Another Harassment Scandal at the University of Michigan

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
News from Graduate Employees’ Organization 3550
June 7th, 2023

Another Harassment Scandal at the University of Michigan

ANN ARBOR—On Wednesday, June 7th, 2023, the Michigan Daily published an investigation into allegations of sexual harassment and abuse perpetrated by Professor Robert Stephenson in the School of Nursing at the University of Michigan. Two graduate students who worked under Stephenson allege that he harassed and abused them over the course of several years. The Daily investigation details the abundance of evidence provided by the abuse survivors and the Equity, Civil Rights, and Title IX office (ECRT) dismissed, minimized, and misinterpreted this evidence to find that Stephenson had not violated University policy. Garima Singh, co-chair of GEO’s Feminist Caucus, states “this story reveals what grad workers already know: that the power hierarchies, culture, and organizational workings of the University of Michigan enable and normalize abuse. The two grad workers victimized by Professor Stephenson showed incredible bravery and integrity by attempting to hold him accountable. That the University has fought and retraumatized them is more evidence that real change is urgently needed.”

The story shows again that high-profile cases like former provost Martin Philbert and Robert Anderson are symptoms of a much deeper problem. Among graduate students in 2019, 40 percent of women and 24 percent of men reported having been sexually harassed while a student at UM (UM Climate Survey 2019, Table 5.1), and according to a GEO 2021 survey, ableism, heteronormativity, economic precarity, and racism make people more vulnerable to sexual harassment. “ECRT’s failure to adequately respond to Professor Stephenson’s abuse shows us what we’ve known all along: the University of Michigan’s harassment crisis did not start or stop with Anderson, Philbert, or former president Schlissel,” says María Laura Martinelli, co-chair of GEO’s Feminist Caucus. “The problem is institutional and addressing it will require institutional reckoning. It is time the Regents start listening to survivors and experts on the subject. They need to show leadership.”

Expanded protections from harassment and discrimination have been one of the primary issues driving the graduate worker strike that began on March 29th. Graduate workers at the University of Michigan, organized through the Graduate Employees Organization, AFT-MI local 3550, have proposed expanding an existing Transitional Funding Program (TFP) within the College of Literature, Sciences, and Arts (LSA) to cover all graduate workers at the University. The TFP would provide financial stability to any grad student transitioning out of an unhealthy and/or abusive relationship with an advisor, primary investigator, mentor, lead instructor, supervisor, or lab. This is particularly important for workers who may need to change research topics if they have to switch advisors due to discrimination or harassment. One of the main points of contention is whether the funding should be conditioned on filing a report with ECRT. ECRT’s handling of Stephenson’s case demonstrates what research by experts on harassment and discrimination at UM and nationally has shown: that reporting processes can be not only time-consuming and fruitless, but actively retraumatizing for victims. For these reasons, survivors should have the power to choose whether they want to file a formal report or not. Nonetheless, University Human Resources are insisting on such a requirement for GEO’s proposed TFP. According to GEO’s lead negotiator, Evelyn Smith, “this story shows that the U-M HR does not understand harassment. They’ve told us again and again that we should trust ECRT and that reporting requirements are necessary. We know that’s not true. Sadly, these allegations show that ECRT is more likely to retraumatize survivors than to help them. It is unfathomable to me why this University, mired as it is in a seemingly endless series of abuse scandals, would refuse to listen to the evidence on how to address these problems.”

The University’s TFP proposal would only cover current Graduate Student Instructors and Staff Assistants – meaning that under HR’s proposal Professor Stephenson’s victims would have been ineligible for support. “The need for the Transitional Funding Program is clearer than ever”, says Singh. “It needs to cover all graduate students, it needs to be ‘no-questions-asked’, and it needs to cover every single graduate student worker on this campus.”