Scenario Four – Improper relationships between students and employees

A male graduate teaching assistant (GTA) in biology supervises an evening lab for nine male and one female undergraduate students.  The GTA is especially attentive to the female student. When male students have questions, he puts them "on hold" because, “Girls need a little extra help in the hard sciences." The female student is flattered when the GTA asks her to get a beer after lab one night to continue discussing ways she can improve her performance. They have a good time and the GTA offers to take the student home afterwards.  When they reach her residence hall, the GTA kisses the student on the cheek, and says he'll see her “next time.” The after-lab social sessions continue and the student and the GTA begin a sexual relationship that lasts for several weeks. The student then decides she does not want an exclusive relationship and she tells the GTA of her decision. In future labs the GTA ignores the female student. When the course ends, she receives a failing grade, though her research techniques have improved.  She wonders if ending the relationship had anything to do with the failing grade and she wants to talk to the GTA about it, but is afraid. 

Could the failing grade given by the GTA constitute unlawful harassment and/or retaliation? 

Maybe

Why?

The GTA’s behavior changed markedly after the female undergraduate student ended their sexual relationship.  Leading up to their liaison, he had been more attentive to the female student than to the male students.  When she ended the affair, he began to ignore her.

Because the female student’s research skills improved over the term, her concern that the GTA issued a failing grade in retaliation is not unreasonable.

However, there are other concerns with this scenario that could lead to an allegation of sexual harassment or hostile environment based on sex.

While a liaison may be entered into willingly by both people, a consensual relationship cannot truly exist when there is a power imbalance between the individuals.

The University of North Carolina’s Policy Concerning Improper Relationships Between Students and Employees states, in part:

• The University of North Carolina does not condone amorous relationships between students and employees … which can harm affected students and damage the integrity of the academic enterprise.
• It is misconduct, subject to disciplinary action, for a University employee, incident to any instructional, research, administrative or other University employment responsibility or authority, to evaluate or supervise any enrolled student of the institution with whom he or she has an amorous relationship.

This policy includes graduate students who are employed as teaching assistants for undergraduate classes and labs.

In addition, language such as “Girls need a little extra help in the hard sciences,” is demeaning and sexist, as well as untrue.  In this scenario, the GTA demonstrates particularly troublesome behavior by simultaneously singling out and demeaning the female student.

Finally, though not the main subjects in the scenario, the male undergraduate students could bring forth a claim of disparate treatment because of their sex during the first part of the semester, when the GTA devoted a majority of his attention to the female student.

Read the complete policy concerning improper relationships at

http://policy.appstate.edu/Improper_Relationships_between_Students_and_Employees

http://policy.appstate.edu/Harassment_and_Discrimination

Scenario Five – Hostile environment based on religion

An employee in the finance department was promoted recently to supervisor of a unit which consists of six employees who are friendly with one another and often socialize outside of work.  She hosts a barbecue to celebrate the promotion and invites all of her former co-workers, whom she now supervises.  During the barbecue, the supervisor tells a couple of jokes about Muslims.  Later in the evening, she shares two cartoons that show demeaning caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed.  One employee is visibly upset by the jokes and cartoons and abruptly leaves the barbecue without saying anything to the supervisor.  Over the course of the next few months, the supervisor repeatedly makes derogatory comments about people of the Islamic faith. The same employee who abruptly left the barbecue is increasingly uncomfortable with the supervisor’s religious statements but is afraid to speak up. 

Could the supervisor’s behavior be considered harassment based on religion if the employee in question is not Muslim? 

Yes.

Why?

Even though the events in question take place outside of work, the supervisor is still an agent of the university.  By repeatedly telling jokes, sharing demeaning cartoons and making derogatory comments to her employees about people of the Islamic faith and the Prophet Mohammed, the supervisor in this scenario engages in behavior that violates both law and policy that protect individuals from harassment based on religion.

If you have questions or comments about these analyses, please contact EDC at 828-262-2144 or edc@appstate.edu.  We welcome the opportunity to talk with you.