A professor’s academic career seems about to take off — until suddenly a sexual-harassment allegation against her triggers an investigation that knocks it off the rails. Who filed the complaint, and why? There proceeds to unfold a bizarre and unsettling story of what to universities and their federal overseers can pass for due process [Sarah Viren, New York Times Magazine; Robby Soave, Reason]
3 Comments
And this is one of the biggest flaws, among many, of any Title IX investigation done by schools—that you as the one being complained about are guilty until proven maybe innocent, no ability to confront the supposed accusers, little or no protections, Star chamber or drumhead justice, and even if found not credible no way to make right. Something is wrong when all it takes is a phone call(s) or social media post(s) or such to start an investigation but—as here—$10,000+ to defend and months in time. Maybe it’s time to reform or eliminate this aspect of Title IX as we’ve seen on this and other blogs about the abuse, misuse, and more.
Although I am surprised at one thing: That the professors, knowing and able to prove who it was, didn’t file to open a Title IX investigation on the accuser given the evidence they had on him.
Filing a Title IX complaint would, under the facts, probably be considered prohibited retaliation. He filed a false complaint using false names, events, etc. But, there’s no allegation that he ever had a direct interaction with the Professors, so there’s no basis for a Title IX action against him. This is a major weakness with that law – no consequences for false claims.
I would have contacted the selection committee requesting in on whether he had applied for the position. There is probably a requirement that the Professor disclose the Title IX complain to the committee, so you do that, explain that on information and belief that its a false flag complaint and you believe that the actual identity of the person who filed is a competing applicant who is trying to eliminate you from receiving an offer, and ask the selection committee if that person is an applicant, also. That will probably take him out of the running.
Now, I’d demand that Univ of Michigan offer the positions, now that you’ve cleared yourselves from the false flag complaint. See if they are willing to settle. If you sue, they will probably join him for indemnity and his confidentially clause probably won’t be upheld by a federal court.
You may never collect any money, but you’ll understand why Klingons say that Revenge is a dish best served cold.
” Filing a Title IX complaint would, under the facts, probably be considered prohibited retaliation. He filed a false complaint using false names, events, etc. .”
Don’t agree.
It is not retaliation, at least in my neck of the woods, if the person making the complaint (here, the competitor for a job) did not have a good faith belief that his complaint was valid. Here, the complainant clearly did not.
Not sure how a Title IX complaint itself would fare…these days, legal analysis is, too often, “Who..whom?”