Board of Regents pays out $100K to former USD staffer in sex discrimination lawsuit

The South Dakota Board of Regents has recently agreed to pay a former international student advisor at the University of South Dakota $100,000 to settle a lawsuit she brought, alleging sexual harassment, sex discrimination and retaliation.

Semehar Ghebrekidan worked in the International Office at USD in her role for less than a year -- July 9, 2018 to June 21, 2019 -- before she was placed on administrative leave and her contract wasn’t renewed after she reported incidents of sexual harassment in the office and filed a Title IX complaint, according to her initial complaint.

The settlement agreement and release, obtained Frida by the Argus Leader and first reported by The Dakota Scout earlier this week, details Ghebrekidan received a check from the SDBOR for $10,307.10 for wages with $2,390.40 in taxes withheld for a net wage payment of $7,916.70, and a check from the SDBOR for $64,757.70 for non-wages.

Her counsel at the Boyce Law Firm received a check from the SDBOR for $24,935.20 for attorney’s fees.

The release means that the plaintiff, Ghebrekidan, discharges USD and the SDBOR from what she sued them for, and that she won’t sue or complain about USD or the SDBOR in the future for claims that occurred prior to the execution of the settlement agreement and release.

“Accordingly, without any admission of liability, the parties have reached this agreement and compromise after considering the substantial expense and uncertainty of future litigation, trials, and appeals, and with the desire to resolve all pending or potential disputes and administrative matters in their entirety,” statss the settlement agreement and release, dated Feb. 13.

Initial complaint of sex discrimination

Ghebrekidan names two people in the lawsuit: Susan Hackemer, then-director of the international office at USD and now the assistant vice president for career services and student success; and Patrick Morrison, then-associate director of the international office and now the director of the Gallagher International Center, which oversees study abroad, international admissions and international student services.

Neither Hackemer nor Morrison responded to emails by the Argus Leader asking for comment.

In her initial complaint, Ghebrekidan states Morrison was “party to a conversation which degraded and stereotyped Semehar as a ‘whore,’” according to court documents.

Ghebrekidan alleged in her suit that on or about Dec. 10, 2018, international office secretary Patty Lase told Ghebrekidan in a conversation with an international student about modesty that sometimes Ghebrekidan “wears those super short skirts and tights, and I get the ‘Me Too’ movement and all, but sometimes you are just asking for it.”

Lase did not respond to messages from the Argus Leader.

Ghebrekidan said she interpreted the comments to mean she was “asking” to be sexually assaulted because of her outfit, according to court documents.

The next day, Ghebrekidan said she overheard Morrison and Lase talking about the way Ghebrekidan behaved and dressed in the office, with Lase stating that Ghebrekidan had been “dressing like a whore,” according to Ghebrekidan’s complaint. Lase also said Ghebrekidan hugging an international student was “culturally insensitive,” according to the complaint.

“Rather than address Lase’s inappropriate and derogatory remarks, Morrison responded by saying that he would talk with (Ghebrekidan) regarding the way she dressed and behaved,” according to Ghebrekidan’s complaint.

The following day, Ghebrekidan reported the conversation she overheard to Khara Iverson, then the Title IX coordinator at USD, who suggested Ghebrekidan discuss the situation individually with Morrison.

That next day, Ghebrekidan spoke with Morrison about the conversation, who told her that hugging was not “culturally acceptable,” and that the rest of the employees in the office were “Midwestern and white” and had a different view of what was culturally normal than Ghebrekidan, according to the complaint. Ghebrekidan grew up in a traditional Ethiopian household to parents who both immigrated to the U.S.

Ghebrekidan asked Morrison if he wanted her to disregard her culture as someone who is Ethiopian and a person of color, and Morrison responded that “she ‘needs to make adjustments,’” according to the complaint. Ghebrekidan asked if a student ever reported feeling uncomfortable or disrespected due to her hugs, and Morrison said no, the complaint states.

Two days later, Lase left Ghebrekidan a voicemail attempting to apologize for Ghebrekidan overhearing the conversation she had with Morrison, the complaint states.

Ghebrekidan requested to change office locations but was denied. In her complaint, she alleges USD, Morrison and Hackemer refused to take corrective action with Lase for these incidents.

Retaliation complaint

Ghebrekidan requested Jan. 11, 2019, that Morrison conduct her six-month evaluation, but Morrison delayed it until Feb. 24, 2019, according to Ghebrekidan’s complaint.

While in the office, Ghebrekidan continuously requested feedback from Morrison and was told she was doing the right things, Ghebrekidan states in her complaint, but despite Morrison’s earlier reassurances, Ghebrekidan was informed in the evaluation that she wasn’t passing two of four employment categories, and was placed on a 60-day improvement plan.

Several days later, Ghebrekidan requested her informal Title IX investigation be escalated to a formal investigation.

Ghebrekidan requested feedback from Morrison and Hackemer during the 60-day plan but received little to no response regarding her status or how to make progress after the initial evaluation, she states in her complaint.

By April 12, 2019, Ghebrekidan’s Title IX investigation was closed for lack of substantial evidence, her complaint states.

Ten days later, she met with Morrison, who told her she’d improved on her 60-day plan and that he’d speak with Carl Gutzman in USD’s human resources department regarding next steps on her plan, according to Ghebrekidan’s complaint.

On May 14, 2019, Hackemer gave Ghebrekidan a memorandum notifying her she was being placed on administrative leave and her contract wouldn't be renewed because Hackemer said Ghebrekidan hadn’t made progress on the 60-day plan, according to Ghebrekidan’s complaint.

Ghebrekidan alleges that the delay in conducting her evaluation, being placed on a 60-day plan and administrative leave, and not having her contract renewed, were all done in retaliation for her pursuit of a Title IX investigation.

She also stated in her complaint that as a result of the defendants’ unlawful conduct, Ghebrekidan “suffered and continues to suffer loss of income and benefits, out-of-pocket expenses, emotional distress, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, harm to reputation, loss of earning capacity, and other harm to be compensated through damages in an amount to be proven at trial.”

What happened next

In a joint answer filed Feb. 15, 2022, the SDBOR, Morrison and Hackemer stated they denied most of the allegations in Ghebrekidan’s complaint, but admit that the conversation between Lase and Morrison took place, and that Ghebrekidan spoke with Morrison about the conversation he had with Lase, for example.

The joint answer also disputes the reason Ghebrekidan’s Title IX complaint was closed, stating that it was determined that there was no reasonable basis for believing she had been subjected to retaliation or harassment, and that Ghebrekidan did not appeal this determination.

Ghebrekidan’s contract wasn’t renewed due to inadequate performance, the joint answer states.

“Any employment decisions made by defendants concerning (the) plaintiff were based upon legitimate, business-related decisions and not discriminatory or retaliatory reasons,” the joint answer states.

On June 1, 2022, both parties moved that the Title IX claims alleged against Morrison and Hackemer be dismissed from the lawsuit, and that was granted by U.S. District Judge Karen Schreier on June 2, 2022.

Multiple motions and orders amending the scheduling orders were made between Sept. 12, 2022 and Dec. 13, 2023, as the parties scheduled a mediation for January 2024 and discovery was to be commenced in time to be completed by April 30.

The parties made a joint motion to dismiss the lawsuit on Feb. 22, and Schreier filed a judgment and an order dismissing the case on April 8.

This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: SDBOR pays out $100K to former USD staffer in discrimination lawsuit