The University concluded a seven-month investigation into a scholar’s claim of race-based total discrimination perpetrated by using the former Center for Women in Law governor and observed that the govt director’s alleged behavior no longer violated 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, 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) was 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 research findings.
“I condemn racial prejudice of all kinds,” Chernow wrote. “When I started my work at the Center for Women in Law almost ten 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 Texan’s aid, D’Aguilar stated Chanow created an adversarial painting environment and dealt with her disparately on race. D’Aguilar mentioned ten pieces of 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 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. However, to show that (Chanow) created adverse painting surroundings, (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 D’Aguilar and Chernow and 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 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 differently than this and that she, therefore, become concerned about discrimination attributable to her race.”