Skip to main content
Close
A-Z
Quick Links

Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy

This policy was posted for public comment from January 11 - January 26, 2023.

Comments

Typically ASL Interpreters who become aware of discrimination while performing their job duties are also considered confidential employees.  Can this be added to protect our ASL interpreting staff as well as the privacy of the Deaf and hard of hearing community? https://rid.org/ethics/code-of-professional-conduct/

I think 85 business days is too excessive.  The amount of days adds up to 17 weeks.  That is over 4 months to complete the investigation.  This is too long for someone to either continue discriminating or to have someone trying to clear their name. Granted retaliation is prohibited, but the status can put an individual at a great amount of stress.  Performance can be affected and thus end with other actions being taken not related to the complaint.  I believe this amount should be cut in have to possibly 45 business days.

IV.A.2.b: remove "diverse".  if you need to include "members of protected class" here, that's fine, but not "diverse."

IV.F.2. a&b. If the case is dismissed as not potentially violating policies, why would you notify the respondent?  That seems like it would create a hostile work environment, or at least a very uncomfortable one.

IV.J.7.b: Totally unacceptable to have 85 business days to complete the investigation. Absolutely harmful to make a complainant (and respondent) wait that long. The problem isn't in the 30 days; it's in the understaffed office. Address the problem; don't make it worse.  An investigation should be completed within one month, maybe two.  But, a whole semester is unacceptable.

"Investigators must complete the final investigative report within 85 business days of the delivery date of the Notice of Investigation."

85 business days is an excessively long period to complete the final report.  For a person experiencing harassment, this means they may wait as long as 119 calendar days or almost 4 months for a resolution.

Instead of lengthening the time permitted for the report to be generated more resources should be allocated to these tasks so they can accomplished more quickly.

In J /7 the 85 business days is really over 100 days. It is way too much time. Leave it at 30 days. Think of a person who is being harassed and harassed. They are suffering and you make them wait 30 days. Now you add 70+ more days! Tyrannical.

Turn around for responses in J/5 should be 10 business days rather than 5.

Missing "retaliation" several times in the list of discrimination, harassment and __________

Most of the discrimination, harassment and retaliation I know about at the college is not associated with a protected class but with everyday employees. It is still criminal. However, there is no teeth in the Bullying Policy for SLCC. Some of the wording in this policy needs to be applied to the Bullying policy so effective action can be taken and personnel and students can feel safe and respected.

I find 85 days as an unacceptable timeframe for the completion of an investigation. 30 days seems much more reasonable (and humane!)

I am wondering if Mediation is the first step? The policy says "At any time before reaching a determination regarding responsibility, the college may facilitate a mediation process instead of a full EO investigation." That sounds to me like Mediation is the first step. If that is the case, maybe Mediation should be highlighted more. When I search the college website for "mediation", I see just a brief mention on the Employee Relations website about mediation. Maybe what mediation is and how it can be helpful should be explained a little more in this policy and on the college website. Thank you!

Part C on Page 3 - this is meaningless wording.  How do people report retaliation?  What is the anti-retaliation form?
Eb on Page 4 - the wording suggests that no evidence is actually needed.  There really should be evidence and not just hearsay or opinion
G1 Pages 5 and 6 - nowhere in this policy does it address what should occur if the supervisor is the one accused of harassment.  The policy needs to include a section addressing what chain of command should be followed if the supervisor is the harasser.
6a page 6 - need to define "timely"
7b page 9 - this is a HUGE increase in time - is this due to short staffing?  This change means that the person suffering harassment will have to deal with it for at least 100 days?  How can SLCC find this acceptable?
K page 10 - if you increase the time for the investigation why not increase the time for a response and an appeal?  I'd suggest increasing the time for response and also for appeal to 10 business days rather than 5.  This increase in time can help the party to cool off and thing more rationally about the situation before crafting a response/appeal.

I think that there should be more than 5 days allowed for appeal.  People need time to process and then gather information for their appeal.  Also, what is procedure if the person harassing is the supervisor?  Who do they report matters to and what is the policy against micro aggressions as retaliation?

Responses

ASL Interpreters as Confiential Employees

In reviewing your comment, we reached out to the General Counsel’s office with your suggestion to include ASL Interpreters as Confidential Employees in IV.H of the policy document. The General Counsel provided feedback that confidential employees are limited to healthcare providers such as those who work in the Center for Health and Counseling. These employees are not required to disclose discrimination or harassment to the EEO office unless the client or patient consents to the disclosure. The rationale for this non-disclosure requirement was that victims of discrimination or harassment would be less likely to seek health care if their statements could be disclosed without their consent. The General Counsel’s Office also shared that within the 2033-page DOE Title IX preamble, there was considerable discussion regarding Confidential Employees, but it was limited to healthcare providers and did not include ASL interpreters.

Length of Time for Investigations (IV.J.7.b)

We understand fully the concerns around the time it takes to complete investigations. The change to extend the timeline is to bring the policy into alignment with the current time it takes the EO Office to complete thorough and impartial investigations. The current policy requirement for 30 days for completion and delivery of the investigative report is a timeline that the EO Office is unable to meet given the number of parties that need to be investigated and the often-complex nature of EO and Title IX investigations. With the new timeline within the policy, this is to lay out the maximum amount of time from notice of investigation to completion of final investigative report. This does not preclude the EO Office from completing investigations faster and releasing reports as soon as the report is completed. We are keenly aware of potentially leaving someone in a situation where they are continuing to be discriminated against or harassed and EO Office works closely with Employee Relations to intervene as needed while investigations are ongoing. During past year, the College has allocated additional resources to support the EO Office and ensure we can meet the newly established timelines.

Applicability (IV.A.2.b)

This section has been updated to the following language:

2. All employees are responsible for assuring:

  1. that discrimination, harassment, or retaliation does not occur; and
  2. that the college's working and educational environment is not threatening, hostile, or offensive to a member of a protected class at any college site.

Filing a Complaint (IV.F.2 a&b)

If there is no violation of the Anti-Discrimination or Title IX policy, as noted in part b. the EO Office will notify the complainant. If there has been an investigation, as noted in part c. the EO Office does notify both the complainant and the respondent. This is so the respondent is also aware that there is no finding or on-going investigation into any alleged behavior. I do not disagree that this could potentially create an uncomfortable working environment, however if there is an investigation, the respondent is already aware of the alleged complaint. This is why the policy also speaks to protection against retaliation and Employee Relations is typically brought in to provide another level of support and awareness to keep an eye out for potential retaliatory behaviors.

Notice of Investigation (IV.K.5)

This section has been update to the following language:

5. Upon receipt of an appeal, the EO Office shall forward the appeal to the other party and invite that party to submit a written response within ten business days.

Concerns around "Retaliation" Language

Regarding missing instances of “retaliation” in references to discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, we have reviewed the document collectively several times and are not seeing any areas where this is not reflected. We are asking the College’s Policy Coordinator to proofread again to identify any areas we are missing.

This policy specifically addresses any retaliation because an individual made a discrimination or harassment complaint or participated in any way in a discrimination or harassment investigation. Your suggestion that we mirror the language here in the workplace bullying policy is a good one that has been shared with Dr. Rick Enyard, our AVP for People and Workplace Culture, as the Workplace Bullying Policy comes under review.