Advertisement

Asian-American Workers View Hughes Memo as Ethnic Insult : Race: Officials admit note warning employees about Taiwan espionage efforts was lacking in cultural sensitivity.

Share via
TIMES STAFF WRITER

An internal memorandum at Hughes Aircraft earlier this year, warning scientists of Korean and Chinese descent to be careful about Asian espionage efforts, has set off a fiery controversy among Asian-Americans who say the document was a racial insult.

Hughes Aircraft officials acknowledged Monday that the unusual memo, written by a mid-level executive at the firm’s telecommunications and space unit in El Segundo, contained an “unfortunate choice of words.” Hughes said it is still trying to make amends with its Asian-American employees.

Several dozen Asian-American scientists and other non-Asian-American employees signed a petition in April, asserting that the memo was “damaging to our image simply based on our national origin.”

Advertisement

Asian-Americans say the memo has evoked such a sharp reaction because it challenges their loyalty to both the company and their country unfairly and without any facts. Nearly a fourth of the Hughes staff of scientists and engineers are Asian-Americans, as are about half of all new engineers in California.

“Hughes would never issue such a memo about Jews and their vulnerability to Israeli espionage,” said one Korean-American scientist who asked not to be identified. “And yet, they don’t have one shred of evidence that Asians are any more targeted than are Jews or French or anybody else.”

Michael Tom, president of the Hughes Asian Pacific Professional Assn., wrote a letter to Hughes Chairman C. Michael Armstrong charging that the memo violated company policies on employee harassment based on national origin.

Advertisement

In response to a Times query, David Barclay, Hughes vice president, said in a statement: “It was never intended by anyone at Hughes to question the loyalty and trustworthiness of our employees of Asian descent. We agree that there was an unfortunate choice of words made in an internal memo relating to a potential contact with the Republic of China.”

Barclay said that the memo’s author was “made more aware of ethnic sensitivities,” and that the company is continuing its talks with Asian-American groups to “insure their concerns are being met.”

The memo asserted that a Taiwanese satellite project, in which Hughes declined to participate, was actually an effort by Taiwan to develop its own space industry and that the nation planned “to exploit this capability commercially. I have made it clear that from our prospective we see no advantage in helping create additional competition.”

Advertisement

The furor was set off when the memo went on to warn that Taiwan “maintains a fairly extensive record of Taiwanese students who studied in the U.S. and who currently work for U.S. hi-tech companies. They work this network very effectively. They invite these people to address (Taiwan) seminars and exploit their Chinese ancestry to the fullest. Like Korea, many are recruited to return to Taiwan to assume positions of responsibility.”

The memo went on to say that employees should be warned of the risks associated with technology transfers and that they should avoid breeching U.S. technology transfer constraints.

While the memo’s language might not seem inflammatory, it touched a nerve among Hughes workers. An internal Hughes study last year, conducted by UCLA Prof. William Ouchi, found that Asian-Americans are underrepresented in Hughes management, making up just 5% of the managers in technical areas.

Vincent Yee, a former Hughes administrator, filed suit for wrongful termination earlier this year, charging that the firm had created an “ethnically hostile environment” and that “Asian people do not receive the deserved promotions and salary increases that other non-Asians receive.”

Yee was fired last year after being reinstated in his job after a previous wrongful termination suit. Yee filed a class-action complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission, charging the firm with discriminatory practices. Hughes has previously denied the allegations.

Advertisement