In some workplaces, some violations of workplace rules may result in immediate dismissal, depending on the employer.
@hebegebe I think that varies widely depending on district, what accused of, union rules etc. I know of some reported cases where teachers were immediately dismissed, some where they were reported to be moved to some kind of “purgatory” office where they show up, are paid, but don’t teach or have interaction with kids.
Didn’t Google just flat out fire James Damore the engineer who wrote the memo on women in tech? As far as I know he didn’t get any adjudication of his alleged misconduct at all.
Google engineers are not union employees, whereas most teachers are, and therefore may have policies that determine how they are treated during investigations. But I did not know the details.
I am going to bet that for teachers in a union they cannot be suspended without pay. But I was under the impression that only half of the teachers in the U.S. are covered by a union.
His adjudication, if any, will come through the court system.
I know that LAUSD has an infamous “teacher jail” which is paid purgatory. I know of private school teachers sent packing the day the accusations became public.
http://laschoolreport.com/most-in-lausd-jail-facing-charges-of-sexual-misconduct-violence/
It is not college, but a resent case came to light of a SoCal school student who attacked a (female) fellow student with a hammer a few years ago, pled to a misdemeanor and graduate with a suspended sentence. They have changed their name, are married, have kids and are now a GOP official in Florida with no official record of the assault due to their age at the time of attack.
We have a very patchwork and disparate judicial system. It is slow and provides very little victim protection in general.
You are right, @HarvestMoon1. About half, as it dropped below 50% in 2015.
An employee at will can be fired for any reason, or no reason as long as they aren’t fired for an illegal reason. It is completely different from a student being dismissed from a school.
I am linking below the data on the disposition of every case that the Yale Title IX panels have decided in the last year. Yale is one of the schools that provides this data. You need to look at “Formal Complaints” which start on page 6 as they are the only ones where a hearing is available and suspension or expulsion is possible.
Based on what you see there do you think it is true that Yale “comes at this issue with an attitude that all accusers should be believed?”
For the period January through June 2017:
http://provost.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/August%202017%20Report.pdf
For the period July through December 2016:
http://provost.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Feb-2017-Report.pdf
Being a student may be a property right but it is still a privilege. Virtually all civil wrongs are adjudicated with the preponderance of the evidence standard. This world is misogynistic enough. Most campus rapes are not reported. I don’t see why alleged rapists on the college campus need special privileges.
Today the president I guess thought it was funny to show a video of him physically assaulting Clinton. It is part of the good old boy culture. I find it repulsive and it creates a victim mentality among many of the accused on college campuses
I read through one of the reports that Harvestmoon put in post 91. Yale took little action against accused rapists and harassers. They sure did a lot of counseling. Big deal. I think in one period there was about 82 complaints and only three students got suspended for a year. There are lots of parallels to the BLM movement. Womens lives matter on college campuses
@HarvestMoon1 -I am sure there are many schools where there are real, impartial investigations regarding sexual assault. I don’t think statistics from one school proves anything one way or the other. I think the current atmosphere on many (but by no means all) campuses is that all complainants should be believed when they assert sexual violence has occurred.
I believe that all complainants should be taken seriously when when they assert sexual violence has occurred. That is quite different from saying that all complainants should be believed. In cases where the Title IX office has the attitude that all complainants should be believed I don’t think it is possible to get a truly independent investigation.
@Proudpatriot Besides press reports that because of confidentiality constraints cannot include the college’s side of the story, upon what do you base that opinion?
I do strive to remain objective and by no means do I believe that the process is perfect or that there have not been missteps by some schools. But the often over emotional and knee jerk reactions on this forum to one sided press accounts that report the most sensationalized cases, do not reflect the reality of the data we do have on dispositions of these cases.
ETA: I don’t think Title IX offices have the attitude that all complainants should be believed. Rather they have the attitude (as required by law) that all complaints should be investigated. I think this is a good thing.
That’s not an accurate reflection of the links. Of the 7 UWC sexual misconduct resolved cases, involving student respondents, Yale found in favor of the complainant in 3 cases and the respondent withdrew from the university in a fourth case. Of the 3 cases where Yale found in favor of the complainant, the respondent was suspended for at least a year.
And they found insufficient evidence to support the allegations in 3 of the 6 cases that were heard in that 6 month period. Hardly results that support they have the mindset that all accusers should be believed.
look at the previous couple posts…the claim is rapists and harassers… really?? And what court determined that these people were rapists for heavens sake or “harassers” and what laws were used to determine that these people were rapists or harassers? Cripes we might as well put these women in all girls colleges and keep them awAy from the big bad world until they find the "right husband, procreate and become SAgms because that is sure as heck where we are headed.
@motherofthreeboys
That is such a silly, sophistic response as to beggar discussion. We are not “sure as heck” headed to “keep these girls away from the big bad world.” That’s just dull, absurd rhetorical BS. Hopefully, we are headed toward not allowing the big world to be “bad” to students, male or female, without consequences. Why should the “big world” be allowed to be “bad?” Why should students be expected to accept “bad?” Students are not expected to accept theft by their fellow students. Or vandalism, or academic fraud. Should students just accept harassment and assualt as something they just need to “adapt to” in the world?
Our kids continue to hear it over and over again, from tech-guru rape-apologists like Peter Theil and David Sacks (back in their, ironically or not, Stanford days) to Candace Jackson’s “90% of rape is ‘we were both drunk…’”
This is such a crazy mentality I can’t even believe we have to argue against it. How about there is just a clear code of conduct and students follow it or get tossed out? That seems simple.
Perhaps someone has already commented on this upthread: I wonder if you have observed the way that the media has framed the meetings held by DeVos with 1) people claiming to have been assaulted or raped and 2) others claiming to have been falsely accused of assault or rape. The short-hand word choice adopted in numerous articles that I’ve read is “survivors” and “the accused.”
So, what’s wrong with that? Well, “survivors” implies that the claims are true (that the person did indeed suffer an assault or rape) while “the accused” implies that the person may (or may not) be guilty of assault or rape. If the media chooses to accept the claims of one group, they should accept the claims of both groups. That is, the media could have been consistent and use the short hand “survivors” and “falsely accused.” Alternately, they could have used “purported survivors” and “the accused.” They did neither.
When I read those articles it was obvious to me that the media chose to subtly frame the argument (i.e., bias your opinion). This may not be important to some readers, but this obvious lack of objectivity really gets under my skin.
Moreover, the choice of the word “survivors” invokes a positive response from the reader – empathy for those that have had to endured a harrowing, life-altering event. The use of the words “falsely accused” would have similarly invoked a positive response from the reader – empathy for those that have had their names and reputations dragged through the mud. The word “accused” is benign and noncommittal.