Debate surrounds harassment allegations

Despite four formal grievances filed against the Physical Plant's manager of building services, gaps in communication still exist as to how to mediate the situation.

The formal complaints against Chadwick White — who was hired in November of 2009 — began in May 2011, when 18 Custodial Service employees filed a collective letter of grievance to President Shirley Raines regarding White's interaction with his employees.

The complainants suggested White undergo further training in communication and supervisory skills as well as training in The University of Memphis' and Tennessee Board of Regents' policies and procedures.  The complaint also suggested anger management classes.

In the fall of 2011, three more employees filed formal complaints against White, one alleging sexual harassment. The Affirmative Action Office was unable to come to a final conclusion regarding this charge. Two workers alleged White belittled them and wrote them up without first discussing their performance.

The Daily Helmsman examined dozens of letters, memos and reports filed in the investigation obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

White said he has not "done anything wrong," and denies all allegations. He said his method of supervising his employees is "being firm, fair and consistent."

White has never undergone a mandatory performance evaluation plan in his two-plus years at The U of M and also had never taken the required online sexual harassment course until Monday, though ordered to do so in November.  

White said he waited to take the course because he felt doing so would imply an admission of guilt to the sexual harassment charges. Once he was made aware that the course was required, he completed it online.

U of M legal counsel Sheryl Lipman said supervisors are supposed to administer evaluations for all employees but the rule is followed inconsistently, leaving many employees without regular evaluations, something she said was "a problem."    

In regards to complaints made against him, White said his employment history is in hospital housekeeping, where federal regulations required strict guidelines for cleanliness.  He said he is holding his workers accountable; a change that he said has caused a reaction.

"I am bringing in the element of change," he said. "Of course this change is met with resistance because people tend to resist change."

White also said he believes his position as middle manager makes him the "sacrificial lamb" in cases of disciplinary action.  The supervisors he oversees bring complaints about employee performance to him and he must in turn get approval of any disciplinary action he issues from his supervisor, Calvin Strong, director of custodial landscape services.

After a fellow supervisor filed the sexual harassment charge against White in October, Equal Employment Affirmative Action Officer Michelle Banks investigated the case but could not come to a clear conclusion as to what happened between White and the alleged victim.  

"It should be noted that there are far too many rumors concerning interactions between administrators and staff members for the investigator to feel comfortable," the report said.

The alleged victim did not respond to an email and note left at her home by a reporter requesting an interview.

It was determined by the Human Resources Office that White should have more interaction with Strong when disciplining employees.  Strong said in a phone interview last week that he has done "nothing differently" as White's boss since the complaints were filed against White.

During the course of the sexual harassment investigation, the alleged victim was found to have forged doctor's notes to be excused from work. White claimed the complainant's poor work performance and forging of medical documentation was her reason for filing a sexual harassment claim against him after he requested her termination four days prior.  White said it wasn't the first time the woman forged a document.

The investigation, which included numerous interviews with other administrators, supervisors and employees, concluded that White made inappropriate comments before the complainant forged medical documents.  In her hand-written complaint, the alleged victim claimed her poor work performance resulted from depression and physical breakdown related to the continuous harassment she was receiving.

White said he felt the investigation was mishandled because the investigator never formally interviewed him. He has filed a grievance against the investigator in the case, an employee in Human Resources, and his boss, Strong.

"If I did something wrong, then why am I still here? Why am I not suspended? Why am I not demoted?" White said.

According to records, the alleged victim missed multiple days of work.  The investigator reported the complainant "indicated" she could not afford the physician's co-payment.

"The administration needs to take a look at the policy of requiring medical statements from lower-paid Physical Plant and Planning employees when this practice is not required for other Physical Plant employees," the investigator wrote in a response.    

The complainant met with Strong, White's supervisor, to discuss problems about White on multiple occasions.  According to Strong's statements given to the investigator, the complainant did not mention sexual harassment.  The complainant said she stopped attempting to speak with Strong because she did not feel he took her seriously.