Recent changes in the University's harassment policy are affecting the way grievances filed against faculty are dealt with on campus.
The changes are an attempt to preserve a professor's due academic process while making the harassment policy as fair as possible, said Judith White, sexual harassment prevention coordinator and special assistant to the president.
"We had to make some changes in the proceedings concerning what to do when the respondent to the harassment claim was a faculty member. We wanted to emphasize the victim's rights, yet not violate faculty entitlement to due academic process," White said.
The change in policy specifically affects the make-up of the harassment board, a group which deals with formal complaints about harassment. In a typical harassment case, however, a hearing before the harassment board is the third step of a three-tier process. Minor changes have also been made to the first and second steps of the grievance process.
Under the new policy, a case is activated when the victim makes an informal complaint about any form of harassment to the newly formed Office of Institutional Equity. In the past, sexual harassment complaints were processed through White's office, while other complaints were processed by Leonard Beckum, former University vice-president and vice provost.
Myrna Adams, the new vice provost for institutional equity, is in the process of getting settled in her position and declined to comment on the new policy.
Undergraduates now have the option of first meeting with a harassment prevention adviser, who is a trained member of the faculty or administration. There are 12 harassment prevention advisers in various academic departments of the University to encourage students to feel comfortable discussing their harassment claims, said Linda Studer-Ellis, harassment prevention adviser and the financial manager of the Office of Student Affairs.
"We consult with people who feel they have been harassed to help them understand and deal with the procedures. We hope to be perceived as student-friendly so that victims will feel that they can come talk to us to sort out the situation," Studer-Ellis said. "Harassment prevention advisers will help students brain-storm for solutions."
If the complaint is not resolved at the informal level, the second tier of the process is an informal mediation. The victim has the option to discuss his concerns directly with the respondant or can choose to have a harassment adviser intercede on his behalf.
After informal mediation, the victim can then choose to have a hearing before a panel chosen from the harassment board. The board is made up of five undergraduates, five graduate students, 10 faculty members, and 10 non-faculty employees. Under the new policy, if the respondent is a faculty member, the harassment board conducting the hearing consists of six members--three faculty members, two people of the constituency of the complainant, and one member of the other category.
All six board members hear the evidence and participate in the discussion of what happened, but only the three faculty members can vote on the case and conclude what action should be taken in regard to the respondant.
Under the previous policy, five members of the harassment board conducted each hearing: two from the constituency of the complainant, two from the constituency of the respondent, and one from the other category. The five members of the board reviewed the case, made a decision about what happened in their findings, and then issued a recommendation about what course of action should be followed in dealing with the respondent. This procedure still applies if the respondent is not a faculty member.
The policy was modified on July 1 to follow national guidelines as set forth by the American Asociation of University Professors, which requires that the faculty member's due academic process not be violated by having non-faculty members vote on whether or not to take tenure away from the respondent.
White said she has received about 120 calls concerning harassment since last April, 12 of which have gone to the formal level of complaint, and only one of which resulted in an actual hearing.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.