10 11 12 13 14 -15COMPLAINT OF EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION BEFORE THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING Under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code 12900 et. seq.) In the Matter of the Complaint of Erin Bennett - 1736 Franklin St. Suite 400 Oakland, CA 94612 VS. University of California, Board of Regents Office of the Secretary and Chief of Staff to the Regents 1111 Franklin St., 12th ?o'or Oakland, CA 94607 University of California, Berkeley; and Assistant Professor of South and SoutheastgASia, Blake Wentworth. Complainant allege-s: ??Ba 1. Respondent Cali?lrnia, Board of Regents and the University of California, Berkeley, Blake Wentworth, are subject to suit under the Galifornia Fair Act (FBI-IA) (Gov. Code, 12900 et seq.) and'the Unruh Civil Rights (Cal. ij. ?51 et. seq.). Complainant believes respondents are subject to the U'nruh On oi about Airil 11, 2016, complainant alleges that Respondent-took the following adverse and Offensive Work Environment, Asked Impermissible, Non-Job Related -estio=?iis, and Denied a Work Environment Free of Discrimination and/0r Retaliation. Cofgiplainant believes Respondent committed these acts because of their: Sex-Gender. 3. Complainant Erin Bennett resides in the City of Berkeley, State of California. If complaint includes co-respondents, please see below against complainant: Discrimination, Sexual Harassment,- Oppressive, Hostile, Additional Complaint Details: Erin Bennett is currently employed as graduate student reader with the University of California Berkeley She has been employed in this capacity since August 1, 2015. As a graduate student reader, Ms. Bennett was responsible for grading and providing feedback on undergraduate student assignments. Ms. Bennett is a member of the United Auto Workers Union. In addition to her employment, Ms. Bennett has been a student in the Compg?igative Literature department at UCB since her enrollment on August 26, 2014. She is currently on medical leave from her academic studies due to havings??ie?en . ,490ted?io sexual harassment by a UCB assistant Dr., as described below. Ms. Bennett toiling?fgseii?roll in her graduate-pro gram for the Fall 2016 semester, if her complaint is satisfaeto solv?g. Since the Fall semester of 2014, Ms. Bennett has been subjectew?i?o wual harassment, gender-based discrimination and an oppressive, hostile, intimidating andl?ifi??rfsive wg,.environment. Since the inception of her graduate studies, Ms. Bennett began to and mistreatment from UCB assistant Dr. Blake Wentworth. Dr. Wentwortlgigfi? an l?gg?stam professor in the South and Southeast Asian Studies Department, which is to the Comparative Literature department, where Ms. Bennett is employed. Drif clenduct began by subjecting Ms. Bennett to conversations of a sexual nature and sexu then escalated to inappropriate touching. A - Dr.? Wentworth encouraged Ms. Benrigtt*?Wya milependent study class, a one?on?one intensive course, for the Tamil language, eii??i?iiorth is considered an expert. In this class they I Ms. Bennett had chosen for her graduate school emphasis, and for a $16,000 annual scholarship to study, Ms. Bennett agreed. On September 18, riefigumber of weeks into Ms. Bennett?s ?rst semester as a graduate student at UCB, they met and Wentwor?i offered to create an independent study course for Ms. Bennett. There was no plan, was required in such a class. Rather, during the four subsequent independenfgudns aggjtings Dr. Wentworth conducted over the next month, he primarily talked to Ms. we}: Bennett about?h1's ped?gbnal life, speci?cally about his failing marriage. In this session, he compared amil td?triggirig ?better than sex.? . On-a seggii?ate obgcasion, on October 9, 2014,? Dr. Wentworth placed his hand on Ms. Bennett?s hand when she?l?iggas petting his dog, which he then had in his of?ce, and attempted to hold. her gaze in silence. In another incident, after Ms. Bennett expressed to Dr. Wentworth that the she was interested in feminist Tamil literature, Dr. Wentworth translated into English a passage from a book describing, in detail, a woman being raped by her husband. He again tried to hold her gaze while doing so. Although Dr. Wentworth warned her that it would be explicit, Ms. Bennett felt disgusted and uncomfortable. Ms. Bennett last attended Dr. Wentworth?s independent study class on October 23, 2014, as she could no longer endure the extremely uncomfortable conversations and conduct of Dr. Wentworth. During their last meeting on or about October 23, 2014, Dr. Wentworth also twice approached Ms. Bennett when she was in his of?ce, placing his hand on her shoulders, without consent, and leaned in towards her. At this time, he said that he wouldbe able to help her with her transfer'application from Comparative Literature Studies to South and Southeast Asian Studies, the department where Dr. Wentworth taught. He also said they could translate Tamil literature that had nevgg translated before and publish it together, and that he could introduce her to female Tamil i During one of his meetings, Dr. Wentworth told her that he needed to you and my own protection,? but after checking with a graduate student of?ce, he closed the of?ce door. However, he re-opened the door Benn?gt ?fooked visibly upset. There were also an instance where Dr. Wentworth went sagsBennett while his arm went across her shoulder to point something on the book 'w According to Ms. Bennett, he could have easily pointed out what was on the sitting adjacent to each other. In translating a passage in' a Tamil book, he things lireiiwould do if Ms. Bennett were his wife, which was out of context because the no mention of this. Unsolicited, Dr. Wentworth also gave Ms. Bennett his persona??i ail: and AOL instant messenger information. safe?ibeigrfg? Wentworth?s class and of?ce. She These acts made Ms. Bennett feel harassedlzg? slie would tolerate. felt he was teSting her boundaries, to see us ?($283723 On November 7, 2014, Ms. Bennette?ileg to inform him she was dropping his class. He called her his ?poor little mei?last meeting, further cOittributing to the hostile work and academic environment he, creati?g, -- i ?332? At first, Ms. Bennett no port Wentworth?s conduct to the University because she felt ashamed, afraid of retgafiiatibn, negatively impact her success in graduate school as well as her career. However, jii?i??ennetfs professors began to support her in ?ling a formal complaint with the university. On March 1, 2015, Ms. Bennett made a formal complaint about Dr. Wentworth?s harassment of Harassment and Discrimination On March 16, 2015 Ms. with Andrea LaCampagne, OPHD Complaint Resolution Of?cer, and. shared her concerns Ms. Bennett however was not informed that she could have an attorney or uniontiieurgsentatisggs?resent at this meeting, or that certain time limits applied to ?ling a complaint with th??D - On Marcliig?, 2015, Ms. Bennett attempted to obtain a No Contact Directive from OPHD to prevent Dig: Wentworth from being within 100 yards of her, but the of?ce would not agree to her terms. During this period, Dr. Wentworth approached Ms. Bennett from behind in Dwinelle Hall, causing Ms. Bennett to leave the building, fearing for her safety. Dr. Wentworth alone signed the NCD on June 6, 2015. Ms. Bennett did not agree, as the NCD did not mandate Dr. Wentworth to maintain a speci?c distance from Ms. Bennett. 1October 8, 2015, approximately eight (8) months after Ms. Bennett ?le her complaint, .OPHD issued a report and found that Dr. Wentworth?s conduct was merely ?unprofessional and exhibited poor personal boundaries?, but did not violate Sexual Harassment and Sexual Violence Policy, (?Policy?) because it was not sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute sexual harassment based on a preponderance of the evidence. negative ?nding had a strong impact on Ms. Bennet?s physical safety as a UCB employee, and on her general wellbeing. The last day Ms. Bennett attended her graduate lasses was October 13, 2015. On November _1 1, 2015, Ms. Bennett requested medical leave from her stugie?edue? and is afraid to return to UCB because of Wentworth?s persistent harassinggt caused her great anxiety and depression. Her medical leave request was '"ovemef 17, 2015. ennettgiwhich complainants ?iving rise to the' instant Dr. Wentworth has not been disciplined for his behavior towasgd?g believe amounts to sexual harassment and gender based dischirriinati complaint. i VERIFICATION I, R. Michael am the Attorney(s) for Complainant in the above-entitled complaint. I have read the foregoing complaint and know the contents thereof. The same is true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters which are therein alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe it to be true. On April 11, 2016, I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. . 10 11 '12COMPLAINT 0F EMPLOYIVIENT DISCRIMINATION BEFORE THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING Under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code 12900 et. seq.) In the Matter of the Complaint of Kathleen Gutierrez 1736 Franklin St. Suite 400 Oakland, CA 94612 DFEH No.: 56sgaeseai324 VS. University of California, Board of Regents Office of the Secretary and Chief of Staff to the Regents 1111 Franklin St., 12th floor Oakland, CA 94607 University of California, Berkeley; and Assistant Professor of South and- Southeast?i?i Blake Wentworth. Complainant alleges: 0f Board of Regents, and University of California, Berkeley, Pugli?i?algm?l?ggrs, ?nd Blake Wentwortha are. Subject to suit under the Fair Hen - 1. Respondent Unive?? (FEHA) (Govt. Code 12900 et. seq.) and the Unruh Civil Rights Act) (Cal. Civ. Code. 51, et. seq.) Complainant believes the is FEHA and Unruh Act. ?iigpril 11, 2016, complainant alleges that Respondent took the following adverse ,mmaetions againsj? complainant: Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Oppressive, Hostile, Offensive Work Environment, Asked Impermissible, Non-Job related and Denied a Work Environment free of Discrimination and/or Retaliation. believes Respondent committed these'acts because of their: Sex-Gender. mix focus on Tamil literature. Dr. Wentworth?s conduct began Gutierrez to Additional Complaint Details: Kathleen Gutierrez is currently employed as part time graduate student instructor with the University of California Berkeley She has been employed in this capacity since the fall of 2014. As a GSI, Ms.? Gutierrez teaches courses for undergraduate students in her area of concentration. Ms. Gutierrez is a member of the United Auto Workers Union. In addition to her employment, Ms. Gutierrez is also third year student in Southeast Asian studies at UCB. Since the Fall Semester of 2014, Ms. Gutierrez has been subjected to an hostile, intimidating and offensive work environment. Beginning in the 'Fall Semester began to experience harassment and mistreatment from assistant professorglalii?ggyenrth. Dr. Wentworth is an assistant professor in the South and Southeast Asian Stugigs-?Depa?ii?gnt?ihere Ms. Gutierrez is employed; however, she had not taken any classes from classes conversations of a sexual nature and sexual innuendos and escalatiiggto inapp?p?ate touching and .23 proposals for dates. . .. ce, where works and holds of?ce Ms. Gutierrez often encountered Dr. Wentworth in the hours for her students. The GSI of?ce is a space fer us?ii and undergraduate students to meet with other students and work on their teaching dutie?i?ihot professors of the university. Nevertheless, Dr. Wentworth had been a frequenti- GSI of?ce for social purposes. On these visits, Dr. Wentworth often made inapproprigteg of a sexual nature (such as the sexual practice of ?sting and taking that have caused several GSl?s to On February 17, 2015, Ms. is - of?ce when Dr. Wentworth came in with his dog and requested that she take atiiagialk? Ms. Gutierrez felt singled out and uncomfortable by Dr. Wentworth?s request as,,there Sign? graduate students present and she is not one of his students. Once outside, enhvortliggbeg?ian to talk about his recent divorce, visiting a strip club, and doing drugs of a sgsi?per then grabbed her hand. Ms. Gutierrez felt uncomfortable by his actions. Dr. Wen?fvorth to sit silently holding Ms. Gutierrez?s hand and after a few minutes got up and wait y. Dr. Wentworth then made comments the following Comment; could lose my, over would tell you, but I?m just so attracted to you? acknowledging to the nature (Saws actions. This frightened and confused Ms. Gutierrez, and she to talk to Dr. Wentworth about his comments. Instead of addressing Ms. Gutieggez?s concerns, Wentworth ignored her request and walked away. Ms. Gutierrez returned to her friigl?tt??iied and confused. A few hours later Ms. Gutierrez again attempted to speak to Dr. ,erthigigai?out his inappropriate conduct; instead, he invited Ms. Gutierrez to dinner skirting the imp??t of ihis actions. When she insisted that they talk, he requested that. she initiate the conversatiri via email. Upon their return to the of?ce, Dr. Wentworth again made an inappropriate pass at Ms. Gutierrez by coming up behind her, wrapping his hand over and around her head and ear; inappropriately touching her after she had made it clear that she was uncomfortable. with his inappropriate behavior. ?rst, Ms. Gutierrez did not report Dr. separate groug?ggif a hoe facvul?tyrito review the facts of her case, yet again. She was not informed that The day after, Dr. Wentworth again approached Ms. Gutierrez in front of other students, this time requesting that she come into his Of?ce. Ms. Gutierrez did not want to be alone with Dr. Wentworth and did not go in. On February 27, 2015, Ms. Gutierrez met with Dr. Wentworth at a coffee shop to discuss his inappropriate behaviOr. Again, Dr. Wentworth ignored Ms. Gutierrez?s requests and derailed the conversation by attempting to discuss monogamy and non-monogamy. Ms. Gutierrez replied that she could not speak with him about these topics while trying to set some boundaries with Dr. Wentworth. He-proceeded to tell her that the other institutionswhere he used to teach, .hicago and Yale, had a different culture than that of U.C. Berkeley, implying that intim?te stu teacher relationships were acceptable. During this meeting, Dr. Wentworth also suggeste at. he ciuld help her with her career by stating that he could be a strong ally in the be gguld assist her with fellowships. Ms. Gutierrez took these suggestions as a threat beggine g1 that if she reported Dr.?WentWorth her career could be at risk. After this meetip1?i?=aM mutierrn??iz {felt numb and awful for days. She reports that she had dif?culty focusing ,entirassigmnents and showing up to teach herclasses. She also turned in an for .??Ehe first time in her graduate program. a" the University because she felt ashamed and afraid. However, on March 30, 2015: Gutierfj?? spoke to the Southeast Asian Studies Department Chair, eff Hadler, about Dr. two Linap'prop'riate conduct. That same day, the Department Chair referred her complaint to ?Of?g?iglfor Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination On. April 20, Ziez?met with Andrea LaCampagne, OPHD Complaint Resolution Of?cer, and shaer with Dr. Wentworth. Ms. Gutierrez was not informed that she could have an present at this meeting. Approximately six (6) months iat?gr, on gtobeg??, 2015, OPHD issued a Formal Investigation Report and found that Dr. ?fii?rage sexual advances (or alternatively a verbal comment), suf?ciently sevei?f?ato constiipte?behavior of a ?sexual nature,? that affected and interfered with [Ms Gutierrez?ngiifatk which violated the UC Policy on Sexual Harassment and Sexual Violence OPHD then referred Ms. Gutierrez?s complaint to the Vice Provost of?ce for further review. On March 14, 201.6, Ms. Gutierrez had met with a she could hag-fie union representative, or the Head Graduate Advisor of her department present at of today, her case is still pending. Dr. Wentworth had violated University Policy Dr. Wentworth was not actions and continued to come by the G81 of?ce, when Ms. Gutierrez would be there. fall of 2015, prior to the directive, the Chair of the Department, Jacob Dalton, asked Dr. Wenhvort?zrto stop visiting the GSI of?ce, however, Wentworth continued to visit the office. On November 2, 2015, Ms. Gutierrez sought a No Contact Directive against Dr. Wentworth to protect herself from further harassment. VERIFICATION I, R. Michael am the Attorney(s) for Complainant in the above-entitled complaint. I have read the foregoing complaint and know the contents thereof. The same is true of my own knewledge, except as to those matters which are therein alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe it to be true. On April 11, 2016, I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Oakland, CA Mich GRADUATE DEMANDS FOR REFORM OF UCB SEXUAL HARASSMENT POLICY AND PROCESS (1) UC Berkeley must hold accountable the perpetrators of sexual harassment on campus with consistent and proportional penalties. There should be a zero tolerance policy for sexual harassments regardless of the faculty member?s tenure status. In its current system, U.C. Berkeley tenure process upholds a protectionist culture for tenured and tenured-track faculties in order to protect their career or reputation, While leaving student complainants vulnerable to unwanted sexual conduct or inappropriate comments. Dr. Wentworth?s employment with U.C. Berkeley must be immediately terminated. (2) Any professor or staff with repeated sexual harassment complaints should not be allowed to continue working on campus. (3) There should be expeditious, transparent, consistent procedures for investigating complaints and holding harassers accountable. OPHD needs to clearly explain to complainants the process for investigation, accountability, and. resolution, including a clear and expeditious timeline of the process. Complainants should also be advised on the consequences of each step. OPHD should inform complainants of their legal rights, including deadlines to take legal action with administrative agencies, including California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, or with the courts. The complainant should be able to choose to have their interview with OPHD recorded, and OPHD should provide the complainant with a draft copy of their complaint to approve before further action is taken. Confidentiality policies should not be used. to shield repeat sexual harassers from accountability. (4) U.C. Berkeley should support students, provide for representation, and form a Peer Advocacy Organization for students who have endured misconduct and who are considering filing a grievance through OPHD. Advocates could help complainants navigate through the complaint process, as well as provide emotional support. Students could request for peer advocates and/or support person, of their choosing, to be present with them at any interview by the OPHD staff, ad hoc committees or law enforcement.