[NABS-L] Caring concerns of James and Susan Gashel

Sun Jul 11 03:12:05 UTC 2021

Based Emily

On Sat, Jul 10, 2021, 11:03 PM Emily Schlenker via NABS-L <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
wrote:

> NO.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jul 10, 2021, at 7:49 PM, James Gashel via NABS-L <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > STATEMENT OF CARING CONCERNS OF JAMES AND SUSAN GASHEL
> >
> > I.    THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND’S 2021 SPECIAL COMMITTEE
> REPORT ON SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
> >
> > We write these concerns because we care about the NFB.  As a member of
> the Board, Mr. Gashel voted in favor of the Code of Conduct, in favor of
> the SAFE fund, and voted to release the Report for our members to review,
> but did not and does not endorse the Report’s content or conclusions.  We
> write, because, in its zeal to curb misconduct, the members need to know
> the NFB is creating a kangaroo court.
> >
> > We stand with survivors.  No one should have to suffer unwanted
> harassment or violence, whether in the NFB or anywhere.  Standing with
> survivors does not mean we should turn over our organization to outside
> investigators.  This disempowers the affiliates, the backbone of our
> organization.
> >
> > The Code of Conduct defines sexual harassment, but does not define
> sexual misconduct.
> https://nfb.org/about-us/history-and-governance/code-conduct.
> Regardless, the Special Committee used the term sexual misconduct (which
> wasn’t defined) and not sexual harassment.  This is not, we repeat, not, an
> issue of terminology.  According to RAINN, sexual harassment is widely
> understood to be a narrow term as compared to the broader term of sexual
> misconduct.  The substitution of terms is a misleading sleight of hand.
> Did the Report conclude any transgressor committed sexual harassment?  We
> don’t know.  Therefore, we don’t know if any transgressor violated the Code
> of Conduct.  By being casual about the terms, the Special Committee leads
> us to believe that the Code of Conduct was violated.  We don’t know and
> neither do the NFB members.
> >
> > The Report lacks investigative standards, the text is conclusory, not
> supported by any stated evidence, and written to evoke strong feelings.
> The Report says that Dr. Schroeder was guilty of sexual misconduct over
> four decades, yet no allegations go back nearly that far.  Sadly, we
> believe the Special Committee’s methods resulted in a predetermined outcome
> – a kangaroo court.
> >
> > According to the Report, the investigator was objective.  We don’t
> agree.  Sexual misconduct, not being defined, is in the eye of the beholder
> – in this case, the External Investigator and the President of the NFB.
> Yet, we don’t know what the investigator considers to be sexual misconduct,
> neither does the membership.
> >
> > We acknowledge mistakes have been made; they have been made by the Board
> of Directors as a whole.  The Report blames the immediate past president
> and current president, while this may be expedient; we find it to be untrue
> and unfair to Dr. Maurer and President Riccobono.
> >
> > 52 separate people are alleged to be either transgressors or individuals
> who failed to “respond adequately to sexual misconduct allegations.”
> Lumping these two categories together creates a perception of a larger
> problem than we have in NFB.  We don’t even know what failed to “respond
> adequately” means.  Is it leadership response, is it witness response?  We
> don’t know.  Did those who allegedly failed to respond adequately violate
> the Code of Conduct? We don’t know.  Did the transgressors violate the Code
> of Conduct? We don’t know.  Is consensual sexual behavior sexual
> misconduct?  We don’t know.  All we do know is that the transgressors
> violated whatever standard is applied by the External Investigator.  But we
> don’t know the standard, and neither does the membership.
> >
> > Given the size of the NFB, and the fact that allegations from the
> distant past were considered, we need to step back and reconsider the
> Report’s conclusions.
> >
> > If the NFB adopts the Report’s recommendations for processing sexual
> misconduct complaints, an External Investigator decides if it is “more
> likely than not” that a violation took place and recommends disciplinary
> actions.  The President accepts, rejects or modifies the report and
> notifies the parties.  An appeal has to be filed within 30 days; the
> President picks a three-member Appeal Panel from the Board.  But the Appeal
> Panel cannot overturn the President’s decision unless it is “manifestly
> unjust,” this means that it has to be plain and obvious that the decision
> was wrong.  There are no other appeals permitted.  There is an exception
> for “extenuating circumstances” but this is not explained.  We simply don’t
> know.
> >
> > One thing we do know is this: Under the NFB Constitution,
> https://nfb.org/about-us/history-and-governance/constitution, the
> President does not have unilateral authority to suspend, expel, or
> discipline a member. This authority is expressly reserved to the Board of
> Directors and the Convention.
> >
> > Therefore, the actions now being taken by the president violate Article
> III, Section E of the NFB’s Constitution.  Under Article III, there are
> only two ways for a member to be suspended, expelled, or disciplined:  by a
> two thirds majority vote of the Board of Directors or by a simple majority
> of the states present and voting at a national convention.  The national
> convention has the sole authority to reverse the Board of Directors.
> >
> > Having not amended the Constitution, President Riccobono is throwing
> people out.  Because there is no appeal to the Board of Directors, and no
> opportunity to go to convention for redress, the investigation and appeals
> process being used is unconstitutional, since the constitution requires a
> two-thirds Board vote, reversible by the national convention.  The NFB
> membership deserves better.  The membership deserves to have the final say,
> if anyone wants to take a discipline issue that far.
> >
> > Our concerns are informed by the references set forth at the end of this
> statement.
> >
> >
> >
> > II.    CURRENT STATUS AND PRIORITIES OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE
> BLIND
> >
> > We fear that the NFB is being consumed by internal disputes while losing
> its focus on the compelling struggle of blind people for equality,
> opportunity, and security in society. Mr. Gashel has proposed the following
> initiatives; all were rejected by President Riccobono:
> >
> > Public benefits advocacy.  From 2014 through 2018, Mr. Gashel urged more
> emphasis on advocacy by NFB on behalf of our members eligible for and/or
> receiving public benefits, including SSI and SSDI.  President Riccobono
> agreed that these efforts were needed but said NFB lacks staff and
> resources.  It’s all a matter of priority.
> > In January 2018 after Mr. Gashel retired, he offered to contribute time
> to develop an advocacy effort with respect to Social Security and other
> public benefits, but President Riccobono did nothing.
> > Mr. Gashel, given his unique and extensive experience as a lobbyist,
> proposed to Mr. Riccobono a plan for the NFB to have a more consistent
> effort in state and local legislation and advocacy, including volunteering
> to lead the effort, but President Riccobono did absolutely nothing, while
> agreeing that action was necessary in this area.  His announcement to
> establish a committee on state and local legislation and advocacy after Mr.
> Gashel’s resignation exemplifies the problem of Mr. Riccobono’s reactive,
> not decisive, leadership.
> >
> > We are losing our focus.  Only the membership can bring it back.  We
> urge all members to ensure that NFB remains the unified voice of the
> nation’s blind, and that, with love, hope, and determination we will turn
> our dreams into reality.
> >
> > REFERENCES:
> > https://hbr.org/2020/05/why-sexual-harassment-programs-backfire
> > https://www.rainn.org/articles/sexual-harassment.
> >
> https://www.newamerica.org/better-life-lab/reports/nowwhat-sexual-harassment-solutions-toolkit/top-down-industry-level-or-organizational-change.
>
> >
> https://www.unh.edu/research/prevention-innovations-research-center/evi.dence-based-initiatives
> .
> > https://www.apa.org/monitor/2018/02/sexual-harassment.
> >
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2018/01/17/the-metoo-movement-is-at-a-dangerous-tipping-point/
> >
> > James Gashel joined the National Federation of the Blind in 1965 and
> became the first president of the NFB Student Division. In 1974 he joined
> the NFB staff as chief of the Washington office, where he became one of the
> best-known advocates for the blind in the United States. His well-known
> efforts in Washington have led to significant changes in virtually every
> law directly affecting blind Americans: the Social Security Act, the
> Rehabilitation Act, the Randolph-Sheppard Act, the Americans with
> Disabilities Act, the Copyright Act, the Individuals with Disabilities
> Education Act, and the Help America Vote Act. While championing these
> causes, Jim has won the love and respect of the thousands of blind men and
> women across America who have directly benefited from his informed and
> effective personal advocacy.
> > During Jim's service at the NFB, he received the Commissioner's Award
> for Outstanding Leadership in Rehabilitation Services to the Disabled, the
> highest honor conferred by the Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services
> Administration. He received the Secretary of Labor's Outstanding American
> Award and the NFB’s Jacobus tenBroek Award, the NFB’s highest honor to
> recognize members and leaders in our movement.
> >
> > Susan Rockwood Gashel is an attorney based in Honolulu, Hawaii.  Her
> employment history covers work with non-profits, government agencies, and
> the private practice of law over five decades.  She has worked with migrant
> farmworkers and governing boards, as a staff attorney for Hawaii’s open
> meetings and public records agency; as a deputy attorney general assigned
> to the Departments of Health and Human Services, and has served as an
> arbitrator for 17 state licensing agencies in actions against the Federal
> government, as well as representing blind vendors from 11 states.  In 2008
> she met James Gashel; they married in 2012.  She has been admitted as a
> member to the Supreme Court of Hawaii, United States District Court for the
> District of Hawaii, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth and
> Seventh Circuits, United States District Court for the District of
> Colorado, United States Court of Federal Claims, and United States District
> Court for the Western District of Michigan.
> >
> >
> > Best and Aloha,
> > James Gashel
> >
> > M: (808) 234-9259
> > E: jgashel0923 at gmail.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NABS-L mailing list
> > NABS-L at nfbnet.org
> > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> NABS-L:
> > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/eschlenker%40cox.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NABS-L mailing list
> NABS-L at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> NABS-L:
>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/jacobryanham%40gmail.com
>