Note that we still need a good name for the Eph scandal du jour.

Although we can be almost certain that the scandal occured in the Art Department (and I, for one, almost almost sure of the perpetrator), we still don’t know much of anything about the “sanctions” that the College has imposed. Those curious about this topic should read up on the appropriate section of the Faculty Handbook.

There is a lot of interesting material here. We need to know — surely the BSU is agitating about getting this information (and we at EphBlog are here to help!) — whether or not the College’s “Discrimination Grievance Procedures” were invoked. As best I can tell, this would depend on the type of complaint that Ali filed.

The reason that this matters is that, if the College went down this route, there should have been a panel of 6 faculty members reviewing the case. I would wager that at least 1 or two of the 6 are unhappy with the sanctions that the College imposed. Those disgruntled members are the folks that the Record needs to find and contact.

If a formal grievance was not filed, if Ali (and others) just went to Lenhardt with a “complaint,” than it seems that the entire matter might have been handled informally by Lenhardt himself, although I would assume that we would have discussed the situation with other senior people, probably including Morty. In this case, it will be much harder to find out what the sanctions were, unless the College decides to tell us.

I wonder if Ali (and other present at the meeting who complained) are informed what the sanctions are. Many of the possible sanctions listed are items that other people in the department, and perhaps in various College offices like payroll, might know about.

As always, if you don’t want to read anymore speculation about this case, then you should probably avoid my posts for a while.

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email