Can university compel professor to use student's requested title? Ohio lawsuit

[GrinitchSpinach]

I don't think this has been posted here yet. This story and its legal implications are making a splash in the US right now:

www.portsmouth-dailytimes.com/news/32807/professor-files-suit-against-ssu

Nicholas Meriwether, a philosophy professor, has filed suit against his employer, Shawnee State University in Portsmouth, Ohio. Because of his religious convictions, he feels unable to address a male student as "Miss."

When the student complained (reportedly becoming belligerent and stating "Then I guess that means I can call you a cunt!") the administration advised Meriwether to stop using titles entirely, and instead refer to all students by last name only. Meriwether wanted to retain titles for other students and refer to this student only by last name. The administration initially approved this course but when the student threatened to file a Title IX complaint, the university told Meriwether he must comply with the student's requested title. Meriwether proposed complying in class, but placing a disclaimer on his syllabus to note that he was doing so under compulsion and in conflict with his deeply held convictions. The university said this, too, would violate its non-discrimination policy.

An internal investigation found that Meriwether's "disparate treatment" of the student had created a hostile environment, and he was issued a written warning. He is still employed as a tenured professor.

Now, to me it seems weird that this guy wouldn't just use the title as a courtesy in class, or else switch to first names for everyone. He doesn't seem to have tried very hard to find a solution that wouldn't single this student out. Basically he sounds like kind of an a-hole.

Nevertheless, I think the university took a weird turn when they switched from trying to find a compromise to simply insisting Meriwether use "Miss" for this student and disciplining him when he did not comply (if that is actually how it happened). IANAL but it seems tricky to claim that one's employer can compel speech to which the employee objects strongly, at least in a country where a pharmacist can't be compelled to dispense a prescribed medication against which she has moral objections...

Since I brought up the Masterpiece cake case in this thread about a case in US court, I should mention that the Masterpiece ruling was a very narrow one that left unresolved some of the major issues it raised.

In case anyone's interested, a very similar case might also be headed to the US Supreme Court. The plaintiff's attorneys in this case recently said, “Freedom of speech has always included the freedom not to speak the government’s message. This case can clarify whether speech is truly free if it is government mandated.”

www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/masterpiece-cakeshop-round-two-may-be-headed-to-the-supreme-court

Also it’s accepted in our society that people can identify as male/female, but you can’t identify as a doctor if you don’t hold the appropriate qualifications.

For the sake of argument:

Surely 'identifying' as a doctor is more valid than identifying as the opposite sex. Doctor is an honorific, a social construct, whereas your sex is an intrinsic part of your nature and can be judged more obviously by others than whether you are a doctor.

If you want to say that being a doctor should have objective standards of achievement behind it, what about identifying as a princess and using 'her highness'? What if everyone else identifies them as royal? Do I have to bow and call Charlie Wales 'your royal highness' just because most people do so?

I suspect this professor is being a dick, but I'm not sure people should have to accept other's titles, just because they say so.

GrinitchSpinach - Why, thank you!

It seems to me that human beings are very prone to identifying themselves as that which they are not - see also "Nice Guys" - and to take everyone at their word would be ridiculous.

And, indeed, people respond with ridicule to the Rachel Dolezals and the Emile Ratelbands of the world. It is strange how identifying oneself into womanhood seems to be the exception, despite the fact that sex is far more distinct as a category than race or age.

Here is a link to the lawsuit:

www.adfmedia.org/files/MeriwetherComplaint.pdf

Obviously it was written by his lawyers who are sympathetic to his cause, and the university will have a different story to tell, but while he may have been conservative and difficult it sounds likely that the students was pretty challenging and aggressive and the administration were themselves quite hostile to the professor and very dismissive of his beliefs.

I used to work for a university in Canada and the scenario is quite familiar to me, not the trans aspect so much but the challenge of managing conflict between a difficult, demanding student from a protected group and a professor who feels his autonomy and principles are under threat. Having seen these things play out I can easily believe that everyone involved was at least somewhatunreasonable. The only thing that surprises me about the case is that the union was not more active in supporting the professor. Usually any hint of administration getting involved in teaching related issues is pushed back very hard indeed, especially for tenured professors.

Picking up comments made here, this professor liked his classroom to be formal and felt that that was appropriate for his classes (ethics and philosophy including courses about religion). So he addressed his students formally as 'Sir' and 'Ma'am' and using their title and last name. He wanted to call this student 'Sir' and 'Mr X' the same as all his other male students, and said his beliefs meant he couldn't call them 'Ma'am' and 'Miss X'. He offered the compromise of just calling this student 'X' or of complying but with the caveat that he wanted it to be known he was complying under pressure but neither were accepted.

I think it was not at all unreasonable for him to say that no he really didn't want to call all of his students by surname alone as that does create a different atmosphere, and the principle of accommodating individual students with different treatment is not a new one (it's used for students with disabilities all the time).

I think this will make a good test case for the ADF. The professor is an evangelical Presbyterian, involved in his church and because part of his academic specialism is focused on religion and ethics he belongs to several academic groups focused on Christianity and Philosophy. He also objected to transgenderism prior to this incident so I think it will be easy to show he has a serious issue with the ideology and that it does conflict with his religious beliefs, plus there is some evidence that university administrators had an issue with his religious beliefs.

The Equality Act (2010) identifies 9 protected characteristics. Sex is one of those, and gender reassignment is another. So gender IS a protected characteristic for trans people.

You’re allowed to assume any social title you want, regardless of your gender identity. Honorific titles are different - you can’t just assume those. You can’t force anyone to use your chosen title but I’d regard it as discriminatory if their refusal to use your chosen title was because you’re trans.

Lewis my friend.

Gender and gender reassignment are not the same thing.

Lewis, gender reassignment, not gender, is the protected characteristic and it means being protected from discrimination based on your gender reassignment, which is very different from the right of compelling speech.

It's a strange case. In the UK, academics address their students by their first name, and vice versa. Are there really places in the US where it's normal to address students as Miss, Mr etc?

I also wondered. Particularly from US unis I am used to first names between students and professors.

I think so.
When I was at Oxford the only tutor I had who used to use titles was American.
I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes I think the British system is badly in need of restoring a bit of formality between students and staff.

Interesting. In my time in the US it was first names all the way. But we were all grad or post grad students, so maybe that‘s why?

I think it's just the style of this particular prof. The law suit talks about how he uses the Socratic method in his classes which is about 'thoughtful dialogue' involving lots of questioning. I can see that a certain amount of formality could be helpful. Apparently the trans individual was an engaged contributor and performed very well in the course so there were probably multiple occasions when they were both referred to or addressed.

Coyoacan

It" does sound like six of one and half a dozen of the other. But the teacher sounds rather obnoxious."

Really?
I thought the one calling the other a cunt was the obnoxious one.