Faculty Senate OKs Voluntary Program on Harassment Issues

Workplace harassment.

Defining exactly what it is can sometimes be a difficult task. Agreeing on what actions to take to minimize it is no easy endeavor either, as the Faculty Senate has discovered.

After debating the issue for three months, the senate on Feb. 2 approved a resolution supporting the development of voluntary instructional programs on sexual and racial harassment issues, instead of mandatory training.

The resolution also calls for distributing more information on harassment-related matters to faculty that would include explanations of what university, state and federal guidelines apply to alleged cases of harassment.

An amendment that would have made the programs mandatory for faculty who supervise grants or academic units was rejected.

Those opposed to mandatory training say it simply isn’t necessary, with some even stating that it is insulting to suggest that professors be required to participate.

“I don’t think (harassment) is a major problem for the vast majority of faculty,” said English Professor Richard Knowles.

Those in favor, however, say workplace harassment is more common than people realize and stress the value of mandatory training on ethical and legal grounds.

Supporters say they expect to raise the issue again next academic year.

“We see this as a good place to make progress,” said Peg Barratt, chair of the Committee on Women in the University.

The committee ignited the debate over training to eliminate harassment in the workplace last November, when it recommended that faculty and staff who supervise grants — known as principal investigators — undergo mandatory training.

In response, Geology and Geophysics Professor Charles Bentley introduced a proposal in December supporting voluntary instructional programs and expanded distribution of harassment-related information.

Bentley’s resolution was approved Feb. 2 after being amended to remove language about demands on faculty workloads and the lack of justification for mandatory training. The amendment was proposed by Elizabeth Thomson, professor of sociology.

Alberto Rodriguez, assistant professor of curriculum and instruction, introduced the failed amendment to require training for principal investigators and faculty who supervise academic units.

“The training will allow people to check their language and behavior toward people other than themselves,” Rodriguez said in support.

Law Professor Gordon Baldwin opposed Rodriguez’s amendment, saying it was based on the assumption that there are clear guidelines to follow in harassment cases. He instead defined harassment regulations as a “morass” of laws.

“The President Clinton-Paula Jones case is an example that there is not a clear definition of sexual harassment,” Baldwin said.

In other action, the senate confirmed the appointment of political science Professor M. Crawford Young to the University Committee. Young will serve through May and finish this year’s term of history Professor William Courtenay, who resigned in January due to time constraints.

The senate did not discuss the UW System’s 10-year diversity plan, due to a delay in the publication of the draft report. The report — which is now available on the World Wide Web at http://www.uwsa.edu/multcult/oma– rpt.htm — will be discussed at the March Faculty Senate meeting, said Brent McCown, horticulture professor and chair of the University Committee.