Jul 302014
 

… you’re a vigilante.

According to the same viewpointsonline.org article – Mark Takano had some choice words for the victims of the pervasive era of harrassment:

“The Board should be asking more questions and they’re not,” Slocum said. “They should be demanding different answers.”

In fact, Slocum said the Board is like a wife in an adulterous relationship, where everyone but her knows her husband is cheating. She said the Board only received 10 pages of the 19-page Office for Civil Rights’ report. They only got the section dealing with what the college planned to do to correct its mishandling of discrimination complaints.

“This was not nearly as damning as the report itself,” Slocum said. “The OCR report puts it out there pretty clearly.”

On the faculty-administrator level, life sciences instructor Kathy Brooks said she’d experienced harassment. In a faculty forum dated April 18 related to the Feb. 28 Office for Civil Rights’ report she discussed her encounter.

“Last semester a high level administrator came to my office and told me to ‘stop talking’ about certain district issues or ‘you won’t get things you need or want,'” she said.

Brooks was a joint complainant with the three students in the recent investigation by the Office for Civil Rights. But she said that other faculty members have told her of their fears of retaliation for whistle-blowing. “A large number of faculty that I’ve talked to are afraid to speak out,” Brooks said. “I do think this is a culture of the college … Our department is not the only department this happened in.”

On the administrative level, Slocum said fellow board members retaliated against her for reporting “irregularities” to the state Attorney General.

“The day after I informed the board of what I’d done I was stripped of my committee chairs,” Slocum said.

Prior to her report of “potentially criminal activities” to the Attorney General, Slocum said she chaired the Planning and Development Committee and was second chair on other committees relating to academic affairs.

At the Board of Trustees meeting on May 17, Board President Mark Takano did not directly address Slocum’s removal, saying only, “I acted in the best interest of the college.”

At the Board of Trustees meeting on May 17, Takano said the real problem is an atmosphere of over-excited activism.

“The problem is a vigilante spirit that circumvents the established process,” Takano said.

If a trustee, an elected official, is open to harassment and retaliation, Slocum said, then what hope do students and faculty have that their rights will be protected? Administrators, faculty and students, from the top to the bottom of RCC’s ranks, all seem to be pondering this question.

“The Board’s actions against me show the entire college that this behavior is pervasive,” Slocum said.

Harassment and retaliation are part of the culture of the college. The problem lies in an environment of hostility and fear.”

—-

Got all that? Mr. Women’s rights slammed a female colleague and called female students who were victims of harassment “Vigilantes”.

So – Mark Takano and his whores in the media want you to focus on a 20 year old incident. Why not focus on stuff that happened in the last five years – including Takano’s attitude and strong-armed tactics against women.

There is more to women’s rights than just Abortion!

Mark Takano will change his views to suit his agenda, just like he turned his back on harassment victims. Mark Takano has also turned his back on us to serve his master Nancy Pelosi.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.