Singh now works for St. John’s University.
AB Wire
An Indian American former assistant professor at Emporia State University, Rajesh Singh, is suing four officials at the university, alleging he faced racial discrimination and retaliation before he was fired.
Singh taught at the university’s School of Library and Information Management from 2009 to 2015. He is suing two current administrators in the department, a provost and the university’s former president. He plans to add the university to the lawsuit, according to the Associated Press which first reported the lawsuit.
The lawsuit comes a month after Melvin Hale, a current assistant professor in the same department, filed a defamation and invasion of privacy lawsuit against the university.
Singh contends he was subjected to years of discrimination at the university, despite receiving outstanding reviews, and his efforts to argue his case were ignored.
Singh has since then joined St. John’s University in Queens, New York, as an assistant professor, Division of Library and Information Science.
He holds a Ph.D. from Abo Akademi University, Finland as well as M.L.I.Sc. and M.Sc. (Botany) degrees from the University of Lucknow, India. After earning his Ph.D. in Information Studies, he was a lecturer at the University of British Columbia, before joining Emporia State University.
According to the lawsuit, filed in Kansas federal court, Emporia State University hired Singh as an assistant professor with the School of Library and Information Management on June 2, 2009.
Here is part of the complaint filed in the lawsuit:
“On June 23, 2010, Dr. Singh met with Dean Alexander to discuss the possibility of salary equity with Dr. Andrew Smith and Ms. Sheila O’Hare, who were two new hires for Fall 2010. They were no more qualified than Singh, yet they were hired for a 5% higher salary just one year after Dr. Singh.
“Despite it being a reasonable and polite request, Dean Alexander became enraged and behaved in a confrontational and unreasonable manner during the meeting. She refused to consider pursuing salary equity for Dr. Singh.
“After this June 23, 2010 meeting, Dean Alexander began a campaign of character assassination and marginalization against Dr. Singh.
“Dean Alexander pitted other faculty against Dr. Singh by discussing the private details of the June 23 2010 meeting with Dr. Smith, Ms. O’Hare and other faculty.
“Dean Alexander maliciously, deliberately and repeatedly began marginalizing Dr. Singh by removing him from committees, blocking opportunities through policy changes, and otherwise abusing her power with the express purpose of damaging his work and reputation.
“Dr. Singh pursued intervention by appealing to Provost as advised in the ESU Policy Manual, but then-Provost Mehring did not provide any remedy.
In 2012 when President Shonrock appointed Dean Alexander as Interim Provost, he also approved Dean Alexander’s recommendation of Andrew Smith as Interim Dean for SLIM, putting Dr. Smith in a position of power over Dr. Singh.
“By this time, Dr. Singh had endured two year of discrimination and harassment that interfered with his work and caused a great deal of stress.
“On August 8, 2012, Dr. Singh met with President Shonrock to discuss his concerns about Andrew Smith’s new role and SLIM’s dysfunctional and discriminatory management.
“Dr. Shonrock immediately shut down the conversation by saying that he approved Dr. Smith’s appointment, and supported Dean Alexander’s recommendation. He similarly shut down any further conversation about the discrimination Dr. Singh was experiencing.
“Dr. Shonrock was not open to hearing anything that Dr. Singh had to say about his experiences in SLIM, so Dr. Singh spoke to him about their mutual interest in management theories for the remainder of the meeting.
“Pursuant to ESU policy and course of conduct, Dr. Singh received an evaluation at the end of every calendar year for his work. The initial evaluation is conducted by a committee of his peers—the Faculty Promotion Committee (FPC).
“The FPC makes a recommendation regarding whether ESU should renew Dr. Singh’s appointment. Dean Alexander then decides whether to adopt or disagree with the FPC’s recommendation.
“Defendant Cordle decides whether to affirm or reverse Dean Alexander’s decision.
“During Dr. Singh’s first full three years at ESU—2010, 2011, and 2012—he received outstanding reviews. He was one of the highest rated teachers in the department and was well published.
“Despite the stellar evaluations, the FPC included an inappropriate section on “collegiality,” called “Additional Comments,” in each evaluation letter, and Dean Alexander included similar statements endorsing the FPC’s “collegiality” comments in her evaluations.
“These inappropriate “collegiality” comments were included in a malicious intent to build a case for terminating Dr. Singh.
“In October 2013, Dean Alexander and Dr. Singh had dinner together at a conference. Before the dinner, Dean Alexander told Dr. Singh that he had everything he needed to achieve tenure. On previous occasions, Dean Alexander had praised Dr. Singh and encouraged him to apply for early tenure.
“One month later, in November 2013, the FPC arbitrarily determined that Dr. Singh should be fired in order to prevent him from obtaining tenure. Dr. Singh would have been required to apply for tenure beginning in the 2014-2015 academic year.
“Dr. Singh received nearly identical high objective teaching scores from students in 2013 that he received in 2012, 2011, and 2010. Despite the high objective teaching scores the FPC subjectively and arbitrarily chastised Dr. Singh for engaging in too much group work and accused Dr. Singh of both (1) “failing to make course changes in response to student comments” and (2) making changes to a course because he allegedly “did not discuss these changes with the SLIM faculty.” Ironically, in 2012, the FPC praised Dr. Singh for the exact same action—making changes to his classes.”