The Mike Pence rule is a code of conduct among men which has become more common in the era of #MeToo since at least 2017 onwards. Which is that men who abide by it intentionally avoid spending any time alone with women to whom they are not married so as to ward off any potential for false accusations or rumors of impropriety. It is so named after Mike Pence because he's said to never let himself be in a room with other women unless his wife is present.
While it is all well and good (if the intention is self preservation among men who have a lot to lose), the only major problem is that it is sexist and likely illegal under US labor law if it isn't the same case in other developed countries as well.
Because there are many situations where women in the workplace at some point- have to be alone with a higher ranking man to be mentored or to discuss business, but women often miss out on crucial promotion/career advancement opportunities if those same men refuse to associate with the opposite sex at work out of fears of getting blackmailed or pushed out of their career if they're in a vulnerable position and it looks bad to the wider public when or if a false accusation is made over hurt feelings or whatever else may be the real motive/reason.
It sometimes doesn't matter if misconduct happened or not, if it merely appears to be the case and if his defense is too weak, he's liable to possibly get fired or arbitrarily put on blast as a creep. There is sometimes no winning in that, if you avoid too much, you're creating a "hostile work environment" but if you socialize too much it is unprofessional "fraternization."
Then I've got to thinking, why not permit the use of body cameras or proliferate the technology to the civilian world? Law enforcement in recent years has used this relatively new technology to great effect to try to hold themselves accountable and to regain the trust of the public that pays them. In settings where there is no expectation of privacy, would it not make more sense to allow if not require people to record footage/audio of their entire day at all hours whilst away from home? Might this be the solution to get men to be comfortable enough to work with women in one on one contexts? I see it as a win-win, if women can get the career benefits they want, whilst men won't be railroaded into a situation where he'll lose if it is only his word against hers.
In any dispute which comes up, footage of the "day of the incident" from both sides' point of view will be taken and compared to give a fully unbiased accounting of what happened, from which- HR will know for sure who to fire or punish if they're in the wrong. If footage is missing, the person with less footage will have a weaker case and will lose more likely, which should incentivize people to ensure that their body camera is active and working.
I'm in favor on those grounds, but what do you all think? Are there any ethical/legal/privacy concerns which may come about from what I propose? Do you believe that some day, body cameras will be used even more for many purposes as insurance or due diligence? Might there some day be worn cameras which will look practically invisible that can still perform their functions in gathering evidence when you're out in public?
Where I live anyways, there are no laws pertaining to what you're allowed to do with body cameras because they're new and the legal system doesn't have much case law on it because relatively few people as of yet, go to the trouble of utilizing these devices in a civilian or workplace context. Asides from of course, what isn't already not allowed under existing laws, like remotely spying on someone's hotel room. Personally, I'd love to live in a world where if you did nothing wrong, there is at least some proof that allegations aren't true. I want to wear a body camera at work and in public to protect my good name, but do you? Why or why not? Discuss.
