Simon Fraser University ?

S.97-58

0 ?

Memorandum

TO: ?

Senate

FROM: ?

Senate Committee on Agenda and Rules (SCAR)

DATE: ?

June 25, 1997

SUBJECT:

?

Motions regarding the Existing Harassment Policy and?

revisions to the Harassment Policy

- SCAR-received- the- attached-documentfrom-a-group-ofSenators-After -discussion,

SCAR agreed that the following motions could be presented to Senate:

Motion 1

IN VIEW OF THE ADVERSE IMPACT OF THE PRESENT HARASSMENT POLICY

(GP 18) ON THE ACADEMIC PROGRAM OF THE UNIVERSITY, IT IS MOVED

O

THAT SENATE RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS THAT

SECTION 10 OF POLICY DOCUMENT (GP 18) BE PLACED IN ABEYANCE AT THIS

TIME.

Motion

2

IT IS MOVED THAT SENATE RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS

THAT ANY NEW OR REVISED HARASSMENT POLICY BE BROUGHT TO

SENATE FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE BEING IMPLEMENTED.

0

---

.

?

S97-

Simon Fraser University

Memorandum

TO:

?

John Stubbs, President and Chair of SCAR

Alison Watt, Director, Secretariat Services

FROM: ?

see below for signators

DATE: ?

June 17, 1997

SUBJECT: Motions for Senate

?

-

?

-

We are submitting this to SCAR in order to have the following two motions placed

on the agenda of the next (July) meeting of Senate. The issues involved are

important and urgent since the quality of the University's academic programs and

the reputation of the University as an academic institution are in jeopardy at this

. ?

time. We therefore believe that the motions need to be voted on by Senate promptly

and that a motion to table would not be in the best interests of the University. For

It is therefore moved that senate recommend to the board of governors that policy

document GP18 be placed in abeyance at this time. While the policy is in abeyance,

harassment complaints can be filed with the B.C. Human Rights Commission or the

RCMP and the University's Harassment Office and legal staff should assist

complainants in doing that. The University Harassment Office can, of course, also

continue to assist in informal resolution of conflicts. This motion is being proposed

under section 36(n) of the University Act which gives Senate the power to make

recommendations to the Board considered advisable for promoting the interests of

the university or for carrying out the objects and provisions of the University Act.

MOTION TWO

IT IS MOVED THAT SENATE RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS

THAT ANY NEW OR REVISED HARASSMENT POLICY BE BROUGHT TO

SENATE FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE BEING IMPLEMENTED.

Rationale: The University's harassment policy affects the University's academic

programs since it influences which modes of communication between faculty and

students are feasible and which are not in the classroom setting and out of it. The

policy's impact on academic programs may be positive or negative depending on the

specific provisions of the harassment policy. Therefore it is moved that senate

recommend to the board of governors that any new or revised harassment policy be

brought to senate for consideration before being implemented. This motion is being

proposed under section 36(n) of the University Act which gives Senate the power to

make recommendations to the Board considered advisable for promoting the

interests of the University or for carrying out the objects and provisions of the

University Act.

Len Berggren

Charles Crawford

Veronica Dahl

John M. D'Auria

George Kirczenow

Louis K. Peterson

Michael Warsh

Michael Wortis

Senator

former Senator

Senator

Senator

Senator

Senator

Senator

Senator

---

1I,J

• SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

?

Date ?

Number

April

26 1988 ?

GP 18

POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

?

Rev. Date

?

- Rev. No.

January 22, 1991

?

A

HARASSMENT POLICY

PREAMBLE

Simon Fraser University endeavours to provide a working and learning environment

that is supportive of scholarship and research and the fair treatment of all members of

the University community. The basis for interaction among all members of the

University is mutual respect, co-operation and understanding. Harassment of any

kind-vioIates

University considers

fundamentalrig

harassment

h

tspersonaldigni1y

to be a serious offence

-

an-d-personaI

which is

integrity

subject to

The

a range

­

of

disciplinary measures up to and including dismissal or expulsion.

POLICY

?

1.0 ?

General Definition of Harassment

•

?

1.1 ?

Harassment is aggressive or threatening behaviour which would be considered

by a reasonable person to create an environment unconducive to work or study.

?

1.2 ?

Behaviour which would be considered discriminatory under the Canadian

Human Rights Act and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation

constitute one form

of

harassment.

?

1.3 ?

Harassment may occur between people of the same or different status within

the University community, and both men and women may be the subject of

harassment by members of either sex.

?

1.4 ?

Harassment may occur during one incident, or over a series of incidents

including single incidents which, in isolation, would not necessarily constitute

harassment.

?

1.5

?

Reprisal or threat of reprisal against any participant in a complaint of

policy.

harassment under this policy may itself be considered harassment under this

?

2.0 ?

Definition of Sexual Harassment

?

2.1 ?

Sexual harassment is defined as unwanted sexual attention, sexual solicitation,

or other sexually oriented remarks or behaviour, made by a person who knows

or ought reasonably to know that such attention or solicitation is unwanted; and

without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes:

GP 18 Rev.A Jan 22, 1991

?

Page 1 of 6

---

a)

the implied or expressed promise of reward with respect to a term or terms of

employment academic status, or academic accreditation, for complying with a---•

sexually oriented request; or

b)

reprisal or an implied or expressed threat of reprisal with respect to a term or

terms of employment, academic status, or academic accreditation, for refusing

to comply with a sexually oriented request; or

?

C)

?

the denial of opportunity or the threat to deny opportunity with respect to a term

or terms of employment, academic status, or academic accreditation for refusing

to comply with a sexually oriented request; or

?

d) ?

unwanted sexual attention or solicitation which has the effect of interfering with

an individual's work or academic performance, or which creates an

environment unconducive to work or study.

?

2.2 ?

Sexual Harassment may be physical or psychological.

?

3.0 ?

Due Process and Natural Justice

?

3.1 ?

Allegations of harassment shall be dealt with in a fair, unbiased and timely

manner. All parties shall be advised of the procedures available to them and

persons against whom allegations of harassment have been made shall be

advised of the allegations against them, and shall be accorded the opportunity

to provide comments in support of their own position.

?

3.2 ?

Not withstanding the foregoing paragraph, the President, acting on the

recommendation of the Harrassment Policy Co-ordinator, may make a

preliminary determination that some specific action of an individual or group in

the University community constitutes harrassment and should cease forthwith.

Such a determination shall remain in effect until it is rescinded by the President

or the matter is resolved in accordance with the provisions of this Policy.

?

4.0 ?

Confidentiality

4.1 - Allegations of harassment, particularly sexual harassment, may involve

sensitive disclosures. Confidentiality is required so that those who may have

been harassed feel free to come forward and so that reputations may be

protected throughout the procedure.

?

4.2

?

Confidentiality, however, must be distinguished from anonymity. It is one of the

requirements of natural justice that an individual accused of an offense and

subject to sanctions be informed of the allegations: this information may

require disclosure of the identity of the complainant. The complainant who

wishes mediation or formal investigation must therefore be prepared to be

identified.

GP 18 Rev.A Jan 22, 1991

?

Page 2 of 6

---

?

5.0 ?

University Jurisdiction

?

5.1

?

Allegations of harassment by members of the University in their capacity as

members of the University community shall be considered within the

jurisdiction of the University to investigate whether or not the alleged

:

harassment occurred on campus, whether or not this occurred during working

hours, and whether or not the complainant is a member of the University

community.

?

6.0 ?

Ap p

ointments associated with the imolementaijon of the Harassment Policy

?

6.1 ?

The President shall appoint members of the University community to the

following positions after consulting with the various campus constituencies

(Student Society, unions and associations representing employees):

•

?

- ?

Harassment Policy Advisors

?

-

?

Harassment Policy Co-ordinator

?

- ?

Harassment Policy Panel -

?

6.2 ?

Harassment Policy Advisors

The Harassment Policy Advisors shall be responsible, with the Harassment

Policy Co-ordinator, for the following:

?

-

?

handling initial complaints in individual"harassment cases;

?

- ?

being part of a team charged with increasing awareness of harassment issues

on campus;

?

- ?

reviewing the implementation of this policy and suggesting changes.

6.3

?

Harassment Policy Co-ordinator

The primary responsibilities of the Harassment Policy Co-ordinator shall be:

?

?

- ?

handling initial complaints in individual harassment cases;

?

-

?

co-ordinating the collection of data on the complaints of harassment and their

disposition;

?

- ?

leading the effort to educate the campus community on the Harassment Policy;

?

-

?

initiating a training program. for the line administrators (in conjunction with the

other training efforts) so that, over time, administrators will take responsibility for

the majority of harassment cases;

?

-

?

referring (where requested) individuals involved in harassment cases to

appropriate agencies for assistance.

The Harassment Policy Co-ordinator shall report directly to the President and

shall as far as possible, remain in the office space he/she already occupies.

. ?

.

GP 18 Rev.A Jan 22, 1991

?

Page 3 of 6

---

6.4 ?

Harassment Policy Panel

The panel shall elect its own chair. Appointments shall normally be for a three

y

earterm, but initial appointments shall be staggered to establish a rotation of

membership.

When an Investigative Committee is required, the Chair

of

the panel shall

appoint a three-person Committee from members of the panel for the purpose

of

investigating whether there is cause for administrative action.

The Committee shall advise the President on all aspects of the disposition of

requests for formal investigation, in accordance with this policy and its

procedures.

PROCEDURES

7.1 ?

Informal Consultation: Complaints of harassment must be initiated, and may be

resolved, by informal consultation. If the complaint is not carried beyond this

stage the University shall maintain no written record of the names of the parties

nor of the precise particulars of the complaint.

7.1.1 A complaint shall be brought first to a Harassment Policy Advisor or the

Harassment Policy Coordinator (who may act as an Advisor). The complaint

may be written or oral. The advisor shall discuss the matter fully with the

complainant and shall inform the complainant of the procedures of this Policy.

With the agreement of the complainant, the Advisor may discuss the complaint

with the alleged harasser (the respondent) in an effort to reach a mutually

acceptable resolution without recourse to formal procedures.

7.2 ?

Formal Procedures: There are two formal procedures for the resolution of

complaints: mediation, which requires the agreement of both parties; and a

formal investigation, which shall be set in motion at the request of either party.

7.2.1 A request for resolution by means of either mediation or formal investigation

• must be made in writing and shall contain a detailed account of the relevant

facts. All such requests and all written responses from the other party shall

become part of the record and shall be placed in the appropriate files (student

files and/or employee files).

7.2.2 The resolution procedures of this Policy are not meant to preclude such other

avenues

of

recourse as may be provided for by existing University regulations,

rules, policies or employment agreements.

8.0 ?

Mediation

8.1 ?

Either party may request mediation, but it will be arranged only with the consent

of

both parties. The mediator shall not have punitive power, but shall seek

resolution

of

problems by mutual agreement of the complainant and

GP 18 Rev.A Jan 22, 1991

?

Page 4

of 6

.

---

respondent. The mediator may be the Co-ordinator or one of the Advisors or

•

?

any other member of the University community. Both the mediator and format of

the mediation process must be acceptable to the parties.

?

8.2 ?

Mediation will be conducted without prejudice to any further action by either

party.

?

8.3 ?

Each party may be accompanied by a representative.

?

8.4 ?

If the complaint is resolved through mediation the matter will go no further. If

mediation fails to arrive at a mutually acceptable resolution, either party may

request formal investigation as specified in section 9 through the Harassment

Policy Co-ordinator. Requests for formal investigation must be submitted to the

Harassment Policy Co-ordinator, normally within two weeks of the cessation of

mediation.

?

9.0 ?

Formal Investication

?

9.1 ?

Either a complainant or a respondent may request a formal investigajjon,

through the Harassment Policy Co-ordinator. The request and the written

complaint shall be submitted to the Harassment Policy Panel through the Office

of the President and an Investigative Committee shall be appointed. The other

party shall immediately be informed of the request and the details of the

complaint. Two weeks shall be provided for further response. The Investigative

Committee will consider requests from either party for information which might

enable them to find witnesses or other supporting evidence.

?

9.2 ?

The Investigative Committee shall arrange to interview all parties to the

complaint as soon as possible, giving reasonable consideration to their

schedules and the time needed to prepare responses. While strict time limits

may be impractical, delays in dealing with the matter must be avoided in the

interest of fairness. The Committee is free to develop appropriate procedures

and practices to investigate and conduct interviews properly and confidentially,

within the framework of principles of natural justice. This will include each

party's right to know and to respond to all allegations.

?

9.3

?

Both parties must be informed of their right to be present at an interview or

hearing and to be accompanied by a representative. If a union or professional

association is present at this stage, it shall be without prejudice to any

subsequent grievance or action taken under the terms of the relevant collective

agreement or contract.

?

9.4

?

If more than one complaint has been lodged against an individual, the

complaints may be investigated together by the same Investigative Committee.

10.0 Discipline and Remedies

10.1 The President shall impose an appropriate sanction for the harassment, may

provide a remedy for the complainant, or may exonerate the respondent. The

GP 18 Rev.A

Jan22, 1991

?

Page 5 of 6

---

appropriate criterion for a decision in this process is "proof on a balance of

probabilities," the standard in civil litigation. Considerations affecting

administrative action should include:

- ?

the severity of the harassment;

• ?

whether the. harassment was intentional or unintentional;

- ?

whether the offense is an isolated incident or involves repeated acts of

harassment;

- ?

mitigating or aggravating circumstances affecting any party.

10.2 The range of sanctions may include, but are not limited to: dismissal, expulsion,

suspension, or public or private reprimand, depending on the seriousness of

the offense and the respondent's relationship with the University.

10.3 Where a complaint is found to be justified, reasonable efforts will be made to

protect the complainant from any subsequent harassment, discrimination, or

reprisal which might arise as a result of the complaint. Possible remedies may

include written or oral apology, reassessment of academic work (eg.,

examination, essay, thesis), or transfer out of a particular class or worksite. The

President might also order a person to cease having any contact with the other

party.

10.4 Where a complaint is found to be unjustified, the President may provide a

remedy for the respondent.

E,

..

11.0 Time Limits

11.1 A written complaint and request for either mediation or formal investigation

should be submitted within six months of the date of the last alleged incident of

harassment. If the complainant submits evidence that there is reasonable

cause for an extension beyond the six months limit, the matter must be referred

directly to the President. The President may exercise discretion in waiving the

limitation period, however the onus is on the complainant to establish a

reasonable and bona fide cause for the delay, and to show that waiver of the

time limitation is in the best interests of justice. The respondent shall be given

an opportunity to challenge the case for such a waiver.

12:0 This policy shall be reviewed after three years.

INTERPRETATION

Questions of interpretation or application of the Policy or its procedures shall be

referred to the President whose decision shall be final.

GP 18 Rév.A

Jan 22, 1991

?

Page 6 of 6

.