UMass Lowell Nondiscrimination and Harassment Guidelines

Policy Statement

The University of Massachusetts Lowell (“UMass Lowell” or “University”) reaffirms its commitment to employment and pedagogical practices and a learning environment free of discrimination and harassment. These Guidelines incorporate standards of behavior that are consistent with the university's values.

The University will not be tolerant of conduct which violates rights guaranteed to all members of its community, including but not limited to, applicants, visitors, and vendors. Accordingly, the University prohibits unlawful discrimination and harassment, and related retaliatory conduct, in accordance with state and federal nondiscrimination laws, including, but not limited to, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the Title IX regulations by the U.S. Department of Education (including the definition of sexual harassment as defined by the Title IX regulations), Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Massachusetts anti-discrimination laws (MGL c. 151B), and the University of Massachusetts Non Discrimination and Harassment Policy.

Purpose

The purpose of these Guidelines is to:

  • Promote UMass Lowell's commitment to integrity in fostering safe learning and working environments; and promote equitable, fair, consistent, and transparent standards to prevent and address unlawful discrimination, harassment, including sexual harassment, and retaliation.
  • Provide an overview of the civil rights regulations to which UMass Lowell is subject.
  • Define behaviors that are prohibited.
  • Describe how to report a concern regarding a potential violation of these Guidelines.
  • Describe responsibilities of supervisory employees (including faculty), to share a concern that these Guidelines may have been violated.
  • Describe reporting requirements for employees under Title IX.
  • Delineate potential consequences for violations of these Guidelines.
Scope

These Guidelines apply to all employees, students, vendors, and visitors of UMass Lowell.

Prohibited Conduct

These Guidelines prohibit all conditions and all actions or omissions, including acts of discrimination, discriminatory harassment, and retaliation, which deny or have the effect of denying any person their access to education or a workplace environment free of discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation.

The prohibited conduct contained in these Guidelines shall apply to and be enforced against all members of the University community, including, but not limited to: faculty, librarians, researchers, administrators, staff, students, vendors, contractors, and all others having dealings with the institution.

  • Discrimination as defined in these Guidelines is prohibited.
  • Discriminatory Harassment as defined in these Guidelines is prohibited.
  • Retaliation as defined in these Guidelines is prohibited.
  • Sexual Harassment, a form of Sex Discrimination under Title IX as defined in these Guidelines, is prohibited.
  • Sexual Misconduct as defined under these Guidelines is prohibited.

The principles of academic freedom and the First Amendment do not protect conduct that constitutes discrimination, harassment, or retaliation as defined in these Guidelines. While the University values open dialogue and the free exchange of ideas, those freedoms must be exercised responsibly and may not be used to justify behavior that denies others equal access to an environment free from discrimination or harassment.

Conduct that is Not Prohibited

UMass Lowell is committed to protecting, maintaining, and encouraging both freedom of expression and full academic freedom of inquiry, teaching, service, and research. Nothing in these Guidelines shall be construed to penalize a member of the University community for expressing an opinion, theory, or idea in the process of responsible teaching and learning. Accordingly, any form of speech or conduct that is protected by the principles of academic freedom or the First Amendment to the United States Constitution is not subject to these Guidelines.

Duty to Cooperate

I. Applicability

This policy/guideline applies to all University employees, including but not limited to: faculty members, researchers, librarians, administrators, staff, and graduate and student employees, regardless of funding source or appointment type. As a Massachusetts public institution and quasi-public agency, the University and its employees are subject to state and federal laws governing discrimination, harassment, and due process.

II. General Duty

All employees have a duty to fully and honestly cooperate in any investigation, review, or proceeding conducted under the University’s:

  • Equal Opportunity and Non-Discrimination Complaint Procedures, and/or
  • Sex Discrimination (Title IX) Grievance Procedures.

This duty includes:

  • Meeting with the Equal Opportunity Officer, Title IX Coordinator, Administrative Investigator, or designated review/appellate body when requested;
  • Providing complete and truthful information; and
  • Producing all relevant documents or evidence in their possession that relate to the matter under investigation.
III. Standards and Legal Framework

As a Massachusetts public employer, the University’s investigations must comply with applicable laws and standards, including but not limited to:

  • M.G.L. c. 151B (Massachusetts Fair Employment Practices Act);
  • Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. §1681);
  • Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
  • Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
  • M.G.L. c. 268A (conflict of interest law, where applicable);
  • Collective bargaining agreements under M.G.L. c. 150E; and
  • Due process protections afforded to public employees under state and federal law.

The University’s procedures are administrative, not criminal, in nature. However, employees retain all constitutional and statutory rights afforded to them as public employees.

IV. Carney Rights—Compelled Statements by Massachusetts Public Employees

In accordance with Article 12 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights and Carney v. Springfield, 403 Mass. 604 (1988), when the University seeks to compel a Massachusetts public employee to answer questions that may reasonably tend to incriminate the employee:

  • The University may require the employee to attend an investigatory interview and answer questions narrowly and specifically related to the employee’s duties, job performance, or fitness for employment.
  • Before compelling an answer under threat of discipline, the University must inform the employee of the specific employment consequence—such as suspension or discharge—that will result from an unjustified refusal to answer. A general warning that discipline “may” result is insufficient.
  • If the employee invokes Article 12 or otherwise clearly objects to answering a particular potentially incriminating question without transactional immunity, the University may not compel the answer or discipline the employee for refusing to answer unless legally sufficient transactional immunity has been obtained from an authority competent to provide it.
  • Transactional immunity protects the employee from Massachusetts prosecution for offenses to which the compelled testimony relates. This protection is broader than the use-and-derivative-use protection arising under Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 (1967).
  • The employee must attend and participate in the investigatory process and must assert the privilege as to particular potentially incriminating questions. A blanket refusal to attend, participate, or answer any questions may be treated as noncooperation.
  • The employee may request a reasonable opportunity to consult with counsel or an authorized union representative, subject to applicable law, collective-bargaining agreements, and University policy. A good-faith assertion of Article 12 as to a potentially incriminating question will not, by itself, constitute noncooperation.

Nothing in this section protects an employee from discipline based on independently obtained evidence, from discipline for misconduct established through the administrative investigation, or from consequences for knowingly false statements, as permitted by law.

V. Consequences for Non-Cooperation

Failure or refusal to cooperate fully and truthfully in an administrative investigation—absent a valid legal privilege or criminal defense—may result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination.

Such actions will be taken in accordance with applicable collective bargaining agreements, University policy, and due process requirements.

VI. Confidentiality and Retaliation Protections

All participants in investigations are expected to maintain confidentiality to the extent permitted by law. Retaliation against any person for participating in an EO or Title IX process is strictly prohibited and will result in disciplinary action independent of the underlying investigation.

VII. Summary Statement

The University is committed to maintaining a workplace and academic environment free from discrimination and harassment. Cooperation in investigations is both a professional obligation and a condition of employment for all University personnel. These procedures ensure fairness to all parties while upholding constitutional and statutory rights under Massachusetts and federal law.

Affirmation of Retaliation and Misleading or False Information Policies

All Parties and Witnesses meeting with Equal Opportunity and Outreach (EOO) will be required to sign an Affirmation of Retaliation and Misleading or False Information Policies. The relevant information is below.

Retaliation

The Policy and Guidelines prohibit retaliation. As defined within the Policy and Guidelines, retaliation may occur when an individual harasses, intimidates, or takes other adverse actions against a person because of that person’s participation in an investigation, opposition to discriminatory practices, or support of someone involved in an investigation.

The University will impose sanctions on any faculty, student, or staff member found to be engaging in retaliation. Please do not hesitate to contact the Investigator or EOO if you have concerns about retaliation.

Misleading Conduct, False Information, False Statements Prohibited

The University prohibits employees and students from engaging in misleading conduct during an EOO Investigation, furnishing false information to University Officials acting within the scope of their job duties, and/or improperly influencing witnesses or parties in an investigation. If a student knowingly provides false information, it would constitute a violation of the Student Code of Conduct.

Misleading conduct refers to:

  • (A) knowingly making a false statement;
  • (B) intentionally omitting information from a statement and thereby causing a portion of such statement to be misleading, or intentionally concealing a material fact, and thereby creating a false impression by such statement;
  • (C) with intent to mislead, knowingly submitting or inviting reliance on a writing or recording that is false, forged, altered, or otherwise lacking in authenticity;
  • (D) with intent to mislead, knowingly submitting or inviting reliance on a sample, specimen, map, photograph, boundary mark, or other object that is misleading in a material respect; or
  • (E) knowingly using a trick, scheme, or device with intent to mislead.
Expectation to Preserve Evidence and Information

All University employees are required to preserve any information—whether electronic or in hard copy—related to allegations of discrimination, discriminatory harassment, sexual harassment, and/or retaliation.

In accordance with these Guidelines, the Equal Opportunity and Outreach (EOO) office may request such information from Parties, Witnesses, or other relevant individuals. EOO may also collaborate with Information Technology and/or the UMass Office of General Counsel (OGC) to implement litigation and/or preservation holds on certain information, which may include an employee’s electronically stored information (“ESI”), which may include but is not limited to their email, attachments, Teams chats, OneDrive and more.

All University employees are expected to fully comply with any litigation holds issued by OGC and/or preservation holds issued by EOO. The intentional or inadvertent destruction of relevant information is strictly prohibited and may result in disciplinary action.