You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
A professor who was sued for sexual harassment has agreed to resign from Washington State University in return for indemnification and a settlement amount. In a somewhat surprising move, the university will assume the legal burden of the professor, Bernardo Gallegos, even though it declined to provide counsel for him when he first requested it in 2005 and encouraged the deal under which he is leaving.
In the agreement, approved last week by the university's Board of Regents, Gallegos forfeits any legal claims against the university and receives $87,328.24 "in exchange for the sale of his tenure." Even though Washington State's internal Center for Human Rights conducted its own investigation and found that Gallegos violated faculty sexual harassment policies, the university filed for summary judgment along with the defendant, asking that the suit be dismissed. The agreement between the university and professor includes a clause in which both sides deny wrongdoing.
Gallegos said the agreement came after two and a half months of negotiations, which began after the university's counsel, Washington assistant attorney general Suzanne Parisien, approached his lawyer with a settlement offer. Parisien wouldn't comment on the negotiations or why the university decided to take responsibility for Gallegos's defense, but she said, "It was part and parcel of the agreement severing his relationship with the university. It is in the best interests of the university."
Gallegos maintains that the university believed in his innocence and wanted to take the case to trial. But he says he believes that the dynamic changed when the attorney general's office contacted Elson Floyd, who will become Washington State's new president later this month. Floyd, who could not be reached for comment, wanted to "consider alternative ways" of handling the lawsuit, Gallegos said.
University officials wouldn't comment on the ongoing litigation, but Robert C. Bates, provost and executive vice president, said that "WSU continually evaluates what is best for the institution and adjusts our course accordingly. We determined it was in the best interests of the university to enter into this agreement."
Gallegos evidently felt the same way, emphasizing that he wasn't pushed out. "It was painful being there," he said. When the university hired the multicultural education expert in 2004, some saw it as a coup.
The original complaint, which will go to trial on Sept. 4, was filed by a graduate student who was on friendly terms with Gallegos, Christina Garcia. Since the professor was not her adviser and didn't teach her in any classes, and because the alleged events occurred off campus, the university denies any legal responsibility. In doing so, Parisien appears to both endorse Gallegos's version of events and sidestep whether the accusations are true.
"Like Gallegos, WSU disputes the facts as alleged in Plaintiff's Complaint," the university's motion for summary judgment last year states, "but for purposes of this Motion only, accepts Plaintiff's version." It goes on to repeat the findings of the Center for Human Rights investigation, which included that Gallegos applied "subtle pressure for a personal relationship" and engaged in unnecessary touching.
The Center for Human Rights report begins with the student's allegations and follows with Gallegos's rebuttal which, the report states, "seemed carefully calculated to deflect any suggestion of inappropriate behavior ... even before he had received a written copy" of Garcia's allegations. The report is based on interviews with both Gallegos and Garcia, two unnamed witnesses in the College of Education, and various e-mail messages and statements.
Gallegos referred to the final report as having a "he-said, she-said" quality, and said he was never interviewed by the director of the center, Raul Sanchez, who he said also wrote the report. Sanchez disputed that characterization, saying, "That makes a whole lot of assumptions about how this office operates. To say that I wrote the report is inaccurate. The reports in this office are written for the most part as a team, and that report was no exception."
The events outlined by Garcia's accusations in the report revolve around a meeting with Gallegos at a local cafe. From there, she alleged, the professor suggested they move to his house, where he began making suggestive comments and drinking wine. She decided to leave the house, and on the way out he "grabbed" her face, according to the report. Gallegos disputes that version of events, implying that he was only following Garcia's lead. He expressed surprise when her demeanor turned cold out of "left field" after he touched her shoulder, according to his interview for the report.
The center's report was completed in April of 2005, two months after the initial incident. After the report was released -- but before the lawsuit was filed that June -- Gallegos received a raise in salary, which he contends reflects the provost's confidence that he was innocent. Garcia's lawsuit, on the other hand, says he was not sufficiently disciplined and claims the professor upset her ability to receive an education.
Gallegos also claims that he did not receive the due process accorded to him in the faculty manual, which requires the provost to notify the faculty member if the complaint has been dismissed or allow a hearing of the professor's peers and an appeals process. Neither has occurred, he said. "This whole situation I felt was a real rotten deal, and I was never allowed to refute the allegations," he said. "They just stuck, they stayed. I never got a committee of my peers, as the faculty handbook indicates should happen." At the recommendation of the Center for Human Rights report, Gallegos also attended sexual harassment counseling.
Garcia's lawyer, Guy Nelson, would not comment on the legal proceedings, but he said there was at least one positive outcome: the university's revised sexual harassment policy. "I think it’s noteworthy that at the same time the WSU Board of Regents approved this agreement ... it also adopted a new discrimination and sexual harassment policy that has been in the making since shortly after this lawsuit was filed," he said.
The new policy strengthens reporting requirements and more clearly specifies disciplinary actions.
