DRAFT September 2023
Respectful Behavior Policy.
Preamble
The Division of History of Science and Technology of the IUHPST is an international
non-governmental organization devoted to international cooperation in the fields ofhistory of science and technology across the world. It is managed by voluntary, unpaid
elected officers and an elected council (also unpaid). The main activity of DHST is toorganize an international congress every four years and coordinate the activities ofnumerous commissions. The members of DHST are representatives of 98 nations, eachnominated by a national committee for the history of science, and 26 international
scientific unions.
Respectful behavior
Freedom of expression and vigorous debate are crucial to scholarly exchange. The
Division of History of Science and Technology (DHST) strongly values mutual respectand strives to provide an environment for intellectual exchange that is free from bias
and intimidation. DHST is dedicated to securing a safe, hospitable, and productive
environment for everyone engaging in our meetings, of any size or form. We expect
speakers, questioners, and audiences at DHST International Congresses todemonstrate self-control and civility, even during strong disagreement, and not toengage in ad hominem attacks. Furthermore, we expect those participating in DHST
events to treat others with respect and not to engage in behavior at any time that isdiscriminatory, intimidating, threatening, or harassing. This expectation applies to ourofficers, speakers, volunteers, and attendees at DHST occasions, whether in person, orremotely, via digital media such as Twitter or Zoom.
Commitment
DHST affirms its commitment to building a safe and inclusive environment for allparticipating individuals, especially students, early career scholars, and individuals fromgroups that have been, or are currently, historically marginalized. We recognize thatpeople can be vulnerable to power differentials in academic structures and that it can bedifficult for individuals to file a complaint. Accordingly, DHST deplores all harassment
and is sensitive to the harm suffered by persons who experience it.
Nondiscrimination and Anti-Harassment Standards
DHST prohibits any unwelcome conduct that is based on an individual’s sex (includingpregnancy), sexual orientation, gender identity, race, color, religion, national origin, age,marital status, disability, or employment status and that creates an environment that areasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive. Harassment may
include such actions as:(1) inappropriate physical contact;(2) demeaning jokes, kidding, or teasing;(3) verbal abuse and epithets;(4) degrading comments;

(5) the display of offensive or sexually suggestive objects or pictures;(6) conduct or comments of a lewd or lascivious nature, including subtle pressure forsexual activity;(7) repeated offensive sexual flirtation, advances or propositions;(8) any other conduct that the individual (or group of individuals) might reasonably find
to be intimidating, hostile, offensive, coercive, or threatening.
Sexual harassment does not refer to occasional compliments of a socially acceptable
nature or consensual personal and social relationships.
Reporting
1. If an individual or group of individuals believes that they have experienced any
violation of this policy at events or in media funded or organized by DHST, theperson or group should report the incident immediately to the designatedOmbudperson or Ombudspersons (abbreviated to Ombud), who are appointed
as independent mediators. The Ombud will have a dedicated email address. TheOmbud will generally be present in person at International Congresses. Althoughanyone may seek advice from the Ombud, only the individual or individuals
alleging that they have been harassed may file a complaint. The Ombud shalllisten to the grievance, describe the policy and procedures, outline issues ofprivacy and confidentiality, and discuss possible courses of action regarding thefiling or non-filing of a formal complaint.
2. The Ombud will not attempt to resolve the complaint nor approach any cited
individuals and shall take all reasonable efforts to maintain in strict confidence
the identity and privacy of both the complainant and the person or persons
implicated in an incident.
3. If an individual elects to file a formal complaint, that person must describe theincident in a non-confidential written statement delivered to the Ombud. There isno time limit on filing a complaint, but it is preferable either immediately or verysoon after the incident. The Ombud will provide the statement to a three-person
Respectful Behavior Review Committee appointed by Council who will
investigate the case. The Chair of the Review Committee shall contact bothparties to discuss the incident and determine whether there is a fair resolution.
The accused party may elect to file a written response. If no resolution can befound, the Committee shall determine whether the incident constitutedharassment under the terms of this Policy.
4. The Committee will aim to expedite the inquiry and respond within three monthsof receiving the complaint from the Ombud. The Respectful Behavior policy aimsto ensure that the process is fair.
Procedure
If the Review Committee determines that the incident constituted harassment, it shallfurnish a report with names erased of the incident with the Committee’s findings, and arecommended sanction, if any, to the Secretary General within six months of receiving
the complaint from the Ombud. The Secretary General will bring the matter to Council,
who shall consider the case in confidence. The Secretary General shall determine
whether the consideration takes place via email or in person. Special attention will bepaid to the question of private discussion taking place via platforms such as MicrosoftTeams.
Sanctions
If a majority of Council concurs with the recommendations of the Committee, theCouncil Executive Committee shall issue a written reprimand including any sanctions.
Possible sanctions include banning an individual from attending one or moreInternational Congresses, banning access to DHST digital media such as Twitter, or, inthe case of an elected official, removal from DHST office. The president of DHST will
issue a written notification on behalf of Council including any sanctions. Council will
decide whether to notify any national committee or commission of their action. TheOmbud shall prepare, on a cycle to be determined by Council, an aggregate,
anonymized summary of all such reported incidents.
Appointment of Ombudsperson(s) and Respectful Behavior Review Committee
1. Preferably, the Ombud(s) will belong to a qualified international NGO specialized
in dealing with harassment. Outsourcing the Ombud is recommended by theInternational Ombuds Association. Current charges for such a person arerecommended as US$12000 for 10 hours work per month plus expenses forattending on site any annual conference/congress.
2. The DHST President and Council will appoint a committee to obtain an Ombud. If
Council decides, it may ask this committee to appoint a DHST member. Special
care will be taken to avoid any conflict of interest in the appointment of theOmbudsperson(s).
3. The Ombudsperson or persons will be nominated every four years by theGeneral Assembly to deal with questions related to harassment and any otherkind of behavior that is hostile or abusive and that takes place in events
organized and/or funded by the DHST.
4. The Respectful Behavior Review Committee will, for the time being, be drawn
from Council and nominated every four years. However, it is recommended thatthe three-person committee should be independent of DHST.
DHST Commissions
We strongly encourage the Commissions supported by DHST to adopt a RespectfulBehavior Policy for their own governance activities and events. The DHST policy may
be used in lieu.

Notes on Proposed Respectful Behavior Policy
1. The draft includes and accommodates the points raised at online meetings ofCouncil since January 2022 and the exchange of emails. In the interest of a succinct
and workable policy some of these comments have been abbreviated and/or mergedwith others.
2. The independence of the Ombudsperson is crucial to ensure that no conflict ofinterest will interfere.
3. Please note the recommendation to appoint an independent Ombudsperson. This isconsidered best practice by the International Ombuds Organization(https://www.ombudsassociation.org/).
4. Likely cost would be US12,000 per annum for 10 hours input a month plus expenses
for attending meetings or congress. It could be more.
5. DHST is composed of unpaid volunteers, not a publicly owned company oruniversity. New budgetary arrangements need careful consideration. A sisterorganization such as HSS relies on carefully chosen volunteers but pays forexpenses.
6. If the review committee is to be drawn from Council, it is important that the Ombud,
who determines if there is a case to be answered, should be entirely independent ofhistory of science and technology.
7. If the review committee is to be drawn from Council, it will be preferable to offer alittle training (perhaps online). The review committee should be appropriately diverse
in its composition and attention to a variety of languages would be helpful.
8. Nominations of ombudsperson. It is recommended that Council proposes aperson(s) and that the GA is asked to approve that person(s).
9. Should there be two appointees to ensure neutrality?
10. If we specify a time limit on the initial complaint, almost no complaints will be filed, it
often takes time to realize that what might be brushed away as a mere unimportant
incident reveals harassment. Per contra, it seems reasonable to require a time frame
for the Committee’s investigation of a given complaint (3 months) and Council’sdeliberations (6 months). It could perhaps be shorter, eg two months.
11. Rather than have the accusation given directly to the accused party, it might bemore reasonable to have an independent entity conduct an independent
investigation. A direct notification to the accused might create pressure on victims
and witnesses, and might also be hurtful to those unjustly accused.
12. It might not be a good idea to specify in too much detail how and in which way
sanctions and conciliations should be carried out, but rather let these decisions andmeasures be taken by Council.
13. It seems counterproductive to insist on confidentiality and then require the whole
council to consider the case (unless it is strictly anonymized). It may be better thatthe findings of the Review committee be given to the President (and any otherofficers as may be determined) for consideration, and that the president brings theresults of the case, suitably anonymized, to Council, probably via email, to expedite
the procedure14. How far should the results of the investigation and the sanctions adopted be statedpublicly? This would be a strong preventative measure but requires certainty.
Action1. It is proposed that for an interim period, until the next General Assembly, theOmbudsperson will be an existing member of Council.
2. After that point it is proposed that a separate elected position is created.
3. Council should decide whether the elected Ombudsperson should also be amember of Council, thereby increasing the number of Council members by one.
4. The Ombudsperson should have a dedicated email address.
5. A position of Respectful Behavior Champion is already in the Statutes, due to be
ratified at the 2025 General Assembly.
6. Appointment of a three-person Respectful Behavior Review Committee.