| Redirect | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Sexual Harassment
DREW UNIVERSITY POLICY ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND SEXUAL ASSAULT
Sexual harassment, which has been considered tantamount to sexual discrimination under state and federal law, undermines the educational and employment environment of the university. The purpose of this policy is to guarantee all students equal educational access and all employees' equal employment opportunity in an environment free from sexual harassment of all kinds. This policy seeks to protect the atmosphere of trust and collegiality in the university community, to education the community about sexual harassment, and to provide students, faculty and staff who believe that they have been sexually harassed with a reliable and effective process for seeking a remedy, while affording those accused of a violation a fair opportunity to be heard.
DEFINITION
Sexual harassment is physical or verbal conduct of a sexual nature which has the intent or effect of creating an intimidating or hostile education or employment environment. Sexual harassment includes a range of behaviors specified below. Common to all of these is that non-compliance or objection by the person(s) being harassed carries with it an implied threat to an individual's employment or academic status or access and/or compliance carries an implicit or explicit offer of advantage or preference.
1) Overt Sexual Advances
Demands for sexual favors; pressure for sexual activity; physical molestation; sexual assault; coerced sexual intercourse or attempted rape.
2) Other Verbal and Physical Conduct
Behaviors in these categories are most often sexual harassment when they are frequent and repeated or when they continue after someone has asked that they stop.
A) Harassment of an Individual
Pinching and other inappropriate touching; rubbing and brushing against the body; remarks about an individual's body, sexuality or sexual preference; sexist remarks or humor directed at an individual.
B) Harassment of a Group
Sexist humor of jokes; use of derogatory, denigrating or belittling terms or stereotypic generalizations of a sexual nature; repeated differential treatment based on gender or sexual preference.
RETALIATION
This policy seeks to encourage students, staff, and faculty to express freely and responsibly their opinions and feelings about any problem or complaint of sexual harassment. Any act of reprisal, interference, restraint, penalty, discrimination, coercion or harassment -- overtly or covertly -- by a University employee or student against a person who uses the policy and procedures responsibly interferes with free expression and openness. This includes both retaliation against a complainant at any point during or after the process and retaliation against a person complained against at any point during or after the process. Accordingly, such acts violate this policy and require appropriate and prompt disciplinary action.
FRIVOLOUS OR MALICIOUS CHARGES
This policy shall not be used to bring frivolous or malicious charges against students, faculty or staff members. Disciplinary action under the appropriate university policy may be taken against any person bringing a charge of sexual harassment in bad faith.
FREE ACADEMIC INQUIRY
Academic freedom is central to the university's education mission, Charges that would undermine free academic inquiry or expression will not be considered under this policy.
PROCEDURES:
1) Initial Interview
Someone who believes that she/he has been sexually harassed may request an interview with any member of the sexual harassment committee. In that interview, the committee member will:
- listen to the account of what occurred;
- give the person information about the committee's policies and procedures;
- outline the person's options beyond that interview;
- if appropriate, set an appointment to talk again within five days.
2) Fact Finding and Consultation
A) Committee member calls one of the co-chairs and informs her/him that an interview has occurred and repeats the person's account.
B) The co-chair attempts to verify basic facts reported. No one checks at this point with the person complained against or with his/her department chair or supervisor.
C) The committee member and co-chair discuss the case and agree on the recommendation to be made to the person at the second meeting.
3) Second Meeting: Determination of How to Proceed
A) The committee member first approached holds a second meeting with the person and presents one of the following three assessments of the case:
- A formal complaint is appropriate;
- An informal procedure which aims at education is appropriate;
- Pursuing a complaint is not recommended for one of several reasons: basic facts could not be verified; something clearly occurred but it doesn't fall under the sexual harassment definition; not enough evidence to pursue a charge. In some cases, the committee member might refer someone to another process or body within the university (e.g. Academic Standing, Judicial Board)
B) Before she/he decides whether to proceed, the committee member will inform the complainant that her/his name will be revealed to the person complained against unless extraordinary circumstances of the complaint indicate that it would be dangerous to the complainant. The complainant decided what course she/he wishes to pursue. She/he can take several days to consider.
C) If the complainant decides to pursue a complaint, the committee member gets a statement of the facts of the case from her/him. The statement may be written or taped by the person or responses to questions recorded by the committee member. The complainant chooses the means of recording the statement. By the end of this step, the committee will have a written statement signed by the complainant.
INFORMAL PROCEDURE
4) Contact Person Complained Against
The committee co-chair contacts the person complained against, tells her/him the nature of the complaint, and sets up a meeting to discuss the complaint.
5) Meeting
The co-chair meets with the person complained against and:
- reports the complaint;
- outlines the policies and procedures of the committee and makes it clear that this is an informal procedure;
- asks for a response from the person complained against, giving her/him the option of responding immediately or within several days.
6) Resolution of Informal Procedure
Depending on the response of the person complained against one of the following processes is followed:
A) Resolution by Agreement
6A) The person complained against agrees with the complainant's report of what occurred and says she/he was unaware of its impact and will modify the language or behavior complained about. At this point, even if the two accounts of events differ, the parties may agree that the complaint arose from a misunderstanding and that it need go no further.
7A) The committee co-chair records the resolution of the informal procedure and includes as part of this record the complainant's statement and any statement the person complained against wishes to include. Letters are sent to both complainant and person complained against informing them of the resolution of the procedure.
B) Resolution with a Committee Review
6B) The account of the person complained against does not agree with that of the complainant; they offer two different versions or interpretations of the occurrence. The committee member refers the complaint to an informal committee review. At this point, the person complained against should be cautioned/requested not to contact the complainant.
7B) The committee co-chair convenes a review committee of three members not previously involved in the case. The complainant and the person complained against are expected to attend. If the person complained against refuses to cooperate with the committee in any way, the co-chair may ask a dean or supervisor to intervene. The committee may look at evidence but witnesses should not be brought in. Minutes will be taken at the hearing.
8B) Both the complainant and the person complained against make brief statements presenting any information or raising any issues they wish the committee to consider. The review committee may ask questions of both parties. In its deliberation, the committee agrees on one of the following findings:
- that the report has foundation. The committee recommends that the person complained against modify language of behavior or seek some further education in this area.
- that the report is unfounded, or that there is insufficient evidence to confirm it, and that the conduct of the person complained against was acceptable professional conduct.
9B) After the hearing, the committee reports its finding to the person complained against and the complainant. The records are filed in the committee's files only. No appeal of the findings of an informal procedure is possible.
FORMAL PROCEDURE
4) Contact the person complained against
The committee co-chair contacts the person complained against; The chair tells her/him the nature of the complaint, sets up an meeting within 5 working days, and follows up immediately with a letter which states the complaint (including names) and summarizes the complainant's statement. The letter should also include information on the policies and procedures of the committee.
5) Meeting
The co-chair meets with the person complained against and:
- reports the complaint;
- outlines the policies and procedures of the committee;
- asks for a written response from the person complained against, within several days;
- discusses a hearing date.
6) Preparation for Hearing
The co-chair sets a hearing date within seven working days of his/her meeting with the person complained against (i.e., the meeting in step 5). The co-chair confirms the date with the complainant and, then, within one day, delivers a letter to both parties to confirm the hearing date. At least four days before the hearing, both parties should provide the co-chair with the names of any witnesses they wish to have contacted. Each party may bring a supporter who is a member of the university community. The function of this supporter is to provide support for the person, not advocacy. The name of the supporter should be provided to the committee along with the names of witnesses. The hearing committee may also designate witnesses it wishes to have present. Documentation is available in a file for committee members to read.
7) Committee selection
The hearing committee will be composed of five members and a non-voting chair. The co-chair of the sexual harassment committee who has not been involved in the proceedings to this point serves as chair of the hearing committee. The co-chair selects, by rotation through the list of members of the full committee, the members of the hearing committee for the case and informs them of the background of the case.
In all cases, both the complainant and the person complained against may request that one person be removed from the committee and replaced with another member of the same constituency. In the event that the complainant does not want her/his constituency represented on the hearing committee, the chair should replace those members with members of the uninvolved constituency. Members of the sexual harassment committee with connections to the complainant (e.g. in their department) or the person complained against will be skipped in the selection process. The chair will make every effort to guarantee the impartiality of the committee.
A) Complaints against Faculty
When a faculty member is the person complained against, the hearing committee will consist of five voting faculty members. The hearing committee will also include two members of the constituency of the complainant (staff or students) who will have no vote but will be present, with voice, throughout the hearing and the committee deliberations. If both the complainant and the person complained against are faculty, the hearing committee will consist of five voting faculty members only.
B) Complaints against Staff Members
When a staff member is the person complained against, the hearing committee will consist of five voting staff members. The hearing committee will also include two members of the constituency of the complainant (faculty or students) who will have no vote but will be present, with voice, throughout the hearing and the committee deliberations. If both the complainant and the person complained against are staff, the hearing committee will consist of five voting staff members only.
C) Complaints against Students
When a student is the person complained against, the hearing committee will consist of three students, and two members selected from the two other constituencies. If both parties are students, four members of the hearing committee will be students and one is selected from another constituency.
8) Hearing
The purpose of the hearing is for the members of the committee, by listening to the parties and witnesses, to determine what happened and to make a recommendation on the basis of that finding. The hearing is an investigation by the committee, not a trial; therefore, the hearing committee asks the questions etc. not the parties involved. The committee has the right to limit witnesses, to ask for written statements instead of appearances. The hearing will be taped.
Present: Hearing committee; complainant and supporter; person complained against and supporter; witnesses (witnesses are only present for their own statement). Lawyers may not be present at the hearing; supporters of either party should not also be witnesses.
Hearing Procedures
A) Supporting documentation. Written statements are preferred; however if person complained against makes an oral statement, the complainant may respond.
B) At the hearing, both the complainant and the person complained against make brief statements presenting any information or raising any issues they wish the committee to consider. The hearing committee may ask questions of both parties. Both parties may submit questions to the hearing committee.
C) The committee members ask the questions and interview witnesses; witnesses are not all in the room at the same time.
D) Each person can make a final statement.
E) Everyone except the hearing committee members leaves for the deliberations. The committee members have the option of asking witnesses to be available during deliberations or dismissing witnesses, complainant and person complained against.
F) Formal rules of evidence will not apply to the committee deliberations. Evidence considered must, however, be relevant to the charge.
9) Recommendations
The committee can reach one of four conclusions:
A) It can substantiate the complaint finding that events occurred substantially as the complaint describes them;
B) It can find that there is no basis for the complaint and that events did not occur as described in the complaint;
C) It can find that there is insufficient information to substantiate or to refute the complaint; or
D) It can find that the complaint is malicious or frivolous.
If the committee determines that sexual harassment has occurred, the members of agree on the level of sanction they wish to recommend to the appropriate sanctioning officer of the university. The committee should strive for unanimity both in findings and recommendation of sanctions, but where unanimity cannot be achieved a majority of 4-1 can decide. The vote should be reported with the recommendation. Unanimity is required for a recommendation of severe sanctions. The committee should also recommend appropriate redress for the complainant.
10) Notice of Findings
Complainant and person complained against should be notified of the committee's findings orally at the end of the deliberations. Within two days they should each receive a letter reporting the committee's findings. The committee also reports its findings and recommendation for sanctions by letter to the appropriate sanctioning officer of the university, a dean, or a vice president. Recommendations for sanctions against staff members should be made to the cabinet-level supervisor.
11) Imposition of Sanctions
The committee has the power to recommend but not to impose sanctions. Sanctions will be imposed by the appropriate sanctioning body. For faculty the dean will act on recommendations for further education or reprimands; for recommendations of severe sanctions, the professional conduct committee will be convened. For students, the dean of students will act on recommendations for further education or reprimand; for recommendations to suspend or dismiss, a judicial board will be convened. For staff recommendations will be acted on by the cabinet-level supervisor. The sanctioning officer will inform the committee chair of what action was taken on the committee's recommendation.
12) Appeal of Committee Findings
A) An appeal by either the complainant or the person complained against will be allowed within seven days of the notice on findings on two grounds: procedural errors or significant new information.
B) Appeals are filed with the Academic Vice President who will determine the validity of the appeal. If the Academic Vice President finds that the appeal is justified, a new hearing committee will be convened, chaired by the co-chair who did not chair the original hearing.
COMPOSITION OF THE SEXUAL HARASSMENT COMMITTEE
The Sexual Harassment Committee will be composed of up to 42 members chosen by the constituencies they represent (e.g. CLA divisions, SGA) in consultation with the committee members. The committee will have two co-chairs, 16 student members (4 CLA plus 4 CLA alternates, 2 graduate students plus 2 alternates, and 2 theological students plus 2 alternates), 15 faculty members (8 CLA, 2 from each division, 5 theological school faculty and 2 library faculty), and 9 staff members (representing diversity of staff positions). Members will serve for two year terms; half the membership will change each year. Members can serve consecutive terms. Co-chairs serve for two years and are selected from among faculty and staff members who have already served a two-year term on the committee in the last five years; one co-chair is selected each year; co-chairs may also serve more than one term but no more than three consecutive terms. Co-chairs will be nominated by a nominating committee composed of the current co-chairs and one representative each of faculty, staff and students; these nominating committee representatives will be chosen by the representatives of each constituency currently serving on the sexual harassment committee. The nominee must be endorsed by a vote of a majority of the Sexual Harassment Committee. At least one co-chair should be a faculty member.
Committee members can be dismissed by the constituency that elected them on the recommendation of a two-thirds vote of the entire committee. Grounds for dismissal are: failure to fulfill obligations as a committee member of to maintain confidentiality; being found to have sexually harassed a member of the community.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE COMMITTEE
The Sexual Harassment Committee is responsible for: administering the sexual harassment policy; pursuing all complaints brought to the attention of any member of the committee; maintaining records of all complaints; developing and implementing on-going educational programs for the entire campus community; developing and distributing educational materials on sexual harassment; reviewing and updating the policy as needed.
RECORD KEEPING
The committee files are confidential and are kept by the co-chairs and they alone have access to them.
Files should contain:
- All letters and documents from formal procedures;
- Final letter and statements from informal procedures;
- Minutes of business meetings (not confidential);
- Minutes of informal hearings (confidential);
- Log maintained by co-chair of all contacts; committee members report each contact to chair even if no action results.
- Log by co-chair of calls;
- Yearly specific record of cases including:
- Person involved
- Sanctions
- Who sits on case
...