In its first public assembly because the resignation of its chancellor over his dealing with of sexual harassment complaints, the California State College’s Board of Trustees on Tuesday unanimously voted to undertake a collection of reforms and opinions in response to the scandal.
The vote passed off after a public remark interval throughout which college students, college and workers closely criticized the board and CSU leaders for betraying their belief and awarding profitable settlements to administrations who resigned or retired in shame.
The assembly comes six weeks after a USA TODAY investigation revealed then-Fresno State President Joseph Castro’s mishandling of six years of sexual harassment, bullying and retaliation complaints in opposition to then-Vice President of Scholar Affairs Frank Lamas.
Castro repeatedly declined to self-discipline Lamas, USA TODAY’s investigation discovered, even after an outdoor investigator discovered Lamas accountable in 2020 for sexually harassing an subordinate and interesting in “abusive office conduct.” As an alternative, Castro approved a settlement with Lamas that gave him $260,000 and a clear file in trade for his retirement. Though the settlement banned Lamas from working on the CSU once more, it promised him a letter of advice from Castro to assist him discover work elsewhere.
Three weeks after the settlement, Castro was promoted to chancellor of the 23-campus CSU – the nation’s largest public college system with practically half 1,000,000 college students and 56,000 staff. He held the place from January 2021 till his resignation on Feb. 17 amid mounting stress from college students, college and workers after USA TODAY’s investigation.
Kevin Wehr, a professor at Sacramento State College for twenty years, criticized Castro for having “coated up for and paid off a serial sexual harasser” and the board for giving Castro a “golden parachute” after his resignation.
Advertisement
“I’ve felt lots of issues about my job in these years. I’ve felt delight, solidarity, pleasure, and in addition the stress, anxiousness and unhappiness, however I’ve by no means earlier than felt disgrace,” mentioned Wehr, who serves as vp of the California College Affiliation. “Proper now I really feel ashamed to inform individuals the place I train as a result of conduct of this board in dealing with the previous chancellor’s errors. You’re the ones who must be ashamed of this conduct.”
After listening to feedback from dozens of scholars, college and workers, the board took plenty of steps in response to the information group’s findings. Among the many actions they voted to take: the initiation of an “exterior, impartial investigation” of the dealing with of the complaints in opposition to Lamas by Fresno State and CSU chancellor’s workplace directors, together with Castro.
The investigation can be accomplished inside 90 to 120 days, board chair Lillian Kimbell mentioned.
“You will need to acknowledge that we’re studying and that we maintain ourselves accountable, and genuine accountability contains reform,” Kimbell mentioned. “The CSU Board of Trustees has pledged to strengthen the CSU’s institutional tradition and make sure the well being security and welfare of its college students. This agenda units forth particular gadgets the CSU will undertake to meet that pledge.”
Moreover, the board voted to rent an outdoor legislation agency, Cozen O’Connor, to conduct a separate evaluation of Title IX practices throughout all 23 CSU campuses. The board may even reform its insurance policies on letters of advice for retiring or resigning directors and on “retreat rights,” which Castro and Fresno State directors cited as the primary purpose they didn’t fireplace Lamas.
Retreat rights are supposed to present job safety to professors who go away tenured college positions to take “at-will” jobs in administration, equivalent to dean and provost. It permits them to retreat to their college place at any time if the executive place would not work out.
Advertisement
Lamas negotiated retreat rights into his employment contract when Castro employed him in 2014. In accordance with Fresno State legal professional Darryl Hamm, that meant Lamas had the precise to take a non-tenured assistant professor job even when they’d fired him from his administrator job.
Quite than threat Lamas exercising his retreat rights, Castro and Hamm mentioned, they signed the settlement that ensured Lamas wouldn’t sue the college for wrongful termination.
The board mentioned it should undertake a brand new coverage on retreat rights that bars directors from exercising them if they’ve been discovered accountable for critical misconduct.
“We as a board had been saved in the dead of night and never served properly by current occasions and our previous chancellor,” mentioned Adam Day, a trustee who served as board chair earlier than Kimbell. “With as we speak’s actions, we acknowledge the ache suffered by victims and start the therapeutic course of as a system. Campuses, college, workers, alumni and lots of different constituencies have been let down.”
Castro additionally negotiated retreat rights into his contract when he was employed as chancellor in September 2020. It offers him the power to retreat to a tenured professor place within the enterprise faculty at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, despite the fact that Castro by no means held a school job and has no enterprise diploma.
Castro can train his rights in February 2023, when he completes a yearlong appointment as an adviser to the CSU board. The appointment, which pays $401,000, got here as a part of a settlement between the board and Castro within the days following his resignation. It’s a part of the CSU’s “government transition program,” which the board mentioned can be now below assessment.
Advertisement
The CSU chancellor’s workplace will begin a job drive to assessment this system. Within the meantime, the CSU will “instantly” stop granting government transition program rights to new hires till the duty drive points its suggestions. It’s anticipated to take action by Might, Kimbell mentioned.
The board unanimously adopted all 5 resolutions.
Trustee Douglas Faigin thanked USA TODAY for bringing the state of affairs to gentle and spoke of the worth of investigative journalism.
“We’re right here as we speak, going by this catharsis and nice change for the higher due to a free press in America and particularly USA TODAY,” mentioned Faigin, who additionally referred to the reporter who broke the investigation.
“What I additionally suppose is so necessary out of that is the thought of what sort of hazard America faces because the media face robust winds economically and institutionally in opposition to it. And what number of papers and investigative reporting are going downhill as a result of it is an costly, tough proposition,” Faigin mentioned. “This alone is a superb instance of why we want a free press in America.”
Kenny Jacoby is a reporter for USA TODAY’s investigations staff who covers universities, sports activities, policing and sexual violence. E mail him at kjacoby@gannett.com and comply with him on Twitter @kennyjacoby.
Simply sign up to the Retail sector myFT Digest — delivered directly to your inbox.
The Australian government is tightening regulation of the country’s powerful supermarkets, with the threat of potentially billions of dollars in fines if they squeeze farmers and other suppliers on price.
The government said it would push through legislation to enforce a mandatory code of conduct on large food retailers, including Woolworths and Coles Group, which control about 65 per cent of the market. Breaches would result in fines ranging from A$10mn (US$6.6mn) to up to 10 per cent of turnover over a year-long period.
Michael Simotas, an analyst with bank Jefferies, said the penalties for bad behaviour could be as much as A$5bn for Woolworths and A$4bn for Coles. He expected the companies would remain “front and centre of media and political commentary”.
Advertisement
Jim Chalmers, Australia’s treasurer, said: “We’re cracking down on anti-competitive behaviour in the supermarkets sector so people get fairer prices at the checkout.”
The move to replace a voluntary code with a mandatory one comes as a cost of living crisis and persistent inflation have put many household budgets under strain.
It follows a review conducted by former cabinet minister Craig Emerson, with the retail sector finding itself in the spotlight over alleged price gouging for products including fresh fruit and vegetables over the past two years. Those price increases have not been passed on to farmers and other suppliers.
The proposed legislation would apply to companies with annual sales of more than A$5bn, including Aldi and smaller player Metcash. Companies including Costco and Amazon could be covered by the code in the future based on their growth rates and the expansion of their product lines.
Allegations of price gouging and the poor treatment of suppliers have led to increased scrutiny of supermarkets, with calls growing in recent years to break up the largest companies to improve competition.
Advertisement
Woolworths’ longtime chief executive Brad Banducci announced his retirement this year, days after a fractious interview with broadcaster ABC on price gouging. He later appeared in front of a Senate committee in Canberra and was threatened with jail for refusing to detail certain financial metrics to MPs who questioned whether a true reflection of the retail sector’s profitability was being provided.
The government has stopped short of proposing a break-up but wants to set up an anonymous whistleblower and supplier complaint mechanism within Australia’s consumer watchdog.
Woolworths said in a statement it would support a mandatory code of conduct. On ideas such as a price register to improve transparency over fresh fruit and vegetable prices, which have soared in recent years, it said it would study the proposals in detail.
“While there is broad support for greater price transparency in the sector, there isn’t yet consensus on how to deliver it,” it said.
Coles said in a statement: “Coles has worked collaboratively with Dr Emerson in his review to strengthen the Code. We will consider the final recommendations and Government’s response in detail, and we remain committed to supporting a healthy and sustainable grocery sector.”
Advertisement
Jolyon Burnett, chair of the National Farmers Federation’s Horticulture Council, said the review and government proposals had left “a clear impression of the raw deals our growers are getting with supermarkets” and that the recommendations provided a “rare opportunity to reform our markets”.
Wimberly Muñoz, a Venezuelan migrant waited at the Chaparral pedestrian border in Tijuana, Mexico to cross into the US. She is traveling with her mother, Ana Muñoz, right, and son Matia Muñoz.
Carlos A. Moreno/NPR
hide caption
toggle caption
Advertisement
Carlos A. Moreno/NPR
Wimberly Muñoz, a Venezuelan migrant waited at the Chaparral pedestrian border in Tijuana, Mexico to cross into the US. She is traveling with her mother, Ana Muñoz, right, and son Matia Muñoz.
Carlos A. Moreno/NPR
In early June, President Joe Biden severely restricted asylum requests from migrants attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border without authorization.
Two weeks later, the President struck a more welcoming tone, saying he’d protect hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants married to U.S. citizens.
Advertisement
Immigration has become a big issue, for both parties. Policy experts say Biden hopes that in a close election year, these executive actions will sway voters to his side.
But will that strategy pay off and how will it affect migrants?
NPR’s Adrian Florido speaks with immigration correspondent Jasmine Garsd who is reporting from the San Diego border with Mexico.
For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.
Email us at considerthis@npr.org.
Advertisement
This episode was produced by Brianna Scott and Kathryn Fink.
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that the end of the “intense phase” of Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza was “very close”, and that Israel would soon redeploy forces to its northern border where it has been trading near-daily fire with the Lebanese militant group Hizbollah.
In an interview with Israel’s Channel 14, the Israeli prime minister said the end of this phase of fighting in the enclave would not spell the end of the war. He insisted that Israel would continue until it had destroyed Hamas and freed the roughly 120 hostages the militant group still holds.
But he said the switch to lower-intensity conflict there would give Israel “the possibility to shift some of our capabilities” to the north, where cross-border fire between Israeli forces and Iran-backed Hizbollah has escalated sharply in recent weeks.
Advertisement
“We will do this, first and foremost for defensive purposes. And secondly, to allow our residents to return home,” Netanyahu said, referring to the roughly 60,000 Israelis who have been evacuated from northern Israel since the start of the war.
“If we can do this diplomatically, great. If not, we will do it another way. But we will bring everyone back home.”
Netanyahu said he hoped a full-blown war with Hizbollah, one of the world’s most heavily armed non-state actors, could be averted. But he said Israel would “meet this challenge” of fighting on multiple fronts if needed.
“We can fight on several fronts. We are prepared for this,” he said.
In a wide-ranging interview — his first with Hebrew media for 14 months — Netanyahu also ruled out the prospect of Israel re-establishing settlements in Gaza once the war with Hamas was over, and said that while he was prepared to countenance a brief truce to free hostages, Israel would resume fighting afterwards.
Advertisement
“I’m willing to do a partial deal that will return to us a portion of the [hostages], but we are committed to continuing the war after a pause in order to fulfil the war’s objectives,” he said.
Despite the intensifying exchanges between Israeli forces and Hizbollah, which have displaced tens of thousands of people and caused casualties in Lebanon and Israel, the two sides have not been drawn into all-out war, with the US leading a diplomatic push to de-escalate the situation.
However, Israeli officials have repeatedly said they are prepared to take military action in the absence of a diplomatic resolution to the stand-off, and the Israeli military said last week that senior officers had approved “operational plans for an offensive in Lebanon”.
That warning came after Hizbollah released a nine-minute video of what it said was footage gathered by its surveillance drones of Israeli military and civilian infrastructure in the north of the country, including the port in Haifa.
Diplomats briefed on the US-led talks to de-escalate the tensions between Israel and Hizbollah — which fought a 34-day war in 2006 — say a deal would involve Hizbollah withdrawing its forces from the border, and the resolution of a series of territorial disputes between Israel and Lebanon.
Advertisement
Netanyahu told Channel 14 that two senior Israeli officials who visited Washington last week had expressed hope that a diplomatic solution could still be reached. But he said Israel would ensure that Hizbollah’s forces did indeed withdraw from the border.
“It won’t be an agreement on paper,” he said. “It will include the physical distancing of Hizbollah from the border, and we will need to enforce it.”