Opinion ID: 2342242
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: the testimony of jackie jones

Text: The TBR next contends that the Chancellor erred by declining to consider the testimony of Jackie Jones, who worked as a secretary in the biology department at TSU from 1977 to 1983. Ms. Jones testified that Dr. Wells sexually harassed her during her tenure at TSU and that she filed charges against him with the University. Ms. Jones further testified that after learning that the University's only disciplinary action against Dr. Wells was a six-month probation, she left her job because she did not feel safe working in the same building as Dr. Wells. Although Ms. Jones had testified at the faculty committee tenure hearing, the Chancellor did not consider her testimony when evaluating the case, on the ground that her claims were very specifically employer-employee sexual harassment and were fully and finally resolved through a formal administrative process. Disciplinary action was taken against Dr. Wells as a result. Thus, the claims of Ms. Jones have no bearing on the present case. The TBR points out that the Chancellor cites no authority indicating that the capricious disregard of accepted standards of professional conduct applies only to conduct of faculty members toward students. Furthermore, the TBR insists that we have held that the capricious disregard grounds for termination does in fact apply to conduct between faculty and staff. We agree. In Phillips v. State Bd. of Regents, 863 S.W.2d 45 (Tenn.1993), we addressed the situation where a tenured faculty member at Shelby State Community College was terminated for capricious disregard of accepted standards of professional conduct based upon her lack of professional behavior toward students, staff and colleagues, insubordination to supervisors, and continuous increasing patterns of controversy with other professional areas at the college. See id. at 48. This Court affirmed the tenure termination, finding that there was overwhelming proof from students, staff, colleagues, and superiors about Phillips' inappropriate behavior. See id. at 48. The Phillips case clearly illustrates that the behavior of tenured faculty toward staff, colleagues and superiors, as well as toward students, can constitute capricious disregard within the meaning of Tenn.Code Ann. § 49-8-302(5) (1996 Repl.). Accordingly, we conclude that the Chancellor erred by disregarding the testimony of Ms. Jones, a staff member who complained of harassment by Dr. Wells. This error, however, does not alter our conclusion that the Chancellor's findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence.