Section 1. Nondiscrimination
MIT will not discriminate against any employee based upon race, religion, national or ethnic origin, ancestry, caste, pregnancy status, family status (except as to benefits an employee receives as either an employee or a student), color, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity/expression, genetic information, age, disability, veteran status, union membership, activities, or support, participation in a grievance or complaint whether formal or informal under this Agreement, or any other factor prohibited by applicable state, federal, or municipal law.
For the purposes of this Article, the term “caste” is defined as a system of rigid social stratification characterized by hereditary status, endogamy, and social barriers sanctioned by custom, law, or religion that originated in South Asia.
For the purposes of this Article, the term “family status” means the actual or supposed condition of having minor children living with the individual, or not, and/or the actual or supposed state of being or having been married, separated, or divorced, or not.
The parties agree that differentiation on the basis of family status in benefits and leaves of the nature currently provided by MIT, or as provided under this Agreement, shall not constitute discrimination for the purposes of this Agreement. For example, MIT may provide childcare assistance for employees with children, may have different premiums and employer subsidies for individual versus family health insurance, may provide leaves for family-related reasons as set forth in this Agreement, and may continue similar differences in benefits without challenge under this Article.
For the purposes of this Article, the term “gender identity/expression” is defined as a person’s gender-related identity, appearance, or behavior, whether or not that gender-related identity, appearance, or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person’s physiology or assigned sex at birth.
Section 2. Harassment
MIT shall not tolerate harassment (as defined by MIT Policies and Procedures 9.5).
In order to create a respectful, welcoming, and productive community, the Institute is committed to providing a living, working, and learning environment that is free from harassment.
Harassment is defined as unwelcome conduct of a verbal, nonverbal, or physical nature that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a work or academic environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive and that adversely affects an individual’s educational, work, or living environment.
Harassment is prohibited whether or not the employee is being harassed because of their membership in one or more of the protected categories listed in Section 1 of this Article.
Section 3. Grievability
Allegations that MIT has discriminated against an employee in the workplace because of union membership, activities, or support may be the subject of a grievance under this Agreement in accordance with Article 5, Grievance Procedure.
Other allegations that MIT discriminated against or harassed an employee in the workplace in violation of Sections 1 or 2 of this Article shall first proceed in accordance with MIT’s policies and procedures for complaints of discrimination or harassment, with the addition of the mediation and grievance and arbitration options indicated in Section 4 herein.
Section 4. Processes
A. In utilizing MIT processes for claims of discrimination or harassment, an employee is free to have a Union representative accompany them in any preliminary discussions with the Institute Discrimination and Harassment Response (IDHR) office or central Human Resources (HR) office about possible incidents of harassment and discrimination if they so choose.
B. An employee has the right to be accompanied by a Union representative at any and all steps of MIT’s formal complaint procedures regarding any complaints of alleged discrimination or harassment under Section 1 or 2 of this Article.
C. An employee has the right to have a Union representative present at any interviews or meetings with investigators during the formal complaint procedure.
D. Under no circumstances should an employee be coerced by IDHR staff or any other MIT employee to accept informal resolution of their complaint or supportive measures, in place of filing a formal complaint. Coercion may include but is not limited to providing misinformation about the formal resolution process or telling the complainant that they are prohibited from pursuing the formal resolution process. Discussing in good faith the pros and cons of various approaches shall not be considered pressure to accept informal resolution.
E. Mediation
a. The Union and MIT share a goal of resolving allegations under this Article at the earliest opportunity possible. Therefore, the Union and MIT may mutually agree to engage in mediation and may discuss possible referral to MIT’s informal resolution pathways before or soon after the filing of any formal complaint under MIT’s internal complaint resolution processes. If mediation is agreed, then the parties shall follow the procedures in E(b)–(f) below.
b. As the parties to the mediation, the Union and MIT shall meet to mutually select a mediator and will in good faith attempt to identify a mediator with experience in discrimination or harassment cases. If the parties cannot agree on a mediator, they will follow the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) processes for selection of a mediator. The Union and MIT will split the costs of mediation evenly.
c. An individual employee shall not have the right to invoke mediation on their own.
d. Any such mediation will be between the Union and MIT.
e. Any resolution that may be reached by the parties in mediation shall remain confidential between the parties and all participants to the mediation, except for Union and MIT employees with a legitimate need to know, unless the parties mutually agree otherwise.
f. The parties agree that neither the mediator nor the parties or participants to the mediation will in any way disclose, discuss, or publish in any forum, including but not limited to any social media platform, any communications, negotiations, or settlement discussions that arise from the mediation.
F. Step 3 Grievance and Arbitration Options
a. Once an investigation of a formal complaint of discrimination or harassment under this Article is commenced, and until the internal review process is complete, the employee and the Union may request a status report after sixty (60) days and every thirty (30) days thereafter. This report will include an estimate of the additional time required to complete the process.
b. Once the internal review of a formal complaint is concluded, including any appeal(s), an employee who alleges a violation of Sections 1 and 2 of this Article may file a grievance at Step 3.
i. In cases where the internal review of the formal complaint has not been completed within five (5) months from the filing of the formal complaint, the employee may request a meeting with the director of IDHR or director of Employee and Labor Relations, or their designees, to discuss the status of the case. The employee may take a Union representative with them to such a meeting at the employee’s discretion.
ii. Notwithstanding Subsection F(b) above, in cases where the internal review of the formal complaint has not been completed within six (6) months from the filing of the formal complaint, and where the formal complaint does not involve an allegation that implicates the Institute’s review procedures under Title IX, the employee may, prior to the internal review being completed, file a Step 3 grievance as to their discrimination and harassment allegations under the provisions in Subsections F(c) and F(d) below.
iii. As complaints often require extensive review and vary in complexity, MIT may extend the six (6)-month period for reasonable cause up to a maximum of three (3) additional months. In such cases, MIT will explain to the Union the basis for the extension. In determining reasonable cause, MIT may consider factors such as the nature and duration of the conduct at issue, the number of parties and witnesses, the availability and location of the parties and witnesses, availability of faculty panels, the extent and availability of documents (including emails and text messages) that must be reviewed, the necessity to obtain translation or interpreter services, the number and length of deadline extensions provided to the parties, and the existence of any parallel criminal investigations.
iv. In addition, any time spent by the parties pursuing mediation under this Article shall not count toward the time limits in this paragraph.
v. If the employee elects to file a Step 3 grievance under Subsection F(b)(ii), then MIT, in its discretion, may suspend or terminate its internal review as to the claim(s) that will be arbitrated. At MIT’s discretion, the Institute may also stay its review of any additional claims that the employee included in their formal complaint and any counter-complaint filed against the employee, and any deadlines related to such claims may be suspended.
c. Any such Step 3 grievance will be processed in accordance with Article 5, Grievance Procedure, provided, however, that any such grievance is filed at Step 3 no later than twenty-one (21) calendar days following the conclusion of the internal review process, including any appeal decision.
d. Arbitration
i. If the grievance is not resolved at Step 3, the Union may pursue arbitration. The arbitrator will be selected from a panel of arbitrators that have been previously agreed upon by both parties. The parties shall identify arbitrators with experience in discrimination and harassment cases. If they cannot, then the Union may request a list of arbitrators from the FMCS and selection shall be made in accordance with the Arbitration Policies and Procedures of that body. The arbitration will be conducted in accordance with the Arbitration Policies and Procedures of the FMCS.
ii. The arbitrator shall decide whether or not this Article has been violated and what remedy, if any, is due to the employee. The arbitrator shall not have the ability to impose any discipline, sanctions, or other penalty upon any individual. The arbitrator shall be without authority to render a remedy concerning any academic matter or any aspect of the employee’s status as a student.
iii. Except as set forth in this Article, the other arbitration rules and other limitations on the arbitrator’s authority delineated in Article 5, Grievance Procedure, will apply with equal force to a grievance over claimed violations of this Article.