Opinion ID: 816113
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Complaint and Investigation

Text: On August 3, 2007, Gerald met with the Chancellor of the Medical Sciences Campus, Dr. José R. Carlo Izquierdo, and other University personnel, to lodge an administrative sexual harassment complaint against Kraiselburd. Gerald was emotional and crying, and apparently Carlo found her credible. Gerald was told that she should formalize her complaint in writing so that it could be investigated. Gerald did so the next day. An outside attorney, Maritza Miranda López, was brought in as the investigating officer and charged with looking into things and issuing a recommendation. After reviewing documentary evidence, including email communications, and interviewing Gerald, Kraiselburd, and a handful -7- of other University personnel, López issued her findings in a seventeen-page investigative report, dated October 22, 2007. We highlight the more pertinent findings. Gerald had alleged three instances of sexual harassment to López: (1) the April 15, 2007 incident when Kraiselburd propositioned Gerald in the hotel parking lot, (2) the May 29, 2007 encounter where he grabbed her breast, and (3) the June 7, 2007 instance where Kraiselburd stated, among other things, What will it take for you to fuck me?. Kraiselburd flatly denied the first two occurrences. As for the third, he admitted to making a comment of that nature but said it was a joke made in response to Gerald saying that she was going to do it like rabbits (or something to that effect) with her visiting friend. The co-workers who were interviewed all painted a similar picture of Gerald and Kraiselburd's relationship. The general consensus was that the two appeared to have a close and trusting relationship, and their interactions often included off-color remarks and jokes of a sexual nature, many a time to the discomfit of some. None of the co-workers witnessed either of the first two acts of alleged harassment but co-workers James Ayala and Janet Rivera were at the June 7 meeting. Rivera said she heard Kraiselburd say what would you do to be with me, at which time -8- she withdrew from what she perceived was a personal conversation.1 Ayala thought Kraiselburd said something like what will you pay to spend the night with me in a joking manner. Ayala said this comment was in response to Gerald joking about the intimate nature of her relationship with her visiting friend. Interviews were also conducted with some of the University personnel who Gerald had met with when she first lodged her complaint. One said Gerald reported that Kraiselburd had approached her with inappropriate comments and had grazed her breast. The other said Gerald made vague and somewhat unclear allegations about Kraiselburd touching her breast and making certain comments and invitations. Aside from contradicting Gerald's claims about the three acts of alleged harassment, Kraiselburd also gave his take on why he restructured Gerald's position as Scientist in Charge. Gerald, he said, was shirking her job responsibilities, not adhering to her work schedule, mistreating personnel, and not respecting her superiors. More specifically, he claimed Gerald was not going to Cayo Santiago as often as needed, not charging researchers for bench and lodging fees, ordering employees to operate boats in 1 Rivera claimed Gerald approached her prior to her interview and told Rivera to tell López that she had heard the word fuck and that it was offensive. Rivera told Gerald that was not what she heard and she would tell the truth. Gerald insisted that Rivera call her after the interview. Gerald was deemed by López to have attempted to influence Rivera's testimony. -9- dangerous conditions, misrepresenting her role at Cayo Santiago to the press, not satisfying job responsibilities resulting in others absorbing the tasks, and that she had profanely called an employee an asshole. López reached her conclusions. She did not find Gerald credible and determined it unlikely that the hotel proposition or breast grabbing incident occurred. To the extent the latter had taken place, she found that the incident did not appear to impact or even matter to Gerald. As for the third incident, López's report noted that jokes and comments of a sexual nature were admittedly common for Gerald and Kraiselburd and it was unlikely Kraiselburd's wording was as crude as Gerald suggested. To the extent any of the incidents did take place, they were deemed not severe or offensive enough to alter Gerald's work conditions. The changes in Gerald's job, López concluded, were strictly performance related. López's report ended with recommendations. Despite her not buying Gerald's story, she recommended that an administrative hearing be commenced. López suggested that if the administrative hearing officer reached the same conclusions she had, then the University should consider filing administrative charges against Gerald. She also advised the University to instruct both Gerald and Kraiselburd about the inappropriateness of using obscene language at work. Finally, citing Gerald's reported non-compliance -10- with her duties and the animosity that had arisen as a result of this investigation,2 López recommended that Gerald's post be relocated away from Cayo Santiago.