# data[].attributes.body
The topic for this padlet is about discrimination based on gender for individuals in professional roles. I have luckily not been a victim of such unethical behavior although, working in student affairs in higher education, I learned about a Director of Military & Veterans Services who repeatedly got told from higher ups who were in charge of hiring, that the role was better led by a male veteran. Thankfully, the Director continued to push to get the position and seeing that no males applied for the position, the institution deemed her as the most qualified candidate. That said, I knew that there was a potential to be similar cases for other institutions, which is how I came across an article on Higher Education, where Esposito was hired as CEO of Manchester Community College, but was then fired due to sexism allegations she confronted to her leaders about (Moody, 2022).

The audience that will best benefit from this legal guide will be staff in higher education to learn about the legal guidance on gender discrimination in the workplace, states, and federally. This guide may also benefit anyone dealing with discrimination against gender at their workplace.

Reference:
Moody, J. (2022). CEO sues connecticut state system, wins job back. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/08/22/ceo-manchester-community-college-wins-job-back

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ousted last fall as CEO of Manchester Community College, Nicole Esposito subsequently sued the Connecticut State Colleges and Universities system, alleging gender discrimination and a number of other issues, including violations of her First Amendment and equal protection rights.

Today she's returning to her role-with a payout and other concessions from the CSCU system.

"I am eager to get back and continue providing the best possible experience for the students of Manchester Community College, as well as everyone else who is a part of the MCC community," Esposito said in a statement provided through her legal counsel.

Esposito filed suit in August 2021 after facing alleged gender discrimination. The lawsuit alleges that her supervisor, Rob Steinmetz, threatened her job when she complained about his behavior and that officials pressured her to resign when she asked them to intervene in the matter. The lawsuit charges that Esposito was removed without cause.

Now CSCU must pay Esposito $775,000-a mix of back pay, compensatory damages and attorney's fees-and provide training for executives and managers on discrimination and retaliation, whistle-blower protections, and employee free speech rights. The settlement also bars Esposito's former supervisor-the man accused of sexist behavior toward her and other women-from holding any managerial power over her.

The defendants in the case did not admit to any wrongdoing.

The Lawsuit

Esposito was hired as CEO-a president-like role-of Manchester Community College in July 2020. Though she had held various positions in higher education, it was her first executive job. Her run was interrupted after she clashed with Steinmetz, who was the Capital Region East president, a now-discontinued role in the community college system.

Esposito claimed in her lawsuit that Steinmetz began making sexist statements early on, criticizing the tone of her voice and describing her as "off-putting." Esposito said Steinmetz also made sexist comments about a highly qualified female job applicant, criticizing her for talking too much during an interview. When Esposito confronted him with allegations of sexism, Steinmetz reportedly threatened her job security, according to details in the lawsuit.

Contacted by email, Steinmetz did not provide a comment to Inside Higher Ed.

Esposito's lawsuit also stated that system officials took no action when they were informed of her supervisor's behavior, allegedly telling her "to go back and work things out with Steinmetz." According to the lawsuit, system officials not only failed to intervene but also pressured Esposito to resign.

With tensions still simmering, Esposito was told in June 2021-less than a year after she took the job- that her appointment as CEO of Manchester Community College would be discontinued. The lawsuit claims that Esposito was given no "justification or rationale" for the proposed termination.

Esposito also alleges that an outside law firm hired to conduct an independent investigation into Steinmetz's alleged behavior was the same firm that represented the system in labor and employment issues, and that it excluded relevant information that her legal counsel provided.

Esposito was suspended and removed from her post in August 2021. Her lawsuit claims she was not granted proper due process, citing a delayed hearing related to her suspension. A hearing eventually took place in January, and her termination was upheld, which Esposito argues was partly because she had "expressed concerns to the [U.S.] Department of Education."

Shortly after being removed from her post, Esposito hired a legal team, filing suit against CSCU. After roughly a year in limbo, the case was settled earlier this month, leading to Esposito's return.

The Big Picture

As Esposito battled in court to keep her job, allies on campus rallied around her.

Angelo Messore, who teaches political science and economics at Manchester, said Esposito's termination came as a surprise on the cusp of the new school year.

"She was removed abruptly. We were getting ready for the beginning of a new fall [2021] semester and suddenly she was informed that she was being removed," Messore said.

Messore quickly organized and sent a petition to the Board of Regents opposing Esposito's termination.

Patrick Sullivan, an English professor at Manchester Community College who wrote op-eds advocating for Esposito, said by email that her termination was "sudden, confusing, and shocking." He added that Esposito had skillfully led the college through the early days of the coronavirus pandemic. Campus reaction to her termination consisted of "confusion, bafflement, and fear," he said. (Sullivan also pointed out that Esposito won a woman of the year award from the American Association for Women in Community Colleges in April while still fighting for her job.)

Both faculty members suggested that Esposito had been asking hard questions about the consolidation of Connecticut's community colleges, which also factored into her termination.

"This ouster was read by many as a chilling message: We are in charge. Get in line or bad things will happen," Sullivan wrote. "We won't stand for 'insubordination' (a word they liked to use a lot around that time for anyone with a difference of opinion or who spoke their mind)."

Now, with Esposito's return, faculty members said they're happy to have an advocate for Manchester Community College as consolidation looms for fall 2023.

"We feel that we finally have our president back, that we have someone to represent us and fight for us, someone who will help us to maintain our standing. Without a CEO, we had nobody to represent us at the system office and to voice our needs," Messore said.

Both Messore and Sullivan were sharply critical of the consolidation process, which they see as forced and clumsy. They alleged that system administrators were bullying their way through it and expressed a need for greater accountability for system leadership extending to the very top.

"The way the system is set up now, more of these kinds of problems are inevitable," Sullivan said. "Right now, there are no checks and balances and no legislative oversight. The governor appoints individuals to the Board of Regents, which has simply rubber-stamped everything the system office has wanted to do. Appointees know that the governor supports this merger and the people leading it. It's a system designed to produce these kinds of unfortunate reckonings."

The Fallout

The CSCU system did not provide a statement or make officials available to discuss Esposito's lawsuit, instead directing Inside Higher Ed to an Aug. 12 announcement of staff changes, which included a brief mention of Esposito's return and noted that Steinmetz had been moved from the regional president position to instead be executive vice president of college services and student affairs.

The CSCU system-and Steinmetz-have since been named in another lawsuit, filed in July, by a plaintiff alleging discrimination based on her age and physical limitations.

A CSCU official said that lawsuit is "a personnel matter that is currently under review."

To outside legal observers, Esposito's victory is somewhat uncommon.

Stephanie Hamm, who works in employment law as a partner at the law firm Thompson & Horton LLP, said by email that employment cases "are usually an uphill battle for the plaintiff because most employment laws are designed to make it difficult for plaintiffs to prevail."

Hamm, who has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in employment cases, said it's rare to see a lawsuit where an employee gets to keep their job and receives both back pay and compensatory damages, describing the legal outcome as "a big win for the plaintiff."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
CEO of Manchester Community College wins job back

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ousted last fall as CEO of Manchester Community College, Nicole Esposito subsequently sued the Connecticut State Colleges and Universities system, alleging gender discrimination and a number of other issues, including violations of her First Amendment and equal protection rights. Today she's returning to her role-with a payout and other concessions from the CSCU system.

# data[].attributes.body
The governing agency for the University of Central Missouri involves first and foremost, the President of UCM, who then reports to the Board of Governors made up of 8 roles including the presidential role (UCM). These are the individuals who I will make most interactions with regarding any issues or concerns I have in my department. The Missouri institutions are then governed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) which also works with “educators, legislators, government agencies, community leaders, and citizens to maintain a strong public education system” (Missouri State). I have learned that state agencies are mainly there to oversee all institutional matters brought by the Board of Governors and/or support staff with legal guidance if necessary. Lastly, there is the U.S. Department of Education that oversees the educational departments and responds to the White House. Other related agencies for this topic are the Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education and the Office of Postsecondary Education (USA). These agencies hold bigger responsibilities including what the institutions will need and who will be appointed to those items, which student population needs to further be supported, and what programs are working and which are not.

Board of governors. University of Central Missouri. Retrieved February 27, 2023, from https://www.ucmo.edu/about/university-leadership/board-of-governors/

Dept of Elementary and Secondary Education. Official Missouri State Website. Retrieved February 27, 2023, from https://www.mo.gov/government/guide-to-missouris-government/department-of-elementary-and-secondary-education/

U.S. Department of Education. USA.gov. Retrieved February 27, 2023, from https://www.usa.gov/federal-agencies/u-s-department-of-education

# data[].attributes.body
The federal law in relation to this topic is in section 1 of the 14th amendment of the Constitution which denies discrimination to any citizen based on equal protection laws (U.S.C.,Amdt.14 §1.8.1.2).

The law allows courts to first identify how to classify the issue to rationalize the intent and whether the law does apply.

The issue can either be classified as overinclusive or underinclusive based on the information gathered (U.S.C.,Amdt.14 §1.8.1.2).

A state constitutional law is an amended section of Article I of Connecticut's state constitution (CT., Amdt. 1 §20.5).

The amendment states that “No person shall be denied the equal protection of the law,” which also prohibits discrimination due to “religion, race, color, ancestry, national origin, or sex” (CT., Amdt. 1 §20.5). That said, this law could have supported both Esposito and the Director of the Mil/Vets Center since they were discriminated against for their sex and were unable to perform their duty enjoyably.

References

Amdt14.S1.8.1.2 Equal Protection and Rational Basis Review Generally. (1868). U.S.C. Amdt.14 § 1.8.1.2.  https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-14/

Constitution of the State of Connecticut. (1984). CT. Amdt. 1 § 20. Art. 5.

https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/content/constitutions/ctconstitution.htm

# data[].attributes.body
A statute to consider is the Whistle-blowing protections for employees of certain corporations, which prohibits listed employers from discharging, threatening, harassing, or discriminating against an employee for their right to provide information on a legal matter (CT. Stat. §33-1336) like Steinmetz threatened Esposito for accusing him of sexism allegations (Moody, 2022).

A violation is considered a violation, or one that is in the process of being filed– that the employee provides information for, when it is “of 18 USC Section 1341, 1343, 1344 or 1348, any rule or regulation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or any provision of federal or state law relating to fraud against shareholders” (CT. Stat. §33-1336).

A special court order in the Supreme Court can be held if the employee brings up the allegation within 1 year after knowledge of the claim (CT. Stat. §33-1336).

An administrative law that aligns with the discrimination against gender in higher education is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which “prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin” (Civil Rights Act, 1964).

According to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is unlawful employment to discharge an employee based on gender (Civil Rights Act, 1964).

When an individual makes a claim, the Commision is the one to take over and provide information that includes the date of the incident, location, and a summary of what occurred– within 10 days of when the Commission is aware then the Commission can decide whether it can be dropped or pursued (Civil Rights Act, 1964).

References

Connecticut Whistleblower Laws. (2004). Statute Code Sec. 33-1336. https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_603.htm#sec_33-1336

Civil Rights Act of 1964 § 7, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq (1964). (Pub. L. 88-352).

Moody, J. (2022). CEO sues connecticut state system, wins job back. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/08/22/ceo-manchester-community-college-wins-job-back

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 § 7, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 et seq (1964) [Section 703]. https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 § 7, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 et seq (1964) [Section 706]. https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964

# data[].attributes.body
The case law that relates to Esposito’s case is Linda Guzzo, Plaintiff v. Connecticut State Colleges and Universities which was also involved Steinmetz, who claimed to have discriminated against her rights in the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) (Linda v. Connecticut, 2022).

At first, Guzzo did not have enough information to back her allegations although, after filling a second claim with defendant names and description of allegations, it had to be given a different number (Linda v. Connecticut, 2022).

The Court sets a deadline when receipt of report is given and the defendants are given their “obligation under Local Rule 26(f)” (Linda v. Connecticut, 2022).

References

Linda guzzo, plaintiff, v. Connecticut state colleges and universities, defendant. (2022). United States District Court District of Connecticut. https://ecf.ctd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2021cv0254-43

# data[].attributes.body
The federal regulation that supports Esposito’s case is the Equal Employment Opportunity, Executive Order 11246 that prohibits discrimination based on sex and other attributes, which also ensures equal employment actions are being demonstrated upon the workforce for Government employment (Executive Order 11246, 1965).

In Subpart B– Contractor’s Agreement of the Executive Order 11246, the regulation mentions that the contractor must not discriminate and must have it in writing or state it to the employees as well as not discharge employees because of discrimination (3 CFR § 202 amended, 1967).

References

Executive Order 11246, as amended (1965).  30 FR 12319, 12935, 3 CFR, 1964–1965 Comp., p.339. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/executive-order-11246/as-amended

Sec. 202 amended by EO 11375 of Oct. 13, 1967, 32 FR 14303, 3 CFR, 1966–1970 Comp., p. 684, EO 12086 of Oct. 5, 1978, 43 FR 46501, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 230, EO 13665 of April 8, 2014, 79 FR 20749, EO 13672 of July 21, 2014, 79 FR 42971

# data[].attributes.body
Much like other institutions across Missouri state University, there is an institutional policy that adheres to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The university policy at Missouri State incorporates clear guidance on a “strict” no discrimination policy including who to report to for sex discrimination, which would be the Title IX Coordinator, versus other inquiries (§G7.02-2, MSU).

The policy also enhances a training program that educates employees of sexual harassment and discrimination including “the Discrimination Awareness in the Workplace Online Training Program and Title IX: Roles of Responsible Employees Online Training Program” (§G7.02-2, MSU).

Lastly, reports must be made to the Title IX Office or the Office for Institutional Equity and Compliance (OIEC) no later than 3 days after the allegation, or knowing of the allegation (§G7.02-2, MSU).

Reference

University Policies. (2022). G7.02-2 University Policies. https://www.missouristate.edu/Policy/Chapter7/G7_02_2_UniversityPolicies.htm#Section2.1

# data[].attributes.body
A risk management strategy that can support discrimination is to create a homogenous workforce, which is intended if there is a lack of diversity. This strategy can help increase diversity including more females in the workplace, which could support Esposito’s case. The important part is to monitor the response in relations within the workplace.

Another strategy is for there to be a “culture of civility and respect” and make sure to include the “highest levels of leadership” (EEOC). This could also be supported by including mandatory programs that teach employees about discrimination such as those initiated in Missouri State University (§G7.02-2, MSU). If this is not implemented, employees like Esposito may be susceptible to harassment.

Lastly, it is important to apply rules to everyone and make it clear they do apply to everyone in the workplace. This is important because it is geared towards making sure that employees are feeling equally-valued. As mentioned by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, if there is a ‘high value’ employee then other employees may be reluctant to speak up about any wrong-doings of that individual(EEOC). This will support future cases like Esposito’s since employees will feel safe to speak to their supervisors about serious concerns.

References

Chart of risk factors for harassment and responsive strategies. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commision. Retrieved March 1, 2023, from https://www.eeoc.gov/chart-risk-factors-harassment-and-responsive-strategies

University Policies. (2022). G7.02-2 University Policies. https://www.missouristate.edu/Policy/Chapter7/G7_02_2_UniversityPolicies.htm#Section2.1

# data[].attributes.body
The Ethics Policy written for the institution I work for holds general information regarding the employees of the University of Central Missouri. The major section that is relevant to the topic is that all employees must be familiar with the policies and procedures for UCM and “is responsible for ethical conduct consistent with the university policy and procedures and with the law” (§1.2.180 RsMo). The reason for this being so important is that the policies can state what is allowed/ what is not allowed, but the Ethics Policy makes it clear that all employees (including anyone that is acting on behalf of or under the wing of the university) must abide by the policies and act ethically. There is a long policy on the prohibition on sex discrimination, which means that if a women is feeling any type of discrimination or harassment, then she will be allowed to report it, which would hold the individual accountable to both policies and the report will need to be sent up to Human Resources (§1.2.180 RsMo). Code of conducts are important to have and follow, but also making sure that employees are aware of their policies to use caution, act appropriately, and leave no room for questioning if someone is being ethical or not.

Reference

1.2.180 Ethics Policy. (2017). University of Central Missouri. §1.2.180 RsMo https://www.ucmo.edu/offices/general-counsel/university-policy-library/policies/ethics-policy/index.php

# data[].attributes.body
This assignment has allowed me to follow an issue and research relating legal and ethical standards. It takes a lot of work to make sure that you are not only finding related information, but also make sure to explain the connection and that it is truly rationalized. I have used a similar process to help me understand all the information I need to give a better response to my students, which allows them to understand their VA benefits better. The most difficult part about this assignment and course is becoming familiar with legal terminology such as using procedures vs. policies at work. I was finally able to understand and explain to myself those terms are very similar to federal laws vs. statutes since they still need to be signed, although that doesn’t mean they are not valid in some cases. I now feel more confident with understanding the legal and ethical conversations that take place in staff and faculty meetings.

# data[].attributes.body
Here are some best practice recommendations for legal compliance in higher education:

Use risk management to support best practices by highlighting scenarios where individuals act unethical or violate policies. This can help showcase what not to do in the workplace and understand the consequences for breaking policy/protocols.

Use feedback tools. Let the team clearly know the policies, the consequences, and confirm that they understand through feedback. Aside from a statement of understanding, this can be used through knowledge check questions once a quarter, by including questions in morning huddles, and/or surveys.

Use mandatory compliance program completion for zero tolerance policies. This will help build transparency for the major policies that coincide with federal laws such as FERPA, Title IX, and Title VII violations.

Accountability. Make sure that the ethical policies are held to all individuals that are in association with the institution and follow through with holding everyone accountable. This means making sure there are consequences for employees who break the policies and there is minimal use for warnings.

Construct clear policies. It is a lot easier to break policies if the policies are not clearly defined, including the descriptions of who it pertains to, what is the purpose, and what will be the disciplinary actions if not in compliance with policies.

Make your goals and mission clear. This can also help new employees realize the importance of customer service, professionalism, and other needed skills in support of having a friendly, team-building environment. If you remind your team of your goals and become a role-model, then employees can be more likely to be influenced by good behavior.

Lastly, it is important to know the staff and be present for interactions to notice the relation between employees. This can confirm whether employees are receptive to the standards that were presented to them. It can also help build professional relationships with the staff that can build a level of trust in case your employees need to come to you for serious issues.