I.
PROCEDURES
A.
SCOPE
1.
These local Abusive Conduct in the
Workplace complaint resolution procedures have been established pursuant
to Section IV.A. of the University of California Abusive Conduct in the Workplace Policy.
2.
These procedures apply to complaints of
Abusive Conduct and complaints of adverse actions as a result of reporting
Abusive Conduct or participating in an investigation or other resolution process
related to Abusive Conduct.
B. DEFINITIONS
1. Application of Definitions
The definitions provided herein are for ease of
reference only. The operative definitions for this implementing procedure will
be the definitions provided in the University of California Abusive Conduct in
the Workplace Policy.
2.
Abusive Conduct
Abusive Conduct is
harassing or threatening behavior that is sufficiently severe, persistent, or
pervasive conduct in the Workplace that denies, adversely limits, or interferes
with a person's participation in or benefit from the education, employment, or
other programs or activities of the University. The conduct creates an
environment, whether intended or not, that is objectively intimidating or
offensive and unrelated to the University's legitimate educational, employment,
and business interests. The conduct shall be evaluated on a case-by-case basis,
taking into account the circumstances of the parties, relationship between the
parties (including power imbalance); the frequency, nature and severity of the
alleged conduct; whether the conduct was physically threatening; and whether
the conduct may be protected as academic freedom or free speech. A single act
may constitute Abusive Conduct if especially severe or egregious. When the
alleged conduct involves issues related to academic freedom, the applicable
University Office will consult with the Academic Senate.
3. Complainant
An individual who
alleges and/or has been reported to have been subjected to Abusive Conduct. Any
individual, including a student, can be a Complainant.
4. Reporter
An individual who
makes a report of alleged Abusive Conduct. Any individual, including a student,
can be a Reporter.
5. Respondent
An individual
alleged to have engaged in Abusive Conduct.
6. Retaliation
An adverse action
taken against an individual based on their report of Abusive Conduct or
participation in an investigation or other resolution process provided for in
this policy. An adverse action is conduct that would discourage reporting
Abusive Conduct or participating in a process provided for in this policy, and
includes but is not limited to threats, intimidation, or coercion.
7. Workplace
Any space where
University business is conducted or occurs, in connection with University
employment and/or in the context of a University program or activity (for
example, University-sponsored study abroad, research, health services, or
internship programs, as well as the online workplace).
C. AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES
1.
Complaint Review Authority (CRA)
The Complaint Review
Authority shall be responsible for administering these
procedures. The CRA or their designee will determine whether a complaint is
eligible for processing under this Policy, ensure that complaints are processed
in a timely manner, and issue final decisions.
2.
Investigation Complaint Officer
(ICO)
The CRA may appoint one
or more individuals to serve as Investigation Complaint Officer(s) (ICO).
The ICO will be responsible for overseeing the investigation of a
complaint under this Policy. The ICO may personally
conduct the investigation or may delegate the fact-finding, in whole or in
part, to another investigator.
3.
UC San Diego Complaint Review Authorities
The designated offices
that serve as CRAs at UC San Diego are:
• Campus Human Resources
• UC San Diego Health Human Resources
• Academic Personnel Services
Complaints will be
assigned as follows:
• If the respondent is campus staff: Campus Human
Resources
• If the respondent is health staff: UC San Diego Health
Human Resources
• If the respondent is an academic appointee: Academic
Personnel Services
• If the respondent is unknown: the
CRA that oversees employment issues for the Complainant
• If the respondent is unaffiliated with UC San Diego: the CRA that oversees employment issues for the
Complainant
• If the respondent is a student who is not an employee:
the CRA that oversees employment issues for the Complainant
4.
Substitute Complaint Review Authorities
A substitute CRA may
act in the place of the CRA assigned in this Implementing Procedure in the
event that (i) the CRA recuses him or herself, (ii)
the campus Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer determines a conflict of
interest exists or a serious potential for an appearance of a conflict of
interest exists, or (iii) the matter might be handled more expeditiously by a
substitute due to limitations on staffing or other resources.
Substitute CRAs will be
assigned by the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer and may be any appropriate
officer or employee or outside service provider; however, priority
consideration for assignment as a substitute shall be given to the UC San Diego
CRAs provided in this policy.
D. HOW TO REPORT AN ABUSIVE CONDUCT COMPLAINT
1.
An abusive conduct or retaliation complaint may be reported:
a.
By reporting to “Abusive Conduct at UC
San Diego” https://blink.ucsd.edu/HR/policies/conduct/abusive.html;
b.
By reporting to an employee's manager or
any supervisor (mandatory reporter);
c.
By reporting to the UC Whistleblower Hotline or 800-403-4744;
2.
An abusive conduct or retaliation complaint may also be
filed pursuant to the employee's existing grievance
and complaint resolution policies and their
respective implementing procedures.
E. INITIAL SCREENING PROCEDURES FOR
ABUSIVE CONDUCT AND RETALIATION COMPLAINTS
1.
Gather Initial Information:
a.
Collection of the specific factual
allegations that form the basis of the complaint. If the CRA is uncertain
whether the alleged behavior meets the definition of Abusive Conduct, the CRA
is authorized to conduct an initial inquiry as the CRA deems necessary or
appropriate, including requiring the complainant to provide details in writing
and documentation regarding the alleged conduct.
b.
Identification of the alleged Respondent.
c.
Verification that the alleged abusive
conduct took place in a university Workplace.
d.
Desired resolution of the Complainant.
2.
Screen for Emergencies and Additional
Policy Violations
a.
Reports of Abusive Conduct are not an
appropriate place to report immediate health and safety concerns that require a
rapid response. Physical violence or threats of violence should be reported to
the UC San Diego campus police department.
b.
Sex-based conduct: If the alleged
conduct is sex-based, including conduct that is sexual in nature or based on
gender, gender identity, gender expression, sex- or gender-stereotyping, or
sexual orientation, the University's Sexual
Violence and Sexual Harassment (SVSH) Policy will apply. Reports shall be made or forwarded to the Office for
Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination for review.
Protected Category conduct: If the alleged conduct is
based on one or more protected categories outlined in the University's
Discrimination, Harassment, and Affirmative Action in the Workplace policy,
that policy will apply. Reports should be forwarded to the Office for
Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination for review.
3.
Offer resources:
a.
Employee Assistance Programs provide
assessment, consultation, counseling and referrals regarding work and personal
stress or emotional concerns that are interfering with an individual's ability
to work in their professional Workplace or academic setting.
b.
The Ombuds
Office provides confidential, neutral, informal dispute resolution services and
may provide assistance for any party in an abusive conduct situation.
4.
Advise the Complainant:
a.
Instead of, or in addition to, reporting
Abusive Conduct in violation of University policy, an employee may file a
grievance or complaint. That grievance or complaint must meet all of the
requirements, including time limits for filing, under the applicable complaint
resolution or grievance procedure, for example PPSM-70
(Complaint Resolution), APM-015 (The Faculty Code of Conduct), APM-016 (University Policy on Faculty Conduct and the
Administration of Discipline), APM-140 (Non-Senate Academic Appointees/Grievances), APM-150 (Non-Senate Academic Appointees/Corrective
Action and Dismissal), or applicable
collective bargaining agreements). Any such grievance or complaint will be
forwarded to the CRA for resolution of alleged violations of this policy, and
the grievance or complaint procedure will be held in abeyance pending
resolution under this policy, unless the applicable collective bargaining
agreement provides otherwise. After completion of the process under this
policy, the grievance or complaint may be reactivated under the applicable
grievance or complaint procedure.
5.
If the Complainant wishes to move forward
with a complaint per the Abusive Conduct in the Workplace policy, refer the
Complaint to the appropriate CRA.
F. INITIAL COMPLAINT
REVIEW
1.
No more than 30 business days, after
receiving a report, the CRA or their designee(s) will make an initial assessment,
including a limited factual inquiry when appropriate, to determine how to
proceed and whether an investigation is warranted. The CRA may extend this
timeline for good cause. The initiation of an investigation does not imply any
judgment or conclusions regarding the matter to be investigated other than
further inquiry is warranted.
2.
Anonymous reports and allegations from
Reporters who are not Complainants will be reviewed and may or may not be
investigated. The response to reports may be limited if the Complainant does
not wish to pursue the complaint or if the University is unable to collect
sufficient information to determine whether the alleged conduct occurred or
constitutes a violation of this policy.
G. EARLY RESOLUTION—OPTIONAL PARTICIPATION
1.
The CRA will offer the Complainant and
the Respondent the opportunity to participate in a voluntary early resolution
process, typically within 60 to 75 business days after the CRA has made an
initial assessment of a complaint.
2.
The CRA may extend this timeline for good
cause, with written notice to the Complainant and the Respondent of the reason
for the extension and the projected new timeline. Options for early resolution
may include, but are not limited to:
a.
Facilitated discussion or mediation to
obtain an agreement between the Complainant and Respondent;
b.
Agreement to counseling, coaching,
educational, and/or training programs;
c.
Negotiating an agreement for corrective
action/discipline.
H. FORMAL INVESTIGATION PROCEEDURES
The CRA may initiate a
formal investigation after a preliminary review of the allegations even in
cases where the Complainant does not wish to pursue the complaint. This may
occur if the CRA determines that an investigation is necessary to mitigate
potential risk to the campus community.
Formal investigation of
reports of Abusive Conduct and/or Retaliation will incorporate the following
procedures:
1.
The Respondent will be advised of the
relevant allegations in the complaint and will be reminded that Retaliation is
prohibited by this policy.
2.
The investigation generally will include
interviews with the parties, interviews with other witnesses as needed, and a
review of relevant documents or other evidence as appropriate.
3.
Disclosure of facts to parties and
witnesses will be limited to what is reasonably necessary to conduct a fair and
thorough investigation, consistent with University policy and due process
requirements. Participants in an investigation may be advised to maintain
confidentiality when essential to protect the integrity of the investigation.
4.
The Complainant and the Respondent may
have an advisor present when they are interviewed and at meetings. If
authorized by other University policies, they may have other support persons
present. Other witnesses may have an advisor present at the discretion of the
ICO or as required by University policy or a collective bargaining agreement.
5.
Interim protections or measures may be
implemented prior to or during the investigation. These interim protections or
measures should be implemented in consultation with the CRA and relevant
university authorities and should take into account the due-process rights of
both Complainants and Respondents.
6.
The ICO conducting the investigation will
complete the investigation promptly, typically within 120 business days of
notifying the parties in writing that a formal investigation of the complaint
will be conducted. The CRA may extend this timeline for good cause, with
written notice to the Complainant and the Respondent of the reason for the
extension and the projected new timeline.
7.
Following the completion of the investigation,
the investigator will prepare a written report that, at a minimum, includes a
statement of the allegations and issues; the positions of the parties; a
summary of the evidence; findings of fact; and a determination by the
investigator as to whether the conduct at issue violated this policy. In
determining whether this policy was violated, the investigator will apply the
preponderance of evidence standard.
I. THE DECISION
1.
The ICO conducting the investigation will
submit the report to the CRA, who will recommend next steps.
2.
The Complainant and the Respondent will
be informed when the investigation is completed and whether or not a violation
of this policy was found to have occurred.
J. REMEDIES
AND CORRECTIVE ACTION
1.
Actions taken to resolve the complaint,
if any, that are directly related to the Complainant, such as an order that the
Respondent not contact the Complainant, will be shared with the Complainant.
2.
In accordance with University policies
protecting individuals' privacy, the Complainant may be notified generally that
the matter has been referred for appropriate administrative action but will not
be informed of the details of the recommended action without the Respondent's
consent.
II.
REVISION HISTORY
02/17/2023 Policy
issued.