 |
New York State Unified Court System |
|||
 |
||
Director's Message:
Second, the Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI) is one of several options that employees have available to help address matters that involve illegal discrimination, including sexual harassment. In today’s message, I would like to spend some time clarifying the retaliation portion of that policy. Many employees fear workplace retaliation by supervisors and co-workers, and cite the same as a reason they may not want to initiate a discrimination, bias or sexual harassment complaint, or to become a party as a witness to someone else’s complaint. Regarding retaliation, the Court System’s Sexual Harassment Policy and Procedures specifically states: “The Unified Court System will not tolerate any acts of retaliation against covered individuals for exercising their rights under this Policy or their rights under federal, state and (where may be applicable) local law.” So, what is retaliation? The Court System’s Sexual Harassment Policy and Procedures defines retaliation as: “any materially adverse action intended to discourage or deter an individual from filing a complaint, testifying, assisting, or participating in any manner in an investigation or proceeding or from opposing any practice made unlawful under the UCS policy or under applicable law, and any adverse action taken in response to protected activity regardless of whether the action occurs in the workplace.” Among other negative actions, supervisors and managers cannot and must not negatively change a complainant's (or witness to a complainant’s) work assignment or location, initiate newly negative performance evaluations (unless warranted by documented evidence, and proper coaching and remedial action plans), or create a hostile or toxic work environment where none existed before the employee became a party to an investigation. Let’s be very clear: The Court System’s policy on retaliation specifically states that: “Such retaliation is unlawful under federal, state and (where may be applicable) local law.” The UCS policy goes on to state, “Covered individuals who have engaged in “protected activity” are protected from retaliation. “Protected activity” occurs when a covered individual has:
Many employees still exhibit fear of retaliation, because they falsely believe that they can face retaliation if an investigation is ultimately unsubstantiated. This is not true. The UCS Harassment policy clearly states that: “An individual is protected from retaliation even if the complaint is not substantiated.” Some may feel that these are just “words on paper…” and that in the real-life interactions in our courts and court environment, retaliation is real and does persist. I would hope that this message underscores the UCS’ commitment to a bias-free and retaliation-free workplace, and that it provides some clarity on the protections employees have against retaliation. If you believe that you (or a court employee or court user), are a victim of retaliation, please contact a supervisor, the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, and/or the Managing Inspector General for Bias Matters for assistance and guidance. You can also find the retaliation policy here.
|
||
Hello everyone. First, let me wish you all an impactful and insightful Black History Month. The UCS has many celebrations going on during the month of February, throughout the state, and we have included a sampling of 
 |
||
 |
||