A federal appeals court determined Thursday that Paul Barrows was not treated unfairly by the university. The case comes in the wake of the 2004 scandal in which Barrows, the former UW-Madison vice chancellor for student affairs, was accused and later exonerated of sexual harassment against a female graduate student.
In the lawsuit, Barrows claimed the university forced him to take sick leave when the accusations of sexual misconduct first surfaced in November 2004.
Barrows' suit argued he should have received backup employment promised to him in his employment contract. However, we side with the court and believe the university did not treat Barrows unfairly throughout this ordeal.
If anything, the university was favorable to Barrows throughout the scandal. The university paid Barrows his normal salary, and signed off on vacation and sick leave time when they knew he was not ill, but rather taking leave for the duration of the investigation into his affairs.
Additionally, the court maintained that Barrows could have been allowed the lower level position, but did not immediately ask to be placed there.
Given the community and local media's response to the initial scandal and investigation, the university could not have acted any other way. Even though the August 2005 Steingass Report presented information that seemed to corroborate Barrows' guilt, his claims that the university's opinion that his actions against women were inappropriate will further hinder Barrow's pursuit of employment.
We believe the university has a right as a former employer to keep whatever opinion they wish of Barrows, even though he was not found guilty of sexual harassment. Any other employer would do the same if asked to recommend or refer an employee.
However, we also believe that if Barrows feels wronged, it is his prerogative to pursue legal means to defend himself and his reputation. Barrows did sustain a substantial assault to his professional reputation and has the right to seek reconciliation for unjust defamation.
Barrows is presently following this route, taking legal action against former UW-Madison Dean of Students Luoluo Hong. Barrows claims Hong interfered with his employment by informing Chancellor John Wiley of alleged sexual harassment that was not found to be true. Barrows is also pursuing a case accusing the university of rescinding a $150,000 job offer separate from the unseated backup position.
Barrows lost his battle against the university, but if he wishes to pursue action against Hong, he may exercise that right. The facts of the matter will speak for themselves, though we do feel Barrows is drawing out a bitter grudge. Ideally, Barrows would drop the case and allow everyone to move on.
