[Vision2020] False Charges of Sexual Harassment Ruin UI Professor's Career

[Nicholas Gier]

Dear Visionaries:

I've been wanting to make this case public for over a year, and I finally
have the

attorney's permission to do so.  She has decided that we should not release
the

names right now, but reporters will soon have access to the court
documents.  The

local faculty union will meet on Nov. 7 to vote on another $2,000 for the
case.

*
*

*False Charges of Sexual Harassment Ruin UI Professor’s Career*

*
*

by Nick Gier, President of the Idaho Federation of Teachers


*Damage could result to the career and reputation of any person
who is accused of sexual harassment falsely or not in good faith*.


—*Faculty Staff Handbook*, Section3220 C-2, University of Idaho


The University of Idaho has recently experienced some high profile sexual
harassment cases. Unfortunately, heightened vigilance on the part of UI
officials has led to the termination of an innocent professor.

In order to protect his identity, the faculty member is simply referred to
as “the Professor.”  In May of 2011, the Professor hired a research
assistant (RA). It soon became apparent that the RA had overstated her
qualifications on her resume and was not qualified to perform her
experiments.

However, instead of terminating the RA’s employment, the Professor decided
to give her extra training, and, eventually, an extension for her formal
evaluation. On September 19, 2011, both signed an evaluation in which the
RA admitted that she was still deficient in her duties.

Fearful of losing her job, the RA went to the Professor’s supervisor and
accused him of sexual harassment. Based solely on the RA’s charges, which
were never put in writing, the Professor was labeled a sexual harasser and
was suspended.

Sometime before the first of November, 2011, a colleague called the
Professor to say that the RA told people at a party that the Professor was
“going to prison.” On November 2, 2011, the Professor e-mailed the UI
administration to complain about this violation of the confidentiality to
which both parties agreed. This misdeed was ignored, and the RA was
transferred to the UI Moscow campus where she is still employed.

During the dismissal hearing on April 21, 2012, the UI provided the RA with
an attorney, but the Professor had to hire his own counsel. UI policy is
very clear that the university attorney represents the university and not
its employees.  Additionally, university counsel may not advise persons who
have a claim against the university or one of its employees.

Unfortunately, the dismissal hearing board found that a probationary
employee, who had padded her resume, and who, with an UI official’s
encouragement, falsified her research notebook, was believable, but decided
that the Professor and his wife were not credible. Former UI President
Duane Nellis fired the Professor in June of 2012.

The Professor waited eight months for his appeal to be scheduled. A panel
of five faculty met on March 21, 2013, and they voted 3-2 that the evidence
against the Professor was not enough to warrant dismissal. Here is a
summary of their findings:

·          * Some of the evidence the university administration presented
at the termination hearing was known to have been falsified.

·            *There is an alternative and plausible explanation for
virtually every single allegation made against the Professor.

·           * The panel worried that the case was investigated during a
time of heightened sensitivity because of the two previous high profile
cases.

·           * The UI should have a high standard for the evidence it
presents against one of its faculty, and it should discard it once it has
been proven either false or unreliable.

     After another seven month’s delay, Interim President Don Burnett has
not responded to the appeal decision, and he has rejected a very reasonable
offer of settlement.

Everywhere the Professor turned for comparable employment, the false
charges  arrived before he could apply. He is now in a post-doctoral
position with his former employers, who know very well that he is innocent.

Do the Professor’s constitutional rights mean anything? These are the
questions that the Idaho Federal District Court will decide. The Professor
has retained Coeur d’Alene attorney April Linscott  to represent him in a
wrongful termination suit against the UI.

Currently, the Professor’s applications for research funding are in limbo
because of questions about what happened in Idaho. Early in 2011 the
Professor received a 4-year $7.8 million research grant that he obtained
with five other scientists, and his share of the funds and data generated
in his lab are now being used by a woman who testified against him. Part of
the lawsuit charges theft of intellectual property.

    The local and state chapters of the American Federation of Teachers
have committed $6,000 to the Professor’s case, and we anticipate that our
national office will also grant substantial legal aid.  We will stand by
the Professor until his good name is cleared, and when he is able to
receive compensation for lost wages, $30,000 in unpaid attorneys’ fees, and
emotional damage.

Nick Gier is President of the Idaho Federation of Teachers, AFT/AFL-CIO.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20131027/79822ffe/attachment-0001.html>