Horseplay or sexual harassment: Discipline and due process in the Michigan Department of Corrections

ABSTRACT

Maynard Wiertalla is a Corrections Shift Supervisor 12 (Lieutenant) for the Michigan Department of Corrections DOC). He is accused of sexually harassing a male subordinate, who alleged that Lt. Wiertalla touched him inappropriately more than 300 times over 12 years. The DOC interviewed the subordinate and staff members as part of its investigation, revealing that the inappropriate physical contact took the predominant form of prodding and poking with fingers in the ribs or stomach, or grabbing of the upper thigh or crotch area, often by surprise. Lt. Wiertalla admitted to what was described. Witnesses characterized the physical touching as horseplay rather than sexual harassment. This case explores how the DOC disciplined Lt. Wiertalla and defended its disciplinary action on appeal to the Employment Relations Board of the Michigan Civil Service Commission. The case is useful for raising questions about sexual harassment, authority, grievance procedures, due process and organizational justice.

KEYWORDS:

• Authority
• discipline
• due process
• grievance
• sexual harassment

Appendix

Types of Grievances

(1) Discrimination; (2) Reprisal [Whistleblower Protection]; (3) Discipline without just cause; (4) Written counseling issued without just cause; (5) The abolition or creation of a position for reasons other than administrative efficiency; (6) An arbitrary and capricious lateral job change resulting in substantial harm; (7) Denial of compensation or supplemental military pay to which the grievant is entitled; (8) The actual or anticipated failure or refusal to comply with Rights of Employees Absent Due to Service in the Uniformed Services [Rule 2-14].

Steps in the Michigan Civil Service Grievance Process: Illustrated

Steps in the Michigan Civil Service Grievance Process: Explained

A grievance may be filed for reasons outlined above. When filed, the procedure for reviewing the decision begins at the agency level. The grievant is required to fill out a form, Michigan CS-100, within a specified amount of time. The process progresses from there, if necessary, but may be resolved at any level in the process.

Grievance Procedures at the Agency LevelStep 1 ● File CS-100 Form within 14 days ● Conference: Informal hearing held ● Answer: Written response within 14 days of filed grievanceStep 2 ● File CS-100 Form within 14 days of receiving Step 1 answer ● Conference: Optional ● Answer: Written response within 28 days of Step 2 grievance being filed

Grievance Procedures above the Agency LevelCivil Service Hearing Office (CSHO) ● File CS-100 Form within 28 days receiving Step 2 answer appealing CSHO. If no answer is received, CS-100 form requesting appeal to CSHO must be received within 42 days of when the Step 2 answer was due ● Investigation: No set time limit ● Answer: Written responseEmployment Relations Board/Civil Service Commission ● Appeal CSHO decision within 28 days of written response ● Investigation: No set time limit ● Answer: Written responseCircuit Court ● Appeal ERB/CSC decision within 60 days of the ERB/CSC decisionCircuit Court of Appeals  ● Appeal Circuit Court decision within 21 days of judgment being issued

Notes

1. Michigan Department of Corrections. Work Rule 6: Physical Contact. “Any inappropriate placing of hands on another person, touching another person, or other types of body contact, is not permitted.”

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Gregory K. Plagens

Gregory K. Plagens is an associate professor at Eastern Michigan University.