Departments have a right and an obligation to consider ethical behavior of faculty they are recruiting because the Code extends the ethical obligations of sociologists beyond their own behavior. Departments, and more specifically, the individual sociologists in them who are covered by the Code, are required to be concerned with the protection of all students, staff and faculty. So, in this case, Professor Stone's information was relevant and, the members of the Personnel Committee acted appropriately in gathering factual information from official, responsible parties, rather than relying on rumor. In this case, because Professor Maksom was cleared of charges, the information that he had been charged with sexual harassment cannot be used against him in the hiring decision. To do so would be prejudicial and in violation of the Code. The situation would have become more difficult in two situations. First, if the Committee found that officials who would have reason to have access to such information stated that, officially, they could not discuss any charges regarding Professor Maksom. The use of "sealed bargains" presents enormous problems that pits the responsibility of protecting those we serve and of ensuring fair treatment of colleagues. Second, that while the committee, indeed, found that Professor Maksom has been cleared, or at least not found guilty, of sexual harassment in almost a dozen complaints over the last twenty years. In this case, the pattern of allegations raises more serious problems for the Committee.