Name that Section - Frequently Used Education Code and Title 5 Sections for Community College Districts

80 / 130

Name that Section: Frequently Used Education Code and Title 5 Sections for Community College Districts
©2018 (c) Liebert Cassidy Whitmore
80
Section 10 RESPONDING TO A DISCRIMINATION C OMPLAINT
As discussed above, Title 5 section 53003 subdivision (c)(2) requires that district EEO Plans
describe the procedure for filing complaints under Section 53026, and identify the person with
whom such complaints are to be filed.
A. INVESTIGATING ALLEGATIONS OF HARASSMENT, D ISCRIMINATION,
OR RETALIATION
Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations requires that districts investigate and attempt to
resolve complaints alleging violation of state and federal anti-discrimination laws. It sets forth
the specific procedures districts must follow when handling discrimination complaints filed by
students and employees.242 Title 5 also mandates that districts implement formal complaint
procedures.
While Title 5 provides guidance regarding the investigation process districts must follow in
terms of deadlines and notifications, it does not establish the specific investigation procedures to
be used. Instead, that is left to the district.
Title 5 requires that each district designate one person as the district officer responsible for
receiving complaints and coordinating the investigation. But depending on the circumstances,
that district officer can assign the actual investigation of the complaint to other staff or retain an
outside investigator. Districts should consider retaining an outside investigator if the complaint
names or implicates a high-ranking employee or if it involves particularly sensitive issues. Once
the district officer assigns the complaint for investigation, the district should provide the
investigator with relevant documents and information, as well as access to potential witnesses.
Following the proper procedure can insulate you from liability.
Case Study for Investigating Allegations of Harassment, Discrimination and Retaliation:
Swenson v. Potter243
Melanie Swenson believed that a co-worker was sexually harassing her, but she
did not report it to anyone. Once management became aware of Swenson’s
complaints, they spoke to the alleged harasser and opened an investigation. The
investigation did not find sufficient evidence to support formal discipline.
Swenson then sued for sexual harassment. The Ninth Circuit held that the
employer could not be held liable under Title VII. The employer’s prompt
response once it learned of the alleged harassment and the fair and unbiased
investigation fulfilled its duty to Swenson.
Complaints should be processed as confidentially as possible, with identities disclosed only
when necessary. Statements made by employees should not be disclosed to other employees
except to elicit specific, relevant, and necessary information from the employee. At the start of
each investigative interview, witnesses should be told that the information they provide will only