Student workers who are sexually harassed on the job do not enjoy a higher standard of protection under federal employment law than do workers in other employment settings, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday.
The case involves Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit concluded is not liable for an undergraduate student’s claims of sexual harassment by a prominent emeritus faculty member who was also a major donor.
In a 2-to-1 opinion, a three-judge panel of the appeals court rejected claims by the student, Samuel Milligan, under federal employment law that Southern Illinois created a hostile work and educational environment. It also dismissed Mr. Milligan’s assertions that the university retaliated against him for complaining about alleged harassment by the professor, Cal Y. Meyers. Mr. Meyers died in March at 84 after a 50-year career at Southern Illinois.
In the fall of 2007, during his freshman year, Mr. Milligan worked in the chemical stockrooms of the building that housed the chemistry department. At that time, Mr. Meyers, then 79, was director of the Institute for Interdisciplinary Research in Organic and Medicinal Chemistry, founded in 2000 with a $2.5-million donation from him.
According to the student, on at least three occasions Mr. Meyers harassed him. After the first encounter, Mr. Milligan notified his supervisor, who offered to accompany the student to talk with someone about it, the court said; the student declined. After the second episode with the professor, Mr. Milligan’s mother arranged a meeting with the chairman of the chemistry department, who in turn notified the university’s vice chancellor for research and graduate dean.
At that point, university officials emphasized to Mr. Milligan that the accused professor was a scholar and donor of “great stature” on the campus, noted Judge Gary S. Feinerman, writing for the majority. But the officials also set in motion an appropriate response to the student’s harassment claims, the court said.
A prompt investigation of the professor’s behavior concluded that he had indeed violated the university’s sexual-harassment policy; he was reprimanded and later banned from the campus for failing to comply with the university’s demands.
On Tuesday the appeals court upheld a district court’s conclusion that Southern Illinois had dealt with Mr. Milligan’s allegations appropriately. The university’s response was “reasonable” and “on par” with those of employers in several other key sexual-harassment cases, Judge Feinerman wrote. Nor did the alleged harassment rise to the level that would have required “drastic” action—a same-day investigation or termination—so the university’s response was carried out in a time frame appropriate to the circumstances.
In a dissenting opinion, Judge Kenneth F. Ripple said that while Southern Illinois’s response might have been sufficient in most workplaces, student workers are unique because of their “special relationship” with the institution.
“An institution of higher learning assumes special responsibilities for all students, but especially undergraduate students, who undertake such a formative educational experience within its walls,” he wrote. “A breach of that trust, even in a work environment, can have dire consequences to a neophyte in the halls of higher education. If sexual harassment occurs, and especially if the perpetrator is a faculty member, the university has a responsibility to implement a remedy that restores the victim’s ability to work comfortably and effectively as a student worker.”
Shari R. Rhode, a lawyer in Carbondale, Ill., who represents Mr. Milligan, said that her client had not yet decided whether to appeal Tuesday’s ruling.
