The University concluded a seven-month investigation into a scholar’s claim of race-based total discrimination perpetrated by using the former govt director of the Center for Women in Law, and observed the govt director’s alleged behavior did no longer violate the University’s Nondiscrimination Policy.
Ayana D’Aguilar, who graduated from UT in May, spoke out on social media in February about her enjoy interning for then-executive director Linda Chanow, as pronounced via The Daily Texan in March. D’Aguilar, who identifies as Jamaican-American, stated Chanow, a white woman, made racist feedback to D’Aguilar that led her to stop her internship at the Center. Chernow resigned from her position following the Texan’s original coverage.
“Based on its investigation, OIE (Office for Inclusion and Equity) concluded that there was inadequate proof to find Respondent (Chanow) in violation of the University’s Nondiscrimination Policy,” the document says. “The proof didn’t exhibit that Complainant (D’Aguilar) turned into subjected to remedy due to, or in part of, her race.”
In a statement furnished to the Texan, Chanow stated she became “very pleased” with the findings of the research.
“I absolutely condemn racial prejudice of all kinds,” Chernow wrote. “When I started my work at the Center for Women in Law almost 10 years ago, I vowed that the Center could constitute all-girls attorneys and bridge gaps among girls of all races and ethnicities, backgrounds, and cultures, and I am extremely pleased with our development on this place.”
According to the University investigation performed via OIE and obtained with the aid of the Texan, D’Aguilar stated Chanow created an adversarial paintings environment and dealt with her disparately on the idea of race. D’Aguilar mentioned 10 feedback Chanow made as proof of the allegations, every of which OIE investigated.
According to the research, D’Aguilar said Chanow advised her that she could “never sense comfy within the workplace due to the fact (she is) black;” that she would need to “suck it up” when it comes to racial issues; and that she ought to attention on commonalities that she has with white ladies.
In the research findings, OIE referred to that Chanow “admitted making a number of the feedback” and “denied making different remarks, or added context to them.” Chow did no longer specific to the Texan which feedback she admitted to or denied.
“(Chanow’s) feedback did now not create a racially hostile work environment,” the investigation says. “The remarks (Chanow) is said to have made may be considered uncomfortable and inappropriate. To show that (Chanow) created adverse paintings surroundings, however, (D’Aguilar) must display that her behavior becomes ‘intense, pervasive, or continual.’ The comments proven in allegations 1-6 have been now not located to rise to that degree.”
According to the research, OIE spoke to over a dozen witnesses, including those requested by way of D’Aguilar and Chernow, as well as contemporary and beyond interns at the Center.
“Most of the witnesses believed that the CWIL might be a hard place to work for various motives, sometimes including (Chanow’s) management style,” the research says. “Most of them did not accept as true with that the CWIL became a racially antagonistic work surrounding.”
In allegations 7-10, D’Aguilar alleged disparate treatment on the idea of race, announcing that projects she worked on have been no longer a concern to Chanow at the same time as those of white interns had been, according to the research.
“(Chow) is alleged to have been dismissive of (D’Aguilar’s) thoughts and worries, and to have handled her in a manner that might be described as domineering,” the investigation says. “She claims that white employees or interns at the Center have been dealt with in a different way than this and that she, therefore, become a concern to discrimination attributable to her race.”