Employee Conduct Policy

This policy was posted for public comment from April 19 - May 7, 2021.

Comments

Under #3 (Controlled Substances and Alcohol Use) - How is "under the influence" defined, specifically as it relates to alcohol? Is it a "not a drop" standard, or something else? On a related note, it might be worth considering adding a specific clarification in policy somewhere about if an employee can consume alcohol at lunch (off campus) during work hours.
Under #10 (Equal and Respectful Conduct), it looks like perhaps a comma is needed between "disability" and "religion" in the list.
Section 11.c.1 (Workplace Bullying) - is the annual bullying training part of our required training program? If so, the timing stated here (annually) is confusing given that our other required trainings are on a 2-year cycle.
Section 13.b - my understanding is that the College has eliminated travel credit cards.
I believe there's a typo in the following section: 10. Equal and Respectful Conduct a. College employees shall promote equal access and opportunity regarding employment, services and other activities within their job responsibilities without regard to race, color, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, genetic information, disability religion, protected veteran status, expression of political or personal beliefs outside of the workplace, or any other status protected under applicable federal, state, or local law..... Shouldn't there be a comma between disability and religion?
Section 8.c contains an error, "c. . . . within two working says." should be "c. . . . within two working days." i.e., "says" should be "days".
Typo in the intro: "xpansive"
1. A: I think this should be “professional accountability.” Can “personal” apply to non-work matters? (Could it be construed to?) Could be overreach. This could be revised to: “…accountable for personal integrity, respect, and fairness for others, and sound judgement in carrying out their professional responsibilities.” That would take care of the problem. 2. Just a note: there are a number of typos throughout this. 3. 7d: Can’t this just say that “Employees who have evaluative, counseling, or supervisory duties over a student(s) shall not:” and then go into the list? The “special trust” and “undue influence” is too complicated and legalese-ish. 4. Also that section duplicates ii and iii. Those sentences (which are about lewdness) should go in the next section. So, you could remove the list entirely and just have a single sentence saying that they can’t get involved with romantic or sexual relationships with subordinate students, and then move the prohibition of sharing images to section i. 5. 9: I think you should add “Gender Expression” here too. So, the first sentence should read, “…communication related to a person’s sexuality, gender, or gender expression.” Then, delete “Sexual” before “misconduct” in the rest of the section. 6. 10: This is a problematic section because it falls into that trap of “equal treatment” or “equitable treatment.” While the language in this section is necessary for anti-discrimination and harassment (can’t discriminate based on these identities), but sometimes we need to regard some of these identifications in order to promote equity (which is what would lead to equal opportunity). So, to say “without regard for” is a problem. a. What if, instead, it said this: “In analysis, demeanor, and expression, college employees shall treat all people with respect and promote equal access to opportunity to employment, services, and other activities within their responsibilities.” In fact, I would change “equal” to “equitable.” And, I would change the heading to “Respectful and Equitable Conduct.” 7. 11aii: Take out “especially” 8. 11aii1: Delete “The sharing of”. Change “developmental” to “formative,” change “critical” to “summative” 9. 11aii2: Change “occasional” to “respectful” 10. 11aiii3: This is a problem. “Differences” is too vague. “Personality differences” is too vague. I can be a narcissistic sociopath and claim that it’s just a personality difference. I think this line should be deleted. 11. 11aiii4: I think this could be combined with #2, and the supervisors comment couldl be “supervisors equitably managing responsibilities” (take out “in line with college policies and goals). That’s another excuse that some sadistic ADs have used. 12. This whole section about what Bullying is NOT is useful, but what IS bullying? I think it is terribly important to identify what it is. To have that missing here is a massive hole that is not acceptable. It really looks like this is just to protect bullies and the institution, not to deal with bullying as a problem. 13. 11d: What is this here for? This needs reworking. Reporting bullying to a supervisor should be up there with reporting it to Employee Relations. And, then, it should go through that process. Also supervisors should be required to report to Employee Relations that bullying has been reported. We need to see patterns in behavior. And, someone needs to be responsible for tracking the patterns (I mentioned this in the Title IX response). I feel like this needs more work and needs to come back out again for 15 day review. The bullying section is just not enough.
I have sent a word doc by email to Mikel Birch with suggested edits.

Responses

A. General Comments

1. Policy does not address adjudication or disciplinary actions

This policy’s purpose is to outline employee standards of conduct. This policy should be read in conjunction with the Corrective Action, Employee Grievance and other college policies which outline the procedures for reporting a complaint, the process for imposing corrective action and employee’s grievance rights. Thus, for example, if an employee committed race discrimination, that would be in violation of this policy. However, the process for reporting this discrimination is in the Anti-Discrimination policy. If the employee committing the discrimination is subjected to corrective action, his or her rights to challenge this corrective action are addressed in the Corrective Action and Employee Grievance policies.

2. Policy needs more work and should be posted for 15-day review a second time

Due to the goal of having this new policy in place by the beginning of the 2021-22 academic year, it will not be posted for a second 15-day review. If this were done, the comment period would be during the summer semester, when many faculty are not on campus.

3. Improve clarity

The following sections of the policy will be revised to be more concise.

B.3-Conflict of Interest
B.4-controlled Substances and Alcohol Use
B.10-Sex and Gender-Based Misconduct
B.11-Equitable and respectful Misconduct
B.14-Institutional Credit Cards
B.15-Expense Claims
B.24-Vehicles

B. Personal Accountability

The recommended revision was adopted. This section now states: “All SLCC employees are responsible and accountable for personal integrity, respect and fairness for others, and sound judgment in carrying out their professional responsibilities.”

C. Standards of Conduct

1. Communication system IV.B.2 and IV.B.7

The policy review team recommends the deletion for B.2 addressing “Communication Systems” because it is mostly redundant with section B.7 which is entitled “Communication Systems.” Section B.7 is clearer and more concise than B.2.
On B.2 and B.7.a, addressing “Communication Systems”, a comment was made whether use of a personal cellphone to text a co-worker on a work related matter constituted a violation this policy language which states: “Employees are to use institutionally funded communication systems of any type for institutional benefit.

These comments will be discussed further. Technically, this is a violation of a policy. The big concern for OIT is the use of a personal laptop to log into our system.

2. Conflict of Interest (IV.B.3)

On IV.B.3.b, a question was asked whether senior leaders still need to complete a conflict of interest form. There is no legal requirement for the Board of Trustees or Executive Cabinet members to execute a conflict of interest statement. Under Utah Code §17-16a-6, only county officials are required to file an Annual Conflict of Interest form. Nevertheless, adoption of this requirement would be prudent for the college. The State Auditor’s office has a template for this document.

On B.3.c, entitled “Self-Dealing”, it was recommended that “SLCC” or “college” be inserted before the “business.” This recommendation was adopted and its now states: “No employee shall transact any college business. . ."

3. Controlled Substance and Alcohol Use (IV.B.4)

Under the influence can be determined by the employee’s actions, appearance, speech, or bodily odor that creates a reasonable suspicion that an employee is impaired because of alcohol or drugs. If this occurs, SLCC’s Drug Free Workplace policy section IV.K permits reasonable suspicion testing and provides direction on the types of behaviors upon which a reasonable suspicion testing can be conducted. While it does not violate college policy to consume alcohol off college premises during lunch, the employee may be violating policy if they return to work under the influence.

4. Romantic and Sexual Relations (IV.B.8)

In IV.8.c, a recommendation was made to move the clause stating “who has a romantic or sexual relationship with another employee” to the end of the sentence. This recommendation was not adopted.

In IV.8.d suggestion was made to rephrase this provision to remove legal terms such as “special trust” and “undue influence” by simply stating: “Employees who have an evaluative, counseling, or supervisory duties over a student shall not . . .” No revision was made. In 2020, this policy section was revised, in response to legislative amendment to Utah Code §63G-7-201 entitled “Immunity of governmental entities and employees from suit”. This 2019 legislative amendment required USHE institution to adopt policies regulating behavior of “special trust” employees towards students. The failure to do so would result in the college’s loss of its limited sovereign immunity. HB-309.

In IV.8.d. ii and iii, it was suggested that “iii” be deleted because it was redundant with “ii.” No revision was made. There is a small, but important difference between “iii” and “ii”. IV.8.d.ii addressing sharing a lewd image with a subordinate student. IV.8.d.iii involves sharing a lewd image of a subordinate student. (emphasis added)

5. Lewdness and Pornography (IV.B.9)

Since this type of misconduct is closely aligned with sexual harassment and sexual misconduct, this section has been revised to state: “Employees must report lewdness or pornography incidents to their immediate supervisor, second-level supervisor, the director of EEO & Title IX or Associate Vice President for People and Workplace Culture within two working days."

6. Sexual or Gender-based misconduct (IV.B.10)

This section has been revised. References to “gender-based misconduct or expression “have been deleted. In addition, the term “sexual misconduct” will remain because of its distinct meaning.

IV.B.10.b now states: “All acts of sexual misconduct are prohibited at all college sites".

7. Equal and Respectful conduct (IV.B.11)

The heading was changed from “Equal and Respectful Conduct” to “Respectful and Equal Conduct.”

IV.B.11.b, was revised to state: “In analysis, demeanor, and expression, college employees shall treat all people with respect and promote equal access to opportunity to employment, services and other activities within their responsibilities."

Minor grammatical errors were resolved.

8. Workplace Bullying (IV.B.12)

During the 2020 legislative session, the legislature enacted H.B. 12 entitled the “Abusive Conduct Reporting amendments. This bill amended Utah Code §67-26-203(3) (b) requiring the college to have a policy against workplace bullying. Previously, the college had a department rule addressing workplace bullying but did not have a college-wide policy addressing this issue approved by executive cabinet and the board of trustees. Adoption of this policy is an important first step to addressing workplace bullying in the SLCC workplace.

It is recommended that a new section IV.B.12 be added which states as follows:

A. "Workplace Bullying Prohibition

1. The college prohibits workplace bullying.

2. Workplace bullying is the verbal, nonverbal, or physical conduct of one employee toward another that, based on the severity, nature, or frequency of the conduct, a reasonable person would determine the actor intended to cause intimidation, humiliation, or unwarranted distress; resulted in substantial physical or psychological harm, humiliation, or unwarranted distress; or exploited an employee's known physical or psychological disability."

IV.B.12.a.iii - the first sentence was edited to state: “Bullying that occurs within and outside of the workplace . . . “

IV.B.12.a.iv now states: “Workplace bullying does not include a single act unless is severe or extreme.”

IV.B.1.2a.v. revision suggestion was added as follows:

iii. Workplace bullying does not include:

1. "formative, summative, performance related feedback:

2. respectful disagreement or conflict over workplace concerns."

A comment stated that IV.B.12.a.v use of “differences in management” and “personality differences” is too vague. No revision was made. This language mimics the college’s Workplace Bullying Avoidance guidance. It is important that this section’s language is flexible to address the variety of employment relationships where this section will be applied.

A proposed recommendation is as follows: IV.B.12.a.v.4 will be combined with IV.B.12.a.v.2. IV.B.12.a.v.2 will state:

"Workplace bullying does not include:

2. "Respectful professional disagreements or conflicts about workplace processes or concerns that are aligned with college policies and goals.”

In IV.B.12.b - this section was revised to refer to the” Anti-Discrimination” policy and not the “Employment Discrimination” policy since that policy had been renamed.

Under both the sexual harassment and anti-discrimination policy, all discrimination complaints must be referred to the EEO & Title IX Director within two business days. Once referred, the complaint will be investigated by that office. To allow the supervisor to conduct the investigation would violate those two civil rights policies.

A commenter questioned why IV.B.12.c.i required that Workplace Bullying training be required to be provided on an annual basis where SLCC required training schedule requires employees receive training every two years. The commenter noted that this difference could confuse employees. This is a valid point. Utah Code §67-26-203(3) (c) requires annual training for Workplace Bullying. The Everfi training has been revised to include a workplace bullying segment, however, employees will receive this training every two years. People and Workplace Culture will annually distribute a workplace bullying communication to all employees providing information on workplace bullying to meet this annual requirement.

IV.B.12.d has been revised as follows:

d. Procedure for Resolution

i. Employees should report workplace bullying to the nearest supervisor not involved in the activity, or to Employee Relations.

ii. If a workplace bullying report is made to a supervisor, the supervisor must inform Employee Relations within two business days.

iii. Employee Relations is responsible for the prompt investigation of the alleged workplace bullying conduct.

iv. When it is determined, after investigation, that workplace bullying conduct has occurred, the supervisor must take appropriate corrective action.

9. Improper Use of Staff, Students, Facilities, Equipment and Supplies IV.B.13

Revisions were made to IV.B.13.a. as follows:

“In all circumstances, the college prohibits supervisors from assigning using any college employee or student to for non-college-related work in which either the employee or a related person with a relationship to that employee has a financial or other interest.”

In IV.B.13.b., a recommendation was made to add a section regarding the use of college property for personal purposes. The recommended revision was to add a condition for allowable use that “the use does not adversely affect the condition of the item.” This revision was not adopted. If this revision was allowed, an employee who took home for the weekend an expensive tool to work on their car and returned it on Monday would not violate the policy. There has been a problem at the college with employees using expensive equipment for personal purposes. This condition, if added, would promote this behavior.

In IV.B.13.c, a comment was made that this provision which prohibits the use of photocopier and other consumable items contradicts the incidental personal use of college facilities and equipment authorized in IV.B.13.b. The two provisions do not contradict one another. IV.B.13.b addresses the use of facilities and equipment. Meanwhile, IV.B.13.c prohibits the use of consumable items.

IV.B.13.c has been revised to state: “Under no circumstances are employees permitted to use college purchased supplies, including photocopies, other consumables, surplus materials and equipment for personal or private purposes.

10. Gifts (IV.B.16)

Word changes were made to replace “things” with “items.”

Grammatical errors were identified in IV.B. 16 and 18 addressing “Gifts” and “Misuse of Position.” Two commas were added to each section.

11. Misuse of Position (IV.B.18)

IV.B.18 has been revised to state: “Employees must not use or allow another to use their college position or employment to secure financial gain, privileges, advantages, or employment for themselves or others.

12. Political Involvement (IV.B.19)

IV.B.19 has been revised as follows:

Employees have the right to free speech and are free to support candidates, issues, political parties, or campaigns., however, Utah System of Higher Education R-250 and Utah Amended Executive Order 2018-001 places limitation on employee speech in the workplace on political matters.
Unless provided by their job description and the college president’s direction, an employee must not use institutional time, funds, equipment, email or other resources to work on a political campaign or influence legislation.
Employees, in their official capacities, are prohibited from engaging in any communication with a state legislator regarding the passage or defeat of a specific bill or resolution pending before the Utah legislature.
The president may authorize employees to engage in legislative communication for the limited purpose of explaining technical concepts or providing subject-matter expertise.

13. Private Information (IV.B.21)

IV.B.21 now states: “College employees shall secure or hold in strict confidence all information in their possession. . ."

13. Recording Employee communications and Meetings (IV.B.23)

IV.B.23.c was revised to state: “Voice mail systems are permitted to record telephone communications and messages.” This text replaces “Administrative systems, such as voice mail, are also permitted.”

In IV.B.23.e, two recommended minor revisions were adopted.

The heading was revised to state: Employee or Student Grievances
Subsection e.iii was revised to state: "No parties in a mediation may record it.

SLCC Policies and Procedures