Over the last few years, the Philadelphia Museum of Art has trumpeted a major $228 million renovation, designed by the architect Frank Gehry, that is to be completed next fall.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But over the last several months, the 144-year-old institution has been forced to undergo an overhaul of a very different kind.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Complaints\n that a manager, Joshua Helmer, had made advances toward multiple female\n employees during his tenure and that museum officials failed to respond\n to the women appropriately, have led to weeks of reckoning between the \ninstitution and its staff.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Mr. Helmer\u2019s quiet resignation in 2018 seems to have done little to quell staff frustration. Since the complaints against him surfaced publicly in January, more than 400 current and former staff members have signed a letter calling for greater accountability and structural change at the museum. Some come to work each day wearing \u201cWe Believe Women\u201d buttons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cAs someone who has worked at the museum \nfor 20 years, I know they need to finish the renovation,\u201d said Ah-Young \nKim, a manager in the education department. \u201cBut can you imagine opening\n more galleries for programming and exhibitions when the staff is so \ndefeated?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The museum has sought to gain control of the situation, embarking on a staff-wide listening tour, commissioning a consultant to conduct a \u201ccultural assessment\u201d of the workplace and creating an anonymous hotline for reporting human resources-related violations or concerns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe museum is taking it really seriously,\u201d said H. Richard Dietrich III, a trustee, who declined to comment further.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Still, there have been hitches. Only last month the museum had to answer for the behavior of yet another former executive, James A. Cincotta, who as retail director was said to have physically and verbally abused employees according to a report in the Philadelphia Inquirer. Mr. Cincotta did not respond to messages requesting comment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And a counselor the museum hired to give staff members an opportunity to work through their frustrations at a difficult time was replaced after only one day on the job. The reasons were not disclosed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
These are not the sort of images usually associated with one of America\u2019s oldest and most esteemed institutions. But they have become emblematic of the wider cultural discussion \u2014 fueled by the #MuseumMeToo moment \u2014 that art institutions have been forced to undertake as pressures build to reform their workplaces.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cEvery\n institution I know is thinking very seriously about standards of \npersonal and professional conduct,\u201d said Gary Tinterow, director of the \nMuseum of Fine Arts, Houston. \u201cMeaningful conversations are happening \neverywhere.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Parts of the conversation in Philadelphia are being directed by VallotKarp, a consulting firm the museum has hired to perform the \u201ccultural assessment.\u201d That assessment is to include an advisory team of 12 to 15 staff members, an optional survey, interviews and a focus group.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On\n Jan. 17, Leslie Anne Miller, the museum\u2019s chairwoman, sent an email to \nstaff members saying she would lead the assessment, which will include \n\u201creviewing existing policies and procedures and ensuring tangible, \nactionable and transparent results and recommended next steps.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWe are working diligently and as quickly as we can to be responsive,\u201d she added in the email. \u201cHowever, we must balance quick action with the importance of being thoughtful and deliberate to be sure we are hearing and understanding all of your concerns.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
VallotKarp also \nexplained the process at a staff-wide meeting that the museum held one \nday last month before the doors opened, thinking the early hour would \nenable most employees to attend.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe \nmeeting was extremely emotional but not well-attended,\u201d Ms. Kim said. \n\u201cIt was held at 8:45 a.m. on a Friday, which was difficult for people \nwith children or part-time jobs to attend because of the time. It was \nalso difficult for the rest of the staff because it\u2019s a day when many of\n us are expected to work later since the museum stays open until 8:45 \np.m.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Administrators have also retained Aorta, the Anti-Oppression Resource and Training Alliance, which has been meeting with small groups of employees who have confidentially shared their workplace experiences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This kind of turmoil is not typically good for a museum leader, in this case Timothy Rub, who has been director since 2009. In memos to the staff, Mr. Rub has acknowledged \u201cmistakes\u201d and apologized for the handling of the Helmer incidents. He apologized again when the accusations surfaced about Mr. Cincotta. He has met with every department at the museum on a listening tour and held a town-hall meeting in late January.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But he has not publicly addressed the issues in any detail and his internal explanations have been similarly sparse in defining what exactly he is apologizing for. His reticence \u2014 along with that of the board \u2014 has fueled a feeling by some staff members that administrators have been opaque and remote in discussing their decision-making.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cI\u2019m not sure \nthis is coming from the right place,\u201d said Brandon Straus, an \naudiovisual technician at the museum. \u201cMaybe they will change their \ntactics from sweeping things under the rug. But what is their \nmotivation? Protecting themselves or their employees?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWhy\n should a cultural assessment have a bigger impact than our stories to \nhuman resources, the administration and the media?\u201d he added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Asked\n if Mr. Rub would comment for this article, a spokesman for the museum, \nNorman Keyes, said in an email: \u201cAt the moment the feeling here is to \nhold off on interviews with Timothy until after the work of the culture \nassessment is completed.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Many \ntrustees did not respond to interview requests, but there has been no \nindication that Mr. Rub has lost the support of the museum\u2019s board.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In\n January, Mr. Helmer was forced to resign from his subsequent position \nas director of the Erie Museum of Art in Pennsylvania, where a female \nemployee also complained of his conduct. Before his departure, the Erie \nmuseum said it had investigated the complaint and found no reason to \ndiscipline Mr. Helmer. He has denied any misconduct and defended his \nbehavior as appropriate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In Philadelphia, political pressure on the museum increased after the complaints regarding Mr. Helmer became public. Government leaders, including Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney, called on the museum to strengthen its policies regarding sexual harassment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This type of \nnegative attention is exactly what a museum does not want in the middle \nof a major capital campaign (its goal is $525 million, with $473 million\n raised so far). The museum says fund-raising remains on pace. But some \ndonors have asked for explanations of recent events, according to people\n in the development office, who were provided suggested talking points \nin the event they faced questions from patrons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe\n museum is undertaking a range of thoughtful and deliberate actions,\u201d \none talking point began, \u201cto result in a safer, stronger and more \nunified work environment.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In one \nbright spot, employees say that weathering the controversy has fostered \nsolidarity among those looking to improve their workplace. \u201cOur \ndepartments used to be siloed and we didn\u2019t know each other,\u201d said an \neducation staff member. \u201cBut that\u2019s not true anymore. We talk and \nsupport each other.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt\u2019s giving many\n of us a lot of hope that something positive is coming out of this,\u201d she\n added.Other employees have decided that their time at the institution \nis over.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Marla Shoemaker, who had been\n Mr. Helmer\u2019s direct supervisor, retired last month. She declined to \ndiscuss her reasoning beyond saying it was her decision to leave after \n47 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cI adore the Philadelphia Museum of Art,\u201d she said, before adding, \u201cI can see it\u2019s in deep trouble now. It makes me sad.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Robin Pogrebin is a reporter on the Culture Desk, where she covers cultural institutions, the art world, architecture and other subjects. She is also the co-author of \u201cThe Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
nytimes <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Over the last few years, the Philadelphia Museum of Art has trumpeted a major $228 million renovation, designed by the architect Frank Gehry, that is to be completed next fall. But over the last several months, the 144-year-old institution has been forced to undergo an overhaul of a very different kind. Complaints that a manager, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1818,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"gallery","meta":[],"categories":[6],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.archaeology.sa\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1817"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.archaeology.sa\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.archaeology.sa\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.archaeology.sa\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.archaeology.sa\/en\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1817"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.archaeology.sa\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1817\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1819,"href":"https:\/\/www.archaeology.sa\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1817\/revisions\/1819"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.archaeology.sa\/en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/1818"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.archaeology.sa\/en\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1817"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.archaeology.sa\/en\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1817"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.archaeology.sa\/en\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1817"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}