| Harassment Policy
Preamble
The teaching and learning of the liberal
arts at Earlham College rest on the principle of free inquiry and
open
discourse. This
principle, however, does not imply that all manner of speech must
be tolerated. Various forms of verbal intimidation lie beyond
the bounds of academic freedom. As the AAUP "Preliminary
Report on Freedom of Expression and Campus Harassment Codes" states: "the
commitment to reasoned discourse that is a defining characteristic
of colleges and universities entails a corollary commitment to
maintain an environment free from such impediments to intellectual
exchange. [R]easoned discourse depends upon common adherence to
minimum standards of civility." (Academe, May-June 1991.24)
The testimonies of the Religious Society of Friends
regarding equality, peace and social justice affirm the centrality
of mutual respect
in inquiry and social discourse. In the language of Earlham's Community
Principles and Practices, "everyone is worthy of respect regardless
of differences." Earlham seeks to create an environment in
which members of the College community can express themselves and
strive for excellence without fear of violence, oppression, intimidation,
or abusive epithets. Members of the college community are called
upon to foster reasoned, respectful and ethical standards of behavior
and to be responsible in their actions towards one another.
Earlham is a community, and acts of physical
violence are inimical to its social fabric. Such acts shall
be dealt with promptly according to steps outlined in the Earlham
College Student Handbook,
the Faculty Handbook and the Staff Handbook for dealing with physical
violence. Because Earlham is an intentional community, it will
take steps to protect its members from harassment or harm arising
from insensitivity or ignorance and assure the integrity of the
College's commitment to free inquiry in a civil community. If
harassment is judged to have occurred, punishment will be administered.
Because Earlham is also an educational institution, an important
response to harassment or harm arising from insensitivity or ignorance
is to educate the guilty party or parties and the rest of the community
to clarify the nature of the offending behavior and reduce the
likelihood of the recurrence of such behavior in the future. It
is particularly important that the community be educated regarding
the distinctions among freedom of expression, harassment, and insensitive
or ignorant behavior.
The "Preliminary Report on Freedom of Expression
and Campus Harassment Codes" informs this policy and underscores
the difficulties and subtleties associated with distinguishing
harassment from the expression of objectionable ideas. "[M]uch
speech that may not be proscribed may nonetheless be morally objectionable.
Threats and verbal assaults need not be tolerated, but idea, however
offensive and however offensively expressed, may be met only with
other ideas." (25,26)
Terms and Assumptions
The following definitions rest on these assumptions:
• that persons are accountable for their behavior that
willful
ignorance is unacceptable behavior;
• that conduct should be evaluated from the standpoint
of a "reasonable
person"; [1]
• that the purpose of adjudication is to make judgments about
complex
relationships, and especially to distinguish free speech,
including
the expression of unpopular ideas, from harassing behavior.
In determining
the line between harassment and the proper exercise of the rights
of free expression, all parties involved in adjudication will be
guided by the preamble to the policy. Harassment is intentional
harm characterized as any action, expression, or other behavior
that seeks to oppress or to convey hatred, contempt or ridicule,
based upon such characteristics as race, gender, ethnicity, physical
disability, or sexual orientation of individuals; and the effect
of which is to degrade, humiliate or deny a person or persons the
full and free exercise of their rights or privileges, or creating
an intimidating or hostile environment.
Sexual harassment may take any of the above forms.
Sexual harassment may, in addition, consist of sexual advances,
requests for sexual
favors, and other conduct of a sexual or gender related nature
which has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering
with an individual's performance or create an intimidating
or
hostile
environment. Such proposals, when made under circumstances
implying that one's response might affect academic or personnel
decisions subject to the influence of the person making the
proposal, are especially abhorrent. May behaviors that do not
seek to harm
still are harmful in their impact. These are characterized
as unintentional harm. Such behaviors may arise from
ignorance and/or insensitivity. Ignorant behavior denotes harmful
action or speech by a person
unaware of the harm that is inflicted. Insensitive behavior
is harmful action or speech that is the result of poor judgment
about the likely consequences or that behavior. Grievance Procedures
A person who thinks that he or she has been harassed is
invited to consulted with a member of the Active Listener's Group
for clarity on what happened and the options available to the complainant. A
list of Active Listeners shall be posted in the Provost's
and Business Manager's offices and widely disseminated. Where a satisfactory
resolution of the problem seems possible, the active listener
should attempt such an effort. If the active listener is able to
resolve the problem to everyone's satisfaction, the matter ends there.
If an attempt at resolution involves inordinate risk, is not
possible for
any reason, or has not produced a satisfactory resolution,
or if the complainant wishes to take immediate action, the
complainant should
contact the Grievance Officer to discuss his or her experience
and clarify the procedural steps that may be taken to file
a formal charge.
If the complainant wishes to proceed, the Grievance Officer
shall refer the matter for adjudication as follows:
• if the alleged offender is a student, to the Dean
of
Student Development. These cases will be reviewed
according
to the procedures for social violations as
outlined in "Community
Principles and Practices."
• if the alleged offender is staff or faculty, to
the Harassment Board.
In hearing the parties and any appropriate witnesses,
the judicial body shall seek to minimize the potential for
intimidation, coercion or abuse
of power. In its deliberations, the judicial body will consider
the terms and assumptions in section II and adjudicate accordingly. Upon
completion of its hearing the judicial body shall recommend action to
the responsible officer. [2] The recommendation shall include:
• if intentional harm or harm caused by willful ignorance
is deemed to have occurred, punishment and steps to
educate
the guilty parties.
• if harm caused by insensitive or ignorant behavior
is determined to
have
occurred, steps to educate the guilty party/ies.
When education
is a part of the recommendation, its form will be determined
jointly by the guilty
party and the Provost. If appropriate, there will be a recommendation
on steps to educate the community. Public education offers
an opportunity to clarify the distinctions between free expression
and intolerable behavior. In
publicizing the issues, the panel shall take care to safeguard
the identity of the participants. The recommendations of the
Harassment Board shall
be forwarded to the responsible senior officer for action
and to the Grievance Officer who shall keep confidential records
accessible only
to future grievance hearings. No adverse action of any kind
will be taken by the College against anyone for bringing a
complaint of harassment
regardless of the final disposition of that complaint unless,
in the judgment of the Harassment Board, the charge brought
was a fabrication. The College does not waive any rights it
may have to take adverse
action
if the complaint is found to be a fabrication. In the absence
of such a finding, the college insists that no person, acting
as a member of
the Earlham community, take adverse action against a complainant.
The President will decide on the disciplinary action to be taken for
a College employee who is found guilty of harassment. The severity of
the penalty will depend on the seriousness of the offense; the penalty
may include termination of employment. When implementing disciplinary
action for faculty, the President will consult the then-current guidelines
published by the American Association of University Professors. The right
of appeal and the procedures for appeal will conform to the processes
described in the handbooks for the various constituencies: staff and students.
The policy should not be construed to limit the College's
ability to address independently acts of harassment that
fall outside the parameters
of this policy. Furthermore, this policy is not a contract of employment
or part of any such contract. The College reserves the right
to revise, modify, amend, or terminate any part or all of
the policy at any time
at the College's sole discretion.
Community Education
Basic to any policy on harassment is the education of the
entire community: students, administration, faculty and
staff. The responsibility for such education lies with
the Provost or designated representative.
The objective of the education should be to:
• enable persons to understand and recognize the
nature
and dimensions of prejudice based on race, gender,
ethnicity,
physical disability,
or sexual orientation, and
to recognize harassment when
it occurs in their own
behavior or in that of others;
• provide members of the community with the means for
confronting potential or actual harassing behavior,
or
accusations of
harassment. Education and discussion
about harassment
is encouraged within the curriculum
wherever appropriate.
Appointment of the Active Listeners Group and the Harassment
Board
The Active Listeners Group shall be appointed by the Provost after seeking
recommendations from Student Government, Faculty Nominating Committee,
and Employee council.
The Harassment Board shall be appointed in the manner appropriate
to the various constituencies and shall consist of two students,
two staff members, and two faculty members. The staff and
faculty members shall
have three year overlapping terms. Student terms should be
as long as possible but not longer than three years.
When adjudicating a case, the Board shall consist of at
least one peer of the alleged offender, one peer of the complainant
(if from a different constituency than the accused) and one
representative from
each of the constituencies. [3]
All appointees should be provided training so that they
are enabled to carry out their responsibilities with fairness,
sensitivity and speed.
Under the direction of these guidelines, the Harassment
Board, the Grievance Officer and the group of "Active Listeners" shall
define procedures to govern the operations of the Board in
a fair and efficient manner.
Part of this policy is a set of administrative guidelines,
which follow immediately below. One provision of the Guidelines
is that the definition of harassment contained in the policy
must not be interpreted
in ways that make unpopular or even offensive speech qualify
as harassment. [4]
Harassment Board Procedures
The Harassment Board will be called together by the appropriate
senior officer of the College, upon receipt of a formal
charge letter from the Grievance Office. If a faculty member
is the alleged offender,
the Provost will bring the Board together. If the alleged
offender is a staff member, the Vice President for Finance
will do so.
The Harassment Board will then meet to decide if the charge
meets the definition of harassment.
If the case is to proceed, the Provost or the V.P. for
Finance will talk with the accused, explaining the Board procedures.
The senior officer will write a formal charge letter to the
accused, including the
time of the hearing.
The Harassment Board will decide if further information
is needed and, if appropriate, ask the Director of Security to
investigate.
The Hearing shall be schedule to occur at least 24 hours
after the accused received the statement of charges. Before
the hearing, the individual(s) shall have the opportunity to discuss
the matter with the
Provost or V.P. for Finance, at which time procedures will
be explained and questions answered. A hearing is closed to the
community unless the accused and the Harassment Board agree
that it should be open.
The alleged offender shall be required
either to attend
the hearing or submit a statement. The hearing will
still be held even if the accused does not attend or submit
a statement. Either the accused
or the accuser or both may select a member of the Earlham
community to accompany him/her throughout the proceedings.
This person shall not participate
actively in the proceeding (except as a witness) nor in
the consensus of the Harassment Board. No lawyers or
non-community
members may attend
the hearing.
The charges will be read and the accused will have the
opportunity to respond to the charges during the hearing.
The accused has the right to face and question his/her
accuser at the
hearing. The accused, accuser
and Harassment Board may invite witnesses to speak
on either side of the issue. The Harassment Board may
direct questions to the witness or the
accused. The accused may remain silent or may direct
questions to the witness. The accuser may direct questions
to the accused and any witnesses.
All participants are expected to refrain from being
abusive or disruptive. Repeated disruptions will result
in exclusion of the individual from the
proceedings. The accuser has the option of being in
the
hearing room separately and will only be there while
giving information.
At the end of the hearing,
both the accused and the accuser may make a personal
statement to the board.
Upon completion of the hearing, the Harassment Board
shall, by consensus, decide on a recommendation
to be made to the responsible senior officer who will
inform the president or his/her designate. The
senior officer will also inform the accused and
the
accuser of the recommendation of the board.
The President or his/her designate will decide on the disciplinary
action to be taken for a College employee who is found guilty of harassment.
A faculty or staff member who is found guilty may appeal
the decision by submitting a written statement to the President.
The President will decide if an appeal should be heard.
This decision will be based
on new evidence or a failure to observe due process. Appeals
will not be heard to reconsider penalties. If the President
decides that an appeal
should be heard, he/she will convene the Appeals Board. The
Appeals Board consists of the President (or his/her designee),
one faculty member chosen
by the Faculty Nominating Committee, and two students chosen
by the Student Nominating Committee.
This procedure may be amended by the consensus of the Harassment
Board. [5]
[1] According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
the "reasonable person" standard does not make the existence
of harassment turn on the perception of the accuser alone. However, in
applying the standard we must consider (as quoted from the EEOC document) "the
context in which the alleged harassment took place; the 'reasonable person'
standard should consider the [accuser's] perspective and not stereotyped
notions of acceptable behavior."
[2] If a senior officer is the alleged
offender, the recommendations of the Harassment Board will
go to the President. If
the President is the alleged offender, the recommendations
will go to the Board of Trustees. Nothing in this policy prohibits any
party in a
dispute from seeking legal counsel if legal advice is desired
or if criminal or civil action is anticipated.
[3] For the purposes of
this policy, all
Earlham students are considered to constitute one set of
peers, all staff members constitutes a second set of peers, and all teaching
and administrative
faculty constitute a third set.
[4] The Harassment Policy
was
approved by the Earlham College faculty on April 15, 1992,
and was updated on October
18, 2001 to reflect references in the Principles and Practices.
[5]
Discussed and recorded in the Minutes of the Earlham
College faculty meeting, April
7, 1993.
A much-abridged form of this policy has sometimes been
published, as follows:
The teaching and learning of the liberal arts at
Earlham College rest on the principle of free inquiry and
open discourse. This principle, however,
does not imply that all manner of speech must be tolerated.
Various forms of verbal intimidation lie beyond the bounds
of academic freedom. As the
AAUP "Preliminary Report on Freedom of Expression and Campus Harassment
Codes" states: "The commitment to reasoned discourse that is
a defining characteristic of colleges and universities entails a corollary
commitment to maintain an environment free from such impediments to intellectual
exchange... [R]easoned discourse depends upon common adherence to minimum
standards of civility." (Academe, May-June 1991, 24)
Earlham seeks to create an environment in which members of the College
community can express themselves and strive for excellence without fear
of violence, oppression, intimidation, or abusive epithets. Members of
the College community are called upon to foster reasoned, respectful,
and ethical standards of behavior and to be responsible in their actions
towards one another. Earlham is a community, and acts of physical violence
are inimical to its social fabric. Such acts shall be dealt with promptly. Earlham College will take steps to protect its members
from harassment or harm arising from insensitivity or ignorance
and assure the integrity
of the College’s commitment to free inquiry in a civil community.
If harassment is judged to have occurred, punishment will
be administered. Because Earlham is also an educational institution,
an important response
to harassment or harm arising from insensitivity or ignorance
is to educate the guilty party or parties and the rest of
the community to clarify the
nature of the offending behavior and reduce the likelihood
of the recurrence of such behavior in the future. It is particularly
important that the
community be educated regarding the distinctions among freedom
of expression, harassment, and insensitive or ignorant behavior.
|