Faculty accused of discriminatory conduct can now have an attorney present during investigations, marking a step forward in faculty senators’ ongoing push to ensure fairness throughout conduct proceedings.
Effective since last Thursday, Provost Georgina Dopico agreed to a proposal that allows all accused faculty to have a legal aide present when they meet with the Office of Equal Opportunity, the department that investigates discrimination complaints. The policy change comes after three years of proposals from NYU’s Full-Time Continuing Contract Faculty Senators Council, as well as more recent support from the Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty Senators Council.
“We’re not trying to get anybody off the hook if they did something bad,” Global Public Health professor and C-FSC chair Chris Dickey told WSN. “We really are trying to make sure that everybody has a fair shot at defending themselves.”
In a statement to WSN, NYU spokesperson John Beckman said the issue has been “fully addressed.”
The senator’s council is still urging administrators to publicly disclose and expand the respondent’s rights in discrimination and harassment cases. This would prospectively include sharing written statements detailing their alleged misconduct, disclosing evidence and reason for guilty finding, and more clearly guiding them through the response and appeals process.
Heidi White, a Liberal Studies professor and C-FSC member, told WSN that she has been the one to tell faculty that they can appeal OEO decisions because they wouldn’t have otherwise known. She added that at least one faculty member accused of violating the NDAH policy was asked to sign “an acknowledgement of guilt,” — despite having insisted that they were innocent and receiving little notice from NYU.
“Merely offering private statements to senators, or claiming to adhere to procedures that no one can publicly verify, is meaningless,” White said. “If a person is wrongly accused, do they have to wait till they run into a faculty senator on the street, maybe years later, before they know what rights they might have had?”
NYU’s new complaint guidelines stipulate that respondents are made aware of “the nature of the allegations made against them” as well as the “relevant section of the policy” prior to their meetings with the OEO. They also say respondents are “advised to review” NYU’s Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment policy to prepare for the investigation.
Previous NDAH complaint guidelines — which cover responses to conduct based on race, gender and religion, among other identities — add that the OEO will “maintain the confidentiality of the complaint” and will not tolerate any form of retaliation. Both parties have the right to union representation during the investigation if they are members of one, and are interviewed separately during the process.
“We definitely don’t want people to feel like they don’t have the ability to raise a complaint if somebody is behaving improperly,” Dickey told WSN. “But we also want an environment that’s fair for everyone, including the people who are being accused.”
C-FSC submitted its first resolution to Dopico in May 2022. Over a year later, the OEO’s former director agreed to notify respondents of the evidence and reasoning behind their case, but the development was reportedly never posted to the OEO’s website. In April and November 2024, the T-FSC sent two letters to Docipo comparing the procedures at NYU to those at Columbia University, citing that the latter has an “84-page document that covers in fine detail matters of process and the rights of the parties.” In April 2025, the C-FSC sent a second resolution to the provost with the same requests.
“It’s in everyone’s interest to have a fair and transparent system,” White said. “A false accusation can ruin a professor’s career, and it can ruin a dean’s career, a staff member’s career — anybody’s career. The academic community as a whole has a powerful interest in setting this right.”
Natalie Deoragh contributed reporting.
Contact Paige Ablon at [email protected].