Wednesday, January 29, 2020

Patent Nonuse and the Role of Public Interest as a Deterrent to Technology Suppression Essay Example for Free

Patent Nonuse and the Role of Public Interest as a Deterrent to Technology Suppression Essay Patents are contracts between the society and the inventor to encourage development in the field of science and technology. It helps the society by enabling them to utilize this technology, and the inventor by protecting his rights and rewarding him appropriately for this intellectual efforts and innovations. Once a patent is given by the patent office, the inventor has to work the invention by himself or through somebody else by means of an assignment or a license. The patent office does not look at the potential commercial value of the invention whilst giving the patent. The invention should have a specific use and should fulfill what it is meant to do. Many inventions given patents have turned to be commercial failures. However, there are several instances in which neither the patentee has worked the invention by himself, nor has he allowed others interested to do so. This is a very serious situation, because it goes against the very intention of granting the patent. The patent system grants patents only to those inventors who are willing to reveal their invention with others, so that it can benefit society. Some patentees may not work their invention due to several reasons, one of which may be to wrongfully hide or suppress technology from the public. One of the first such cases was the Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co. case of 1908. In this case, the patentee had invented a machine that could make a folded paper bag with a rectangular bottom. However, he had not made his invention available to the public, thus preventing others from working the invention. At that time, this invention was a breakthrough, and many people felt bad, because the very intention of giving a patent was not fulfilled. No concrete rules regarding nonuse of patents and compulsory licenses were existent at that time, and everything was left at the mercy of the patent holder. Lower courts also found that the patentee was unreasonable. They in fact tried to draw a line between ‘reasonable nonuse policy’ (inventor unable to use his invention because or some understandable problems) and ‘unreasonable nonuse policy’ (purposefully suppressing technology). However, as no concrete rules existed at that time, the higher court had to give its decision in favor of the rightful owner of the invention. Many breakthrough technologies exist which are being currently suppressed from the public. A plastic that is strong, long-lasting, and can be utilized to make houses that last forever, was granted patents, but not accessible to the public by the owner. New rubber for tires is invented which does not blow up. If this technology could be utilized currently, the lives of many people who die in road accidents could be saved. A new material has been invented for use in toothpastes, which protects the teeth from developing cavities. These technologies are being suppressed due to the anticompetitive intentions of their owners. Some patentees may not use or license their technology so that others may be forced to infringe up on their patents. Lawsuits for infringements could be filed, which could give them earning in millions. An instance of this is a case between Minolta and Honeywell’s, in which Minolta had to pay $127 million to Honeywell for infringing their auto-focus camera patent, although the owners were not using their patent. The patent office should come up with strict rules such that all the patentees have to give an annual report of how their patent is being worked commercially, and in case it is not being worked, the reasons for the same. In case the inventor does not respond, the patent should be revoked. Instances of patent nonuse can be used as evidence in the court, against individuals who indulge in anticompetitive practices. Such practices are strictly considered unlawful under the US Antitrust Laws. The Sherman Act was one of the first such as to protect against unfair trade practices. According to this act, any individual monopolizing or attempting to monopolize, or combines with other people or with other nations to monopolize any trade business in the US, shall be held guilty of an offense under the act. Patent is a monopoly granted to the owner, but they are also contracts between the owner and the public, to permit the later to access the technology. Patent laws are likely to be misused. The exclusionary right (to prevent others from using or making the invention without the license of the owner) is limited and should be more meaningful. The patent system does not give absolute monopoly to the owners. In the case Pfizer V. Government of India [434 US 308 (1978)], the US permitted foreign nations to sue under the Section 4 of the Clayton Act. The Government of India was asking Pfizer to grant licenses for certain broad spectrum antibiotics. However, the company refused to give reasonable licenses. Several antitrust violations such as price-fixing, fraud, market-division, etc were being imposed by the Indian Government against Pfizer and group. The respondents also said that petitioners were trying to limit and monopolize the production, sale and distribution of their patents. The respondents also said that these practices had destroyed businesses. The Company said that the Indian Government could not bring this case forward, as they belonged to another nation. However, the court went on to say that foreign nations could also claim under antitrust laws. The court said that the case was similar to having a citizen having his rights under the antitrust laws being violated. In the case Remington Products V. North American Philips corporation [107 FRD 642, 1985], Remington alleged that the company Philips, a leading Dutch MNC, was indulging in anticompetitive behavior by not disclosing information needed to work the discovery. The defendant claimed that certain clauses in a Dutch statue did not permit disclosure. However, the US court granted the case in favor of Remington saying that the defendant wrongfully withheld information regarding the discovery. The plaintiff had previously approached the defendant to provide information regarding the discovery. However, the defendant refused to give this information needed saying that the information was irrelevant. In the Chevron Research Company’s patent [1970; RPC, 580], the court said that the patentee has to disclose full and relevant information regarding the patent. In the Image Technical Services V. Eastman Kodak Co. [504 U. S. 51 (1992)] provides an association between the antitrust laws and the intellectual property rights regime. Kodak Company had a patent for a photographic device. The case was alleged by companies that serviced Kodak’s products. In this case, a distinction is being made between ‘attempting monopolization’ and ‘attaining monopolizing by exploiting’. The court had to study the market situation to determine if the company was trying to control prices or destroy competition. Kodak in fact monopolized manufacture of components of its photographic equipment and even monopolized servicing of its equipment. The court had said that both patents and copyrights did not come under antitrust laws. An inventor had the right to license or refuse license of his invention. However, a patent owner may be held for developing practices against the antitrust laws (that could destroy competition). The extent to which antitrust laws could be applied to patent laws had to be determined by studying the market situation. The plaintiffs had gathered enough proof that Kodak were trying to monopolize their market situation by limiting the availability of its components to the service companies Nowadays, exclusive license holders may also try to misuse their rights by monopolizing their licensed to make or use the patent. This can be demonstrated in the Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc. v. Michelson case. Dr. Michelson had invented a new spinal treatment device and had given a license to Medtronic which manufactured medical equipment. However, the company did not promote his treatment device, and hence the doctor had to grant licenses to other companies that would compete with the original license holder. The company filed a case in the court claiming that the patent holder breached clauses of the contract. However, the Court felt that the company had adopted certain anticompetitive principles that did not promote the patent. Patent holders are trying to maximize their monopoly, by indulging in anticompetitive acts. Often there is a clash between patent laws and antitrust laws. Patent laws provide the holder with rights to eliminate competition, whereas antitrust laws enable protection of healthy business competition practices. A clear border line has to be drawn between these two conflicting legal regimes. In the case Illinois Tools Works V. Independent Ink, the question of the manufacturer having a market power over a patented product or process could be presumed whilst granting the patent, was being asked. A patent holder may hold so much of powers in the market such that he/she may dominate the scene. A patent holder will usually violate antirust laws if he or she feels that they are in a situation to dominate the market. In this case, Illinois printers invented a printing device and had prohibited the customers from using non-patented ink. The defendant felt that such terms were against the true spirits of competition, and were under the impression that Illinois tool works were trying to dominate the market situation. It may be difficult in such a case to determine the party that would carry the burden of proof. The patent holder had tried to extend his patent. In this manner, they had created both, primary and secondary market rivals. The primary rivals included other manufacturers of printers, and the secondary rivals included other manufacturers of printer inks. The court gave its decision in favor of Independent Ink, citing that patents could not be extended to non-patentable areas. A patent had only specific boundaries, and crossing such boundaries constituted infringement. In another case, Schering-Plough held a patent for a drug. A company that manufactured a generic version of the same drug felt that the original company’s patent was invalid. They wanted to file for a patent opposition, but Schering-Plough decided to pay the generic drug manufacturers to withdraw the case and also stay out of the market for some period. Federal Trade Commission filed a case before the Supreme Court, saying that Schering-Plough was trying to destroy all competition in the market by wrongfully preserving its invalid monopoly. The Court felt that the agreement between Schering-Plough and the generic manufacturers was invalid and was executed to destroy competition in the market. Patent laws should make it easier to obtain a compulsory license in case the patentee wrongfully suppresses the invetion from the public. A compulsory license should be given to anybody in case:- The patentee is unable to meet the reasonable requirements of the public with relation to his patented process or product. †¢ The patentee does not make the invention available to the public at an affordable cost. †¢ The invention is not being worked in the jurisdiction of the patent office. †¢ Special considerations should be given to inventions that relate to public health and nutrition, and emergency situations. Compulsory license should be a sanction (for the patentee) and a remedy (for the public); in case the patentee indulges in anticompetitive practices. The concept of compulsory licenses developed following the African AIDS crisis situation. The continent was in a crisis situation with the HIV/AIDS pandemic. A few companies such as Glaxo, Merck, etc held a patent for an antiretroviral drug which could be life-saving for people suffering from HIV/AIDS. However, these companies had indulged in several anticompetitive practices. The cost of treating each AIDS patients in Africa was exceedingly high (US$ 10,000 per patient per year). Hence, the drugs were inaccessible for many poor patients who belonged to underdeveloped nations. Cipla, an Indian pharmaceutical company volunteered to supply the drug at a fraction of the overall costs the other companies were offering (US $ 350 per year per patient). Some of the African Nations had to modify its trade laws so that parallel imports and compulsory licenses could exist. However, the original companies that held the patents for antiviral drugs began to sue for infringement. These companies had to later withdraw their infringement cases, as there was a worldwide agitation against the anti-public health policies adopted by the patent holders. Later, at the WTO conference in Doha, a comprehensive agreement to protect public health issues was adopted to prevent unhealthy practices by the patent holders (through compulsory licenses). Some people feel that the patent system can create an obstruction in the development of science and technology, as instances of nonuse often arise. Once a patent is granted, it may even prevent others from inventing around a particular invention or inventive concept. This will seriously hinder the developments in that particular field. Inventors, who tend to sit on their inventions by refusing access to the public, should be henceforth refused patents.

Tuesday, January 21, 2020

Race and Destiny Essay -- Comparative, Hansberry, Ellison

Race and Destiny In this paper, I will present the two stories then I’ll show how they compare and contrast. The first one is the drama by Hansberry and the second is the text of Ellison. Since its first paragraphs, the â€Å"A Raisin in the Sun† focuses on a fundamental issue – poverty and how it’s related to race. Hansberry is drawing the portrait of a stereotypical situation, in the mid-20th century, when racial discrimination was linked to lack of money and vice versa. The plays spins around a check of $10000 from the insurance company, granted for the death of Mama’s husband. The story goes with discussing the investment choices about that sum of money. The main male character, Walter Younger, Mama’s son, is presented as man who is eager to get rich fast, over-appreciates money, and has little ethical bias. The phrase â€Å"Check coming today?† (p.1294) written in the beginning of the act one, scene one, shows Walter’s impatience and the idea that he places a greater value on material stuff, rather than interpersonal relations. Living in the Chicago Southside, Walter’s family faces some harsh living conditions. Even as much as fifty cents becomes a luxury option for the couple. This is depicted when Travis, Walter’s son, says â€Å"This is the morning we supposed to bring the fifty cents to school†, while Ruth, Walter’s wife and Travis’ mother, responds abruptly with â€Å"Well, I ain’t got no fifty cents this morning† (p.1295). In this excerpt, the author is emphasizing on two details about the Youngers: first, the value of frugality and the situation that even little money cannot be spent for wants, such as education; second, the family’s financial condition is highly unstable, because Hansberry accents that in a certain morning the famil... ... I wanted to leave but I wanted also to speak and I was afraid they’d snatch me down(P. 306 ). He noticed something wrong when he gave a speech in front of the white people. I spoke automatically and with such favor that I did not realize that the men were still talking and laughing until my dry mouth, filling up with blood from the cut, almost strangled me(P. 305 ). Conversely, when he was given a prize from a white man, he forgot what he realized something wrong. I was so moved that I could hardly express my thanks. A rope of bloody saliva forming a shape like an undiscovered continent drooled upon the leather and I wiped it quickly away (P. 306). While Walter Younger tried to fight his destiny and was striving to get rich and be â€Å"his own boss†, Ellison’s protagonist adopted the society well and was satisfied of his situation without noticing any injustice.

Monday, January 13, 2020

Investigating the effect of different liquid densities on the time taken to release 25 ml of alcohols Essay

* Research question: * Does the change in liquid densities at the same temperature affect the time taken to release 25 ml of the alcohol from a 50 ml burette? * Variables: * Independent variable: The liquid density / g ml-1. * Dependent variable: The time taken to release 25 ml of the alcohol from a burette / s. * Controlled variables: * The volume of alcohol in a burette / ml. * The temperature of the alcohols / oC. * The absence of unnecessary substances or ions. * The same burette for the entire experiment. * Prediction: * The time taken to release 25 ml of the alcohol from a 50 ml burette is, stated by F. Weinberg (1984) [1], dependent on flow velocity and in particular are very sensitive to small changes in the density difference between the two liquids. * My prediction is, the higher the liquid density is, the more time taken for 25 ml of the alcohol to be released from the burette. The time taken to release 25 ml of alcohol increases in order: Methanol, Ethanol, Propan-1-ol, Butan-1-ol and Octan-1-ol. * Method: * Apparatus: * 50 ml burette (Uncertainty: à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ 0.500 ml). * Retort stand. * 125 ml ethanol C2H5OH 95.0%. * 125 ml methanol CH3OH 99.5%. * 125 ml propan-1-ol CH3(CH2)2OH 98%. * 125 ml butan-1-ol CH3(CH2)3OH 99%. * 125 ml octan-1-ol CH3(CH2)7OH 94%. * Thermometer (Uncertainty: à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ 0.0500 oC). * 5 x funnels. * 50 ml conical flask. * Casio stop watch (Uncertainty: à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ 0.0100 seconds). * Distilled water. * Risk assessment: * The procedure uses poisonous alcohols. Notably, suggested by Department of Chemistry – Imperial College London (2006) [2], less than 2 teaspoons (2 ml) of methanol can cause blindness, and 2 table spoons (30 ml) can cause death. This toxicity is mainly due to it being converted in the body to formic acid and formaldehyde, which first attack the cells in the retina, then the other vital organs. Plus, propan-1-ol is used as a common solvent and cleaning agent in chemistry laboratories. Also, because it evaporates rapidly, IPA is widely used in astringents to cool the skin and constrict surface blood vessels. * Goggles and lab coat are therefore needed to be worn throughout the experiment. * Procedures: 1. Close the tap and run some distilled water into the top of the burette, then swish the burette up and down to let the water clean all the inside of the burette. Open the tap, let the water drain out. 2. Attach the burette to the retort stand and take care that the burette is upright and stable. 3. Close the tap and use the funnel to put 25 ml of ethanol into the burette. 4. Remove the funnel, make sure that there is no air bubble inside the burette. Measure the temperature of ethanol by the thermometer. 5. Put the conical flask under the burette, adjust the height of the burette so that the tip of the burette is just above the lip of the conical flask. 6. Open the tap and immediately start the stop watch. 7. Stop the watch when 25 ml of ethanol is fully released from the burette. 8. Continue to open the tap and collect the remained ethanol in the burette. 9. Repeat step 1 to 8 four more times. 10. Then change ethanol with methanol, propan-1-ol, butan-1-ol and octan-1-ol. Experiment step 1 – 9 with each alcohol. * Range and repetitions of experiment: * There are 5 different ranges (The lowest value: 0.789 g ml-1 & the highest value: 0.826 g ml-1, Please refer to Data Collection and Processing -> Processed data). * The initial procedure is repeated 5 times and thus 25 results are recorded. * Control of variables: * The volume of each alcohol sample remains constant for every test at 25 ml. Different volumes of the alcohol sample may cause inaccuracies in terms of measuring the time taken to release. For instance, larger volume of the same alcohol sample certainly takes longer time to be released. * The temperature of each alcohol sample need to remain constant for every test at 20 oC (293 K). The analysis, written by Weirauch, D. A., Jr. (1998, December) [3], of the high-temperature spreading kinetics for liquids affecting density shows that they can be modified with a constant shift factor. Therefore, higher temperature of the same alcohol sample may reduce the time taken for the alcohol to be released. * The burettes and funnels are rinsed carefully with distilled water prior to the experiment to ensure that inside the burettes do not contain any unnecessary substances/ions. If present, they may react with the alcohols to form products which have different liquid density, as opposed to original liquid densities of the alcohols at 20 oC (293 K). * The same burette is used for every measurement. This is because burettes from the same manufacturer cannot be guaranteed to have the same radius of the tips (possessing relatively small values). The use of different burettes can result differences in the time taken for the alcohol to be released. DATA COLLECTION AND PROCESSING * Raw data table: Alcohols Dependent & independent variables Ethanol Methanol Propan-1-ol Butan-1-ol Octan-1-ol Liquid density / g ml-1 at 20 oC (293 K) [4] 0.789 0.791 0.804 0.810 0.826 1st repetition: Time taken to release 25 ml of alcohol from a burette / seconds à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ 0.0100 39.0 43.0 67.0 82.0 112 2nd repetition: Time taken / seconds à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ 0.0100 41.0 44.0 69.0 81.0 115 3rd repetition: Time taken / seconds à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ 0.0100 38.0 46.0 70.0 83.0 111 4th repetition: Time taken / seconds à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ 0.0100 39.0 42.0 71.0 80.0 114 5th repetition: Time taken / seconds à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ 0.0100 40.0 45.0 70.0 79.0 110. Table 2.1 shows the collected raw data table. * Processed data: * Calculating the mean time taken to release 25 ml of alcohol from a burette: * Mean time taken / s = (1st + 2nd + 3rd + 4th + 5th trial data) à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ 5. Alcohols Dependent & independent variables Ethanol Methanol Propan-1-ol Butan-1-ol Octan-1-ol Liquid density / g ml-1 at 20 oC (293K). 0.789 0.791 0.804 0.810 0.826 The mean time taken to release 25 ml of alcohol from a burette / à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ 0.0100 seconds 39.4 44.0 69.4 81.0 112 Table 2.2 shows the processed mean time taken to release 25 ml of alcohol from a burette. * Presentation of processed data: Graph 2.1 shows the relationship between the liquid density and the mean time taken to release 25 ml of each alcohol from a burette. * Treatment of uncertainties: * I try to read off carefully volume of the burette from the bottom of the meniscus with my eye level at the meniscus in order to make sure that the volume of each alcohol sample used is only 25 ml. CONCLUSION AND EVALUATION * Graph analysis: * According to the presented graph of the mean time taken to release 25 ml of different alcohols, there is a very strong positive correlation between the liquid density and the mean time taken to release 25 ml of alcohol from a burette as a very good line of best fit can be observed. (Please refer to Data Collection and Processing -> Presentation of processed data -> Image 2.1). * Conclusion: * The results demonstrate that, the higher the liquid density is, the longer time taken for 25 ml of the alcohol to be released from the burette. * The conclusion totally agrees with my hypothesis. * Evaluation of procedures: * Strengths: * Safety in the laboratory is highly maintained (by wearing goggles, lab coat and being careful with glass apparatus to avoid any poisonous alcohols that may splash). * Standard ranges and repetitions are met, a very strong positive correlation between the liquid density and the mean time taken to release 25 ml of alcohol from a burette is observed. * Quantitative investigation, with repeats strongly supporting each other, successfully proves that the expectations based on scientific knowledge are totally correct. * Weaknesses: * Several inevitable uncertainties occur throughout the whole experiment which may account for inaccuracies in the collected data. * The concentrations of the alcohols vary from 94.0 % to 99.5 %. The differences in concentration of each alcohol affect the reliability of the data, since 25 ml of pure alcohols (or 5 alcohols with the same concentration) may take different time to be released from the burette. * Although there is a very strong positive correlation between the liquid density and the mean time taken to release 25 ml of alcohol from a burette, the independent variables (liquid density) do not increase constantly due to the limited number of available alcohols (Please refer to Data Collection and Processing -> Presentation of processed data -> Image 2.1). * The entire procedures, although are simple, take a long time to finish because of the 50 ml burette need to take at least 3 times to add 5 alcohol samples (5 repetitions for each alcohol), 25 ml each. Overall there are 15 times to add 25 alcohol samples since I decide to investigate 5 different alcohols. The more time I need to add more alcohols into the burette, the more likely inaccuracies to occur. * Improving the investigation: * The procedures can be partially replaced by computer data logging suggested by Laurence Rogers (1995) [5] to prevent uncertainties from human errors when stopping the watch. The experiment can be programmed to collect the data (Time taken for 25 ml of the alcohol to be released from the burette) automatically. * More alcohols with liquid densities within the ranges (The lowest value: 0.789 g ml-1 & the highest value: 0.826 g ml-1) can be tested to fill the 2 gaps between methanol and propan-1-ol, butan-1-ol and octan-1-ol in the presented graph. For instance, penta-1-ol has the liquid density of 0.815 g ml-1 at 20 oC (293 K) [6]. * Pure alcohols should be bought in the same concentration to ensure the reliability of the collected data. Otherwise, diluting the alcohols to the same concentration can be less expensive, yet time consuming. * A larger burette, for instance, with measuring volume of 75 ml (only 2 times to add 5 alcohol samples, 25 ml each) will reduce the times need to pour more alcohols into the burette to 10. Not only this change in equipment may save time of experimenting, but also minimise the uncertainties. Bibliography [1] Weinberg, F. (1984, December). Fluid flow from a low to a higher density liquid. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, 15(4), 681. Abstract retrieved March 8, 2009, from Springer Link. Web site: http://www.springerlink.com/content/n84726w432072592/ [2] Department of Chemistry. (2006, August 25). Biological effects of Methanol and Larger Alcohols. In Ethanol. Retrieved March 8, 2009, from Imperial College London. Web site: http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk/rzepa/mim/environmental/html/ethanol_text.htm [3] Weirauch, D. A., Jr. (1998, December). Predicting the spreading kinetics of high-temperature liquids on solid surfaces (Vol. 12). Alcoa Technical Center. Retrieved March 8, 2009. doi:10.1557/JMR.1998.0478 [4] Process Calculator. (2009). SG. In Liquid Density. Retrieved March 8, 2009, from Radix Business Models Pvt Ltd. Web site: http://www.processcalculator.com/Liquid_Density.aspx [5] Rogers, L. (1995, May). Sensors and The Data-Logger. In Hardware and software. Retrieved March 9, 2009, from School of Education, University of Leicester Web site: http://www.le.ac.uk/se/lto/logging/test1.html [6] Process Calculator. (2009). SG. In Liquid Density. Retrieved March 8, 2009, from Radix Business Models Pvt Ltd. Web site: http://www.processcalculator.com/Liquid_Density.aspx

Sunday, January 5, 2020

Supporting Diversity and Minority Colleagues at Work

Making sure employees from different racial backgrounds feel comfortable at work has several benefits, no matter if the company has 15 workers or 1,500. Not only can a diversity friendly workplace enhance team spirit, it can also boost creativity and promote a sense of investment in the company. Fortunately, creating a diversity friendly work environment isn’t rocket science. For the most part, it involves taking the initiative and a healthy dose of common sense. Make the Effort What’s the surefire way to make colleagues from diverse backgrounds feel comfortable at work? Do the basics. For example, if a coworker or employee has a name that’s difficult to pronounce, strive to say the person’s name correctly. If you’re unsure how to pronounce it, ask the employee to say it for you and listen carefully. Even if you still don’t get it quite right, such employees will appreciate the effort rather than you totally butchering their names. On the other hand, employees won’t appreciate you forcing a nickname on them or refusing to utter their name at all. That’s alienating. Save Race-Related Jokes for Later If the joke you want to tell at work includes a rabbi, a priest or a black guy, save it for home. Many jokes about race, religion and culture involve stereotypes. Accordingly, the workplace isn’t the best place to share them, lest you offend a coworker. Who knows? One day a colleague could make your racial group the butt of a joke. Would you find that funny? Even racial banter between colleagues from the same background can be off putting to others. Some people disapprove of racial humor, no matter the source of it. So, consider telling race-based jokes to be inappropriate behavior at work. Keep Stereotypes to Yourself Stereotypes about racial groups abound. While working, it’s necessary to check your race-based assumptions at the door. Say you think all Latinos are good at a certain activity, but the one Latino in your office isn’t. How do you respond? The correct response is no response. Sharing racial generalizations with those targeted by them will only cause emotional damage. Rather than telling your coworker that he defied your expectations, consider reflecting on how you developed the stereotype in question and how to let go of it. Study Cultural Holidays and Traditions Do you know the cultural and religious holidays that your coworkers observe? If they openly discuss certain customs, consider learning more about them. Find out the origins of the holiday or tradition, when they are celebrated each year and what they commemorate. Your colleague will likely be touched that you took time out to learn about the traditions that mean most to her. Whether you’re a manager or a coworker, be understanding if an employee takes time off to observe a particular custom. Practice empathy by contemplating the traditions that matter most to you. Would you be willing to work on those days? Include All Workers in Decisions Think about whose input counts most in your workplace. Are employees from diverse racial backgrounds included? Listening to opinions from a diverse group of people can change the way business is done for the better. A person from a different background may offer a perspective on an issue that no one else has given. This can increase the amount of innovation and creativity in a work setting. Hold a Diversity Workshop If you’re a manager at work, consider enrolling your employees in a diversity training session. They may grumble about it at first. Afterwards, however, they’re likely to value their diverse group of colleagues in new ways and walk away with a deeper sense of cultural awareness. In Closing Don’t be mistaken. Creating a diversity friendly workplace isn’t about political correctness. It’s about making sure that employees of all backgrounds feel valued.