We seek to ensure a workplace free from discrimination and harassment, and to allow members who believe they have been targeted to enforce the contract by filing a grievance. To exclude these claims from the grievance procedure would be a step backward for Wellesley and a step backward for women in academia. We believe Wellesley College should offer more to its faculty than basic legal compliance.

While the College may offer supportive measures for faculty who report sexual misconduct, the supportive measures are determined at the sole discretion of the College, may be denied, and there is no timeline which dictates how quickly the College may implement supportive measures. For workers who experience discrimination, bullying, or abuse that is not sexual misconduct, the College offers no supportive measures.

A grievance process allows a worker to think through and request supportive measures themselves. It also guarantees meeting and response times. Finally, the grievance process ends with a neutral third-party who makes the final decision in cases where the College dismisses the grievance and denies remedies.

For a full comparison between WOAW and the College's proposals, click here.

Read our letter in support of protections from discrimination and harassment here.

The remedies we can request in the grievance process are often called "supportive measures." These remedies are non-punitive measures designed to restore or preserve an employee's ability to work and participate in the Wellesley community. Punitive or disciplinary measures cannot be accessed through the grievance process.

WOAW's position is that both processes are necessary and that an employee should be able to choose either or both. The grievance process can only provide non-punitive, supportive measures to an employee. If you are looking to open a formal investigation that may lead to discipline, sanction, or other punitive measures, Title IX may be the right choice for you. We believe both processes have a place.

Yes. The ability to file a grievance without having to exhaust an internal investigation, a process which often aims to finish within 75-180 days, is a hard-fought and won right for academic workers. The following academic workers have won this right:

• Sinai Postdoctoral Organizing Committee-UAW at Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (Article 24, link)

• Weill Cornell Medical Postdocs Union-UAW at Weill Cornell Medicine (link)

• Postdocs at the University of California-UAW 4811 at the University of California, all campuses (Article 15, link)

• Postdocs at the University of Connecticut-UAW 6950 at the University of Connecticut (Article 5, link)

• Academic Research Faculty at the University of California-UAW 4811 at the University of California, all campuses (Article 16, link)

• Adjuncts Come Together-UAW at New York University (Article 16, link)

• The Hofstra Chapter of the American Association of University Professors (Article 19, link)

• Temple Association of University Professionals (Article 3, link)

• Academic Student Employees at the University of California-UAW 4811 at the University of California, all campuses (Article 21, link)

• Student Researchers at the University of California-UAW 4811 at the University of California, all campuses (Article 20, link)

• Graduate Employee Organization-UAW at the University of Massachusetts Amherst (Article 18, link; Article 15, link)

• Graduate Student Organizing Committee-UAW at New York University (Article 14, link)

• Graduate Employee Union-UAW at the University of Connecticut (Article 4, link)

No. Academic unions, like those listed above, demonstrate that it is legal to provide workers with the option to use a grievance process, go through a Title IX or nondiscrimination office, or to do both in parallel. Additionally the Department of Education’s most recent guidance on the scope and application of Title IX makes it explicitly clear that a collectively bargained grievance process is not incompatible with federal law: 

…the Department notes that nothing in these regulations interferes with a recipient’s ability to negotiate a grievance process within a collective bargaining agreement that is distinct from grievance procedures under Title IX. Nor do these regulations interfere with a recipient employee’s right to pursue remedies under an applicable collective bargaining agreement instead of making a complaint to initiate grievance procedures under Title IX (Title IX NFR, p. 633).