For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com
Premium Left blogad
Left Blog Ad

Advertisement
Sexual Harassment Rules Employed to Silence Dissent
Written By : Dave Blount

When you live in a totalitarian society run by demented ideologues, it’s safest to keep your mouth shut and your head down, as a professor at East Georgia College discovered after publicly noting that the innocent have no protection from bogus sexual harassment charges:

Professor Thomas Thibeault made the mistake of pointing out — at a sexual harassment training seminar — that the school’s sexual harassment policy contained no protection for the falsely accused. Two days later, in a Kafkaesque irony, Thibeault was fired by the college president for sexual harassment without notice, without knowing his accuser or the charges against him, and without a hearing.

Here’s how the politically correct educrat brass responded to the professor’s thought crime:

Thibeault was summoned to EGC President John Bryant Black’s office. … Black told Thibeault that he “was a divisive force in the college at a time when the college needed unity” and that Thibeault must resign by 11:30 a.m. or be fired and have his “long history of sexual harassment … made public.” This unsubstantiated allegation took Thibeault by surprise. Black added that Thibeault would be escorted off campus by Police Chief Drew Durden and that Black had notified the local police that he was prepared to have Thibeault arrested for trespassing if he returned to campus. At no point was Thibeault presented with the charges against him or given any chance to present a defense. Refusing to resign, Thibeault understood that he was fired.

As for his “long history of sexual harassment,” it apparently consists of this:

[O]ne day after Thibeault expressed his concerns, his colleagues were pressured to produce evidence of “sexual harassment.” A central item of evidence apparently was Thibeault’s reading aloud of non-sexual excerpts from the book An Encyclopedia of Assholes to colleagues in a faculty break room-with the alleged element of “sexual harassment” arising simply from the book’s title.

Even this much evidence is superfluous in a sexual harassment charge. Simply declaring yourself to be offended is proof that whoever you say offended you is guilty.

The charge of racism works the same way, which is why the scum at the bottom of the moonbat barrel — Jimmy Carter, Maureen Dowd — has been accusing Joe Wilson of racism for daring to challenge Dear Leader.

Hat tip: David Thompson. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

0
  • http://conservativebootcamp.com martinhale

    Hope the good perfesser can find a decent employment attorney. I suspect that on the face of it, he might have a good claim worth quite a bit of money.

  • whats_up

    Posted by martinhale

    2009-09-17 12:55:36

    I dont know Martin, Georgia is a right to work state, the proffesor might not have a leg to stand on.

  • http://TheNixonTape.Com Dick_Nixon

    As the University cited a "long history of sexual harrassment" that would be revealed, and apparently there is not such a thing, and confessing to a non existant thing as an option to submitting a resignation isn't really legal, the professor will have a civil claim against the University. It just depends on how far he wishes to go to fight this.

    The discovery phase would be worth following. Also, putting the University President on the stand might be entertaining.

  • http://conservativebootcamp.com martinhale

    I dont know Martin, Georgia is a right to work state, the proffesor might not have a leg to stand on.

    I think you meant 'at-will' rather than 'right to work'. Right to work has to do with whether employees can be compelled to join a labour organisation as a condition of employment or not. Right to work states allow employees to work without joining the union but requires them to pay 'agency fees' to the union since they are the recipients of the wages and benefits negotiated by the union. At-will is a legal status which permits employers to terminate an employment relationship without "cause, notice or reason".

    Presuming that Georgia is an at-will state, and I don't know offhand if it is or not, that still wouldn't preclude the professor from filing a wrongful termination suit. Those at-will laws don't provide employers any shield from consequential steps taken by their former employees, they just make it easier to fire someone.

    If the litigant can establish that the action taken was capricious, inconsistent with established organizational policy and past practices, was in violation of public policy, amounted to retribution for filing a whistleblower claim, or any number of other potential employer sins, it's still actionable, at-will state or not. Thinking that at-will shields employers from litigation is the single greatest misunderstanding about employment law that people share. Being terminated under the at-will provisions of the state law simply means that your employer can refuse to tell you why you're being let go, and they don't have to give you any notice. If you file a suit for wrongful termination and come to court equipped with a folder of decent performance appraisals, evidence of promotions, and other commonly accepted measures of good performance, the onus then falls on the employer to divulge the "cause" and "reason" they let you go and deprived you of future income and benefits. If there is a cause, as in this case, then the substantive details of that cause will be reviewed in court and a decision rendered by the jury as to the appropriateness of the action.

    At best EGC is going to spend a passel of taxpayer cash on defending itself, should this man sue. This case will get very interesting if EGC has a bona fide tenure system and this man was either tenured or about to become tenured. I read the article which VH linked and it's not clear about that. It is clear that the college acted rashly and without providing the prof the policy-mandated hearing process to which he was entitled, so I'm betting that he's got a fairly strong case, should he decide to pursue it.

  • http://conservativebootcamp.com martinhale

    sorry about all that italic crap – sometimes i hate html passionately

  • whats_up

    Posted by martinhale

    2009-09-17 15:07:47

    Yes i did mean at-will, my apologies for the confusion.

Advertisement
Featured Video

Debbie Spend-it-now is selling America’s future to the Chinese

php developer india
Previous Features

Ads

Five Ways Conservatives Will Have to Sell Their Souls if Romney Wins
An Interview With Ron Paul
The RWN Real-Estate Sale
RWN\'s Favorite Tony Robbins Quotes
Stop Apologizing for Being an American
The Amway Experience
Premium Right Ads
Blogads Right
Advertisement
User Info