrition for detainees.  Excessively high bonds generate vacancies in our communities and parishes as loved ones remain detained. Private detention facilities, often built far from legal resources, exacerbate the ability of detainees to obtain legal representation. 

            At the height of the Cold War, we heard stories that communist countries often turned children against their parents which led to prison for parents who refused to conform.  We were taught that the United States was different.  Today, ICE detains arriving minors to lure their parents to detention and deportation.  Technology developed to counter international terrorism has now been turned to domestic surveillance.

As Bishop Vásquez warned, police departments that cooperate with ICE construct barriers to victims of crime who believe local police will detain them or other family members.  Judges have requested ICE to refrain from detaining people at courthouses.  The bonds of our democracy demand that not just litigants, but witnesses, jury members, and interested parties freely gather at our courthouses, but if ICE agents detain persons near courthouses, many will refrain from attending, abdicating important rights or precluding diverse juries of our peers.  In California, ICE has tainted labor law proceedings designed to vindicate worker rights to wages or other benefits when agents arrived at proceedings to investigate workers and their families.    Famous summer events such as racing at Saratoga Springs finds some workers, even those with proper authorization, deciding to forgo employment if ICE targets backstretch areas.

Many states have also legislated anti-immigrant laws that focus on driver licenses, rental properties, or health care.  Some studies have revealed the cascading negative impact of these laws, initially intended against the unauthorized have increased discrimination of LPRs and citizens.  These state laws combined with enhanced ICE enforcement spills beyond the intended targets exacerbating health problems that spread far beyond the unauthorized, weakening our communities. 

            Some will argue that the unauthorized have a right to a legal proceeding to determine their status or remedy, alleging that our system of laws will protect them from overzealous enforcement.  Yet, the enhanced detention and enforcement has overwhelmed the immigration court system.  One critic has suggested that “the deportation system verges on lawlessness” with its excessive backlogs and the “state of chaos negatively impacts all involved.”   Immigration Judge Dana Leigh Marks bemoaned the lack of resources in court proceedings stating, “we do death penalty cases in a traffic court setting.”   Moreover, new border inspection procedures have barred bona fide asylum applicants from even getting to present their cases in court.

            And now, an additional 800,000 DREAMERS face the end of DACA.  Almost half of the DREAMERS attend universities. Many more are attending high schools or community colleges or GRE classes preparing for college.  DREAMERs throughout the land live with thousands of family members within parishes or communities that will be hurt by their detention and deportation. 

            Our nation has known times when anti-immigrant hysteria has led to similar attacks that the foreign-born did not belong in this nation.   In the mid-nineteenth century, the Know Nothing movement fostered anti-immigrant and anti-Roman Catholic fever.  Abraham Lincoln, however, observed that by 1858 immigrants constituted almost half of the nation’s population.  Though these newcomers knew not the Founders who had observed the self-evident truth that all are created equal, Lincoln argued it was not birth here or even ability to trace one’s genealogy back to the Founders, but rather the link to “the electric cord in the Declaration” of equality that binds us in community. 

            The DREAMERS and their families have demonstrated a belief in that cord of democracy by following our laws, participating in our communities, and seeking education to enhance themselves and improve their communities.  Almost all participants across the political spectrum acknowledge that our immigration laws are broken.  It strains credibility to defend DACA rescission as upholding our laws when the broken immigration system improperly detains and deports people.  Enhanced enforcement with its random disruption of communities, fractures neighborhoods, weakens parishes, and further eviscerates a claim that DREAMERS must be deported to maintain law and order.  

Our nation still struggles with its goal of equality.  Lincoln’s moral sentiment of equality provides a civic language comparable to CST’s human dignity.  Equality’s self-evidence is revealed through human dignity.  It is not just the DREAMERS, but many of our staff and faculty come from communities that deal with the daily consequences of these new policies that deny equality.  Rescission and enhanced enforcement hurt all of us.  To continue to build the academic community of equality and dignity, we must support not just DREAMERS, but their families and neighbors—for they are our families and neighbors.  They constitute our community.  We who believe that community enables us to fulfill our mission must oppose these policies that break the bonds of community.[1]

---

[1] Gary Miller’s Update column, “Community as the Foundation of a Healthy Workplace Culture,” Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities Update Newsletter, Fall 2016, can be found at:  http://www.accunet.org/Portals/70/UpdateNewsletter/Update-Fall2016.pdf?ver=2017-06-15-110726-317;  See also, Gary Miller and Mariella Palacios, “Building an Intentional Workplace Culture on the Identity of Community,” Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities Update Newsletter, Summer 2017, can be found at: http://www.accunet.org/Portals/70/UpdateNewsletter/Update-Summer-2017.pdf#page=11

Bishop Vásquez’ letter can be found at:  https://justiceforimmigrants.org/statements/u-s-bishops-chair-migration-responds-dhs-memoranda-immigration-enforcement-border-security/

For a more thorough discussion of the complexity of immigrant status in family relationships, see generally, Marie Friedmann Marquardt et al, Living “Illegal,” The Human Face of Unauthorized Immigration, (The New Press, 2011). For additional information on the consequences of linking federal immigration enforcement to local law enforcement, see Craig B. Mousin,  A Clear View from the Prairie: Harold Washington and the People of Illinois Respond to Federal Encroachment of Human Rights,29 S. Ill. L. J. 285 (Fall, 2004/Winter, 2005) at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2997657

President of DePaul University, Dr. A. Gabriel Esteban’s statement on DACA can be found at: https://resources.depaul.edu/newsroom/news/press-releases/Pages/statement-from-university-president-on-DACA.aspx .  Over 600 college and university presidents have shown support for DACA students https://www.pomona.edu/news/2016/11/21-college-university-presidents-call-us-uphold-and-continue-daca See also Shireen Korkzan, “Despite Catholic Campus Support, DACA Students Fear Deportation,” National Catholic Reporter, Feb. 23, 2017, https://www.ncronline.org/news/justice/despite-catholic-campus-support-daca-students-fear-deportation

For more information on private detention, see September 1, 2017 #1736 - The Strange Death of José de Jesús (Parts 1 & 2), Podcasts 1736 and 1737, at http://www.npr.org/podcasts/510016/latino-usa  Information on the targeting of children can be found at:  The Young Center, “DHS Targeting Parents and Relatives of Newly-Arrived Children,” at http://theyoungcenter.org/stories/dhs-targeting-parents-and-relatives-of-newly-arrived-children/

Two studies that discuss some of the health consequences of the current immigration climate are:  Joanna Almeida, et al., “The Association Between Anti-Immigrant Policies and Perceived Discrimination Among Latinos in the US: A Multilevel Analysis,” SSM Population Health Journal, Vol 2, December 2016, pages 897-903, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2016.11.003 and Morgan Philbin, et al., “State-Level Immigration and Immigrant-Focused Policies as Drivers of Latino Health Disparities in the United States,” Social Science & Medicine, April 7, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.04.007

For information on ICE activity in Saratoga Springs, see Corey Kilgannon, “Far from the Winner’s Circle, Saratoga Track Workers Fear Deportation,” New York Times. August 22, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/22/nyregion/far-from-winners-circle-saratoga-track-workers-fear-deportation.html?emc=eta1

University of Texas Clinical Law Professor Denise Gilman claimed, “The deportation system verges on lawlessness.”  https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/23/immigration-crisis-us-deportation-system-lawlessness-trump-administration

Immigration Judge Dana Leigh Marks, the President of the National Association of Immigration Judges quote can be heard at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/23/immigration-crisis-us-deportation-system-lawlessness-trump-administration

The Abraham Lincoln quote can be found in his “July 10, 1858 speech at Chicago”.  The Speeches of Abraham Lincoln, Including Inaugurals and Proclamations, (Lincoln Centenary Association, N.Y., 1908), pp.72-4.

Tweet

<!-- Twitter tweet button End --

Announcement: Mariella Palacios to Serve on National Hispanic Initiative Taskforce

We are very pleased to announce that Mariella Palacios, co-author of a recent column in this blog on community and outreach and DePaul University's Diversity & Sourcing Consultant, has been appointed to the Hispanic Initiative Taskforce, a working group of the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities in Washington D.C.

Mariella's Column on Community and Outreach ... https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1349939415953600390#editor/target=post;postID=8188102226851911263;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=1;src=postname

Tweet

Building an Intentional Workplace Culture on the Identity of Community

By Mariella Palacios, Diversity and Sourcing Consultant, DePaul University, with introduction and workplace culture background by Gary Miller, Director of HR Process Transformation and Integration, DePaul University 

“Peter Drucker famously said, ‘Culture eats strategy for breakfast.’ What that means ... is that if you do not intentionally create the culture that aligns strategically with your organization's objectives and intended results, you will find yourself in an unintentional culture that may be negative, haphazard, and automatic. What results do you want?” – Suzi Pomerantz 

In the fall 2016 issue of Update (page 9), we highlighted the first step in creating an intentional workplace culture, in accord with David Ulrich and Wayne Brockbank’s customer-centric approach. They propose that an intentional workplace culture should be built on “the identity of a company as perceived by its best customers.” For a Catholic college or university, these “customers” include students and their families, as well as other stakeholders such as alumni, donors, and community leaders. That earlier article made the case that one possible core identity for Catholic colleges and universities should be community.

 In this column, we’ll use the identity of community to explore the next two Ulrich and Brockbank steps to create an intentional culture: “translate the ideal customer-centered identity into behaviors for employees” and “design the right processes, practices, and structures for supporting and encouraging those behaviors.” We’ll conclude by providing some concrete examples of human resources practices that can foster community. “Translate the ideal customer-centered identity into behaviors for employees.”

“Translate the ideal customer-centered identity into behaviors for employees.”

This phase suggests that key principles and concepts related to the customer-centered identity (in our case, community) must be explicitly stated so that faculty and staff can determine how they might align their own behavior.[1] While several facets of community could be emphasized, such as common purpose or sense of belonging, none may be more foundational than that of solidarity. In the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, Section IV, solidarity is highlighted as one of the four permanent principles of the Church’s social teaching.

What might solidarity look like as a principle of community? Using words from the Compendium, solidarity is “a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good. That is to say, to the good of all and of each individual, because we are all really responsible for all.” It’s clearly not a reach to see this as a reason why families might choose a Catholic university — a place where staff and faculty feel connected with a strong sense of responsibility for the success of others, including the success and well-being of each student, as well as for the broader communities in which the university operates.

“Design the right processes, practices, and structures for supporting and encouraging those behaviors.”

Explicitly stating key principles and concepts is not enough. Supporting processes, practices, and structures must be developed to create and sustain solidarity. The human resources (HR) office can design structures and practices to build and promote internal solidarity among faculty, staff, and students. That office can also develop practices that bring the university to greater solidarity with members and groups of the broader communities in which the university functions.

Solidarity with these broader communities might seem to be more the realm of enrollment management or community relations. HR, however, can play a significant role in building solidarity through fair hiring practices and outreach activities that ensure the most qualified applicants are hired. Effective outreach practices create broader and more inclusive applicant pools, thus increasing the likelihood of the university finding better candidates. For the community, effective HR outreach creates opportunities for groups that might be overlooked or underrepresented in the university’s workforce. Overall, effective outreach practices are a powerful way for the university to build its solidarity within the community.

From the experience of DePaul University, proactive outreach practices also can help build a university’s Catholic brand because those actions can support an inclusive and fair recruitment and selection process, with a special concern for reaching qualified applicants from all segments of society. The following section offers some practical examples.

Outreach in Practice

To build solidarity with the community, it is essential that the outreach professionals be passionately dedicated to this work and actively involved with both internal employee groups and external resources. A comprehensive approach to outreach should include developing supportive processes and practices, reducing barriers, and developing structures that create and sustain solidarity, as well as increase the representation of underrepresented populations.

Given this comprehensive approach, outreach professionals may find themselves wearing many hats. For instance, in addition to my formal role, I (Mariella) am the:

• Staff co-chair for the employee resource group LEAD, Latinos Empowered at DePaul. 
• Founder and co-chair of the Military Employee Resource Group (MERG).
• HR diversity representative on the President’s Diversity Council. 
• Co-chair of last year’s annual diversity university forum.

 Additionally, I attend monthly Illinois Diversity Council meetings, quarterly veteran working group meetings, and an annual Disability Inclusion Opportunity Summit in order to learn from other organizations, share best practices, and bring back ideas to put into action.

Your outreach also needs to be authentic and match your institutional identity. The identity of DePaul University is Vincentian and these examples of outreach activities demonstrate our commitment to that heritage in the community:

• I’ve begun to build a partnership with an organization for visually impaired and legally blind individuals. This social service organization assists its clients with training programs and helping candidates find employment. The first step for DePaul was inviting representatives to attend a meeting of our Talent Acquisition, or hiring, team to meet our staff and learn about our hiring efforts and current opportunities. Then, the Talent Acquisition team went to the facility and met with their staff, enjoyed a tour, and learned about their services and candidates. We observed candidates working and training others in a call center environment. A few weeks later, they asked us to attend a career event at which we conducted mock interviews with some of their candidates. At that time, I invited a hiring manager from the university’s call center to come with us so he was able to meet candidates. We’re building our relationship and hope to hire some of their candidates.
• Our Talent Acquisition team and Military Employee Resource Group have also hosted a hiring event. Three area veterans organizations invited their candidates and the university invited student veterans, as well as hiring managers so they could conduct brief interviews with the candidates. The collaboration was extensive and varied, and the candidate feedback was very positive. One individual received an offer of employment at our first hiring event and we are often asked, “When is the next one?
• I recently began working with an organization that identifies, trains, and jump-starts technology careers for Chicago-area low-income young adults who, although lacking access to education and employment, demonstrate the extraordinary potential for success in business and in their communities. Members of Talent Acquisition have interviewed their candidates and I’ve been asked to present an informative session on interviewing do’s and don’ts. We are working on other creative ways to build this relationship.
• Recently, our Military Employee Resource Group hosted a breakfast and panel discussion of ways to support veteran retention. The panel included a representative from the Mayor’s Office of Veterans Affairs, a military-to-civilian employment strategist, and student veteran success expert. The event was well-attended by staff and faculty, student veterans, and alumni. Other diversity organizations with which we have relationships attended, as well. Attendees learned about the challenges and successes of veteran employment and transition from the panelists’ own stories. The post-event feedback was amazingly positive, with half of the attendees saying the panel exceeded their expectations. This type of event can build camaraderie and community, assist with employee engagement, help with retention, and provide learning opportunities for a range of people both on and off campus.

These few examples reveal that there are many ways in which you can creatively build bridges to solidarity. Effective outreach is about seeking and attracting talent from all segments of the community and building relationships with community organizations. In my experience, you need to build long-term and meaningful relationships with minority, disability, and veterans organizations and events such as these help accomplish that goal.  Just as important are finding ways to educate staff and faculty on the value that diverse individuals offer, and then retaining that talent once you’ve hired them.

HR can help create an intentional culture consistent with our Catholic brand; strengthen the sense of community, affinity, and institutional pride among all constituencies; and foster sustainability. Never underestimate your own power to do good. In St. Vincent’s words, “Action is our entire task.”

_________________________

1 Suzi Pomerantz is a member of the Forbes Coaches Council and was quoted in a May 2, 2016, article in Forbes magazine, ”Should Culture Be Created Intentionally, or Should It Be an Evolutionary Process?”

2 Ulrich and Brockbank provide this example: “For Amazon, the focus on disciplined customer-centered innovation sends a clear message to potential and current employees. As their website puts it, ‘If you love to build, to invent, to pioneer on a high-performance team that’s passionate about operational excellence — you’ll love it here.’ This agenda signals to employees what customers expect from Amazon.” 

Tweet

Tweet

HR Management: The Messenger Matters (Updated from the summer 2012 edition of Update)

This article represents a somewhat longer version of the article, The Messenger Matters which appeared in the Summer 2012 issue of Update, the quarterly newsletter of the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities .  It was posted on the ACCU website at that time, but with the new focus on unauthorized persons working in the United States and the increased emphasis on religious liberty issues, we thought the additional case law discussion found in this piece would be appropriate to re-post at this time.  

By Rev. Craig B. Mousin

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court provided a wonderful opportunity to merge the biblical message and Catholic Social Teaching with mission and values in employment decisions. As previous editions of Update have noted, the Bible, Christian theological tradition, and Catholic Social Teaching (CST) all highlight the welcoming of the foreign born into our land.¹  In contrast, U.S.  immigration laws ban the employment of persons who are not citizens or otherwise authorized to work by the federal government—setting up a conflict between the law and the Christian religious tradition to welcome the stranger as the native.

Last January, in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Court held that the First Amendment protects religious institutions in making decisions regarding choice of their religious leadership, upholding a “ministerial exception” to the nation’s anti-discrimination laws.²  In that case, as summarized in the spring 2012 issue of Update, a religious high school’s decision to terminate a called lay minister who wished to return to the classroom was permitted, despite her allegation of retaliation based on seeking a remedy through federal law rather than church procedures for her claim of discrimination on account of disability. A unanimous court stressed that the Constitution’s religious liberty provisions gave religious employers autonomy to decide who is best to lead them without government interference, upholding the ministerial exception as an affirmative defense to the discrimination law.

The EEOC had argued that such a holding might permit employers to hire undocumented persons without following the employer sanctions provisions of the INA.  The attorneys for the local church contended that the ministerial exception would not allow religious organizations to hire the undocumented as ministers, arguing instead that immigration laws would “remain untouched.”³  Apparently unconvinced by the wisdom of either side’s arguments, Chief Justice Roberts instead announced, “There will be time enough to address the applicability of the exception to other circumstances if and when they arise.”⁴  Given the convergence of events, specifically, the long history of the Catholic theological tradition on immigration, the Hosanna-Tabor decision, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ recent letter on religious liberty,⁵  that time may have come.

Chief Justice Roberts succinctly stated the heart of the holding:

We agree that there is such a ministerial exception…By imposing an unwanted minister, the state infringes the Free Exercise Clause, which protects a religious group’s right to shape its own faith and mission through its appointments. According the state the power to determine which individuals will minister to the faithful also violates the Establishment Clause, which prohibits government involvement in such ecclesiastical decisions.⁶

In support of the ministerial exception, the Chief Justice cited then-Secretary of State James Madison’s response when John Carroll, the first Catholic bishop in the United States, requested his input on who Carroll should select to lead the Church in the recently acquired New Orleans. Madison refused to give governmental guidance while stating, “a scrupulous policy of the Constitution” guards “against a political interference with religious affairs.”⁷ Ironically, the priest Bishop Carroll had inquired about was a foreign-born Spanish priest.

In Hosanna-Tabor, the Court made it clear that a religious organization’s determination of what qualified for leadership was not determined by ordination, specific duties, or a fixed number of hours engaged in leading worship. Indeed, the diversity of faiths within the United States revealed myriad criteria relied upon by each faith community for discerning the necessary qualifications and duties for religious leadership. Recognizing that not every criterion for religious leadership would fit a common template, Justice Thomas’s concurrence pointed out that some might even find a particular religion’s choice of ministers “unpalatable.”⁸ Nonetheless, for him, the First Amendment necessarily protected the religion’s choice of leadership to enable it to fulfill its theological tenets.

Justice Alito in his concurrence concisely remarked:

When it comes to the expression and inculcation of religious doctrine, there can be no doubt that the messenger matters. Religious teachings cover the gamut from moral conduct to metaphysical truth, and both the content and credibility of a religion’s message depend vitally on the character and conduct of its teachers.⁹

Legal Threats to Discerning the Divine

One common theme in the biblical stories regarding immigrants reveals that the messenger of God frequently arrives as the immigrant, the sojourner, the stranger, the other. In Leviticus 19:34, we hear God’s instruction to “treat the immigrant as the native, for you were once slaves in Egypt.” In Hebrews 13:2, we are instructed to show hospitality to the stranger, for in so doing, we often entertain the divine messenger. As the last two editions of Update have noted, CST on immigration has developed from these biblical understandings and the Catholic theological tradition of treating the stranger equally as the native. Laws that prohibit hiring of a foreigner or a person not designated by the national government as authorized to work under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) stand in stark contrast to such biblical understandings of ourselves and the immigrant. In effect, they deny a faith organization’s ability to discern whether the one it seeks to call for leadership is that divine messenger. If, as Justice Alito stresses, the messenger does matter, the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA threaten every religious organization’s ability to exercise its religious discernment of the divine messenger in its midst, to choose its own leadership, and with such prohibition, jeopardize the religious organization’s future.

When the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops recently issued “Our First, Most Cherished Liberty,” it cited several examples of government laws that challenged the church’s ability to be the church, including state laws such as those in Alabama that restrict the church’s ability to show hospitality through its ministries to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and shelter the homeless. The bishops recognized that the conflict between the state and conscience might at times cause one to either refuse to follow an unjust law or face the consequences of civil disobedience.

Such decisions are weighty ones and require significant thought and prayerful discernment within the community. The Hosanna-Tabor decision, however, may provide faith organizations the ability to maintain integrity with their Holy Scriptures and teachings while following the law. The ministerial exception might allow organizations to hire undocumented persons in ministerial positions. Imagine university ministers who have fled their homelands seeking safety and peace in the United States, teaching the Joseph story of freedom from slavery to leadership positions. Imagine undocumented persons who have traveled from Central America crossing deserts and suffering hardship leading a Bible study on the Exodus for university students. Imagine if religious universities and colleges joined churches, synagogues, and mosques throughout the nation in hiring undocumented persons as ministers, rabbis, or imams who—through prayer, witness, and example—revealed the message of hospitality to the stranger. Would our students gain greater understanding of CST and the biblical message? Would universities and colleges discover new ways to incorporate and implement CST into their policies and procedures?

For prudential reasons, some might argue that Chief Justice Roberts’ decision to leave this question for another day is too slim a reed to put institutions at legal risk by hiring an undocumented person as a minister. Others might note that the complexity of immigration laws and the confusing interaction of civil and criminal penalties make this claim to the ministerial exception too frightening to envision. Indeed, although immigration law has been considered a civil law for over a hundred years, the federal government has enacted laws increasingly criminalizing offenders, both those entering this nation and those employing them. Even if the ministerial exception protected an institution, hiring an undocumented person as a minister does not automatically protect that minister from greater risk to deportation, as the person’s underlying undocumented status would not seem to change with employment under the Hosanna-Tabor exception. Thus, increased risk of apprehension and removal might find few undocumented persons willing to accept a call to university minister positions.

Such fear underscores how employer sanctions restrict the religious freedom of faith-based organizations to choose their ministers without government interference. The Supreme Court’s insistence that government cannot deny religious institutions autonomy to name their leadership dovetails with the bishops’ insistence that Catholics join with other religions to provide education when government laws violate religious liberty. Employer sanctions, by denying the community of faith its ability to call its messenger, eviscerate the community’s ability to discern the divine messenger or choose its leaders. Given the bishops’ call to vigilance, even for those universities and colleges not willing to risk seeking the ministerial exception for the undocumented, such institutions can still take other actions to oppose this restriction on religious liberty.

Taking Action

The bishops stressed that Catholic colleges, universities, and other faith-based institutions can play a special role in the effort to engage more members of the body politic in protecting religious liberty. Employer sanctions and the I-9 forms that all new employees must complete to demonstrate their authorization to work in the United States provide a particularly apt place for education about CST, mission and values, and religious liberty. The harsh consequences of the federal law faced by the employee occur in at least three occasions: (1) when initially seeking employment; (2) when hired with authorization, but subsequent events cause an otherwise good employee to become unauthorized under the immigration laws, necessitating termination; and (3) when hired despite lack of authorization, which was not discovered until information comes to the notice of the employer and termination is required under the immigration laws—all scenarios not faced by a native.

Severe consequences follow all three scenarios, including the loss of employment and possible removal from the country, breaking up families and communities, and disrupting the workplace. Immigration law is complex. Conflicting instructions and regulations, and changing judicial interpretations and congressional actions all merge to make the complexity especially daunting to human resources departments and workers themselves. Fear of sanctions may chill institutions, with the consequences falling upon the workers.

Why not seize this opportunity to seek ways to ameliorate the process within legal parameters? Internally, colleges and universities can work with their human resources staff to implement policies that make the employer sanction provisions as hospitable as possible. If an applicant would be hired but for lack of paperwork, work with local bar associations to provide lists of competent immigration attorneys, including those of the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC) or Catholic Charities. Some employers provide for the expense of legal assistance for employees who discover they may be eligible for employment, but simply lack the proper paperwork. Consider policies to rehire workers terminated for lack of proper status, but who subsequently obtain status.

Outside campus, colleges and universities can work to educate Congress to the incompatibility of employer sanctions with CST and the biblical call to hospitality. Demonstrate the tragic loss to the common good when undocumented students graduate from our nation’s schools, but fail to use their skills because they cannot obtain work authorization. Inform local communities about how employer sanction provisions break up communities and hurt the common good.

Universities and colleges may also opt to build upon the research that demonstrates how employer sanctions undermine the U.S. economy, stifle business initiative, and weaken local communities.¹⁰  Immigration attorney Angelo Paparelli reminds us that one purpose of employer sanctions is to increase employment opportunities for U.S. citizens.¹¹  If the undocumented person brings innovation, ideas, and imaginative solutions for increasing the number of jobs in this nation, then perhaps new theories of work and corporate legal structure might lead to solutions that fulfill the purpose of IRCA without necessitating removal of that person. Universities and colleges could link business schools with their entrepreneurial institutes and law schools to seek those novel responses. Such collaboration could fulfill St. Vincent DePaul’s call to be “inventive to infinity.”¹²  Law schools could also provide the legal scholarship and briefs that respond to those cases, raising the issues Chief Justice Roberts postponed to a subsequent day.

Unfortunately, the draconian timelines of employer sanctions and the harsh realities of immigration law limit the remedies that might be available. Continuing relationships to legal services for immigrants might be the best an institution can provide for those not hired or subsequently terminated under employment sanctions. Hiring an undocumented person as a minister of care might also offer pastoral help with particular sensitivity to those terminated or not hired under the law. Indeed, the messenger matters. ♦

We invite you to respond to this column through our blog. There, we also invite you to post links to your mission statements as well as HR and compensation philosophy documents. This sharing will permit a fuller discussion of how mission and CST influence the employment process.
The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s alone and do not represent those of DePaul University or the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities. This article does not provide legal advice on the matters discussed above. Any issues involving employment and immigration should be discussed with a competent licensed attorney in your state.

Endnotes

[1] See Collier, E. (Fall 2011). “Higher Education, Mission and Undocumented Students,” Update, 11; and Weldon, L.. (Summer 2011). “The Catholic Church and Immigration: Pastoral, Policy and Social Perspectives,” Update, 20. Both articles also provide a number of resources on Catholic responses to immigration.
[2] 132 S.Ct. 694, 710 (2012).
[3] Petitioners Reply Brief, at 20, 2011 WL 3191978.
[4] Hosanna-Tabor at 710.
[5] United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Ad hoc Committee for Religious Liberty. (May 17, 2012). “Our First, Most Cherished Liberty, A Statement on Religious Liberty.”
[6] Hosanna-Tabor at 706.
[7]  Hosanna-Tabor at 703.
[8]  Id. at 711.
[9] Id. at 713.
[10] For one example of how IRCA fails to meet its alleged purposes, see Massey, D.S., Durand, J., and Malone, N.J. (2002). Beyond Smoke and Mirrors, Mexican Immigration in an Era of Economic Integration. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
[11] See Paparelli, A. (March 18, 2012). Immigration Options for Dreamers Under Existing Immigration Law. Last visited on May 30, 2012.
[12] Coste, P., C.M., ed. (1985–2010). Vincent de Paul: Correspondence, Conferences, Documents, ed. and trans. by Kilar, J., D.C., Poole, M., D.C., et al., 1-13a & 13b. New York: New City Press, 11:131.
  

Embrace Employees as Partners

"There is a limit to how much hard work you can put in as the owner. Especially in a very small company where you only have your employees to rely on, you must turn those few employees into your partners, sharing the same ideas and working together to develop the company. It is essential that you make them into partners who will work as one with you. In other words, I believe it is important for a business owner to view employees as partners. When you hire employees, even if it is only one or two people, you should tell them, "I am relying on you," and then treat them as partners on a daily basis."
 
    -Kazuo Inamori:
http://global.kyocera.com/inamori/management/motivate/motivate01.html

Tweet

The Bible: the Perfect Primer on Immigration Law for Senator Sessions

by Rev. Craig B. Mousin, MDiv 1987

The beauty of the United States’ First Amendment religious liberty protections stems from prohibiting laws established by religion while permitting individuals to exercise their personal faith through a spirit of discernment to pursue policies and laws for the common good. We have witnessed some of our nation’s finest moments initially inspired by persons of faith injecting that spirit into the body politic, from abolishing slavery, building hospitals, and securing civil rights. Senator Jeff Sessions, nominee for U.S. Attorney General, frequently witnesses his faith in public life. His website proclaims his belief in God as one of his four life pillars. He relies on Scripture to restrict immigration, citing Nehemiah’s wall around Jerusalem as the equivalent to building a wall at our borders excluding the unwanted. Sessions asserts that Scripture supports restricting immigration and increasing deportation of those the law bans.

But what would Senator Sessions advocate if his Bible was not available to guide his decisions? I suggest a simple thought experiment. What if the immigration law that he has so energetically advocated held force during biblical times? What if the biblical protagonists were subject to these civil and criminal restrictions? Some might be barred and others deported from the land prior to engaging in the activity that then became part of not only the biblical narrative, but western culture. We do not have to read far into Genesis before the experiment reveals results. Cain, a murderer, would be deported as an aggravated felon. Noah, a smuggler, might receive an exemption for his wife and sons, but he, too, is deported for smuggling his daughter-in-laws. Genesis reports that Pharaoh deported Abraham and Sarah for marriage fraud, a serious immigration violation that would remove them from the story and preclude their role as ancestors of those in the biblical narrative. Joseph, imprisoned for two years for attempted rape, would not be the subject of the feel-good story of a coat of many colors, but rather deported as a criminal felon. His brothers, the founders of the twelve tribes of Israel, would never fill that role for they became aggravated felons by trafficking their brother to Egypt. Even innocent Ruth, widowed, would be deported as a public charge, because gleaning in the fields proves her poverty, a sufficient ground for deportation. God forgives murderers in the Bible, calling Moses and David to leadership, but our immigration law does not forgive easily, barring them entry, thus eliminating their inspiration from the biblical canon.

The one Christians call without sin, Jesus of Nazareth, sadly has more immigration violations than most. His family fled Herod’s persecution before the family could be registered in Bethlehem. As a refugee in Egypt, how would Jesus prove his birth status permitting him to return to Nazareth? How would Joseph prove he was the biological father to the baby he was bringing back with a minor woman without papers? Joseph, guilty of trafficking underage women and children, would find himself barred at the border. Mary and Jesus would be detained, much like the thousands of women and children currently in the private detention centers in Arizona and Texas. Even if Jesus somehow made entry, additional violations plague him. The Bible regales the extravagant hospitality of Jesus in feeding the thousands with a few loaves of bread and fish. The Bible fails to tell us that Rome considered Galileans terrorists. Immigration law designates Jesus’ act of kindness as providing material aid to terrorists, making him deportable. He is later found guilty of sedition, leading to his execution. In this scenario, that conviction subjects him to deportation as an aggravated felon. His co-conspirators, the disciples, would also be deported and unable to evangelize the Gospel message. Peter would be guilty of another aggravated felony in striking the servant in the Garden of Gethsemane, preventing him from leading the church forward. Finally, one might put hope in Paul to reclaim the story. Recall, however, Paul was a persecutor of the early church, thus making him deportable and unable to carry the word to the rest of the world. Taken as a group, the Bible’s heroines and heroes provide an almost perfect primer cataloguing the many grounds of deportation and exclusion our government employs each day to remove individuals from our nation.

Strictly enforcing our immigration laws would deprive the world of any biblical narrative for personal faith or for its contributions to law and morality for the last two thousand years. Deporting or excluding all the major protagonists of the Bible would leave Senator Sessions without one pillar of his life, as no Bible story would exist to guide him. God’s forgiveness and mercy repeat constantly throughout the text including the forgiveness of immigrants. Indeed, scholar Walter Brueggemann finds the biblical core of faith within a matrix of exile.[1] It is within that core of faith that God tells us not only to love our neighbor and to love God, but to love the immigrant. The issue is not building Nehemiah’s wall; it is how we engage the encounter when one comes to us as an immigrant. God has called many: Abraham, Sarah, Moses, Ruth, Joseph, Mary and Jesus, and the others who engaged in activities that would make them deportable under our immigration laws, to teach us what it means to live our faith as if in exile. How many gifts of the immigrant do we deny ourselves today with our deportation and detention policies and practice?

Congress has scheduled Senator Sessions to testify regarding his nomination on January 10 and 11. In the Christian liturgical year, Epiphany falls on January 6, when the three immigrants from the East, the Magi visited the Christ-child. Their report of the birth incited Herod to persecute the innocents in Bethlehem, forcing the family to flee to Egypt as refugees. The serendipitous timing poses this question: how would Senator Sessions respond when Jesus, Mary and Joseph, refugees without papers, seek entry?

Rev. Craig B. Mousin is a 1987 graduate of Chicago Theological Seminary and a CTS Life Trustee. He is a member of Wellington Avenue United Church of Christ. The opinions expressed in this blog are the author’s alone and do not represent those of Chicago Theological Seminary or Wellington Avenue United Church of Christ. Rev. Mousin is the author of “You Were Told to Love the Immigrant, But What if the Story Never Happened? Hospitality and United States Immigration Law” upon which this posting is based and which provides greater detail on the immigration violations discussed above: Tweet