Monday, September 21, 2009

Prof FIREd for Criticizing Policy

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) takes on a case of a college administrator trampling the rights of a professor who asked a rather embarrassing question during a sexual harrassment training session.

The question?

If there any penalty for someone making a false charge of sexual harassment?

The answer was no. And the professor said that was a "flaw" in the policy.

Said professor was dragged in front of the college president and ordered to resign or be fired for being "divisive" to the campus community.

Read all about it.

5 Comments:

Anonymous Minky said...

Strange as it may sound, I raised that very same question when managment and my union had a meeting. I asked, if a union representative would be present at hearing for any memeber being so charged. Both managen and my union looked at me as if I were crazy! I was completely alone in this line of thinking, if such a charge were pressed. Can you imagine, what kind of justice would be served, if our court system thought along these same lines?

September 22, 2009 at 9:32 AM 
Anonymous Minky said...

follow up: Let me explain the reason behind having a union representative at the hearing. obliviously for moral support needed but more importantly, to testify to the character of the individual charged. Charges such as sexual harassment can destroy an entire family and a man's life. It can be devastating to all involved.

September 22, 2009 at 11:43 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Minky-
A) character witnesses are a dime a dozen. Clarence Thomas had them. So did OJ.
B) who were you planning to harass that you wanted to make sure you had union rep support
C) if union management did support representing people so accused, you can be sure that Gil would be writing a fiery column decrying the union for promoting sexual harassment

September 22, 2009 at 7:41 PM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Gil - I had a similar situation. In a training session, I took exception to a company policy that will pass over someone for promotion if they are being investigated for sexual harassment, regardless of circumstances. It could be a simple her word against his, without any witnesses. Doesn't matter. I'd put that under "guilty before proven innocent" Unfair if you ask me.

Minky - I don't know who you work for, but I'm a union rep., and I wouldn't let any employee under any circumstances go to an investigation without a rep being present. That's unheard of where I work.

September 22, 2009 at 7:41 PM 
Anonymous Minky said...

Anonymous: Let me first say that I have never been accused of any kind of harassment and hope that you never will be too. In a job that I have worked for thirty one years, now retired, you develop a reputation, good or bad at work. Like your family, others get to know your character over the years and so any one lying would be easily found out. Any fool who would do so, I believe would only damage there own reputation. I am not saying that there are persons who would not stoop to this but what I am saying, that it would soon be revealed in the investigation. The only reason that I can come too as far as the union running from this situation is that they see this as sweating sticks of TNT -- that is all who are near will suffer the explosive consequences, particularly if the accused is found guilty. By running they are almost guaranteeing the results will be in favor of the one pressing the charge.
There must be a fairer way to handel such a situtation but the feminist would stop it in it's tracks if it involves a male that is being charged. One must live this night-mare to really understand it!

September 22, 2009 at 10:32 PM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home