Page 85

One hundred seventy respondents elaborated on their experiences with exclusionary (e.g., shunned,
ignored), intimidating, offensive and/or hostile conduct (e.g., bullied, harassed) that interfered with
their ability to work, learn, or live at UM-Flint. Three themes emerged from all responses: reporting
process, racial issues, and fear of consequences. There was one theme specific to Student respondents:
student conduct. Two themes emerged specific to Employee (Faculty, Staff and Senior Administrator)
respondents: coworker conduct and behavior of the chancellor.

Page 87

Fear of consequences. For the third theme, respondents described how they were fearful of the
consequences that might result if they shared enough details to reveal their identity. One respondent
wrote, There have been multiple experiences. I worry that if I describe them in detail, I could be
identified, despite what the study says about confidentiality. Another respondent explained, I would
like to but it didn't help before I fear it would only result in retaliation. Some respondents specifically
feared retaliation by the Chancellor. One respondent wrote, I'd rather not elaborate due to fear of
negative repercussions from the Chancellor.

Some respondents refused to elaborate because they wanted to protect their identity. One respondent
wrote, I cannot reveal because it would reveal my identity. The treatment of faculty, abuse by staff,
lies, and lies by omission on this campus is one of the worst I have ever seen in 20 years of teaching!
Other respondents stated, Providing details could identify me, and Doing so will reveal my identity,
and I prefer not to elaborate online.

Page 89

Behavior of the chancellor. For the second theme for Employee respondents, respondents reported
that they had experienced negative and hostile conduct from the Chancellor specifically. One
respondent wrote of their personal experience, The Chancellor has consistently belittled the work that I
and my colleagues have done. She is demeaning and just rude. She has berated the many
accomplishments of our work and several offices. There are a number of instances where she personally
belittled me and my co-workers. I do not want to elaborate because that would reveal my identity.
Another respondent elaborated broadly on the Chancellors behavior, The chancellor has engaged in
bullying and coercive behavior, admonishing and criticizing every program on this campus including
many highly successful ones and chastising a lot of good people. Several staff members have been in
my office crying - this is completely intolerable. I have never been treated poorly by my colleagues
before - never until now.

Clashes with the Chancellor had respondents fearing for their jobs, as one respondent observed, I, and
others that I work closely with, have been directly targeted by the chancellor in a direct, hostile and
disrespectful manner in personal interactions. Many people have drawn a direct link between a person
confronting the Chancellor, or standing up on behalf of their reporting staff, and subsequently losing
their position. I have not ever felt that it was safe to make a formal complaint because all evidence
points to the only result being a demotion or being fired.
Page 106

The Chancellor was often cited as a perpetrator of hostile conduct. A Staff respondent reported, Many
people have been directly verbally assaulted by the Chancellor, as well as receiving intimidating email
and messages. Her style of leadership is bullying. Another faculty respondent worried, When the
chancellor is the perpetrator, I have nowhere to go to report this behavior and can only support the
victims.

Page 136

Eighty-six Faculty and Staff respondents elaborated on their observations of unjust hiring practices. Four
themes emerged from the responses: general favoritism, cronyism with the Chancellor, improper hiring
process, and bias in hiring.

Page 137

Cronyism with the Chancellor. The second theme is a more targeted version of the favoritism described
in the first theme. Respondents in this theme noted instances of favoritism and cronyism specifically
tied to the Chancellor. One respondent shared, The current Chancellor has hired friends and people she
has a history with - she has reassigned, demoted or gotten rid of employees and replaced them with her
friends. For some of the jobs, the positions weren't even posted. Another respondent wrote, Many of
the Chancellor's support staff and executive leadership staff are prior friends. One respondent stated
that this behavior is unprecedented, The chancellor has hired several of her former close friends and
colleagues without a national search or allowing otherwise qualified UM-Flint faculty/staff to apply for
those positions.

One respondent sums up the outrage, Nepotism is out of control. Every hire seems designed to insulate
and protect the chancellor, without any consideration for the unintended consequences brought upon
the university as a whole. U-M HR policies have become a total joke, openly disregarded in the name of
buying a wall of loyalty. What kind of message does it send to our own students when the head of their
school makes it absolutely clear that it's not what you know or what you can do, it's who you know and
what you can do for them?

Page 142-143

Sixty-two respondents elaborated on their observations of employment-related discipline or action, up

to and including dismissal practices. Four themes emerged from the responses: chancellor-driven
actions, race related actions, climate of fear, and supervisor abuse.

Chancellor-driven actions. In the first theme, respondents reported multiple unjust dismissals and
reassignments in upper administration that were done at the behest of the chancellor. One respondent
stated, The Chancellor has single handedly removed all executive officer leadership that was in place
before she arrived and made them all state that they were retiring. Another respondent observed,
Some staff have lost their jobs and/or displaced by the Chancellor which were totally unjust. One
respondent elaborated, The former VC for Student Services, was demoted for no good reason. The
former exec director of U-Relations was demoted so that the chancellor could hire her own buddy.
The provost was fired because the chancellor was threatened by his competency. The VC for Finance
was fired because he objected to the chancellor wasteful spending. The exec director of government
relations was fired because she was threatened by him. There are others.

Page 143

Climate of fear. In the third theme, which is a corollary to the theme of chancellor-driven actions,
respondents discussed how multiple firings and demotions have created a climate of fear. One
respondent wrote, The unfair dismissals are egregious in their own right, but the fear of them is fueling
the exodus of our most-talented people. We also fear that it's too late to stop the bleeding, and maybe
becoming numb to it all isn't such a bad way to deal. Another respondent observed, The manner at
which staff is and has been dismissed is abhorrent and has created an atmosphere of fear at the
university. Respondents were unsure why people are suddenly moved to other departments or no
longer working at UM-FLINT with no explanation and saw the actions as unusual, or unfair.
One respondent summed up the situation, There has been a really stunning number of staff members
and higher level administrators who have been fired (they just disappear) or given a different job. Some
of this seems to be based on gender and some of it seems to be based on the Chancellor's desire to hire
very particular people. It has been incredibly unsettling for many individuals, who are constantly in fear
that they will lose their jobs, and also for the campus as a whole.
Page 162

One respondent reported, I've always promoted UM-Flint as a great place to work and more
importantly have a career until Chancellor came in and has single handedly torn down everything the
previous administration worked to build. Another respondent stated, Before Chancellor came to
campus, I would have said UM-Flint is a wonderful place to work. I would have recommended others to
work here. Another respondent elaborated, I cannot imagine ever saying I would not recommend this
place as a good place to work. I live, eat, and breathe UM-Flint. The current Administrative leadership,
(chancellor and chief of staff) has made me recommend that people look elsewhere for employment.
Not only do we work in a hostile environment but it is compounded by budget cuts and position cuts.
More work, more responsibility, and less staff to complete the mission.

Page 206

The new chancellor has created an environment that is toxic. I cannot stand the way many of our long-
time and highly dedicated employees are treated. The working conditions on our campus are the worst I
have experienced in over 2 decades. One respondent observed, The chancellor and her policies. Top
down decision making on issues has not only slowed progress to a crawl but it has also led to ill feeling
and bad morale. Staff feel like they are not trusted and treated as a necessary evil.

Page 249

If the Chancellor worried more about the students and less about social gatherings, things might be a
little better. Maybe meeting with the people who used to run the university, the people she has now
either fired or demoted, and actually learning what UM-Flint is all about before she started changing
everything at once, it would have helped a bit with climate issues.
Page 385

Respondents blamed the Chancellor for the low morale on campus. One respondent wrote, Get a new
chancellor. The present chancellor has directly caused a climate of fear and disrespect for current
faculty and staff. Students are beginning to detect the hostile climate. Nothing that existed on the
campus prior to her arrival is valued by her. Another respondent suggested, The only way the climate
will improve is with another Chancellor. I am not optimistic that she thinks she is responsible for the
current campus climate.

Some respondents wished that the Chancellor would change her governance and interactions with
faculty and staff. One respondent stated, Maybe the chancellor should stop moving people around and
hiring new people in their place. She is a dictator, not wanting to help people.

One respondent suggested, Stop creating & hiring 6 figure executive positions while cutting the
budgets of other departments. Several respondents wanted more shared governance, Executive
officers need to respect experienced UM-Flint staff members. The chancellor exercises too tight control
over the administrative side, and she doesn't apparently trust anyone from UM-Flint. There are very
many good people here, and she doesn't seem to recognize that. She needs to develop more trust in her
administration and the faculty. She needs to respect faculty more.

Another respondent shared, For years the University and senior leadership valued everyone's opinions.
The University ran on a bottom up type of system where everyone had input and senior leadership
would listen. The Chancellor has stripped that concept away from campus and conducts all business
without input from anyone. She may request input at times (not often), but when she does she ignores
people's opinions and does whatever she wants. We need leadership to value and listen to everyone
on campus.

Page 391

The morale on campus is at an all- time low in the 15+ years I have been here. The driving force for the
low morale is the Chancellor. Staff have lost and/or been displaced from their jobs. The Chancellor has
stood in meetings and lied and evidently thinks that no one knows. The Chancellor has spent so much
money on hiring, the Ross House, and mostly consultants, that it has put the budget of the University in
jeopardy. She has hired friends and their family but then in other areas will not approve the hiring of a
vacant position. She does not trust anyone unless she hires them; she micro-manages big time, and
does not value faculty or staff. Another respondent echoed those concerns, I have worked at the
University for a long time. Never before have I experienced an atmosphere as corrupt and stifling as
that under the current Chancellor's administration. The lack of transparency, hiring nepotism and fear
for one's job and livelihood should one openly express criticism of the Chancellor make the campus
climate hostile for its workers. Long-time University employees are routinely replaced by friends of the
Chancellor. Upper management positions with ridiculously high salaries are constantly being created
and filled by cronies of the upper administration while the lower-level workers face cutbacks and budget
cuts which will affect student services.