Body
University Procedure
Title
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Procedure for Reporting and Responding to Complaints of Discrimination, Harassment, and Related Misconduct Involving a University Employee as the Responding Party
Introduction
A. Purpose
The purpose of this Procedure is to outline the process for a prompt, equitable, impartial, and effective response to reports of Prohibited Conduct as defined in the Policy on Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment and Related Misconduct ("Policy") involving a University employee as the Responding Party.
B. Scope
This Procedure applies to the reporting and resolution of conduct that:
- could constitute Prohibited Conduct as defined in the Prohibited Conduct section of the Policy, and
- meets the requirements in the Jurisdiction section of the Policy, and
- involve a University employee as the Responding Party as defined in the Key Terms section of the Policy.
This Procedure is intended to comply with current federal and state law. While the University will make good faith efforts to update this Procedure to reflect any legal changes, in the event any provision of this Procedure conflicts with applicable law, the law will supersede such provision.
C. Key Terms
Administrative Advisor: an appropriate administrator with sufficient knowledge and authority to be consulted by EOC during the investigation and resolution of a report.
EOC: the University’s Equal Opportunity and Compliance Office.
Outcome Team: a group of designated individuals convened to determine the appropriate course of action based on the investigator’s findings and any other relevant information, considering the factors articulated in the Possible Actions Resulting From an Investigation section.
Policy: the University’s Policy on Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment and Related Misconduct.
Preponderance of the Evidence: an evidentiary standard that means the totality of the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence supports the conclusion that it is more likely than not that the Prohibited Conduct occurred. If the investigator is not persuaded by the evidence that it is more likely than not that the behavior occurred, the investigator must not determine that the Prohibited Conduct occurred.
This Procedure also incorporates all defined terms in the Policy.
D. Resources
Safe at UNC website
Comprehensive Resource Guide
Procedure
A. Reporting Prohibited Conduct
Any person may report Prohibited Conduct to the EOC and/or the Title IX Coordinator or designee in person, by telephone, in writing, by e-mail, by using the EOC’s electronic reporting form, or by any other means that results in the EOC, Title IX Coordinator, or designee receiving the person’s verbal or written report. Details about how to report can be found in the Reporting Prohibited Conduct section of the Policy.
In addition to the process outlined in this Procedure, employees may have additional grievance rights which may have specific timeframe requirements for reporting conduct. To learn more about those grievance processes and filing deadlines, please refer to the Employee Grievances page on the University's HR website.
B. Response to a Report of Prohibited Conduct
Upon receiving a report of Prohibited Conduct, the EOC will conduct an Initial Assessment as described in the Policy. During the Initial Assessment, the EOC will evaluate several factors to determine whether to take action and, if so, the appropriate resolution route. These factors include but are not limited to:
- the Reporting Party’s request not to proceed with a Formal Resolution;
- the Reporting Party’s reasonable safety concerns relating to proceeding with a Formal Resolution;
- the risk that additional acts of Prohibited Conduct would occur without pursuing a Formal Resolution;
- the severity of the alleged conduct, including whether the conduct, if proven, would require the removal of a Responding Party from campus or imposition of another disciplinary action to end the conduct and prevent its recurrence;
- the age and relationship of the parties, including the Responding Party’s status as an employee;
- the scope of the alleged conduct, including information suggesting a pattern, ongoing behavior, or conduct alleged to have impacted multiple individuals;
- the availability of evidence to assist an investigator in determining whether Prohibited Conduct occurred; and
- whether the University could end the alleged Prohibited Conduct and prevent its recurrence without initiating a Formal Resolution.
Where possible based on the facts and circumstances, the EOC will take action consistent with the Reporting Party’s expressed preference for manner of resolution. However, in some circumstances, after considering the factors above, the University may determine that it must move forward to investigate reports in which there appears to be a threat to an individual or to the University as a whole. The University’s ability to fully investigate and respond to a report may be limited or impossible if the Reporting Party requests that their name not be disclosed to the Responding Party or declines to participate in an Investigation.
If the Responding Party is no longer an employee at the time of the report, or if the conduct does not meet the jurisdictional requirements as outlined in the Policy, the University may not be able to fully investigate or take disciplinary action against the Responding Party.
The Initial Assessment may include consultation with appropriate campus units to determine if interim suspension, paid investigative leave, or other interim actions are appropriate for the Responding Party.
At the conclusion of the Initial Assessment, the Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator or designee will determine the appropriate resolution route. Resolution may include:
- take no further action;
- pursue an informal resolution that does not involve disciplinary action against the Responding Party; or
- pursue a formal resolution, which may be an Alternative Resolution or an Investigation to determine if disciplinary action is warranted.
The EOC will take no further action where the conduct, even if true, would not constitute a Policy violation; where the EOC determines it can respect the Reporting Party’s request for no further action; where the EOC is unable to identify relevant parties; and in other appropriate circumstances. To determine that the conduct, even if true, would not constitute a Policy violation, the EOC may request information from other University offices.
Regardless of the manner of resolution, a Responding Party may choose to accept responsibility at any stage in the process.
C. Resolution Process
1. Time Frames
All time frames related to these resolution processes or otherwise listed in the Procedure may be extended on a case-by-case basis for good cause as necessary to ensure the integrity and completeness of the resolution process, to comply with a request by law enforcement, to accommodate the availability of witnesses, to account for University breaks or pre-approved leave, to account for the complexities of an Investigation (e.g., the number of witnesses and volume of information provided by the parties), or to address other legitimate reasons. Any extension of a time frame, and the reason for the extension, will be shared with the parties in writing. The EOC will make best efforts to complete the resolution process in a timely manner by balancing principles of thoroughness and fundamental fairness with promptness.
2. Resources
A Report and Response Manager in the EOC will serve as a resource and point of contact for both parties and any witnesses throughout the applicable resolution and appeals or review processes to answer questions about the process and to connect parties to resources, support, accommodations, or Supportive Measures, as appropriate.
To the extent permitted by law and subject to some limitations, throughout the resolution process conducted by the EOC, any party may have a Support Person and/or Advocate present at any meeting related to resolution of a report under the Policy. For more information about the role of a Support Person or Advocate, refer to the Policy.
D. Informal Resolution Process
When a Reporting Party does not want to move forward with a formal resolution, informal resolution may be an option. Informal resolution is a voluntary process that focuses on supporting the Reporting Party with no participation or involvement by the Responding Party. In an informal resolution, it may be possible for a Reporting Party to maintain anonymity with respect to the Responding Party. An informal resolution does not involve an Investigation or disciplinary action against a Responding Party and is not appropriate for all types of Prohibited Conduct.
Informal resolutions may include, but are not limited to:
- establishing or continuing Supportive Measures;
- conducting targeted or broad-based educational programming or training for relevant groups; and
- providing increased monitoring, supervision, or security at locations or activities where the alleged misconduct occurred.
The EOC will seek to complete the informal resolution process within 30 business days of the decision that informal resolution is appropriate. A Reporting Party may choose to end an informal resolution and pursue a formal resolution at any time, including when an informal resolution is unsuccessful at resolving the report. The EOC will maintain records of informal resolution in accordance with the standards outlined in the Policy.
E. Formal Resolution
Following a determination that the University will move forward with a formal resolution, the University will initiate a prompt, thorough, equitable, and impartial resolution process. There are two types of formal resolution processes: Alternative Resolution and Investigation.
1. Alternative Resolution
At any time prior to determining whether Prohibited Conduct occurred, either party may request or the University may offer an Alternative Resolution process. Alternative Resolution does not involve a full Investigation, adjudication process, or disciplinary action and, when successful, results in a voluntary resolution agreement between the parties.
a. Choosing Alternative Resolution
The University has discretion to determine whether Alternative Resolution is appropriate and may decline to offer Alternative Resolution despite one or more of the parties’ wishes. The EOC will consider the following factors in assessing whether Alternative Resolution is appropriate:
- the nature and scope of the alleged conduct, including whether the reported behavior involves allegations of violence and/or the use of a weapon;
- the respective ages and roles of the Reporting and Responding Parties;
- the power dynamics between the involved parties;
- the risk posed to any individual or to the campus community by not pursuing disciplinary action, including the risk of future harm to others;
- the risk of retaliation against the parties, witnesses, or other related individuals;
- whether there have been other reports of such misconduct by the Responding Party;
- whether the report reveals a pattern of such misconduct at a given location, by a particular group or individual, or through a particular means or method;
- the Reporting Party’s wish to pursue disciplinary action;
- whether Alternative Resolution would adequately address the Reporting Party’s concerns and the alleged behavior; and
- the University’s obligation to provide a safe, non-discriminatory, and non-retaliatory environment.
In most cases, Alternative Resolution processes will not be used to resolve reports that an employee sexually harassed a student.
The University will not require or pressure parties to participate in an Alternative Resolution process and must obtain the parties' voluntarily written consent to the Alternative Resolution process before it can proceed. Participation in an Alternative Resolution process will not require the parties to waive the right to an Investigation or exercise of any other right. However, the parties' agreement to a resolution at the conclusion of the Alternative Resolution process precludes the parties from initiating or resuming an Investigation process arising from the same allegations.
b. Notice of Alternative Resolution Process
If both parties consent to an Alternative Resolution process and the University determines it is appropriate, the EOC will provide written notice of the Alternative Resolution process, containing the following:
- the allegations;
- the requirements of the Alternative Resolution process;
- a provision that any party has the right to withdraw from the Alternative Resolution process and resume an Investigation process at any time prior to agreeing to a resolution;
- the parties’ agreement to a resolution at the conclusion of the Alternative Resolution process would preclude the parties from initiating or resuming an Investigation process arising from the same allegations;
- the potential terms that may be requested or offered in an Alternative Resolution agreement, including notice that an Alternative Resolution agreement is binding only on the parties;
- the EOC will maintain records related to the Alternative Resolution process, which include, but are not limited to, emails with and notes from conversations with the parties and/or other individuals to determine, facilitate, or implement terms; and
- the EOC may use that information in an Investigation, if one is initiated or resumed, if the investigator determines that the information is relevant, not otherwise impermissible, and material to whether a policy violation occurred.
c. Additional Details about Alternative Resolution
The facilitator for the Alternative Resolution process:
- will not be the same person as the investigator(s);
- will not have a conflict of interest or bias for or against Reporting Parties or Responding Parties, individually or generally; and
- will receive training sufficient to effectively serve in the role as facilitator.
Potential terms that may be included in an Alternative Resolution agreement include but are not limited to:
- restrictions on contact;
- restrictions on the Responding Party’s participation in one or more University programs or activities or attendance at specific events, including restrictions the University could have imposed as remedies or disciplinary actions if the conclusion of an Investigation process resulted in a determination that Prohibited Conduct occurred;
- facilitation of a private discussion with the Responding Party about the allegations and discussion of solutions for eliminating the alleged behavior and remedying its effects;
- mutually agreed upon parameters of interaction between the parties, including modified work assignments, agreements for no contact, and/or time or place restrictions to limit interaction; and
- any other remedy that can be tailored to the parties to promote a non-discriminatory environment.
The time frame for completion of an Alternative Resolution may vary depending on the complexity of the matter, but the EOC will seek to complete the process within 30 business days of the EOC’s written notice of the Alternative Resolution process.
2. Investigation
The University will provide for thorough, reliable, and impartial investigations of complaints. The EOC will oversee the Investigation. The Investigation is designed to provide a fair and reliable gathering of the facts by a trained and impartial investigator(s).
All individuals, including the Reporting Party, the Responding Party, and any witnesses will be treated with appropriate sensitivity and respect throughout the Investigation. The Investigation will safeguard the privacy of the individuals involved in a manner consistent with applicable law and University policy. The EOC will provide all individuals whose participation is invited or expected in an investigative interview, hearing, or other meeting related to the Investigation process written notice of the date, time, location, participants, and purpose of the meeting with sufficient time for the person to prepare to participate.
Once the EOC determines that an Investigation is appropriate, the burden of proof and the burden of gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination of responsibility rests on the University and not on the parties. There is a presumption that the Responding Party is not responsible for the alleged Prohibited Conduct until a final determination is made at the conclusion of the Investigation and any applicable appeals or review processes.
a. Time Frame
The EOC will seek to complete an Investigation of alleged employee misconduct within 60 business days from the issuance of the Notice of Investigation.
In reports initiated through the SHRA Grievance Policy, the EOC will seek to complete the Investigation in accordance with the timelines set out by the University of North Carolina System and North Carolina Office of State Human Resources policies governing SHRA employee grievances.
b. Investigators
The Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator or designee will assign investigator(s) who have training and experience investigating allegations of Prohibited Conduct. The investigator(s) will gather information regarding the alleged conduct, review all evidence gathered through the Investigation, determine what evidence is relevant and what evidence is impermissible regardless of relevance, and prepare an investigation report summarizing all relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence obtained as part of the Investigation. The investigator(s) will then determine if the information gathered supports that the alleged conduct occurred by a Preponderance of the Evidence and, if so, whether the conduct constitutes a violation of the Policy. If appropriate, the investigator(s) will recommend disciplinary action, corrective measures, and remedies.
c. Administrative Advisor
The EOC will identify the appropriate administrator(s) (the “Administrative Advisor”) to consult with during the Investigation, if needed. The Administrative Advisor is typically the Responding Party’s second-level supervisor but may be another appropriate administrator or designee. The Administrative Advisor provides departmental expertise and logistical support in implementing disciplinary action, corrective measures, and remedies, as appropriate. The Administrative Advisor will review the investigation report and discuss the findings and implementation of the recommendations with the EOC. The Administrative Advisor does not have the ability to reject investigatory findings, disciplinary actions, or other corrective measures.
d. Written Notice of Investigation
The Investigation process begins with written notice to the parties. The University will provide the Notice of Investigation to parties generally within 10 business days of the later of the EOC’s receipt of a request for an Investigation or receipt of adequate information to determine that the alleged conduct in the report could, if true, constitute Prohibited Conduct. To the extent the University has reasonable concerns for the safety of any person as a result of providing the notice, the EOC may reasonably delay providing the Notice of Investigation to address the safety concerns appropriately. Such reasonable concerns must be based on individualized safety and risk analysis and not on mere speculation or stereotypes.
The Notice of Investigation will include the following information:
- notice of the University’s procedures for resolving reports of Prohibited Conduct;
- notice of the allegations of Prohibited Conduct and sufficient information available at the time to allow the parties to respond to the allegations, including, if known, the following:
- the identities of the parties involved in the incident(s);
- a summary of the conduct reportedly constituting Prohibited Conduct; and
- the approximate date and location of the reported incident(s);
- information about the range of potential disciplinary actions, including, where appropriate, notification that termination is a possible action for a Responding Party;
- information about the parties’ rights and responsibilities, including the following:
- that the Responding Party is presumed not responsible for the reported conduct and that a determination regarding responsibility is made at the conclusion of the Investigation or applicable appeal or review processes;
- that the parties may have an Advocate of their choice, who may be, but is not required to be, an attorney, accompany them to any meeting or proceeding;
- that for each requested meeting (including interviews), the EOC will provide each party sufficient time for the party to prepare to participate in the meeting;
- that prior to the determination, the parties have an equal opportunity to provide relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence to a trained, impartial investigator(s); and
- that it is a violation of the Policy and Honor Code to knowingly make false statements or knowingly submit false information during the resolution process.
- a statement that Retaliation is prohibited and how to report incidents of Retaliation.
If, during an Investigation, the University decides to investigate additional allegations involving the same parties or learns information requiring the original allegations to be amended, the EOC will provide an amended Notice of Investigation to the parties in writing.
e. Consolidation of Complaints
At the discretion of the University, the EOC may consolidate multiple reports into one Investigation if the information related to each incident would be relevant in reaching a determination regarding the other incident(s). This includes, but is not limited to, matters where the EOC has determined that there is relevant pattern evidence or where the evidence relating to the other alleged conduct is inextricably intertwined with Prohibited Conduct under the Policy. The EOC may consolidate matters when they involve multiple Reporting Parties, multiple Responding Parties, or related conduct within a department or unit. When more than one Reporting Party or more than one Responding Party is involved, references in this Procedure to a party, Reporting Party, or Responding Party include the plural, as applicable.
f. Intersection with Laws or Other Policies
If the report includes allegations that could potentially violate other University policies, the EOC may co-investigate with other relevant units or may seek authorization to investigate from the applicable policy authority to maximize efficiency, minimize disruption, and impart a prompt and appropriate resolution by the University. Where an applicable policy authority authorizes EOC to investigate allegations under their policy, these Procedures will apply to those allegations, unless there is a conflict between these Procedures and that policy, in which case that policy will control.
Where the University is made aware that there is a concurrent criminal investigation, the EOC will coordinate with law enforcement to prevent any University processes from interference with the integrity or the timing of the law enforcement investigation. At the request of law enforcement, the University may agree to defer the fact-finding portion of its Investigation until after the initial stages of a criminal investigation. The EOC will communicate with the parties regarding resources and accommodations, procedural options, anticipated timing, and the implementation of any necessary Supportive Measures for the safety and well-being of the parties. The investigator(s) will promptly resume fact-gathering as soon as law enforcement releases the case for review following the initial criminal investigation.
g. Information and Evidence Collection
During the Investigation, the Reporting Party and Responding Party will have an equal opportunity to present fact and expert witnesses and inculpatory and exculpatory evidence that is relevant and not otherwise impermissible. The investigator(s) will seek to speak separately with the Reporting Party, the Responding Party, and any other individuals who have information relevant to the determination of responsibility for a Policy violation. As part of the Investigation, the investigator(s) may gather or receive information that is relevant to the determination of appropriate disciplinary actions, corrective measures, or remedies, including information about the impact of the alleged incident on parties.
The investigator(s) will also gather any available physical or documentary evidence that is relevant to the determination of responsibility under the Policy, including prior statements by the parties or witnesses, communications between the parties, email messages, social media materials, text messages, and other records as appropriate and available.
- Relevance
The University requires investigator(s) to objectively evaluate all evidence that is relevant and not otherwise impermissible, as described in this section. Relevant means related to the allegations of Prohibited Conduct under investigation as part of the Investigation process. Questions are relevant when they seek evidence that may aid in showing whether the alleged Prohibited Conduct occurred, and evidence is relevant when it may aid an investigator(s) in determining whether the alleged Prohibited Conduct occurred.
Character evidence is information that does not directly relate to the facts at issue but reflects on the reputation, personality, qualities, or habits of an individual. If a party or witness offers character evidence the investigator(s) will evaluate the evidence for relevance and permissibility. However, character evidence is generally not relevant to the determination of whether there is a Policy violation.
Pattern evidence is evidence of an occurrence(s) of relevant behavior before, during, or after the conduct under investigation so distinctive and so closely resembling either party’s version of the alleged encounter as to tend to prove a material fact. The investigator(s) will evaluate proposed pattern evidence by assessing whether the previous or subsequent incident was substantially similar to the conduct described in the allegations or indicates a pattern of behavior and substantial conformity with that pattern. The investigator(s) will also evaluate offered pattern evidence for relevance and permissibility.
- Impermissible Evidence
The following types of evidence, and questions seeking that evidence, are impermissible and must not be considered regardless of whether they are relevant, except by the investigator(s) to determine whether an exception applies, and will not be disclosed or otherwise be used:
-
Evidence that is protected under privilege as recognized by federal or state law or evidence provided to a confidential employee, unless the person whom the privilege or confidentiality is owed has voluntarily waived the privilege or confidentiality in writing;
-
A party’s or witness’s records that are made or maintained by a physician, psychologist, or other recognized professional or paraprofessional in connection with the provision of treatment to the party or witness, unless the University obtains that party’s or witness’s voluntary, written consent for use in the resolution process; and
-
Evidence that relates to the Reporting Party’s sexual interests or prior sexual conduct, unless evidence about the Reporting Party’s prior sexual conduct is:
-
offered to prove that someone other than the Responding Party engaged in the alleged conduct; or
-
evidence about specific incidents of the Reporting Party’s prior sexual conduct with the Responding Party that is offered to prove consent to the alleged Prohibited Conduct.
- Credibility
The Investigation process will provide the opportunity for the investigator(s) to question parties and witnesses to adequately assess a party’s or witness’s credibility to the extent credibility is both in dispute and relevant to evaluating one or more allegations. Credibility determinations must not be based on a person’s status as a Reporting Party, Responding Party, or witness.
h. Review of Draft Investigation Report
At the end of the Investigation, but before the investigator(s) issue a final investigation report, the EOC will, as permitted by law or policy, provide the parties with an equal opportunity to review a draft investigation report that summarizes the information gathered and synthesizes the areas of agreement and disagreement between the parties with any supporting information or accounts.
The draft investigation report will not include an investigative finding and may be presented in redacted form. The EOC will give each party and the party’s Advocate, if any, access to the draft investigation report via download-restricted electronic means. To safeguard privacy, the parties may not photograph or copy the draft investigation report. However, the parties will be permitted to take notes on the content.
The parties may submit any additional comment or information to the investigator(s) within 10 business days following the date of the notice of the opportunity to review the draft investigation report. This is the final opportunity for the parties to identify any additional information or witnesses for the investigator(s) to consider.
i. Final Investigation Report and Finding
After receiving the parties’ written responses or after the lapse of 10 business days without receipt of such responses, the investigator(s) will consider any written response(s) and create a final investigation report. In the final investigation report, the investigator(s) will evaluate the relevant and permissible evidence for its persuasiveness and make a finding as to whether the Preponderance of the Evidence supports a finding that the Responding Party engaged in Prohibited Conduct and will include the rationale for the finding. If the investigation report includes a finding that the Responding Party violated the Policy, the investigator(s) will also include recommended disciplinary actions, corrective measures, and remedies, if applicable. In reaching these determinations, the investigator(s) may consult with the Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator, the Administrative Advisor, and any other designated administrator who has information relevant to the Investigation.
j. Administrative Advisor Review
Upon completion of the final investigation report, the EOC will send simultaneous notices to the Reporting Party, Responding Party, and Administrative Advisor indicating the Administrative Advisor review period is underway. The investigator(s) will send the final investigation report to the Administrative Advisor to review the report and any recommendations. The investigator(s) will generally send the final investigation report to the Administrative Advisor within 5 business days of the end of the draft review period. The Administrative Advisor will have 5 business days to review the investigation report.
k. Written Notice of Investigative Finding
The EOC will provide simultaneous written notice to both the Reporting Party and Responding Party of the investigative finding and recommended disciplinary actions, corrective measures, and/or remedies, to the extent permitted by law, within 15 business days after the EOC provides the completed investigation report to the Administrative Advisor. The confidentiality protections provided by the North Carolina State Human Resources Act and FERPA may limit the amount of information provided to the parties.
l. Outcome Team
If the recommendations include disciplinary action and or/further corrective measures in the relevant department or unit, the EOC will assemble an Outcome Team to determine the appropriate course of action based on the investigative findings and any other relevant information, considering the factors articulated in the Possible Actions Resulting from an Investigation section below.
F. Possible Actions Resulting from an Investigation
The imposition of disciplinary action or corrective measures is designed to eliminate prohibited conduct under the Policy, prevent its recurrence, and remedy its effects while supporting the University’s federal obligations and responsibilities as an employer. Such measures may include educational, restorative, rehabilitative, and/or punitive components. Some behavior, however, is so harmful to the educational process and the work environment that it requires severe disciplinary action, including suspension or separation from employment with the University.
In determining the appropriate course of action, the EOC and the Outcome Team will consider the following factors:
- the nature and violence of the conduct at issue;
- the effects of the conduct on the Reporting Party;
- the effects or implications of the conduct on the work environment, the community, or the University;
- whether the conduct involved an abuse of power or authority;
- prior misconduct by the Responding Party, including the Responding Party’s relevant prior discipline history, both at the University or elsewhere, including criminal convictions;
- whether the Responding Party has accepted responsibility for the conduct;
- maintenance of a safe and respectful environment conducive to learning and working;
- protection of the University community; and
- any other mitigating, aggravating, or compelling circumstances to reach a just and appropriate resolution in each case.
All employees must be treated equally when applying these factors, regardless of their category of employment (faculty, EHRA-NF, SHRA). To ensure consistency and equal treatment of all categories of employees, the EOC, in consultation with the Outcome Team, must approve the final course of action and/or remedy. The appropriate supervisor or administrator will implement and enforce the chosen course of action and will provide supporting documentation to the EOC to confirm that the chosen course of action has been implemented.
1. Disciplinary Action
When an Investigation results in a finding that a Responding Party has violated the Policy, disciplinary action may be imposed exclusively or in combination with corrective measures. There are several types of disciplinary actions for employees, which may include, but are not limited to, the actions described below, to the extent permitted by applicable employee disciplinary procedures. The terminology, process, and requirements applicable to disciplinary actions may differ among the different categories of employees, and those details may be found in the disciplinary action policies specific to each category of employee:
- Dismissal/Discharge: termination of employment with the University.
- Suspension without Pay: suspension of employment for a specific period of time.
- Demotion: a decrease in rank and/or compensation.
- Written Warning/Letter of Reprimand: an official reprimand letter placed in the employee's file giving the employee notice that any subsequent violation of University policies will carry more serious disciplinary actions and/or requiring the employee to participate in or adhere to other non-disciplinary corrective measures.
2. Corrective Measures
The Outcome Team may also consider corrective measures that are not disciplinary actions but are designed to promote a safe and non-discriminatory work environment. Such measures may focus on educational and restorative principles that allow a Responding Party or other individuals to develop insight into the relationship between certain behaviors and the prohibitions set out in the Policy, learn about the effects of the behavior on the Reporting Party and the community, and identify how to prevent or change the behavior. In some circumstances, even if the investigator(s) finds that the Responding Party did not violate the Policy, the Outcome Team may require training, education, or other corrective measures for the Responding Party, other individuals involved, or for an entire department or unit.
Such corrective measures that may be implemented include, but are not limited to:
- Educational Requirements: completion of training, programs, or requirements designed to help the employee manage behavior and understand why it was inappropriate.
- "No Contact" Orders: compliance with orders of no contact that limit access to specific University areas or forms of contact with particular persons.
- Adjustment of Work Duties: reassignment of job duties, responsibilities, supervision, schedule, or location that does not entail a demotion of rank and/or pay.
3. Remedies
When there has been a determination that the Responding Party has violated the Policy, the University may implement appropriate remedies, considering the findings and unique circumstances of each report. Remedies are measures taken to address the effects of the conduct on the Reporting Party, restore the Reporting Party’s safety and well-being, and maximize the Reporting Party's educational and employment opportunities. Remedies should seek to restore to the Reporting Party, to the extent possible, all benefits and opportunities lost as a result of the Prohibited Conduct. Remedies may include, but are not limited to, adjustment of work assignments, location, and/or schedule or recommending or requiring a review of a negative performance decision that may have resulted from the conduct that violated the Policy.
The EOC and Outcome Team will identify long-term or permanent remedies for the Reporting Party and address any effects of the conduct on the University community. Long-term remedies may include extending or making permanent any Supportive Measures or implementing additional Supportive Measures tailored to achieve the goals of the Policy. Many of the remedies and supports that a Reporting Party might need after a finding of responsibility will have already been provided as Supportive Measures, including but not limited to no contact orders, access to available resources through the Employee Assistance Program, and modifications to employment arrangements. The EOC will, in all cases, consider whether there is a need for additional or extended remedies.
G. Outcome
Where both the Reporting Party and the Responding Party agree to the investigative finding and any recommended disciplinary action or corrective measures, or where neither party requests further review, the outcome will become final. Where appropriate, the finality of the outcome will be simultaneously communicated to the parties in writing.
H. Review Options
The Reporting Party or Responding Party may have an option for further review of the Investigation outcome or process, as applicable. Options for Support Person and Advocate participation in review and/or appeal processes may vary in accordance with applicable laws, policies, and procedures.
1. Grievance Options
Parties who are employees may have grievance options and should consult the relevant grievance policy:
2. Option for Post-Doctoral Scholar Responding Parties
Responding Parties who are Post-Doctoral Scholars may request a review of the Investigation outcome by the EOC through a Hearing. The Responding Party must notify the EOC of their request to review the outcome within 5 business days of the Notice of Investigative Finding, and if the Responding Party does not timely request a hearing on the outcome, the investigative finding is final and not subject to further review. Hearings will be conducted in accordance with the Hearing Phase section of the Procedures for Reporting and Responding to Complaints of Discrimination, Harassment and Related Misconduct Involving a Student as the Responding Party.
3. Administrative Review
All other parties may request an Administrative Review within 5 business days of the Notice of Investigative Finding. The request for an Administrative Review must be accompanied by a written statement of the reason for the request and the requested outcome. The request will be shared with the other party, who will have 5 business days to submit a written response to the request. The Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator or designee may also submit a written response within 5 business days from the deadline for the parties' submission.
The Administrative Reviewer may speak to or request written information from the Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity/Title IX Coordinator or designee, investigator(s), or the parties, as appropriate. If the Administrative Reviewer elects to speak with one party, the Administrative Reviewer will provide the other party with an equal opportunity to speak.
The Administrative Review will be conducted by a designee of the Vice Chancellor for Human Resources and Equal Opportunity and Compliance, who will review the investigation report, request for review, and any responses. The Administrative Reviewer will consider all of the information provided and, giving deference to the investigator(s) who interviewed witnesses and reviewed evidence first-hand, will determine whether the outcome of the Investigation is clearly erroneous or resulted from a material procedural error.
The Administrative Reviewer will simultaneously provide a written decision to the parties within 20 business days of the request for Administrative Review.
If the Administrative Reviewer finds that the outcome of the Investigation is not clearly erroneous or did not result from a material procedural error, the investigative finding and outcome will be final and is not subject to further appeal or review. If the Administrative Reviewer finds that the Investigation outcome is clearly erroneous or resulted from a material procedural error, the Administrative Reviewer will document the reasons for the decision and will remand the report to the EOC for further review and follow-up.
I. Post-Resolution Follow Up
After a resolution, the EOC may periodically contact the parties to:
- ensure the Prohibited Conduct has ended,
- determine if additional remedies are necessary, and
- assure compliance with any disciplinary action or other corrective measures that have been imposed.
Any violation by a Responding Party of a disciplinary action or corrective measure imposed under the Policy or a failure by a University employee to provide a specified remedy or Supportive Measure should be reported to the EOC or Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity/Title IX Coordinator.
The Reporting Party and Responding Party are encouraged to provide the EOC with feedback about their experience with the process and recommendations regarding ways to improve the effectiveness of the campus’ implementation of the Policy.
J. Consultation with the EOC
For all matters that fall under the Policy, all grievance panels and adjudicatory bodies must consult with the EOC as needed regarding policy interpretation and application, procedural issues, disciplinary actions, corrective measures, and remedies. In addition, they may consult with other offices with specialized expertise, as appropriate. The purpose of the consultation is not to discuss the merits of the evidence, but rather so that the EOC can help facilitate consistency across various processes with respect to policy application, procedures, disciplinary actions, and remedies so that all categories of employees are treated consistently.
K. External Agreements
The University will not recognize or enforce agreements between the parties outside of these procedures. The University will recognize, however, a lawfully issued protective order under North Carolina law.
Related Requirements
See "Related Requirements" in the Policy.
Contact Information
General Inquiries or Concerns
Office: Equal Opportunity and Compliance Office
Telephone: 919-966-3576
Email: eoc@unc.edu
Inquiries or Concerns about Title IX
Name: Elizabeth Hall, Associate Vice Chancellor of Equal Opportunity and Compliance / Title IX Coordinator
Telephone: 919-445-1297
Email: cehall@email.unc.edu
Concerns about the University's Application of Laws Covered by this Policy
United States Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR)
United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)