Engineering department lawsuit

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

99zz

23

24

25

26

27

28Sheridan& AssociatesLaw Corporation

Sheridan & Associates Law CorporationSusan J. Sheridan (State Bar Number: 108851)Ian M. Silvers (State Bar Number: 247416)655 University Avenue, Suite 110Sacramento, CA 95825Telephone: (91 6) 488-5388Facsimile: (916)[email protected]

Attorneys for PlaintiffCICI MATTIUZZI

Superior Court Of CaSiforSacramento

8S/07/2QGeelutta s) rf*/?ttBv £<?XX Dftp.Case M umber:% * *3f$irPi nnns*|£%'t *ftro-zuiKf-utJUda &,

-

DepartmentAssignments

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA cfse Management 44Law and Motion 53

COUNTY OF

CICI MATTIUZZI,

Plaintiff,

V.

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY,SACRAMENTO, MIROSLAV MARKOVIC,and DOES 1 through 50. inclusive,

Defendant.

Cici Mattiuzzi alleges as follows:

SACRAMENTO Minors Compromise 16

) Case No.)) Complaint for Retaliation and) Discrimination:)) 1. Retaliation in Violation of) California Labor Code Section) 3610;) 2. Retaliation in Violation of) California Government Code) Section 12940(h);) 3. Gender Discrimination in) violation of California) Government Code Section) 12940(a);) 4. Negligent Supervision and) Retention;) 5. Assault;) 6. Battery; and) 7. Intention Infliction of Emotional) Distress

Parties to the Action

1 . Cici Mattiuzzi ("Mattiuzzi") is now, and at all times mentioned in this Complaint

was, a resident of the County of Sacramento, California.

///

iComplaint for Retaliation and Discrimination

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25'

26

27


2. Defendant California State University Sacramento ("CSUS") is now, and at all

times relevant to this action was, conducting business under the laws of the State of California,

County of Sacramento, and was Mattiuzzi's employer.

3. Defendant Miroslav Markovic ("Markovic") is now, and at all times relevant to

this action was, an individual and a Full Professor with tenure in the CSUS College of

Engineering and Computer Science ("College of Engineering").

4. Mattiuzzi presently does not know the true names and capacities of the Defendants

sued herein as Does 1 through 50, inclusive, and each of them, and therefore sues these

Defendants by fictitious names. Mattiuzzi will seek leave to amend this Complaint to allege the

true names and capacities of these Defendants when determined. Mattiuzzi is informed and

believes and based thereon alleges that each of the fictitiously named Defendants is culpable in

some manner through their acts and/or omissions for the occurrences and events alleged and that

damages as alleged were proximately caused by such acts and events.

5. At all times relevant, each of the Defendants was the agent, servant, employee

and/or employer of each other, and in doing the acts alleged was doing so within the scope of their

authority as such agent, servant and employee and with the permission and consent of each other.

Mattiuzzi's Initial Employment and Job Classification

6. Mattiuzzi began her employment at CSUS in May of 1978 in the Campus Career

Center, as a Career Counselor responsible for the Schools of Business and Engineering. Her

employment classification was Student Affairs Assistant II ("SAA II"), a staff position without

academic standing.

Director of Career Services for the College of Engineering Appointment

and First Request for Reclassification

7. In September of 1984, Mattiuzzi became the Director of Career Services for the

College of Engineering and was still classified as SAA II, a staff position without academic

standing. The President of CSUS created this position for Mattiuzzi in the College of Engineering

2Complaint for Retaliation and Discrimination

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


and requested that she be reclassified to a position with academic standing ("SSP-AR") which paid

more, provided greater benefits and the opportunity for tenure.

8. On July 10, 1985, the College of Engineering was notified that Mattiuzzi's

reclassification review was complete and that she would not receive the classification with

academic standing as requested by the President.

Second Request for Reclassification

9. On October 12, 1987, Dean Donald Gillott ("Dean Gillott"), Dean of the College

of Engineering, wrote to Betty Moulds, Dean of Faculty and Staff Affairs, and requested that

Mattiuzzi be reclassified as follows:

As I study the classification review of the position occupied by Cici asconducted by Susie and compare that review with the detailed study ofCici's responsibilities, I am convinced that the Student ServicesProfessional Series (Academic Related) is an appropriate classification forCici.

As her supervisor I must ensure that she is properly classified. With theextensive study I have just completed, I am absolutely convinced that theAR classification is proper, and I request Cici be placed in the SSP-ARseries.

10. On December 17, 1987, Jacqueline Holston, ("Holston"), Employment

Coordinator at CSUS, informed Mattiuzzi that Dean Gillott' s request to reclassify her had been

denied by Human Resources. Mattiuzzi questioned this denial and complained to both the Dean of

the College of Engineering and Holston that men hired as Career Counselors in the Campus

Career Center after she was hired were reclassified into positions with academic standing. This

occurred during the same period of time that Mattiuzzi's classification was under review.

Mattiuzzi also complained that men in Student Services positions with responsibilities similar to,

but less significant than hers, were classified in positions with academic standing.

Complaint for Retaliation and Discrimination

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Mattiuzzi was advised by the Dean to be patient and stated that he would continue to pursue the

appropriate classification for her.

Mattiuzzi's Job Duties as Director of Career Services

11. Mattiuzzi is responsible for professional and career development programs for the

College of Engineering. In this role she instructs a regular series of classes, counsels students,

advises faculty, produces a weekly newsletter to 10,000 subscribers, maintains a web-based

information system, develops conferences, oversees visits by recruiters and produces an annual

Career Day that serves over 100 employers and 2000 College of Engineering students and

graduates.

12. Mattiuzzi established and sustained productive working relationships with many

private sector employers and governmental agencies in the Greater Sacramento Area. These

relationships resulted in partnerships including, but not limited to, Hewlett Packard, Agilent, and

Intel. These relationships also resulted in the donations of computer equipment from

Apple, Cisco, and DST and the receipt of development funds from companies, including,

Chevron, Union Pacific, Caltrans, and the Department of Water Resources.

13. Mattiuzzi created a Career Services Office ("Office") for the College of

Engineering students and graduates. The Office has brought regional and national attention to

CSUS and has been repeatedly acknowledged as a model by the Accreditation Board for

Engineering and Technology ("ABET") and the American Council for Construction Education

("ACCE"). The Office has enhanced the stature of the College of Engineering within the industry

and established goodwill for CSUS nationwide.

14. In addition to providing a range of career preparation and information services, the

Office assists students and graduates with internships and job placement in the Greater

Sacramento Area, and throughout the state and nation. In placing students and graduates,

Mattiuzzi is responsible for ensuring compliance with College of Engineering procedures and

CSUS policies. She is responsible for the oversight of the interactions between students and

faculty and private sector employers and governmental agencies.

4


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Markovic, a Full Professor With Tenure in the College of Engineering

15. On May 28, 1991, Dean Gillott called a meeting with Mattiuzzi to discuss the

unsolicited calls they had both received from an Engineering Manager at Bentley Nevada

("Bentley"), a private sector employer that hired College of Engineering students. This

Engineering Manager reported receiving 12-15 calls from Markovic about Peter Robino

("Robino"), a College of Engineering student who had applied for a job with Bentley.

Markovic had called the Engineering Manager and repeatedly accused Robino of cheating in

his class and warned Bentley not to hire him.

16. The next day, Mattiuzzi informed Robino of these calls. Robino told Mattiuzzi

that he was shocked because Markovic had encouraged him and told him that he would try to

get him a local job at Hewlett Packard.

17. On May 30, 1991, Robino told Mattiuzzi that Markovic had invited him to travel

with him and had offered to pay his tuition to obtain a masters degree. Mattiuzzi told Robino

that this was completely inappropriate and advised him to write a memo to Dean Gillott about

the behavior of Markovic. Mattiuzzi is informed and believes that Markovic learned that she

was responsible for advising Robino to write his memo to Dean Gillott.

18. Later that day, Robino called Mattiuzzi to inform her that Markovic was

loitering outside his friend's house and that Markovic had also written a letter to another friend

of Robino's in which he made inappropriate comments about Robino.

19. On May 31, 1991, Dean Gillott called a meeting with Mattiuzzi, Robino and

Stephanie Leiberman ("Leiberman"), the CSUS Affirmative Action Officer, to discuss

Robino's memo, the calls to Bentley and the behavior of Markovic.

20. During that meeting Dean Gillott called the Engineering Manager at Bentley,

who confirmed that Markovic called Bentley 12-15 times to complain about Robino. He

informed Dean Gillott that Markovic also visited the Bentley office twice to speak with

company officials to tell them not to hire Robino.

21. On June 4, 1991, Markovic left a threatening letter to Robino on Robino's car.


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


22. On June 6, 1991, Mattiuzzi reported the threatening letter to Leiberman and

Donna Selnick ("Selnick"), legal counsel for CSUS. Both Leiberman and Selnick suggested to

Robino that he hire legal counsel and schedule a mental health counseling appointment with the

CSUS Health Center. They advised him to find another place to stay where Markovic could

not find him.

23. Mattiuzzi was informed and believes that Markovic was told that the next time

he engaged in inappropriate behavior he would be terminated. Markovic thereafter was placed

on a leave of absence, after which he returned to his position as a Full Professor with tenure,

which shocked many students and faculty.

Mattiuzzi's Appointment as a Part-Time Faculty Lecturer B

and Third Request for Reclassification

24. In August of 2001, in addition to continuing as the Director of Career Services,

Mattiuzzi was appointed as a Part-Time Faculty Lecturer B, a position with academic standing.

25. In September of 2001, Mattiuzzi requested a reclassification based on the

increased duties and responsibilities as the Director of Career Services. These included:

developing an Outcomes Assessment Process for tracking alumni career success (in response to a

new mandate from ABET; writing a section of the accreditation report; developing new curricula

in response to accreditation board concerns; undertaking new teaching assignments; developing

partnerships with industries and outside government entities; developing methods and systems for

data collection and the electronic delivery of student services; and developing a weekly career

newsletter for faculty, students and alumni.

26. On March 27, 2002, Mattiuzzi's request for reclassification was denied.

27. Mattiuzzi questioned this denial and complained to both the Dean of the College

of Engineering and Margaret Blair ("Blair"), the Classification/Compensation Manager who

denied the reclassification, that men in comparable job positions with similar responsibilities

were classified in positions with academic standing. Mattiuzzi received no response to her

complaint.


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


PG&E Complaints About Markovic

28. For 30 years PG&E has had an established pattern of providing internships to

students and jobs to graduates from the College of Engineering. Mattiuzzi is and has been

responsible for overseeing this process.

29. On April of 2002, Frank Tizedes ("Tizedes"), a College of Engineering graduate

and PG&E engineer responsible for hiring and supervising PG&E engineers, called Mattiuzzi.

He informed her that there was a serious problem with Markovic, who was threatening to smear

PG&E's name unless it worked exclusively through him to place College of Engineering

student interns and to hire graduates.

30. Mattiuzzi told Tizedes that Markovic's behavior was inappropriate, and advised

him and Michael Messina, Head of College Relations at PG&E, to speak with the Dean of the

College of Engineering, the Department Chair of the Electrical and Electronic Engineering

("EEE") Department and legal counsel for CSUS.

31. On May 23, 2002, Messina met with Dean Braja Das ("Dean Das"), who

replaced Dean Gillott as the Dean of the College of Engineering. Also attending were Dr.

Yousif, a Professor in the EEE Department, Greg Lemler, Director of Substation Engineering at

PG&E, and Markovic. Shortly thereafter, Dean Das informed Mattiuzzi that he would handle

the PG&E problem and that he did not want her involved.

32. Mattiuzzi was later informed that PG&E concluded that working with Markovic

was "too high of a risk."

Complaints to Legal Counsel, the Vice President of Human Resources

and the Director of Faculty Affairs

33. On November 24, 2002, S.K. Ramesh ("Chair Ramesh"), the EEE Department

Chair, sent a memo to legal counsel Selnick informing her of students' complaints about the

behavior of Markovic. The letter was also sent to David Wagner ("Wagner"), Vice President

of Human Resources, and Sheila Orman, Director of Faculty Affairs. He stated that in addition

to the students listed in his memo:

7


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28Sheridan& Associates

Law Corporation

Other students have spoken to me in confidence about an escalatingpattern of intimidation that they have perceived in his classes. It isimperative that this matter be treated confidentially as these students areenrolled in Dr. Markovic's classes and are fearful of reprisals that mayaffect their professional future and career prospects in the industry.

See Exhibit 1.

34. In response to this memo, Chair Ramesh requested a meeting with Selnick and

Mattiuzzi to discuss the behavior of Markovic. Selnick informed them that nothing could be

done about Markovic's behavior and Mattiuzzi understood that it was because of his status as a

Full Professor with tenure.

Markovic Defamed Mattiuzzi

35. On February 12, 2003, Nathan Laye ("Laye"), a College of Engineering student,

provided Mattiuzzi with a letter he sent to CSUS President Donald Gerth ("President Gerth")

and Chair Ramesh regarding the behavior of Markovic. In this letter Laye explained that he had

asked Markovic if Mattiuzzi would be helpful to him in securing employment. He reported

Markovic's response as follows:

Dr. Markovic replied with a tirade. He said that she would be of no helpand that he believed she had essentially slept or prostituted her way intothe position of ECS career counselor.

I had assumed that Dr. Markovic was merely sexist, but later came tothink that he might be a loose cannon and a potential danger to students.

See Exhibit 2.

Ill

III


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


36. On February 19, 2003, Chair Ramesh wrote to President Gerth acknowledging

receipt of Exhibit 2. He informed President Gerth that he had met with Selnick three months

earlier in November of 2002 and provided her with Exhibit 1. In his letter, Chair Ramesh also

informed President Gerth that he had provided the letter to the EEE Department and the Faculty

and Staff Affairs Department. See Exhibit 3.

Additional Student Complaints About the Behavior of Markovic

37. On May 4, 2003, a group of College of Engineering students sent a letter to

Chair Ramesh regarding their concerns about the threatening behavior of Markovic. Their

letter read in part as follows:

Shortly after PG&E made the initial presence on the CSUS campus, twopower students were approached by Dr. Markovic and were asked if theywould supply him with the names of "electronic" students who appliedto PG&E. He followed this request by stating that "electronic" students"should not be applying for positions with a power company as it stealsjobs from the "power" students.

He concluded by adamantly stating that he would do something aboutthe situation.

Other students and I were alarmed and outraged to hear of this. We'reextremely concerned that he will attempt to sabotage our chances ofobtaining positions with PG&E" as he claimed that "'electronic' studentsshould not be applying for positions with a power company as it stealsjobs away from the 'power' students.

A power student was cornered last week by Dr. Markovic for the namesof the "electronic" engineering students recently given job offers atPG&E

His behavior is unethical and unprofessional and should not be allowed toprevail. We, as students, feel as if we have no power in this situation andare furious that a professor would try to limit our chances of employmentthat we have worked so hard for.


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Mainly we are furious that we were put into a situation such as this whileat a professional institution. His lack of respect and misuse of power asan educator reflects poorly on the Electrical Engineering Department atCalifornia State University, Sacramento. Dr. Markovic should be heldliable for his actions with appropriate consequences.

See Exhibit 4.

Mattiuzzi's Complaints to CSUS Affirmative Action Officer Peter Lau

38. On September 7, 2003, Mattiuzzi wrote to CSUS Affirmative Action Officer

Peter Lau ("Lau"). In her letter she stated as follows:

1. In early spring of this year (2003), I delivered to you a copy of a letteraddressed to the campus president from a CSUS alumnus, Nathan Laye,who said that Professor Miroslav Markovic was making derogatory,sexual comments about me to students. As you will recall, I hadreceived a blind copy and was shocked by what was being said about me.

2. When I spoke to you, I asked if I needed to complete any forms or tofile any paperwork for your office to receive this as a complaint ofsexual harassment. You indicated that no paperwork was necessary andthat the delivery of this letter to you constituted a complaint.

3. Following that discussion with you, it seemed to me that mysupervisor was hostile towards me.

5. On Wednesday August 27th, when I returned to Campus, Braja Dascame into my office. Without any pleasantries or introductorycomments, he began railing at me in a loud vituperative manner. In thiscontext, I could not immediately grasp his point, but I came tounderstand that he had decided not to sign my contract to teach CS 194for the coming semester, as scheduled. I am a Unit 4 staff and have hada contract to teach this course for the past six semesters as a Unit 3,Lecturer B. This contract represents a $3000+/year source of income forme.

6. I believe that Dean Das' decision to withhold this contract was inretaliation for my having filed the sexual harassment complaint. Ibelieve that this is an act of reprisal on his part. (09/10/03. Subsequent to


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


my having prepared this letter, and two hours before the class wasscheduled to meet, Dean Das emailed me and said I would in fact be paidto teach the course, as per instructions from Campus Personnel. Theimmediate issue resolved, but the larger concern remains.

See Exhibit 5.

Dean's Das Did Not Speak with Mattiuzzi for 3 years

39. After Mattiuzzi's repeated complaints about the behavior of Markovic, Dean

Das, her supervisor, did not speak to her for three years.

Fourth Request for Reclassification

40. On April 4, 2007, Mattiuzzi again requested a reclassification to a classification

with academic standing.

Markovic Threatened Mattiuzzi

41. On or about May 21, 2007, Mattiuzzi was warned by Ben Schaffer ("Schaffer"),

an IT employee, that Markovic had threatened her after computer equipment had been

delivered to her by mistake. When Markovic learned of this mistake, he told Schaffer that he

would retrieve it directly from Mattiuzzi himself. His tone and temperament caused Schaffer to

be alarmed which led him to warn Mattiuzzi. On May 30, 2007, Schaffer provided Mattiuzzi

with a written memo which detailed the situation as follows:

*He asked me about a retractable mouse that I had been using in the past.I made a light hearted comment about Cici Mattiuzzi having "stolen" it.

*In response to this comment, Dr. Markovic went into a small tirade:

He referred to Ms. Mattiuzzi as a "bitch"


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


He said that I was a young employee and that he wouldhandle getting my mouse back

See Exhibit 6.

Mattiuzzi's Repeated Complaints to Affirmative Action Officer Lau

42. On October 9, 2007, Mattiuzzi again wrote to Lau about the behavior of

Markovic and enclosed Exhibit 6. She also sent this letter to Dean Emir Macari ("Dean

Macari"), who replaced Dean Das as the Dean of the College of Engineering, Dr. Suresh Vadhva

("Chair Vadhva"), Chair of the EEE Department, and Barbara Peterson ("Peterson"), her union

representative. Mattiuzzi informed Lau as follows:

For the seventh time I find myself writing to complain about Dr.Miroslav Markovic. Three times I have come to you about his harassingbehavior towards me to request you take action. Four times I have cometo you and previous persons in authority regarding harassing behaviortowards students and major employers.

I have never received a response and I have no idea what action has beentaken in the past.

Attached please find a document given to me in late May. I was madeaware that Dr. Markovic was speaking in a hostile and threateningfashion about me once again.

In the spring when the event surfaced, three people in this College, all inpositions of authority, told me that it would serve no useful purpose tocomplain because no action would be taken. Upon my return to work forthe fall semester, I find the problem distracting and I feel unsafe in mywork environment. A little over a week ago my office had been enteredand my computer was on when I came to work. Things were movedaround. I checked with the IT support staff and the student assistantswho work for me, and none of them had been in my office during theprevious period. While I cannot prove that Dr. Markovic was in myoffice, I am aware, as you are aware, that Dr. Markovic has on otheroccasions destroyed labs and student projects.

12


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


I find the continuing harassment embarrassing and humiliating,again I am requesting assistance resolving the problem.

Once

See Exhibit 7.

Concerns About Mattiuzzi's Safety

43. After Chair Vadhva received Exhibit 7, he met with Mattiuzzi to discuss her

safety. After their discussion, Mattiuzzi emailed him as follows:

As you suggested I am working on having the lock on my office changedand I am going to work on figuring out how to juggle my schedule so I amnot coming in at 7 am to an empty building. It may be safer not beingalone in the building at that hour with Dr. Markovic. It is unnerving to findhim coming up the stairs behind me at that hour.

See Exhibit 8.

44. After Dean Macari received Exhibit 7, he also met with Mattiuzzi to discuss the

behavior of Markovic. He informed her that, "I have been told you have a personality conflict

with Markovic" and "I don't want to know about anything that happened before I got here."

45. After that meeting, Mattiuzzi emailed Dean Macari as follows:

Thank you for speaking with me on Tuesday regarding the letter that Iwrote in complaint of the continuing harassment directed at me by Dr.Markovic. After I spoke with you, I told Lynne, who supervises a numberof students that I had written the letter, she indicated that she is also veryconcerned about his behavior and is uncomfortable with him. She told methat she was aware that Dr. Markovic had been "hitting" on a number ofmale students recently and that he had gone into a racist tirade directed at aforeign student, calling him a terrorist.

13


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Dr. Vadhva also spoke to me after receiving his copy of the letter and aphone call from Paul, my husband. Dr. Vadhva is aware of Dr. Markovicand he suggested that I change the locks and that I alter my comings andgoings here. I usually come in at or before 7 am.

After Dr. Markovic was reprimanded in the early 90s for stalking a studenthe was admonished that the next time he engaged in inappropriate behaviorhe would be terminated. That is according to Gwen. It has happened onnumerous occasions since.

See Exhibit 9.

CSUS Claimed to Take Action in Response

to Mattiuzzi's Complaints About the Behavior of Markovic

46. On October 22, 2007, in response to Mattiuzzi's numerous complaints about the

behavior of Markovic, Lau emailed her as follows:

Action has been taken regarding your complaint against Prof. Markovic.I believe there will not be any more harassment directed towards you.Please inform me as soon as possible in case you encounter any moreharassment from Prof. Markovic.

See Exhibit 10.

47. In response to Exhibit 10, Mattiuzzi's union representative, Peterson, wrote to Lau

on October 25, 2007, as follows:

It has recently come to my attention that a member of Unit 4, CiciMattiuzzi has come to you and your predecessors seven times withcomplaints about the ongoing and escalating harassment directed towardsher and certain CSUS students by Dr. Miroslav Markovic.

I am sure you can understand, given the long history of abuse here, that sheexpected something more from you than an email message stating that you

14


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


believe there will be no more harassment directed towards Ms. Mattiuzzi.I'm sure she has received similar assurances throughout her long ordeal. Iam deeply concerned not only for our Unit 4 but for the students involvedas well.

I ask, therefore, that as Ms. Mattiuzzi's union representative, I be providedwith the results of the current and all past investigations into the complaintsas well as the actions you have taken to ensure a safe and healthfulenvironment for all concerned.

See Exhibit 11.

48. On November 16, 2007, Lau wrote to Mattiuzzi and informed her that Dean

Macari had investigated her complaints himself and that his investigation was complete. Lau

explained that Dean Macari represented that he took action to prevent any further occurrences.

Lau repeated:

As I said in my email, should you encounter any more harassment from Dr.Markovic, please inform me as soon as possible.

See Exhibit 12.

Legally Required Sexual Harassment Prevention Training

49. In January of 2008, as required by law of all supervisors at CSUS, Mattiuzzi

participated in a sexual harassment training online workshop.

50. This training included a definition of sexual harassment to include both economic

and environmental sexual harassment. The training materials defined environmental sexual

harassment as including the following:

15


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


actions that create adverse working conditions but do not result in a"tangible employment action." It encompasses jokes, comments, slurs,emails, touching, pictures or any behavior that seriously interferes with anemployee's work environment" (emphasis added)

See Exhibit 13.


51. On January 30, 2008, Mattiuzzi and her husband, Paul Mattiuzzi ("Paul"), met

with Lau in his office. Mattiuzzi informed Lau of the disturbing information that she continued to

receive about the behavior of Markovic and she realized that reporting sexual harassment to CSUS

was futile. Mattiuzzi told Lau that the fourth request for a reclassification was pending and she

was concerned that it would be denied in retaliation for making complaints about Markovic.

Mattiuzzi complained to Lau that she had been retaliated against in the denial of the three prior

requests for reclassification and that each was also based on gender discrimination. During that

meeting, Mattiuzzi gave Lau a letter summarizing her concerns as follows:

I have recently been told that Dr. Gonan, a professor in EEE has received acomplaint from a student about being harassed by Dr. Markovic and thatthe student is unwilling to file a formal complaint.

On January 10, 2008 a student told me that Dr. Markovic has invited himto his home on numerous occasions to work on Markovic's car.. .This typeof personal involvement with a student may not be appropriate. It isdefinitely reminiscent of Dr. Markovic's involvement with Peter Robino.You will recall that this was a situation in which Markovic ingratiatedhimself with a student over a period of time, apparently attempted todevelop a distinctly inappropriate relationship, and then stalked him andactively sought to disrupt the student's employment. The Robino matter iswell documented.

As you know, I was recently required to complete the CSUS sexualharassment on-line workshop. The workshop's instruction is that if a staffmember has reason to believe that any type of harassment is taking place, itmust be reported. My experience, however, is that the effort is futile andthat effective action will not be taken by the campus. In addition, my

16


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


experience is that negative consequences will follow from having made thereport. The workshop also stressed that making negative comments aboutanother employee could be actionable. So I am in a position of having todecide whether or not I should warn a student about a faculty member whomight be grooming him as prey, as he has done before. Either way, I amsubjected to conflict that should not be present in my work environment.And, it necessarily brings back to mind the fact that Markovic has directedhostility towards me, and that he is still just down the hall. And it bringsback to mind the fact that my former supervisor immediately stoppedcommunicating with me in almost any way, after that supervisor learnedthat I had filed a complaint about Markovic. Before communications withthat supervisor ceased, he subjected me to an irrational harangue. Inaddition, he stopped supporting my reclassification and tried to remove anarea of responsibility. I was directly told that my supervisor thwarted myreclass after I reported the 2003 event.

See Exhibit 14.

Affirmative Action Officer Lau Opened an Investigation into

Mattiuzzi's Complaints About the Behavior of Markovic

52. On January 30, 2008, Lau informed Mattiuzzi that he opened a 60 day

investigation into her continued complaints about the behavior of Markovic.

Complaints About the Behavior of Markovic

53. On February 22, 2008, Paul emailed Lau and informed him that Markovic was

harassing students again as follows:

Cici heard yesterday from a former student/alumni who is known to havebeen harassed by the professor whose name you know.

The alumni has a student assistant working for him in the industry. Thestudent assistant was upset at work and described the experience of afellow student who was being pressured by the professor to travel with himto Hawaii. It was distressing to them both, and the student advised hisfriend to make a report to the campus police.

17


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


The alum who spoke to Cici told her that this situation is widely known inhis industry, that it is assumed that the problem is well known on campus(i.e. "everybody knows"), and that it is assumed that the campus will neverrespond effectively. In other words, this is an issue that reflects negativelyon the CSUS community.

As I said before, even though the sexual harassment itself is not directedtowards Cici, it creates a hostile work environment. Contributing to thehostility of the workplace is a common belief that the campus respondsimmediately to racial and hate speech, while ignoring and tolerating sexualharassment and gender hate speech.

See Exhibit 15.

54. That same day, Paul called Chair Vadhva to request that he move Markovic to an

office on a different floor in order to protect Mattiuzzi. Chair Vadhva told him that he did not

have the authority to do so.

55. On February 24, 2008, Mattiuzzi received an email from David Black ("Black"), a

College of Engineering graduate. Black informed her that Unnamed Student A, a College of

Engineering intern with whom Black worked the previous summer, complained to Black about the

behavior of Markovic towards Unnamed Student B in the College of Engineering. Black's email,

which Mattiuzzi forwarded to Lau, noted as follows:

Dr. Markovic had offered to purchase a laptop (for the student) and offeredto take the student to Hawaii during the summer so that they could spendsome time on the beach and grade papers together.

The student filed a complaint with campus authorities.

It is very sad that this type of behavior has been tolerated throughout theyears at CSUS. The fact that Dr. Markovic is a tenured professor does notgive him the right to sexually harass unsuspecting young students. Ipersonally find this behavior intolerable and cannot understand why CSUShas not stepped in to permanently diffuse the situation."

See Exhibit 16.

18


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Affirmative Action Officer Lau Requested

Witness Contact Information from Mattiuzzi

56. On March 18, 2008, Mattiuzzi received an email from Lau in which he informed

her that he had completed preliminary interviews, but was unable to interview Black and

Unnamed Student C, another former student of Markovic. Lau informed her that he would notify

the Dean and Provost and would begin the formal investigation the next week. See Exhibit 17.

57. Mattiuzzi responded to Lau's email and provided the contact information for

Unnamed Student C, but stated that he:

may not want to talk as he is the student who was fixing Markovic's car atMarkovic's house and didn't know that it was inappropriate. I believe it isthe same situation as Peter Robino.

See Exhibit 17.

Denial of Mattiuzzi's Fourth Request for Reclassification

58. On April 11, 2008, one year after the fourth request for a reclassification to a

position with academic standing, Mattiuzzi was notified that her request was denied.

59. Mattiuzzi questioned this denial and complained to both the Dean of the College

of Engineering and Blair that men in comparable job positions with similar responsibilities were

classified in positions with academic standing. In response, the Dean told her not to claim gender

discrimination and assured her that he would get her reclassified to a position with academic

standing.

Affirmative Action Officer Lau Requested

Additional Witness Contact Information

60. On April 30, 2008, Lau emailed Mattiuzzi and asked her for contact information

for Unnamed Student B, who was subjected to inappropriate behavior by Markovic similar to that

directed towards Robino. Mattiuzzi provided him with this information. See Exhibit 18.

19


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

• 18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Mattiuzzi's Union Representative Requested

an Update on Lau's Investigation

61. On May 1, 2008, Peterson emailed Lau and asked for an update on the status of the

investigation and the actions that had been taken to deal with this "very serious situation." Lau

replied that he had learned of new information which required him to interview additional

witnesses, which had delayed the completion of his investigation. See Exhibit 19.

Mattiuzzi's Union Representative Again Requested

an Update on Lau's Investigation

62. On June 3, 2008, Peterson again emailed Lau and requested the results of his

investigation. In response, Lau emailed Mattiuzzi and Peterson and informed them that he had

completed his investigation and that he expected to be finished by June 9, 2008. See Exhibit 20.

Affirmative Action Officer Lau Provided

the Results of His Investigation

63. On June 4, 2008, Lau wrote a letter to Mattiuzzi in which he detailed the results of

his investigation and concluded:

At this time, I do not have enough evidence to proceed with a formalcomplaint against Prof. Markovic.

See Exhibit 21.

Markovic Threatened to Shoot Lynne Onitsuka

64. On July 15, 2008, Lynne Onitsuka ("Onitsuka"), an IT employee, performed

routine work on Markovic's computer. In response, Markovic went into a rage and' told her in a

very hostile tone "I'm going to get a gun and shoot you." Onitsuka, who was pregnant at the time,

///

20


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


did not file a police report as she feared it would prompt further threats from Markovic and place

her in greater danger.

Missing Email from Mattiuzzi's Email Account

65. When Mattiuzzi returned to CSUS for the fall of 2008, she discovered that her

outgoing email from January through August of 2008 was missing from her computer and the

CSUS server. This email included all of the information that Mattiuzzi had submitted to Lau

for his investigation into the behavior of Markovic.

66. Onitsuka restored Mattiuzzi's emails and informed her that she had never seen a

similar situation where an entire time period of outgoing email was missing from the CSUS

server.

Paul's Complaints to CSUS President Gonzales

67. On August 27, 2008, Paul emailed President Alexander Gonzales ("President

Gonzalez") regarding the behavior of Markovic and the treatment Mattiuzzi had received from

CSUS. He informed Gonzales as follows:

I'm a CSUS alum, and as a psychologist, I'm a colleague of yours.

My wife Cici is also an alumni, and for the past 30 years she has been aCSUS employee.

She came home after her first day back at work after summer vacation andin tears, she told me about how demoralized she is working on the campus.

Last Spring, she went through the process of seeking reclassification, forthe third time. And once again, her application was denied for reasons thatcan only be viewed as bogus and arbitrary. As a forensic psychologist, Ihappen to be an expert in the task of interpreting data relative to criteria. Iam routinely examined live in Court in a process that can be likened to an"oral defense on steroids." It is from this perspective that I am confidentthat Cici meets the criteria for a reclassification and that the final decisioninvolved what are politely referred to as "extra-criterial" considerations.

21


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Law Corporation

Also last Spring, Cici learned that the campus has no intention of payingany serious attention to her complaints against E&CS Professor Markovic.This is a guy who has for years been sexually harassing students andotherwise abusing staff members.

Despite her complaints, it has remained "no never mind" that he continuesto do so.

Cici never sought to expose Markovic. She never had an agenda with him.Students and graduates came to her with complaints about Markovic andshe did what you told her she should do in the training she completed. It'sher issue because she is the person in E&CS to whom people bring theircomplaints.

Today, on her first day back on campus, Cici learned that a valued staffmember is intending to resign. The staff member's reason is that he can nolonger stand the ongoing abuse he receives from Markovic.

Cici came home demoralized. She knows that CSUS provides her with noprospect for advancement, that CSUS is intent on ignoring her contributionto the campus, and that CSUS is intent on turning a blind eye towardscomplaints from women on campus.

See Exhibit 22.

Intentional and Forceful Bumping Incident

68. On August 28, 2008, while at a fall reception for faculty and staff, Markovic

intentionally and forcefully bumped into Mattiuzzi on his way to the drink table. He made no

attempt to apologize or make any excuse for his actions. In fact, he said nothing to Mattiuzzi.»

Moments later, he again intentionally and forcefully bumped into her, and again said nothing.

69. That same day, Paul emailed Markovic and instructed him to stay away from

Mattiuzzi. He told him that if he failed to do so, he would obtain a Temporary Restraining Order.

Paul also sent this email to Lau, Dean Macari, and Chair Vadhva. See Exhibit 23.

70. After Dean Macari provided Kent Porter ("Porter"), Associate Vice President of

Human Resources, with Paul's email to Markovic, Porter asked Macari:

22


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Law Corporation

Does Cici want to pursue this matter since apparently there was physicalcontact? Is she willing to speak with someone about the incident? Weneed specifics to determine how to proceed. Also, were there anywitnesses to the "bump?" Please advise.

See Exhibit 24.

71. On September 2, 2008, Paul responded to Exhibit 24 by informing Porter of the

continued behavior of Markovic as follows:

This is not a matter for Cici to pursue. It's your problem.

This goes back to May of 1991 when Markovic stalked and harassed agraduating student who had spurned his advances, and when he intervenedwith that student's employer, trying to retaliate by derailing his career. Cicibecame involved because in her position, she is the one the employercontacted.

Cici was drawn into it again in 2002 when Markovic sent bizarre andintimidating letters to PG&E and when students were complaining aboutbeing bullied by him. I believe that was the first time she heard a studentsay that they felt physically threatened. It was in the context of thatincident that a student documented comments Markovic had made aboutCici, indicating that she had (in the student's words) either "slept orprostituted her way" into her position.

In 2007 when a staff member came to her and warned her about Markovic,it was not because Markovic had called her a bitch, it was because the staffmember thought she might be at risk.

Cici has pursued this before. There is no reason she should pursue it again.The final outcome of her complaints is that he seems to have beenemboldened. If you bump into a person twice (and make no effort at all toat least pretend it was an accident), that's intentional and it's a message.

See Exhibit 25.

23


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


72. On September 5, 2008, at the request of Dean Macari, Greg Revelez ("Revelez"),

in the CSUS Public Safety Department, called Mattiuzzi to discuss the August 28, 2008 intentional

bumping incident. She informed him of the long history of harassment by Markovic and that

CSUS had done nothing about it. She told him that it was her role as the Director of Career

Services to report College of Engineering student complaints to the administration and that she

had done so repeatedly regarding the behavior of Markovic. Mattiuzzi informed Revelez that she

was harassed by the continuing and recent behavior of Markovic and that he had forcefully

bumped into her to send her a message that he could do what he wanted because he was a Full

Professor with tenure. She further informed him that she was retaliated against as a result of

reporting his behavior. Revelez discouraged Mattiuzzi from filing a police report and told her that

it was a Human Resources Department problem.

73. On September 19, 2008, Porter emailed Mattiuzzi to follow up on the intentional

bumping incident by Markovic as follows:

Since the incident last month involving Miroslav Markovic that wasbrought to the attention of the College Dean, who in turn contacted HumanResources and Public Safety, it is my understanding that you have notspoken with anyone to formally report the incident.

The University does not treat such matters lightly. We are concerned andwe wish to properly deal with this matter. To do so, however, we need toobtain from you specific information about the incident. You shouldexpect to be contacted by Greg Revelez, an investigator from our PublicSafety Department.

Your kind cooperation in this matter is appreciated. If you have anyquestions or concerns, you are welcome to contact either Mr. Revelez (278-7245) or me.

See Exhibit 26.

I/I

III

24


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


74. On September 23, 2008, Mattiuzzi informed Porter that she had spoken to

Revelez who told her that the incident did not involve a Penal Code violation, that it was a

civil offense and remained a problem for the Human Resources Department.

75. Porter followed up:

If you had spoken with Mr. Revelez and provided him with the detailsabout the incident, he could have assessed whether the incident was amatter for Public Safety. If Mr. Revelez would have assessed the incidentto be an administrative matter for HR to address, however, at least by nowmy office would have more information about what happened than itcurrently has.

Regardless of whether the incident might be criminal or civil or somethingelse, the University needs specific information from you about the incident.Without specific information, HR cannot initiate any action. I wouldrespectfully invite you to meet with a representative from HR to tell uswhat happened, or if you prefer, you can submit a written statementdescribing the incident. In either case HR would need as much specificinformation about the incident as you can provide.

You are welcome to contact me if you have questions or concerns, or if youwould like to schedule a meeting.

See Exhibit 27.

Mattiuzzi and Onitsuka Reported Shooting Threat

76. On September 24, 2008, Onitsuka informed Mattiuzzi that Markovic had

previously threatened to shoot her. Together, Mattiuzzi and Onitsuka called Porter and reported

this threat. Onitsuka told him that she was afraid for her safety and for that of her unborn child. In

response, Porter asked each of them how tall they were compared to Markovic. Mattiuzzi told him

that she was five foot one, Onitsuka was five foot four, and that Markovic was over six feet tall.

25


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Mattiuzzi Emailed Porter Again About Markovic's Intentional Bumping

77. That same day, Mattiuzzi emailed Porter and again informed him that she had

spoken to Revelez more than two weeks ago and provided him with all the details of the incident.

She addressed Exhibit 27 as follows:

I am not sure why you are using the word "if in your email. As I indicatedin the last email I did speak to Greg Revelez. I spoke with Greg over twoweeks ago. He called me at the behest of Dean Macari. I did give him allof the details. It was he who indicated that it was administrative.

For the record- in my own words- the email you received from myhusband, Paul Mattiuzzi, is extremely accurate. Pull out the records. Thiscampus does not take harassment seriously.

In addition to my own observations, I have repeatedly heard from studentsand staff that this campus does not take harassment seriously. I havewished to believe otherwise I have written 7 or 8 formal letters and I havebeen pulled into numerous investigations. At this point I am demoralized.My husband and I are offended by the response of the campus onnumerous occasions regarding harassment issues. Filing a complaint onthis campus causes one to lose credibility and to feel more isolated andmore harassed.

Recently, Dr. Markovic threatened a pregnant staff member, shouting thathe was going to shoot her. Her response is that since no one heard him sono one will believe that it happened. She does not plan to report it, shedoes not believe anyone will do anything and that it will put her in furtherdanger. I learned this this morning. She told me that she is afraid all of thetime here. So am I. She said to me "I am glad that you are complaining, Idon't think I can". She too has observed the harassment of young males atDr. Markovic's hands.

The staff member who told me Dr. Markovic made threats towards me andwas extremely fearful told me that he was told he should not have told me"because it just makes me angry."

The student who heard the comments at the same time said he continues tobe afraid for me. He told me this recently even though the event happenedover a year ago.

26


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


When I shared the threat event with another person in management here hesaid "he is a full professor", indicating that no full professor will ever beremoved no matter how significant the threat of harassment.

The reason I choose not to write out a formal complaint regarding thebumping incident to HR is because in my last meeting with Peter Lau, inJanuary of 2008, he indicated that although he would reluctantlyinvestigate my complaint, there was very little that the university could do."The best we can hope for is that he might take early retirement."

I cannot begin to tell you how disruptive this continues to be to my workand my life.

See Exhibit 28.

Mattiuzzi Reported Markovic's Harassment of an International Student

78. On September 24, 2008, Mattiuzzi sent Porter a second email in which she

reported an incident involving Markovic and an international student in the College of

Engineering. Mattiuzzi informed Porter as follows:

He said he, like others, was afraid to complain.

This is relentless. The situation is getting worse and the incidents are moreextreme and more frequent. I do believe he is becoming bolder and moreaggressive.

See Exhibit 29.

Mattiuzzi Learned Markovic Threatened to Shoot a

Second IT Employee and Reported it to the Police

79. On October 2, 2008, an IT employee told Mattiuzzi that Markovic had "threatened

to shoot him and make his wife a widow." Mattiuzzi called Porter twice but was unable to reach

him. She then called her union, which referred her to a labor attorney that instructed her to call the

police, which she did. Officer Nguyen responded and took a report from Mattiuzzi, who told him

27


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


that Markovic threatened to shoot the IT employee. She also reported that she was concerned

because of the previous threats of violence by Markovic and the intentional bumping incident.

She informed Officer Nguyen that she had already reported these matters to the CSUS

Administration and the CSUS Police Department.

Mattiuzzi Reported Second Shooting Threat to Porter

80. That same day, Mattiuzzi emailed Porter and informed him of the September 30,

2008 threat by Markovic to shoot an IT employee and reminded him about Markovic's threat to

shoot Onitsuka. Mattiuzzi also informed him that she filed a police report against Markovic and

stated as follows:

I find it incredibly difficult to perform my work under the stress of thecontinued outbursts of Dr. Markovic against my fellow staff and theintimidation he directs towards me. Once again, I do not feel safe in mywork environment.

See Exhibit 30.

81. On October 6, 2008, Mattiuzzi received an email from Chair Ramesh after he

learned of Markovic's recent threats to shoot CSUS employees. Chair Ramesh informed her that

he brought his concerns about the behavior of Markovic to the attention of the CSUS President

and legal counsel on more than one occasion. He also stated as follows:

As far as I know no action was taken on this matter as of the time I leftSacramento State in 2006. My concern then and now is for the welfare ofour students, faculty and staff and it is imperative that appropriate steps aretaken to ensure their safety at all times.

See Exhibit 31.

28


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Dean Macari's Refusal to Address Markovic's Conduct

82. Throughout the fall of 2008 and spring of 2009, Mattiuzzi complained numerous

times to Dean Macari about the behavior of Markovic. On each occasion, he informed her that, "I

am staying out of this."

Mattiuzzi Lost the Right to Teach Classes

83. On November 4, 2008, Dean Macari informed Mattiuzzi that she could no longer

teach the engineering classes she had developed and taught for 25 years. He told her that she

had no computer access to class lists and student records, but that she could teach the classes

under the names of the 5 different Department Chairs. During that meeting, Dean Macari also

addressed her longstanding complaints about the behavior of Markovic and told her to "drop

it", "move on" and to "not mess with Markovic." Dean Macari told her that he had pushed it

too far when he attempted to get her reclassified which had angered Joseph Sheley ("Sheley"),

Provost and'Vice President for Academic Affairs. He told her that Sheley told him to "drop it"

and that she was not going to be reclassified.

Complaint to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing

84. Mattiuzzi timely filed a complaint against CSUS for retaliation, gender

discrimination, and sexual harassment with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing

("DFEH") on November 18, 2008. A Notice of Case Closure letter was issued on November 21,

2008, and the DFEH Complaint and was served on CSUS on December 19, 2008.


85. On December 10, 2008, Mattiuzzi again wrote and complained to Lau that she

personally had been harassed by Markovic and she addressed other disturbing events. She told

him that she was hesitant to complain again since she had previously complained with no results.

She concluded her summary of previous events with the following:

29


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


It seems that the campus cannot figure out if the threatening andintimidating behavior that Dr. Markovic displays is a police matter or ahuman resources matter. In the mean time staff are left to wonder ifanyone is in charge of sorting out this type of problem or cares aboutprotecting staff from threats and intimidation.

Six staff members on this floor have observed threats and tirades or beendirectly threatened or intimidated by Dr. Markovic. Three staff membersof the College of Engineering and Computer Science filed policereports in October of 2008. We have heard nothing.

As you have observed in your previous investigations, it is very difficult toget students, faculty and staff to come forward for fear of reprisals. Thefact that the three of us have come forward and that a student shared hisnumerous observations with Office Nguyen is remarkable. The climate offear and intimidation, and previous inaction by the university are difficultobstacles to overcome.

I trust that you find my letter helpful as you once again are called upon toinvestigate the hostile work environment here in the College ofEngineering and Computer Science.

See Exhibit 32.

Letter to President Gonzales and Investigation into the Behavior of Markovic

86. On December 16, 2008, Mattiuzzi's legal counsel wrote to President Gonzalez and

outlined the behavior of Markovic. See Exhibit 33.

87. Later that month, Lau informed Mattiuzzi that Kira King ("King"), an independent

investigator, had been hired to conduct an investigation into her complaints about Markovic.

88. On January 7, 2009, Mattiuzzi met with King and provided her with numerous

documents including Exhibit 23 and a November 4, 2008 email from James Wilson ("Wilson"), a

former employee in the EEE Department. Wilson detailed inappropriate and threatening behavior

of Markovic as follows:

30


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


He made threats to students so that they would drop his class and lower hisclass size to his satisfaction. There is one instance that sticks out in mymind in which he told a student he would hit him in the head with abaseball bat if he returned for another lecture.

Even students that were allowed to stay in Dr. Markovic's class weresubjected to verbal abuse and often times had their grades adverselyaffected.

Dr. Markovic had made attempts to contact companies that were hiringsome former students to have them 'blacklisted' from being hired.

After the department chair had decided to let another professor use thesame lab Dr. Markovic uses for instructional purposes, Dr. Markovic flewinto a rage and removed all of the electrical equipment from the lab andtossed it into the bushes behind the building. The sprinklers ruined theequipment all weekend long and when it was discovered the followingMonday, nearly $30,000 in electrical equipment was considered a totalloss. The police were called and a report was filed, but no action was takenagainst Dr. Markovic.

I hope this brief narrative illustrates that Mrs. Mattiuzzi's experiences arenot unique and that it is part of a larger pattern in the way Dr. Markovic hastreated colleagues.

See Exhibit 34.

Mattiuzzi Informed that College of Engineering Department Chairs

Must be the Faculty of Record for her Classes

89. On January 13, 2009, Mattiuzzi received an email from Dean Macari informing her

that she would no longer be the faculty of record for classes she had taught for 25 years. Dean

Macari stated as follows:

Starting with this semester, ECS Department Chairs will be the faculty ofrecord for workshops we offer to our ECS students (CE 194, ME 194, EEE194 and CSC 192) Career Planning.


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


This is in compliance with the new regulations of Bargaining'Unit 4.

Students do enjoy and get a lot of these workshops and I want to make surethat we continue with our tradition of focusing on what is best for ourstudents.Thanks for all your work and I look forward to continuing to work withyou for many years to come.

Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.

See Exhibit 35.

90. In response to Exhibit 35 and previous discussions Mattiuzzi had with Dean

Macari, Mattiuzzi emailed him and stated as follows:

You indicated that in an effort to comply with the agreements with Unit 4(sic), "ECS Department Chairs will be the faculty of record" for theseclasses. I have spoken with representatives of both Unit 3 and 4. Thissolution does not meet their approval.

Be that as it may, I have no problem continuing to teach these classes,consistent with my job description. These classes are essential to theacademic mission of the College. They are essential components of astudent services program developed in the College over the course of 25years and under the leadership of four different Deans. These classescannot simply be described as "workshops" as you suggested in your note.And they are not simply something that "students enjoy," as you alsosuggested. These classes have been and continue to be an integral part ofthe student services program in which I work.

Removing me as instructor of record would substantially alter my jobdescription and the terms of my employment.

I have been repeatedly denied reclassification and promotion for arbitraryreasons, irrespective of the stated criteria and specifically in response togender discrimination.

See Exhibit 36.

32


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Mattiuzzi Compelled to Notify Department Chairs

that She Had No Access to Class Lists

91. On January 29, 2009, Mattiuzzi was compelled to inform 5 different CSUS

Department Chairs that she no longer was able to access her class lists. She apologized for any

inconvenience this caused them as follows:

I notice that I can no longer access my classes on My Sac State.

I have 4 classes that are cross listed in all engineering majors and one CSclass. I teach a total of 5 classes with 13 classes feeding into those 5. I willneed you to print me updated class rosters each week for the next threeweeks. Many students are adding my class and I am not able to update thelists.

I know that this is an inconvenience to each of you. It is also very difficultfor me. I am sorry for this problem. I expect that at some point theproblem will be resolved one way or another.

See Exhibit 37.


92. On February 4, 2009, Mattiuzzi wrote to Lau and complained for the tenth time

regarding the behavior of Markovic. She informed Lau of a conversation she had with Unnamed

Student D, a College of Engineering graduate currently employed by PG&E. Unnamed Student D

also reported complaints made by Unnamed Student E. The letter detailed the discriminatory

behavior of Markovic towards women, including as follows:

Dr Markovic repeatedly stated in class that he "hates women" and that"women do not belong in engineering." She stated that Dr. Markoviccontinuously belittled and degraded women in the class and held women toa different standard than men.

33


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Both women went to numerous persons in a position of authority on thiscampus and were told that they "should just graduate and get out of here."They were told that there was nothing that could be done.

See Exhibit 38.

Dean Macari's Attempt to Shut Down the

Investigation into Markovic's Conduct

93. On March 23, 2009, Onitsuka informed Mattiuzzi that Dean Macari was trying to

"shut down the investigation."

Mattiuzzi's Repeated Complaints to Affirmative Action Officer Lau•

94. On March 23, 2009, Mattiuzzi wrote to Lau after she received an email from

Shalveena Dayal ("Dayal"), a College of Engineering student, and again complained about the

behavior of Markovic. Dayal informed Mattiuzzi that that during class Markovic:

"shakes chairs and throws pens in a threatening way" creating a climate offear and anxiety in his class. She indicated that he displays anger in hisoffice hours by throwing pens.

See Exhibit 39.

95. On March 24, 2009, Mattiuzzi wrote to Lau to inform him that she learned

Markovic had threatened to shoot Chetan Krishna ("Krishna"), an international student. Krishna

told her that he was discouraged by the CSUS Police from filing a formal report in order to protect

his future employment opportunities. Krishna spoke to King during her investigation and

informed her of Markovic's threat and the discouragement by the CSUS Police Department. See

Exhibit 40.

34


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


96. On March 25, 2009, Mattiuzzi emailed Exhibit 40 to President Gonzales, King,

Lau, Peterson, and CSUS Affirmative Action Officer Maria Santos.

Second Meeting with King

97. On March 31, 2009, after providing her with Exhibit 40, Mattiuzzi again met with

King.

Assault Complaint Against Markovic By a CSUS Employee

98. On April 2, 2009, Mattiuzzi emailed King and Lau regarding a call she had

received from a CSUS employee who previously worked in the College of Engineering. The

employee informed Mattiuzzi that she had been assaulted by Markovic and stated as follows:

He shoved his hand in her face and pushed her out of his way as he wasexiting the elevator with his bicycle. He spoke harshly to her and shovedher.

She reported "the assault" to multiple people in the Dean's office includingthe office manager.

No report was written and she was not instructed to go to Peter Lau or anyother person in a position of authority in the administration.

See Exhibit 41.

Mattiuzzi Communication with the Regional Staff Representative

for the California Faculty Association About her Improper Classification

99. On April 27, 2009, Mattiuzzi spoke with Jason Conwell ("Conwell"), the Regional

Staff Representative for the California Faculty Association, to discuss her improper classification.

Conwell asked her to provide documentation regarding the classes she taught under the names of

the 5 different Department Chairs.

35


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


100. On April 28, 2009, Mattiuzzi emailed Conwell and provided the information he

requested. Her email, which was also sent to Lau, King and Peterson, stated as follows:

As I mentioned to you yesterday it is very difficult to run my classes asthey are now structured. I have 13 classes listed across 4 disciplines ofengineering and computer science. I actually teach 5 classes but they arecross listed for the convenience of the students.

I have taught these classes for 30 years.

In past years these classes have been listed under my name exclusively.This semester for the first time the classes are all listed under the respectivedepartment chairs.

It should be noted that if I were correctly classified as an SSP AR thiswould never have happened. Because the university refuses to correctlyclassify me as an SSP AR I am required to operate in this fashion ordiscontinue the classes all together. That is an unacceptable optionparticularly in the midst of a recession. This class is an integral part of myjob and and the College of Engineering and has been for three decades.

For me this semester's change has created a logistical nightmare. As yourequested I am documenting this by way of this email.

Some of the difficulties I am experiencing with this change include:Removal of access privileges to class listsFailure to receive book ordering email regarding the textbook from thebook storeDenial of access to the computer system for classes, students, class lists andgrading. I have no updated lists for the class without pestering thesecretaries in four departments or the secretary in the Dean's office for theinfo which they are instructed to print for me. It became so embarrassing tome after the third or fourth week of the semester- I stopped doing it.I have no student ID numbers for grading. Many students finish the classafter the semester ends. This means that I will have to have departmentchairs do the final grades as well as any and all change of grades that occurup to one year later after the class has ended. I will have to repeatedlypester department chairs to do the change of grade forms as the studentscomplete the class assignment or make up for missed classes.

36


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


This entire semester has been embarrassing, humiliating and infantilizing.

I am attaching my recently updated resume with my educationalbackground, professional work experience, publications, papers, programsand projects so you can understand my continuing dismay with the failureto correctly classify me.

See Exhibit 42.

Mattiuzzi Escorted to her Car

101. Throughout the 2008 - 2009 academic year, Mattiuzzi was escorted to her car by

students who were concerned for her safety.


102. On May 6, 2009, Mattiuzzi emailed Lau after she went home sick. She also sent

her email to Edmundo Aguilar ("Aguilar"), legal counsel for CSUS, and President Gonzales. The

email stated as follows:

I visited my doctor because I am distressed and depressed in response toDr. Markovic's frightening behavior. I am routinely worried and afraidwhile at work. I do not go out of my office without being wary. Iconstantly worry that he will hurt students or other staff. Every time I hosta major event, bringing people to the campus or students together, I amconcerned he might come in shooting. I cannot ignore the threat that exists.As you know, I have repeatedly been told about his having harassed,abused and intimidated students. This knowledge continues to weigh onme and constitutes a hostile work environment.

I have a right to a healthy work environment. You have a responsibility toprovide it. In a healthy work environment, employees do not have to listento endless horror stories. I cannot escape exposure to such stories. I cannotescape my thoughts about these episodes at home or in the gym or even inmy sleep. And it is made the worse by the failure of the administration tomake good on its duty to me as an employee.

37


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


I have been told by my Dean to "just forget about it.. .move on."

Right now, the campus is expecting to receive millions of dollars in a"smart grid" proposal funded by the Federal Stimulus package. Markovichas been written in to this proposal as if nothing about his status on campusis ever going to change. And if he is part of the team, he will have an evenmore powerful perch from which to prey upon students. Already it seems,he has again been told that he can act with impunity.

See Exhibit 43.

King's May 15,2009 Investigation Report

103. On May 15, 2009, Lau sent Mattiuzzi the results of King's report, which concluded

as follows:

a. The August 28, 2008 incident was an accidental bumping;

b. There was no evidence of any retaliation by CSUS against Mattiuzzi as a result

of her complaints about the behavior of Markovic;

c. CSUS hired women into classifications with academic standing; and

d. CSUS adequately investigated past complaints about the behavior of Markovic.

See Exhibit 44.

Onitsuka Reported Continued Fear of Markovic

104. On May 21, 2009, Onitsuka informed her supervisor, Michael Wimple

("Wimple"), Director of the College of Engineering and Communications Services, that she

continued to suffer from anxiety attacks, distress and nightmares as a result of Markovic's threat.

She stated as follows:

Due to the continued anxiety attacks and nightmares related to the threatlast summer from Dr. Miro Markovic that he would get a gun a shoot me, I

38


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


am going to start a series of depression classes and therapy sessions with apsychologist. It is unfortunate that this incident is having such long termeffects.

See Exhibit 45.

Reopened Investigation

105. On July 9, 2009, Mattiuzzi learned that CSUS reopened the investigation with a

new investigator, Deborah Allison.

Relocation of Faculty to Accommodate the Removal of Markovic

from the Work Area of Mattiuzzi and Onitsuka

106. Mattiuzzi was informed that Dean Macari recently requested three faculty

members relocate their offices to accommodate the removal of Markovic from the work area of

Onitsuka and Mattiuzzi. Markovic initially agreed to move, but after the three faculty members

relocated to new offices, he refused to move.

California Government Tort Claims Act Claim

107. Mattiuzzi timely filed a Government Tort Claims Act Claim against CSUS and

Markovic on July 29, 2009.

First Cause of Action

Retaliation in Violation of California Labor Code Section 3610

(Against CSUS)

108. Mattiuzzi alleges as against CSUS as follows, re-alleges, and incorporates by

reference paragraphs 1 through 107 of this Complaint.

109. Mattiuzzi was at all times relevant an employee of CSUS.

110. The wrongful treatment of Mattiuzzi by CSUS was in violation of California Labor

39


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Code Section 6310(a)(l). California Labor Code Section 6310(a) makes it unlawful for an

employer to "...discharge or in any manner discriminate against any employee because the

employee has... made any oral or written complaint to the division, other governmental agencies

having statutory responsibility for or assisting the division with reference to employee safety or

health, his or her employer, or his or her representative."

111. Further, pursuant to California Labor Code Section 6310(b) "Any employee who

is discharged, threatened with discharge, demoted, suspended, or in any other manner

discriminated against in the terms and conditions of employment by his or her employer because

the employee has made a bona fide oral or written complaint to. . .his or her employer, or his or her

representative, of unsafe working conditions, or work practices, in his or her employment or place

of employment... shall be entitled to reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages and worki

benefits caused by the acts of the employer. . ."

112. During the course of Mattiuzzi's employment at CSUS, she repeatedly reported

health and safety issues, specifically regarding Markovic and his treatment of employees and

students at CSUS, including but not limited to:

a. Markovic' s May 14, 2007 threat to physically retrieve a computer mouse from

Mattiuzzi;

b. Her October 1 1 , 2007 complaint to Dean Macari that Markovic was "hitting on

male students" and "had gone into a racist tirade directed at a foreign student,

calling him a terrorist";

c. Her January 30, 2008 complaint to Lau that Markovic had engaged in conduct

with a student similar to Markovic's prior conduct with Robino;

d. Her February 24, 2008 complaint to Lau, which forwarded Black's email that

Markovic was "sexually harassing young unsuspecting students" including

Unnamed Student B;

e. Markovic's July 15, 2008 threat to shoot Onitsuka;

f. The August 28, 2008 intentional bumping incident;

40


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


g. Markovic's September 30, 2008 threat to shoot an IT staff member and to make

his wife a widow;

h. Markovic's September 30, 2008 threat to shoot Krishna;

i. Markovic's threat to a student that he would "hit him in the head with a

baseball bat if he returned for another lecture";

j. Her December 10, 2008 complaint to Lau that she had been personally harassed

by Markovic;

k. Her February 4, 2009 complaint to Lau regarding Markovic's treatment of

female students; and

1. Her May 6, 2009 complaint to Lau of the unsafe working environment created

by Markovic.

113. As a result of Mattiuzzi's legally protected activity of complaining about these

health and safety issues, CSUS retaliated against her by, including but not limited to, denying her

reclassification to a position with academic standing, preventing her from teaching classes she had

taught for 25 years, deleting her outgoing email from January through August of 2008 and

refusing to address the dangerous situation posed by the continued actions of Markovic against

CSUS employees and students.

1 14. As a direct or proximate result of CSUS's conduct, Mattiuzzi has sustained special

damages in an amount to be established at trial and in excess of the jurisdictional limits of this

Court.

115. As a direct or proximate result of CSUS's conduct, Mattiuzzi has sustained general


Court.

116. As a direct and proximate result of CSUS's conduct, Mattiuzzi has incurred

attorneys' fees and costs in an amount to be established at trial, and in excess of the jurisdictional

limits of this Court.

Wherefore, Mattiuzzi prays for judgment against CSUS as follows.

41


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Second Cause of Action

Retaliation in Violation of Violation of Government Code Section 12940(h)

(Against CSUS)



118. Pursuant to the applicable provisions of the California Fair Employment and

Housing Act, Mattiuzzi is a covered employee and CSUS is a covered employer as defined

therein.

1 1 9. The wrongful treatment of Mattiuzzi by CSUS was in violation of the California

Fair Employment and Housing Act, California Government Code Section 12900, et seq.

California Government Code Section 12940(h) makes it an unlawful employment practice "to

discharge, expel, or otherwise discriminate against any person because the person has opposed any

practices forbidden under this part or because the person has filed a complaint, testified, or assisted

in any proceeding under this part."

120. Mattiuzzi engaged in the legally protected activity of complaining about sexual

and national origin harassment and gender discrimination towards herself and other CSUS

employees and students including, but not limited to:

a. Laye's February 12, 2003 letter which Mattiuzzi delivered to Lau in the spring

of 2003;

b. Her October 11, 2007 complaint to Lau that for the seventh time she was

complaining about Markovic's harassing behavior towards her;

c. Her October 11, 2007 complaint to Dean Macari that Markovic was "hitting on

male students" and "had gone into a racist tirade directed at a foreign student,

calling him a terrorist";

d. Her January 30, 2008 complaint to Lau that Markovic had engaged in conduct

with a student similar to Markovic's prior conduct with Robino;

42


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


e. Her February 24, 2008 complaint to Lau, which forwarded Black's email that

Markovic was "sexually harassing young unsuspecting students" including

Unnamed Student B;

f. Markovic's sexually harassing behavior towards other students at CSUS;

g. Her December 10, 2008 complaint to Lau that she had been personally harassed

by Markovic;

h. Her February 4, 2009 complaint to Lau regarding Markovic's treatment of

female students; and

i. Her complaint after each denial of her requests for reclassification that men

in comparable job positions with similar responsibilities were classified in

positions with academic standing.

121. As a result of Mattiuzzi's complaints, she was subjected to retaliation by CSUS,

including but not limited to, denying her reclassification to a position with academic standing,

preventing her from teaching classes she had taught for 25 years, deleting her outgoing email from

January of 2008 through August of 2008 and refusing to address the dangerous situation posed by

the continued actions of Markovic against employees and students.

122. As a direct or proximate result of CSUS's conduct, Mattiuzzi has sustained special


Court.



Court.

124. As a direct and proximate result of CSUS's conduct, Mattiuzzi has incurred




43


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Third Cause of Action

Gender Discrimination in Violation of Government Code Section 12940(a)

(Against CSUS)



126. Pursuant to the applicable provisions of the California Fair Employment and

Housing Act, Mattiuzzi is a covered employee and CSUS is a covered employer as defined

therein.

127. The wrongful treatment of Mattiuzzi by CSUS was in violation of the California

Fair Employment and Housing Act, California Government Code, §12900, et seq. Government

Code Section 12940(a) makes it an unlawful employment practice "For an employer, because of

... sex ... of any person ... to discharge the person from employment... or to discriminate against

the person in compensation or in terms, conditions, or privileges of employment."

128. At all times herein mentioned, Mattiuzzi was qualified for and should have

received an academic related classification. The fact that Mattiuzzi is a woman was a substantial

factor in the repeated decision by CSUS to deny her requests for reclassification.

129. The facts on which Mattiuzzi bases her allegation that she was discriminated

against include, but are not limited to, the following:

a. The denial of her requests for reclassification to an academically related

position in 1985, 1987, 2002 and 2008 although she met the academically

related classification criteria;

b. Men hired after her as Career Counselors were classified as academically

related but she, as a woman, was not; and

c. Men in comparable job positions with similar responsibilities were classified

in positions with academic standing.

130. As a direct or proximate result of the conduct of CSUS, Mattiuzzi has sustained

special damages in an amount to be established at trial and in excess of the jurisdictional limits of

this Court.

44


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


131. As a direct or proximate result of the conduct of CSUS, Mattiuzzi has sustained

general damages in an amount to be established at trial and in excess of the jurisdictional limits of

this Court.

132. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of CSUS, Mattiuzzi has incurred




Fourth Cause of Action

Negligent Supervision and Retention

(Against CSUS)



134. CSUS owed a duty of care to Mattiuzzi as an employee to provide her with a safe

and secure workplace and also to encourage the reporting of credible threats of violence in the

workplace.

135. CSUS breached its duty of care when it failed, and continues to fail, to allow the

unsafe working conditions caused by the repeated and known threatening behavior of Markovic.

CSUS failed, and continues to fail, to property investigate the complaints of Markovic's behavior.

CSUS has allowed this unsafe working environment to continue by failing to address Markovic's

actions and threats of violence which have been ongoing for years.

136. As a direct or proximate result of CSUS's conduct, Mattiuzzi has sustained special


Court.



Court.


45


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Fifth Cause of Action

Assault

(Against Markovic)

138. Mattiuzzi alleges as against Markovic as follows, re-alleges, and incorporates by


139. CSUS has allowed Markovic to continue to harass, threaten and abuse employees

and students without repercussions despite numerous complaints by Mattiuzzi and others.

140. With this knowledge, on August 28, 2008, Markovic forcefully bumped into

Mattiuzzi twice with the intent of intimidating her and causing her apprehension of immediate

injury.

141. As a direct or proximate result of the actions of Markovic, Mattiuzzi has suffered


this Court.



this Court.

143. The acts of Markovic were willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive and justify

an award of exemplary and punitive damages in an amount to be established at trial and in excess

of the jurisdictional limit of this Court.

Wherefore, Mattiuzzi prays for judgment against Markovic as follows.

Sixth Cause of Action

Battery

(Against Markovic)

144. Mattiuzzi alleges as against Markovic as follows, re-alleges, and incorporates by


145. CSUS has allowed Markovic to continue to harass, threaten and abuse employees

and students without repercussions despite numerous complaints by Mattiuzzi and others.

46


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


146. With this knowledge, on August 28, 2008, Markovic forcefully bumped into

Mattiuzzi twice, without her consent, with the intent of harming or offending Mattiuzzi.

147. As a result of Markovic's conduct Mattiuzzi was harmed and offended.



this Court.



this Court.

150. The acts of Markovic were willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive and justify


of the jurisdictional limit of this Court.

Wherefore, Mattiuzzi prays for judgment against Markovic as follows.

Seventh Cause of Action

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

(Against CSUS and Markovic)

151. Mattiuzzi alleges as against Defendants as follows, re-alleges, and incorporates by


152. During the course of her career at CSUS, Mattiuzzi has been subjected to extreme

and outrageous acts including, but not limited to:

a. An unsafe working environment, caused by the actions of Markovic, which

CSUS allowed to continue;

b. Retaliation for complaining of an unsafe working environment, sexual

harassment, national origin harassment, gender discrimination, and improper

actions by Markovic;

c. Assault, battery and sexual harassment by Markovic; and

47


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


d. Gender discrimination by CSUS regarding Mattiuzzi's requests for

reclassification.

153. Mattiuzzi was at all times mentioned herein, an employee of CSUS.

154. At relevant times mentioned herein, CSUS's agents and employees took the

actions alleged within the course and scope of such agency and with the permission and consent of

CSUS.

155. Markovic engaged in the extreme and outrageous behavior including, but not

limited to, assaulting and battering Mattiuzzi and creating an unsafe working environment for

Mattiuzzi and others.

156. Defendants' conduct was intentional and malicious and done for the purpose of

causing Mattiuzzi to suffer humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional and physical distress.

157. As a result of this conduct, Mattiuzzi has suffered, and continues to suffer

humiliation, mental anguish and physical and emotional distress.

158. As a direct or proximate result of Defendants' actions, Mattiuzzi has sustained

special damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but in excess of the jurisdictional limits of this

Court.

159. As a direct or proximate result of Defendants' actions, Mattiuzzi has sustained

general damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but in excess of the jurisdictional limits of this

Court.

160. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Mattiuzzi has incurred



161. The acts of Markovic were willful, wanton, malicious, and oppressive and justify


of the jurisdictional limits of this Court.

Wherefore, Mattiuzzi prays for judgment against CSUS and Markovic as follows.

48


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27


Prayer

As To The First Cause of Action: Retaliation in Violation of California Labor Code

Section 3610

1. For special damages according to proof;

2. For general damages according to proof;

3. For reasonable attorney's fees and costs of suit incurred herein; and

4. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

As To The Second Cause of Action: Retaliation in Violation of California Government

Code Section 12940(h)





As To The Third Cause of Action: Gender Discrimination in Violation of California

Government Code Section 12940(a)





As To The Fourth Cause of Action: Negligent Supervision


2. For general damages according to proof; and


As To The Fifth Cause of Action: Assault



3. For exemplary or punitive damages; and


49


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28Sheridano * , .<x AssociatesLaw Corporation

As To The Sixth Cause of Action: Battery

1 . For special damages according to proof;


3. For exemplary or punitive damages; and


As To The Seventh Cause of Action: Intention Infliction of Emotional Distress

1 . For special damages according to proof;


3 . For reasonable attorney' s fees and costs of suit incurred herein;

4. For exemplary or punitive damages against Markovic; and

5. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and

Dated: August 7, 2009. Respectfully submitted,

proper.

Sheridan & Associates Law Corporation

C? /~) ~ /^H 679 0Bv: (Jt^y, (^/U^^Susan J. Slteridan (State Bar Number: 108851)Attorney for PlaintiffCICI MATTIUZZI

G \M\Mattiuzzi, CiCi\P!eadings\Complamt ver 6

50


Exhibit 1

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTODEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC ENGINEERING

MemoTo: Donna Selnick, University Counsel

From: S K. Ramesh, Department Chair - _'

CC: David Wagner and Sheila Orman, FSA

Date: 11/24/02

Re: Dr Miroslav Markovic

The purpose of this memorandum is to make you aware of student concerns regarding Dr Markovic'sconduct and interactions with them. Students who were selected to attend employment interviews withPG&E have expressed serious concerns about Dr. Markovic's behavior. PG&E is a utility companythat hires significant numbers of CSUS graduates and is eager to build a long-term relationship with theUniversity. I became aware of Dr Markovic's e-mail correspondence with PG&E in May 2002 and havetaken steps to reassure PG&E of the University's commitment to build a long-term relationship withthem (see attachments)

The following students have contacted me in person or by e-mail to voice their concerns

i (in person)

(by e-mail and telephone)

(in person)

Other students have spoken to me in confidence about an escalating pattern of intimidation that theyhave perceived in his classes It is imperative that this matter be treated confidentially as thesestudents are enrolled in Dr Markovic's classes and are fearful of reprisals, that may affecl theirprofessional future and career prospects in the industry Thank you for your attention to this matter

1 6000J Street. Sacramento. California 95819-6019 • (916) 278-6873 • (916) 278-7215 FAX

Tin. CnufORNiA SIATI UmvhKsrrv • Sakcrsfieki • Chico • Dormngut: Hilb, • Fresno • Fullmon • Hayurard • Humboldl • Long Bejch • Los Angeles • Maritime Acadenrj

Monterey Bjy • Northndge • Pumona • Sacramento • San Bernardino • San Diego « San Francisco • Sartjose • San Lim Obispo • San Marcos • Sonoma - Stanislaus

1.1

Attachment A : E-Mail Message from StudentDate: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:57:03 -0800From: . <• ^ @hotmail.cQm>To: [email protected]: From:. .(CSUS student)

Dear Dr. Ramesh:

My name is . I am an Electrical & ElectronicEngineering with concentration in Power. Recently, I interviewed withPG&E on campus. They called me back for second interview. I was sohappy because this is my first second interview. However, I talked withDr. Markovic that I would miss his class (Will be my first miss in hisclass), he told me right a way that he would fail two of my classes fromhim if I should go to the second interview. So I need you advise fast.I tried to see you at your office but you was not there. So email is myonly option. The interview will be next week Tuesday, this is the reasonI have to hurry to get answer. So piease help me. I will try to see youagain later. Thank you.

Note: Incase you want to talk with me, my cellphone # is

Sincerely,

Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.

Attachment B: Dr. Markovic's e-mail message to PG&E in May 2002 and responsefrom Shan Bhattacharya to Dean DasFrom: Braja Das [[email protected]: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 10:22 AMTo: 'rameshs'Subject: FW: Proposed meeting

SK:FYI.Braja

1.2

—Original Message-From: Bhattacharya, Shan [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 6:50 PMTo: '[email protected]'Cc: Johnson, Sue (SCJ1)Subject: FW: Proposed meeting

Mr. Das:It was nice meeting you on the CSUS campus a few weeks ago. As I mentionedto you, I am looking forward to maintaining my contact with you and your,staff on an on-going basis. Accordingly, I asked our director of SubstatiqnEngrg. to follow up with your staff to explore the possibilities of studentprojects. He has been setting up contacts with some of your faculty members(including Dr. Markovic) in the Power Programs. The attached e-mail showsthat this effort may have uncovered professional jealousy among your facultythat you should be aware of. This experience, however isolated it is,negatively affects the hiring supervisor's interest in reaching out to yourfaculty.

Even with this initial setback, we are committed to re-e.stablish a healthyirelationship between PG&E and CSUS. I would appreciate receiving yourguidance in this area. ,

Thank you in advance.

Sincerely,Shan Bhattacharya

Original MessageFrom: markovic [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 10:58 AMTo: Lemler, Gregg; Bhattacharya, ShanSubject: Proposed meeting

Hello Mr. Lemler:

How are you today?

I heard your taped message from last Friday regarding my originalrequest

1.3

of meeting with you.

It is beyond my ability to understand what you are trying to do. I haveaskedMr. Battacharya to facilitate a meeting between me and you, nothingelse.

Your lengthy preparation to include all those people that you arelisting is notonly necessary but puzzling.

Those other people neither did call you no ask for a meeting. They careaboutpower engineering program at the CSUS and cooperation with PG&E as muchas an alley cat may care for a marriage license. Your PersonnelDepartmentis as good as a gallon of dehydrated water to a thirsty man in adesert. Whyare you wasting your time? Your move to include them is like callingOsamabin Laden to help US in fight against the terrorism. Your plan toinclude someother persons from the College of Engineering is like asking a banjoplayer to helpwind orchestra in performing a better wind music.

If you want to meet with me and hear what my students are concernedabout,I shall be glad to meet with you and talk about that like oneprofessional personcan talk to the other. I don't need any entourage and make a bigproductionout of something that doesn't exist.

Anything else is sheer waste of time, mirrors and smoke screens.Please, includeme out of it.

After a full year of hard trying to talk to somebody from your companywho is in postion to listen and change the things as they are, now I amgradually becoming able to understand why the PG&E Company is havingsuch a hard time in surviving as a viable organization.

Sincerely,Dr. Markovic

1.4

Attachment C: E-mail from PG&E following May 23rd meeting regarding; a partnershipDate: Thu, 30 May 2002 15:50:42 -0700 ;From: "Messina, Michael" <[email protected]> iTo: 'S. Ramesh' <[email protected]>Cc: "Bhattacharya, Shan" <[email protected]>, '"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,

'"[email protected]"' <[email protected]>, "Lemler, Gregg" ',<[email protected]>, '

"Leder, Steve" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: PG&E - CSUS Partnership ;

Dear Dr. Ramesh:

On behalf of Shan Bhattacharya, Gregg Lemler, and PG&E's College Relationsteam, I offer our sincere thanks for the time and attention you and yourcolleagues afforded Gregg and I during our May 23 visit to CSU Sacramento.Special thanks to you for your efforts in arranging a most enjoyable, !

informative, and productive meeting. It was a pleasure meeting both you andDr. Yousif, and to once again have Dr. Das participate in our discussion.

Gregg and I left campus with a better understanding of CSUS's Power Program,a great sense of energy regarding the many mutual support opportunitiesdiscussed, and the satisfaction of knowing that we'd taken another steptoward personalizing the relationship between our two organizations. Theenergy and receptivity demonstrated by the CSUS team is a great source ofencouragement. \

Thank you as well for your follow-up message summarizing the points of ourdiscussion. I believe you have very accurately captured not only the topicscovered, but, the related agreements and commitments as well. Gregg and Iwill follow-up with Shan, our respective workgroups, and other keystakeholders to ensure that we capitalize on the appropriate identified <opportunities. Toward that end, you can expect to be hearing from one orboth of us in the coming weeks.

Thanks again, and best regards,

Michael

Michael Messina ;College Relations SupervisorPacific Gas and Electric Company415.972.5322for information about programs and career opportunities, visit us at:http://www.pge.com/005_career/005d_college_recruit.shtml

1.5

-Original Message-From: S. Ramesh [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 11:29 PMTo: Messina, MichaelCc: Bhattacharya, Shan; Lemler, Gregg; Hauntsman, Debra; Brodhead, Devon;Tizedes, Frank; Rothenberg, Petra; S. RameshSubject: Re: PG&E - CSUS Partnership

Dear Gregg and Michael

Thank you for visiting with us this afternoon. I hope you found the meetinguseful. We are looking forward to building stronger ties between our Collegeand PG&E in the days ahead.

I've listed a brief summary of the Action Items (Timelines/Owners) for yourreview. Please feel free to edit and make any changes that you deemnecessary.

1. Goal: Build a closer relationship with the CSUS College of Engineeringand Computer Science:

a. Shan Bhattacharya will be joining the College Level IAB (letter in theworks/Dean Das) b. Gregg Lemler and perhaps one additional member from PG&Eto serve on EPEI and provide feedback and input to Power Engineering program(Gregg Lemler-PG&E, Ramesh-CSUS, by mid August 2002) c. PG&E reps on EPEI toattend semi-annual meeting of EPEI (date: TBD in November 2002)

2. Goal: Promote Career opportunities for EE's, ME's and CE's at PG&E

a. Mike Messina, PG&E will inform Cici Mattiuzzi, Director, Career Planningand Placement, CSUS College of Engineering and Computer Science ofopportunities to be advertised in weekly electronic newsletter and bulletinboard (during the academic year). Also plan on attending annual career fairin March 2003.

3. Goal: Promote Co-Op's and internships at PG&E

a. Mike Messina, PG&E , to contact Carol Hopfe, ECS Co-Op ProgramCoordinator, to advertise opportunities. Carol may be reached at916-278-7220 or by e-mail at [email protected]

4. Goal: Sponsor Senior Projects in Power Engineering

1.6

Gregg Lemler (PG&E) will identify suitable projects and work with Dr. Gonen([email protected] or 916-278-6756) from CSUS to identify appropriatestudents. (Fall 2002)

5. Goal: Curriculum Enhancement i

Gregg Lemler (PG&E) or other representative from PG&E will work with Powerfaculty to identify areas of interest. A Preliminary area that wasidentified today was Capacity Planning. PG&E representatives to present alist of areas at Fall EPEI meeting. '

i

6. Goal: Student Scholarship Programs ;

PG&E to consider renewing focused scholarships for high achieving powerengineering students through EPEI. Target approx. $ 1,500/student. Presentproposal at Fall EPEI meeting (PG&E representative) listing desiredqualifications.

7. Goal: Equipment Support

CSUS Power faculty to identify critical equipment needs along withdevelopment plans (Fall EPEI meeting) :

8. Goal: Offer courses of contemporary interest to PG&E engineers

PG&E to identify specific topical areas of interest. In response, CSUS Powerfaculty to develop and offer short courses/seminars etc., of value topracticing engineers. :

Best wishes

Ramesh

*

S. K. Ramesh Tel : (916) 278-7955Department of Electrical Engineering FAX : (916) 278-721 5California State UniversitySacramento, CA 95819-6019.

Internet : [email protected]*

On Tue, 21 May 2002, Messina-, Michael wrote:

1.7

> Dr. Ramesh:>> Thank you so much for agreeing to meet with us, and for taking the> time to make arrangements for our visit to CSU Sacramento on Thursday,> May 23. We are delighted atthe> opportunity to meet> with you and the the assembled "Power Faculty.'1 As you know, Shan> Bhattacharya and I met last month with Dr. Das and Dr. Markovic to> discuss avenues toward a stronger, mutually productive> relationship between our company and the University, we are very pleasedto> be back on campus> so soon to continue that dialog.>> I am looking forward to meeting you and the others, and also pleased> to introduce Gregg Lemler at that time. Gregg is our Director of> Sub-Station Engineering, and represents Shan's Engineering> and Planning organization. Gregg welcomes the opportunity to serve as> Company liaison to the> University, and is a key stakeholder in PG&E's recruitment process.Together> with College Relations,> members of Gregg's team are actively recruiting electrical, civil, and> industrial engineering students at CSUS.>> We recognize a long and positive relationship with CSUS, with many a> University alum among the staffs of our Engineering and Planning, and> Operations Maintenance and Construction organizations,> That said, we feel strongly that with more frequent contact and continuous> dialog, the future holds> many more mutually beneficial opportunities for both our organizations,and> the engineering students> at CSU Sacramento.>> Best regards,>> Michael>> Michael Messina> College Relations Supervisor> Pacific Gas and Electric Company> 222.5322-415.972.5322> for information about programs and career opportunities, visit us at:

I.8

http://www.pge. com/005_career/005d_college_recruit.shtml

Attachment D: Dr. Markovic's November 18 e-mail message to PG&E and responsefrom Mr. Steve Leder on .behalf of PG&EFrom: Leder, Steve [[email protected]] !Sent: Thursday, November 21;, 2002 3:21 PM ;To: [email protected] ICc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Bhattacharya, Shan; Johnson, Sue(SCJ1); Lernler, Gregg; Messina, Michael; Brodhead, Devon !Subject: Sacramento State and PG&E j

Dr. Markovic:i

Shan Bhattacharya, PG&E's vice president of engineering and planning,has asked me to res^md to your e-mail message dated November 19 (attached). Itconcerns me that PG&E's interaction with some CSU Sacramento students may haveinadvertently created? difficulties for you. The students, faculty and staff, and entire CSUSacramento campus community is important to us. It is neither our intent nor desire totrouble or inconvenience any member of that community as we conduct purrecruitment activities.

PG&E representatives who visit the various universities and interact withstudents either on or off campus, do ;

so in accordance with guidelines which are given to us by the respectiveschools and/or departments. While we

always do our best to comply with the general guidelines o1j the 24universities where we recruit, the information

provided is usually limited to advisories about final exams, <days whenclasses are not in session, etc. Beyond that, '

it is very difficult for us to know the various class, exam, and/or workschedules of the many students we meet.

That said, when we contact students to arrange time with them, wemake no demands, but rather, we offer them ;

choices.

On-Campus Interviews \PG&E's on-campus interview days are determined through' discussion

with the Career Center. We advise the ;

Sacramento State University Recruitment Programs representative of thenumber of interview rooms (and interview schedules) we require, and the Universitytells us what days are available to us. Once confirmed, students are invited to sign-upfor interviews at a time that best suits their schedule. The Career Center and PG&Ework together to try to accommodate the needs of interested students.

1.9

On-Site (second round) InterviewsPG&E's identifies multiple on-site interview days to afford students

scheduling options. These interview days arescheduled in a manner intended to balance PG&E's business needs

with the individual needs of the many studentsseeking employment opportunities with us. We offer scheduling options,

and rely on the students to manage theirvarious educational and personal commitments and obligations in a

responsible and professional manner.

PG&E is committed to conducting all university related business in amanner consistent with the wishes of the

institutions where we recruit. Our policies and programs are designed toensure that we act in the student's best

interest, and maintain that their academic endeavors remain paramountto our employment needs. Toward that end,

we schedule regular meetings with university faculty and staff to ensurea successful partnership that provides mutual

benefits. We have met often with various representatives of CSUSacramento, most often in fact with the College of

Engineering and Computer Science where we have enjoyed a longstanding positive relationship. We will be on-campus

again in the Spring for that purpose. \ hope that you can find time in yourschedule to be a part of our on-going dialog;

your thoughts are important to us.

Again, I'm concerned that our actions may have caused you someinconvenience, but, hope that my comments have

shed some light on both our intentions and recruitment practices. If youwish more information or have additional issues

you wish to address, please feel free to contact our College Relationsdepartment directly.

Sincerely,

Steve LederDirectorProfessional Staffing and Diversity

cc: Dr. Braja M. DasDr. S. K. RameshShan BhattacharyaSue JohnsonGregg Lemler

1.10

Devon BrodheadMichael Messina

From: Markovic, Miroslav [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 5:02 PMTo: Bhattacharya, ShanCc: '[email protected]

Subject:

Hello Mr. Bhattacharya:

I am appealing to you to convey my grave concerns toyour Personnel Department for its deliberate disregard of my classes andmy College of Engineering and Computer Science's standards.

Your Personnel Department should know that the attendance of my lecturesis mandatory. If a student decides to leave on his/her own without mypermission, the return into the class is not allowed. This ruleis a part of my syllabus.

If your Personnel Department deliberately demands from some of mystudents to leave my classes in order to be interviewed by'your ,company on Tuesdays and Thursdays, I object adamantly to that practice,because I know that the interviews could be done as well on Mondays, ,Wednesdays, and/or Fridays. ^ :

On Tuesdays and Thursdays, I have two classes and two labs to ;teach. If a student misses those lectures, there is no roomin my schedule for make up of the missed sessions. <- |

For several years, I have tried my best to accommodate the unreasonablydemands of your Personnel Department, but it doesn't work any more.

My University had never disturb a normal work of your company. And it wijllnot even try to inconvenient anybody in your company, while your people areworking.

Therefore, I am requesting and demanding a full reciprocity.

1.11

Through you, I am asking your Personnel Department not to deliberatelydisruptmy classes. They are sacred for me and my student.

I would appreciate your full attention to this serious matter.

Sincerely,

Dr. Markovic of CSU, Sacramento

1

I Page 11

1

1.12

Exhibit 2

2ti03:2870lS!EHpganE#475Gresham, OR 97030

Dr. Donald R GerthPresidentCSU, Sacramento6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819

Dr. Gerth,

I am writing to discuss recent actions of Dr. Miroslav Markovic.

In November, I spoke with Dr. Ramesh, the Chair of the FKF, department regarding theseincidents. I wanted to follow up that oral conversation with a written statement.

I have taken several classes from Dr. Markovic during the past three semesters. He hasalways been good instructor as fat as academics are concerned. However, his recent.personal behavior regarding students and industry has been erratic and frightening, and it•eclipses any iO'fhis instructional abilities.

Dr. Markoyic's actions .during the fell semester of 2002 have undermined the efforts ofstudents seeking, employment for. after graduation; and have created bad relations betweenpotential employers and the College. This has created a great deal df stress for severalstudents, inchiding myself.

In October 2002, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) conducted several on-campusinterviews of .electrical engineering students. Two of these students, x-v >•• • and

jtvere subsequently chosen for secondary interviews that were conducted atPGE's corporate offices in San Francisco. The secondary interviews lasted afl day, andhappened to conflict with Dr. Markovic's classes.

A professor should be expected to allow students who are hi the process of obtainingemployment in their chosen field of industry to miss class for interviews. Such was not thecase with Dr. Markovic. He announced in class that students who went to interviewsduring class time would be failed. In what seemed like a rant, he said that industry needsto respect academia, and that PG&E needed to change its interview dates to avoidinterfering with his class times. (He repeated these statements in the next class period.)

At first, I just thought Dr. Maricovic was simply frustrated for some unknown reason, andthat he was venting in .front of the class: However, in subsequent conversations with Mr

_>.and Mr.^ 1 learned that Dr. Markovic had said that he would make good onhis threats and that he would not pass them if they went to the interviews. Mr.actually went to Dr. Markovic's office to plead bis case, and he received the sameresponse: "Attend the interview and you will fail this class."

2.1

This caused both of them considerable mental stress. Mr. said to me: "The reasonI go to school is to get a job. I cant get the job if I don't go to the interviews and I cant getthe job if I dont pass the class." Mr and Mr continued to be upset aboutthis situation until after graduation.

Dr. Markovic's statements were also quite upsetting to me, for several reasons. First, hisactions caused a lot of stress for my classmates and me. I felt that this behavior crossed theline and that he was bullying and brow beating students. Second, a few weeks before thisincident, I had informed Dr. Markovic that I would be missing class for an interview with acompany. At the time, he seemed to have no problem with it. However, after hisstatements in class regarding the PG&E interviews, I became concerned that I would notpass the class. I continued to worry about this for a number of weeks before graduation

On 11-19-2002, Dr. Markovic took written roll in a manner I'd never seen him use before.He sent apiece of paper around the class and asked us all to write down our names. At theend of this process, he made a verbal comment that Mr. • and Mr .wereabsent '(This was the day of their PGE interviews.)

On several later occasions, Dr. Markovic made comments in class that seemed to be aveiled threat, relating to this same issue.

Near the end of the semester, when the instructor comment sheets were distributed to theclass, Dr. Markovic told us that he had conflicts with staff and with the College in the pastHe said that he had weathered these difficulties without problem, and that "negativecomments about instructors are often reflected back on the writer." I took this to be athreat to the class that negative comments regarding Dr. Markovic would do no good, andmay come back to haunt us. (I considered this a very real threat. In the ElectricalEngineering specialty of power engineering, there are very few instructors available for thearea. Dr. Markovic teaches most of the power classes. I have heard, but cannotsubstantiate, that Dr Markovic would give very low grades to those who somehow got onhis bad side.)

I also believe that Dr. Markovic is a detriment to CSUS in Ms relations with companyrecruiters. During a SDGE interview that I attended, the recruiter commented negativelyabout Dr. Marfcovic's attitude and behavior. (Dr. Markovic himself stated in class that hehad communication with several recruiters and had written several letters regarding whenthey could conduct interviews. To me it sounded more fike harassment of the recruitersand their superiors; Either way, I feel that this would make a potential employer less likelyto bother to recruit at CSUS.)

There are a few other things that have caused me to be concerned about Dr. Markovic'sbehavior.

In the week of 12/7/2002, Dr. Markovic said that per a memo from the CSUS president(Dr. Gerth), he could not see students during finals week outside of class "due to safety

2.2

reasons" and "because accidents had occurred at other campuses." I don't know if such amemo exists, but it sounded like he was saying that students might have reason to beconcerned about Ms mental stability, and that others might have considered him to be somekind of a safety threat.

Finally, during an office visit, about two semesters ago, I asked Dr. Markovie about severalcareer issues. One question was whether or not the ECS career counselor, Cici Mattiuzzi,might be helpful in securing employment. I had expected a simple yes or no answer onwhether or not she could help. Dr. Markovic replied with a tirade. He said that she wouldbe of no help, and that he believed that she had essentially slept or prostituted her way intothe position of ECS career counselor. I was so surprised by this response that it stuck himy mind for a long time. (I did aot mention this conversation to anyone until speakingwith Dr. Ramesh regarding Dr. Markovic's student relations. I had assumed that Dr.Markovic was merely sexist, but later came to think that he might be a loose cannon and apotential danger to students. I could not imagine a professor speaking about a staffmember in that way.)

I should say again that as far as technical knowledge is concerned, Dr. Markovic is anexcellent instructor.

However, ,in liglit of the behaviors I have observed, his propensity to intimidate students,and his erratic and sometimes frightening actions, I'm wondering if he should be removedfrom his position.

Cordially,

Nathan Laye

cc: Dr. S.K Ranresh

2.3

!/alfian Laye|§70NE Hogan Rd E#47SIresham, OR 97630

CERTIFIED MAIL

,&"-**rH:>7001 2510 OOOt flQ40 i<833

hO ri x FS MEtSfl"-•' 844733!

•TUH1 SKRameshDepartment of Electrical EngineeringCSU, Sacramento6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819

04 14 imfift

to

Exhibit 3

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTODEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC ENGINEERING

February. 19; 2003

President Donald R. GerthCSUS

Dear President Gerth:

I just received a copy Mr. Nathan Laye's letter to you, dated February 12,2003, regarding Dr. MiroslavMarkovic of the EEE department The purpose of this letter is to update you on the steps that I havetaken to address student concerns about this situation

As soon as I became aware of the student concerns regarding Dr. Markovic's actions and behavior, Imet with Donna Selnick, University Legal Counsel, on November 15m 2002. Following that meeting. Isubmitted a letter with supporting documents to Donna, with copies to Dean David Wagner and SheilaOnman in Faculty and Staff Affairs, conveying student concerns about Dr. Markovic's behavior. Myletter of November 24th and the supporting documents were hand delivered by the EEE Office Assistantprior to the Thanksgiving Break, to the office of the University Legal Counsel and Faculty & Staff Affairs.We are awaiting a response.

If I can provide any further information please feel free to contact me

Sincerely,

,u.S. K. RameshProfessor & Chair

6000J Street, Sacramento, California 95819-6019 • (916) 278-6873 - (916) 278-7215 FAX

THE CoiroanA STATI UNTVUSITY • Bakersfield • Chko • Domlnguez HlDs • Fresno • Fuflcmm • Haywud • Humholdl • Long Beach • U» Angeles • Maritime Academy

Monterey Bay • Nonhrldge - Pomona - Sacramento • San Bernardino • San Diego • San Franosco • San Jose - San I.UTS Obispo • San Marcos • Sonoma • Stanislaus

3.1

Exhibit 4

May 4, 2003

Dr. S. K. RameshChair, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering

This written statement is in regard to the actions and behavior of Dr. Miroslav

Markovic at California State University, Sacramento that my colleague and

I, I find inappropriate.

Our chosen field of study at CSUS is Electrical/Electronic Engineering in which

we plan to obtain a Bachelor's degree in the Spring and Summer of 2003. Dr. Markovic

teaches classes that focus on Electncal/Power Engineering; therefore, we have only had

him once as an instructor for Electromechanical Conversion (EEE 130),

Since graduation is approaching, job hunting was done early in the semester.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company had made an impressionable presence at the CSUS

campus early in the semester making it clear that they planned to hire many college

graduates within the immediate future. PG&E made no discrimination between

"electronic" or "power" concentration majors. Therefore both and I applied for entry

level positions within the company. After several weeks of interviewing and talking to

the company, a few other students and I were offered positions. Students from both

fields of "electronic" and "power" engineering were hired as it was made clear that both

were needed within the company. We were all excited about the job offers. It made us

realize that all of the hard work put forth in the last several years had finally paid off.

Shortly after PG&E had made the initial presence on the CSUS campus, two

power students were approached by Dr. Markovic and were asked if they would supply

4.1

him with the names of the "electronic" students who applied to PG&E. He followed this

request by stating that "electronic" students should not be applying for positions with a

power company as it steals jobs away from the "power" students. He stated that only

"power" students are qualified for positions with "power companies". He concluded by

adamantly stating that he would do something about the situation.

Other students and I were alarmed and outraged to hear of this. We're extremely

concerned that he will attempt to sabotage our chances of obtaining positions with

PG&E. At this point, I felt it was necessary to talk to you, as I did. After speaking with

you, you told me to document the situation. As time passed our classes consumed us, as

they always do, and the situation took a state of low priority.

The situation remained low priority until last week. A power student was

cornered last week by Dr. Markovic for the names of the "electronic" engineering

students recently given job offers by PG&E. That same day another power student who

Dr. Markovic knew was offered a position with PG&E was cornered by the professor and

was asked to give the name and phone number of the person who hired him at the

company. The student said that he felt very uncomfortable to be put in that situation. He

was taking a class by the professor and did not want to jeopardize his grade but at the

same time did not want to give him any information.

This latest event by Dr. Markovic is deemed as "over the top" by many of the

"electronic" and "power" engineering students. His behavior is unethical and

unprofessional and should not be allowed to prevail. We, as students, feel as if we have

no power in this situation and are furious that a professor would try to limit our chaaces

of employment that we have worked so hard for.

4.2

As of now, we don'I know what Dr. Markovic will do concerning PG&E and the

list of students that he obtained. We feel as if the company will ignore any input from the

professor but at the same time we don't want to underestimate him. Mainly, we are

furious that we were put into a situation such as this while at a professional institution.

His lack of respect and misuse of power as an educator reflects poorly on the Electrical

Engineering Department at California State University, Sacramento. Dr. Markovic

should be held liable for his actions with appropriate consequences.

Sincerely,

Those who support the findings within this letter and the viewpoints expressed.

4.3

Exhibit 5

September. 7,. 2003

Peter I ,auAffirmative Action OfficerCSU, Sacramento6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819

Dear Peter,

1. In early spring of this year (2003), I delivered to you a copy of a letter addressed to the campuspresident from a CSUS alum, Nathan Laye, who said that Professor Miroslav Markovic was makingderogatory, sexual comments about me to students. As you will recall, I had received a blind copy andwas shocked by what was being said about me.

2. When I spoke to you, I asked if I needed to complete any forms or to file any paper work for your officeto receive this as a complaint of sexual harassment You indicated that no paperwork was necessary andthat the delivery of the letter to you constituted a complaint

3. Following my discussion with you, it seemed to me that my supervisor was hostile towards me. Forthat reason, later in the semester, I asked you whether my boss had been informed about the complaint fhad made; you assured me that that would not be the case. I then asked you if you actually knew whomy supervisor was, and you expressed surprise when I told you that my boss is Braja Das, Dean of theCollege of H&CS. You said that you would get back to me about this situation.

4. I had not heard from you by the end of the spring semester, and I spent the summer away from thecampus as I am an academic year employee.

5 On Wednesday August 27th, when I returned to the campus, Braja Das came into my office. Withoutany pleasantries or introductory comments, he began railing at me in a loud and vituperative manner.In this context, I could not immediately grasp his point, but I came to understand that he had decided notto sign my contract to leach CS 194 for the coming semester, as scheduled. I am a Unit 4 staff and havehad a contract to teach this course for the past six semesters as a Unit 3, Lecturer B. This contractrepresents a $3000+/ year source of income for me.

6. 1 believe that Dean Das' decision to withhold this contract was in retaliation for my having filed thesexual harassment complaint. I believe that this is an act of reprisal on his part (09/10/03: Subsequentto my having prepared this letter, and two hours before the class was scheduled to meet. Dean Dasemailed me and said I would in fact be paid to teach the course, as per instructions from CampusPersonnel. The immediate issue resolved, but the larger concern remains.)

7 1 would appreciate a response to this letter.

Sincerely,

Cici Mattiuzzi278-7091/ [email protected]

5.1

Exhibit 6

To whom it may concern:

During the week of 5/14 the following events occurred:

*Dr. Markovic stopped by my work area in 2016. A student assistant and I were both sitting in the room atthe time this occurred.

*He asked me about a retractable cordless mouse that I had been using in the past. I made a light-heartedcomment about Cici Mattiuzzi having "stolen" it.

*ln response to this comment, Dr. Markovic went into a small tirade:• -He referred to Ms. Mattiuzzi as a "bitch"

-He said I was a young employee and that he would handle getting my mouse back

-Ben Schaffer

6.1

Exhibit 7

October 9, 2007;

Pelcrl.auAffirmative Action OfficerCSU, Sacramento6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819

Dear Peter,

For the seventh time I find myself writing to complain about Dr Miroslav Markovic. Three times 1 have come toyou about his harassing behavior towards me to request that you take action. Four times I have come to you andprevious persons in authority regarding harassing behavior towards students and major employers.

I have never received a response and I have no idea what action has been taken in the past. I just know that thebehavior does not stop I am aware that past department chairs in the department that Dr Markovic reports to haveon numerous occasions come to you and your predecessors seeking relief from Dr. Markovic. 1 believe that there isa failure to protect individuals from this type of behavior on this campus.

Attached please find a document given to me in late May. I was made aware that Dr Markovic was speaking in ahostile and threatening fashion about me once again.

[n the spring when the event surfaced, three people in this College, all in positions of authority, told me that it wouldserve no useful purpose to complain because no action would be taken. Upon my return to campus for the fallsemester, I find the problem distracting and I fee] unsafe in my work environment A little over a week ago myoffice had been entered and my computer was on when I came to work. Things were moved around. I checked withthe IT support staff and the student assistants who work for me, and none of them had been in my office during theprevious period. While I cannot prove that Dr Markovic was in my office, I am aware, as you are aware, that DrMarkovic has on other occasions destroyed labs and student projects.

! find the continuing harassment embarrassing and humiliating. Once again I am requesting your assistance withresolving the problem.

1 would appreciate a response to this letter.

Sincerely,

Cici Mattiuz.d916-278-70917 cicifflcsus edu

cc Emir tvlacari, Dean College of Engineering and Computer ScienceSuresh Vadhva, Chair, Electrical EngineeringBarbara Peterson, Vice President, Academic Professionals of California

7.1

I'o whom it may concern.

During the week of 5/14 the following events occurred-

"Dr. Markovic stopped by my work area in 2016. A student assistant and I were both sitting in the room atihc lime this occurred.

*He asked me about a retractable cordless mouse that I had been using in the past. I made a light-heartedcomment about Cici Mattiuzzi having "stolen" it.

•*ln response to this comment, Dr. Markovic went into a small tirade:-He referred to Ms. Mattiuzzi as a "bitch"-He said I was a young employee and that he would handle getting my mouse back

-Ben Schaffcr

7.2

Exhibit 8

Date: Tue, 16:04:59 -0700To: vadhva """From: Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>Subject: your adviceCc:Bcc: [email protected]:

Suresh, i

Thank you for your advice this morning. I appreciate yourkindness and concern. As you suggested I am working onhaving the lock on my office changed and I am going to workon figuring out how to juggle my schedule so I am notcoming in at 7 am to an empty building. It may be safernot being alone in the building at that hour with Dr.Markovic. It is unnerving to find him coming up thestairs behind me at that hour.

Cici

Cici MattiuzziDirector, Career Services OfficeCollege of Engineering & Computer ScienceCSU, Sacramento6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819-6023

phone: 916-278-7091fax: 916-278-5949email [email protected] site: http://www.ecs.csus.edu/career

Subscribe to weekly Career Updates at the above webaddress!

8.1

Exhibit 9

Date: Thu, .Wi iggWl3:53:57 -0700To: emacariFrom: Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>Subject: update: corrected copyCc:Bcc: [email protected]:

Emir,

Thank you for speaking with me on Tuesday regarding theletter that I wrote in complaint of the continuingharassment directed at me by Dr. Markovic. After I spokewith you, I told Lynne, who supervises a number of studentsthat I had written the letter, she indicated that she isalso very concerned about his behavior and is uncomfortablewith him. She told me that she was aware that Dr. Markovichad been "hitting on" ,a number of male students recentlyand that he had gone into a racist tirade directed at aforeign student, calling him a terrorist.

Dr. Vadhva also spoke to me after receiving his copy of theletter and a phone call from Paul, my husband. Dr Vadhvais- aware of Dr Markovic and he suggested that I change thelocks and that I alter my comings and goings here. Iusually come in at or before 7 am.After Dr. Markovic was reprimanded in the early 90s forstalking a student he was admonished that the next time heengaged in inappropriate behavior he would be terminated.That is according to It has happened on numerousoccasions since.

Cici

Cici MattiuzziDirector, Career Services OfficeCollege of Engineering & Computer ScienceCSU, Sacramento6000 J Street

9.1

Sacramento, CA 95819-6023


Subscribe to weekly Career Updates at the above webaddress!

9.2

Exhibit 10

Paul Mattiu/2i|lfe«8:02 A 3700, Fwd: Your concern.To: paulFrom: Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>Subject: Fwd: Your concern.Cc:

X-lronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: trueX-lronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAALbcGEeCVICEnZdsbZJhbACOVAEBAQEHBAYJIIEnX-lronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,302,11 88802800";

d="scan'208";a="117409907"Subject: Your concern.Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:39:09 -0700Thread-Topic: Your concern.Thread-Index: AcgSqT7cs3oPUPVvQZCji+Od/+vMkg==From: "Lau, Peter" <[email protected]>To: "Mattiuzzi, CiCi" <[email protected]>X-Virus-Status: NoX-Virus-Checker-Version: clamassassin 1.2.4 with clamdscan / ClamAV 0.90.2/4545/Wed Oct 1714:05:57 2007

Cici:

Action has been taken regarding your complaint against Prof. Markovic.I believe there will not be any more harassment directed towards you.Please inform me as soon as possible in case you encounter any moreharassment from Prof. Markovic.

Peter LauDirector, Equal Opportunity/Affirmative ActionCalifornia State University, Sacramento916.278.6907

Confidentiality Notice: This communication with its contents maycontain confidential and/or legally privileged information. It issolely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorizedinterception, review, use or disclosure is prohibited and may violateapplicable laws including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. Ifyou are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender anddestroy all copies of the communication.

Printed for Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]> . „ .

Exhibit 11

Local 1002, LIUNA, AFL-CIO

roara Perersen, Northern Vice President 10770 Oakon Way, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 (916)851-9449 Fax (916) 851-9449 af>^[email protected]

Peter Lau, DirectorEqual Opportunity/Affirmative ActionCalifornia State University, Sacramento .6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819

Dear Mr. Lau:

It has recently come to my attention that a member of Unit 4, Cici Mattiuzzi hascome to you and your predecessors seven times with complaints about the on-going and escalating harassment directed towards her and certain CSUS studentsby Dr. Miroslav Markovic.

I'm sure you can understand, given the long history of abuse here, that sheexpected something more from you than an email message staling that youbelieve there will be no more harassment directed towards Ms Mattiuzzi. I'msure that she has received similar assurances throughout her long ordeal. I amdeeply concerned not only for our Unit 4 member but for the students involved aswell.

I ask, therefore, that as Ms. Mattiuzzi's union representative, I be provided withthe results of the current and all past investigations into these complaints as wellas the actions you have taken to insure a safe and healthful work environment forall concerned.

. PetersenVice PresidentCSUS Chief Steward

Cc: Maria SantosEdPurcellCici Mattiuzzi

Office 5040 Partridge Drive, Oakland, CA 94619-3514 (510) 482-1155 Fax (510) 482-1160 [email protected] www.dpd002.org

11.1

Exhibit 12

California State University, SacramentoOffice of Human Resources6000 J Street • Sacramento, CA 95819-6032http //www csus edu/hr

November 16, 2007

To: Cici MattiuzziCollege of Engineering & Computer Science

From

Re:

Peter Lau, DirectorEqual Opportunity/Affirmative Action

Harassment Complaint

This is a follow-up to my Oct. 19, 2007 email to you. I have discussed your complaintwith Dean Macari. Dean Macari has decided to investigate the complaint himself. Hehas informed me that he has concluded the investigation, and has taken action to preventany further occurrence of similar behavior from Dr. Markovic. As I said in my email,should you encounter any more harassment from Dr. Markovic, please inform me as soonas possible.

Sincerely yours,


, v AUf-ORNiA STATt UNivtRSlTY Bakersfield ChanneMslands • Chico • Domtnguez Hills - Ease Say • Fresno • Fulierton • Humboldt • Long Beach • Lo*Ano**U»<, • Maritime Academy Man

Pomortd • Sacramenio • San Bernardino • San Diego • San Francisco • San Jose • San Luis Obtspo San Marcos • Sonoma • Stanislaus

12.1• Sacramento • San Bernardino • San Diego • San Francisco • Sanjose •

Exhibit 13

ASKCSU POLICY GLOSSARY CONTENTS MAIN PAGE

Economic & Environmental Harassment

DEFINEDThe language of sexual harassment has evolved. Today courts talk about it in terms of economicand environmental harassment.

• Economic Harassment is any persistent or severe action that results in a "tangibleemployment action." This can mean that the recipient of the harassment loses pay orexperiences some significant change in workload, assignments or hours of work.

• Environmental Harassment includes actions (that create adverse working conditions butdo not result in a "tangible employment action." It encompasses jokes, comments, slurs,emails, touching, pictures or any behavior that seriously interferes with an employee's workenvironment.

In reality, environmental harassment is more common than economic harassment. In cases ofenvironmental harassment, the focus is on the environment rather than on a tangible economicloss suffered by the recipient.

of 2 1/15/08 11:03 AM

13.1

Exhibit 14

January 30,2008

Peter Lau ' <Affirmative Action OfficerCSU, Sacramento6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819

Dear Pctci,

As in the past, I continue to receive information about Dr. Markovic that is disturbing and unsettling andthat causes me to experience stress in the work environment.

I have recently been told that Dr. Gonan, a professor in EEE has received a complaint from a student aboutbeing harassed by Dr. Markovic and that the student is unwilling to file a formal complaint. Myunderstanding is that this was brought to Dr. Gonan's attention last semester.

On January 10th, a student told me directly mat Dr. Maikovic has invited him toiisitome on-numerousoccasions to work on Markovic's car. The student is quite unaware of the implications. This type ofpersonal involvement with a student may not be appropriate. It is definitely reminiscent of Dr.Markovic'sinvolvement with Peter Robiiio. You will recall that this was a situation in which Markovic ingratiatedhimself with a student over a period of time, apparently attempted to develop a distinctly inappropriaterelationship, and then stalked him and actively sought to disrupt the student's employment The Robinomatter is well documented.

As you know, I was recently required to complete the CSU sexual harassment on-line workshop. Theworkshop's instruction is that if a staff member has reason to believe that any type of harasssieat is takingplace, it must be reported. My experience, however, is that the effort.is futile and that effective action willnot be taken by the campus. In addition, my experience has been that negative consequences will followfrom having made the required report The workshop also stressed that making negative comments aboutanother employee could be actionable. So I am in the position of having to decide whether or not I shouldwarn a student about a faculty member who might be grooming him as prey, as he has done before. Eitherway, 1 am subjected to a conflict that should not be present in my work environment. And, it necessarilybrings back to mind the fact that Markovic has directed hostility towards-me, and that he is still just downthe hall. And, it brings back to mind the fact that my former supervisor immediately stoppedcommunicating with me in" almost any way, after that supervisor learned that I had filed a complaint aboutMaffcovic. Before communications with that supervisor ceased, he subjected me to an irrational 'harangue.In addition, he stopped supporting my reclassification and tried to remove an area of responsibility. I wasdirectly'told that my supervisor thwarted my reclass after I reported the ,2003 event

Indeed, the workshop itself and the requirement that I take it gives reason for me to experience distress.The workshop's injunctions put me in a bind. The workshop's assertion that matters such as this willbe resolved correctly defies reality as I know it

Sincerely,

Cici Mattiuzzi916-278-7091/ [email protected]

14.1

Exhibit 15

Original MessageFrom: paul g. mattiuzzi, ph.d. [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 2:24 PMTo: Lau, Peter; [email protected]; [email protected]: harrassment on campus, hostile work environment

TO: Peter Lau

Peter:

I want to let you know that it is happening again.

The information is third hand but reliable.

Cici heard yesterday from a former-student/alum who is known to havebeen harassed by the professor whose name you know.

Cici was in contact with this alum for a completely unrelated purpose(scheduling him as a guest speaker). As an aside, he said "I guessyou know ..." and proceeded to describe a recent incident.

This alum had a student assistant working for him in industry. Thestudent assistant was upset at work and described the experience of afellow student who was being pressured by the professor to travel withhim to Hawaii. It was distressing to them both, and the studentadvised his friend to make a report to the campus police.

The alum who spoke to Cici told her that this situation is widelyknown in his industry, that it is assumed that the problem is wellknown on campus (.i.e., "everybody knows"), and that it is assumedthat the campus will never respond effectively. In other words, thisis an issue that reflects negatively on CSUS in the community.

The fact that this continues creates distress for Cici. In addition,

15.1

it is exceedingly disruptive to me and requires unimaginable restrainton my part.

And as I said before, even though the sexual harassment itself is notdirected towards Cici, it creates a hostile work environment.Contributing to the hostility of the workplace is a common belief thatthe campus responds immediately to racial insensitivities and hatespeech, while ignoring and tolerating sexual harassment and genderhate speech.

I am meeting with an attorney on Wednesday the 27th for an initialconsultation.

paul g. mattiuzzi, ph.d.

Criminal Forensic Psychologist

'(916) 485-0285

15.2

Exhibit 16

Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 07:38:19-0800To: [email protected]: Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>Subject: Fwd: Dr. MarkovicCc: [email protected], [email protected]:X-Attach merits:

X-lronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: trueX-lronPort-Anti-Spam-Result:Ao8CAEaFwUdMYD4Yb2dsb2JhbACCOzKNbgEKBAQEBQoRBYEPX-lronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,398,1199692800";

d="scan'208,217";a="130056239"From: "David Black" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Subject: Dr. MarkovicDate: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:56:28 -0800Thread-Index: Ach3OHzNYrvHAdW8RXq2YfxEOGoz3A==X-Virus-Status: NoX-Virus-Checker-Version: clamassassin 1.2.4 with clamdscan / ClamAV 0.92/5977/Sun Feb 24 13:56:542008

Cici,

During the summer of 2007, I worked with a CSUS intern named . He informed me that hewas a student of Dr. Miroslav Markovic and that there had been some strange behavior exhibited by Dr.Markovic involving another male power student. .was close friends with the power student and wastold that Dr. Markovic had offered to purchase a laptop (for the student) and offered to take the student toHawaii during the summer so that they could spend some time on the beach and grade papers together.The student did not feel comfortable with the situation because he was also a student of Dr. Markovic andapproached L with advice on what to do. advised his friend to notify campus security about thesituation because he thought that this behavior was not appropriate. The student filed a complaint withcampus authorities ana_ was under the impression that an investigation had begun and that Dr.Markovic would be reprimanded for his inappropriate behavior.

That is all that can remember from what ;told me last summer concerning Dr. Markovic. It is very sadthat this type of behavior has been tolerated thrbughout the years at CSUS. That fact that Dr. Markovic is atenured professor does not give him the right td sexually harass unsuspecting young students. I personallyfind this behavior intolerable and cannot understand why CSUS has not stepped in to permanently 'diffusethe situation. An educational facility should foster and support a harassment free environment as does anyprofessional work place.

Sincerely,

Dave Black P.E.CSUS EE Power Graduate, 2003


16.1

Exhibit 17

From: Cici Mattiuzzi <mattiuzc@gaia ecs.csus edu>Subject: Re: Keeping you informed.

Date: March 18, 2008 11.30:38 AM PDTTo: "Lau, Peter" <peter.lau@csus edu>Cc: [email protected]

Peter,

I sent you David Black's info and I confirmed that it was correct. I had no problem gettingthrough to him. He indicated he would call you.

Contact info for -. current student:

[email protected]@vohoo. com

may not want to talk as he is the student who was fixing Markovic's car at Markovic's houseand didn't know that it was inappropriate. I believe it is the same situation as Peter Robino.

Cici

Cici:

I want to keep you informed as to what I am doing. I have done some preliminary interviews. Acouple of the addresses you gave me are incorrect so I have been unable to contact David Blackand

Next week I am going to initiate the formal investigation, which means I'll notify the Dean andthe Provost as part of the procedure. I'll talk to a couple more witnesses before I notify Prof.Markovic.


Confidentiality Notice: This communication with its contents may contain confidential and/orlegally privileged information. It is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s).Unauthorized interception, review, use or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicablelaws including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. If you are not the intendedrecipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the communication.



17.1

Exhibit 18

Lau, PeterJ|f|fg8Ji38 AM -07'" Re: Contact info.

To: "Lau, Peter" <[email protected]>From: Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>

Subject: Re: Contact info.Cc:

Bcc:Attachments:

- EEE major- ' - _ .email addresses -. @saclink.csus.edu / ^juno.com

Cici:

Do you have contact information for former student


Confidentiality Notice: This communication with its contents may contain confidential and/or legallyprivileged information. It is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized interception,review, use or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws including the ElectronicCommunications Privacy Act. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender anddestroy all copies of the communication.



Subscribe to weekly Career Updates at the above web address!

Printed for Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]> , g ,

Exhibit 19

Lau, Pete^^^^j^;51 AM •" ^0, Re: [email protected],msar @ calstate.edu

From: "Lau, Peter" <[email protected]>To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>CC: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: [email protected],[email protected]

Barbara and Cici:

As Cici already know, new information has come up and I need to interview additional witnesses. Some of the newwitnesses do not work for Sac State nor do they go to school here at this time. They may not even live in the Sacramentoarea. Thus it will take some time to gather up more evidence. Thank you for your patience.

Peter Lau, DirectorEqual Opportunity/Affirmative ActionSAC 162CSU Sacramento916.278.6907 _

From: Barbara Petersen [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 9:48 AMTo: Lau, PeterSubject: [email protected],[email protected]

Good Morning Peter,

I am writing to you today as the union representative for Ms Cici Mattiuzzi. Ms Mattiuzzi has given you written permissionto communicate with me regarding her complaint.

On January 30. 2008 you notified Ms Mattiuzzi that you were initiating a level 1 investigation and that that process wouldtake 60 days. On March 1 8, 2008 you notified Ms Mattiuzzi that you would start your investigation the following week.Here we are at the beginning of May and neither Ms Mattiuzzi nor I have received any communication from you as to the statusof your investigation.

What is the status of your investigation? What, if any, actions have you taken to deal with this very serious situation? I expecta timely answer to my inquiry.

Barbara PetersenAPC Labor Relations Representative916-851-9449

Printed for Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>

Exhibit 20

Lau, Peteig i)$p:24 PM -07^ Re: Investigation' ffFF-°, **- \ I-C—UA—fliJ «M <J

From: "Lau, Peter" <[email protected]>To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>CC: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Investigation

Cici and Barbara:

I have completed my investigation. I am in the process of writing up my findings. It will take several days. I anticipate Iwill finish by next Monday.

Peter Lau, DirectorEqual Opportunity/Affirmative ActionSAC 162CSU Sacramento916.278.6907

From: Barbara Petersen [mailto:apcnvp®pacbell.net]Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 10:09 AMTo: Lau, PeterCc: [email protected]; [email protected]: Investigation

Good Morning Peter,

At the beginning of May you indicated that your investigation would be complete by May 30, 2008. Please provide me withthe results of that investigation. My mailing address is 10774 Oakton Way, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670.

Thank you,

Barbara PetersenAPC Labor Relations Representative916-851-9449

Printed for Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]> ~n

Exhibit 21

California State University, SacramentoOffice of Human Resources6000 J Street • Sacramento, CA 95819-6032http://www.csus.edu/hr

June 4, 200$

Ms. Cici MattiuzziCollege of Engineering and Computer Science

Dear Ms. Mattiuzzi:

I am completed-my ffivestigation into your complaint against Professor MiroslavMarkovic. You made two allegations against Prof. Markovic:

1. You alleged that Prof Markovic attempted to develop inappropriate personalrelations with students.

2. You alleged that Prof. Markovic created a harassing work environment for you.

My investigation found, the following:

1. On your first allegation, I have talked to a number of witnesses, including currentprofessors and staff in the College of Engineering, and current and formerstudents. Of all the witnesses, only one has any direct experience with the type ofbehavior you alleged. This witness, who is a former student, confirmed some ofthe facts as told to me by others. However, this witness did not indicate to methat there was any inappropriate action on the part of Dr. Markovic. This witnessexperienced no attempt from Dr. Markovic in trying to develop any inappropriaterelationship with him.

Aside from this one individual, other witnesses who I have talked to could onlyprovide me with second hand information and rumors. Some of this informationwent back a number of years. No one else had any direct, or current informationto support your allegation.

2. Your second allegation concerned verbal harassment against you by Prof.Markovic. As you know, my office and the Dean's office have investigated theijecomplaints. The most recent incident was investigated by Dean Macari. He hadconfirmed the incident and had taken action based on his investigation. Iunderstand that he had also discussed his finding with you. You did not allegeany new incident since that time.

IMC CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVfcRSITY: Batersfield • Channel Islands • Chico • Dommguez Hills - EasiBay • Fresno • Fullenon - Humboldt • Long Beach • Los Angeles • Maritime Academy . M, ,„„.,.„

• Pomona • Sacramento • San Bernardino • San Diego • San Francisco • San Jose • San Luis Oblspo • San Marcos • Sonoma • Stanislaus

•21.1

At this time, I do not haWesotOogk evidence to proceed wrfli a fennai complaint againstProf. Markovic.

Sincerely yotirs, • • >.„•

Peter Lau,Director, Equal Opporturaty/AfBrmalive Action

21.2

Exhibit 22

"paul g. mattiuzzi, ph.d." <[email protected]>For Dr. Alex Gonzalez ... please forwardAugust 27, 2008 5:29:57 PM [email protected]

Dr. Gonzales:

I'm a CSUS alum, and as a psychologist, I'm a colleague of yours.

My wife Cici is also an alum, and for the past 30 years, she has been a CSUS employee.

She came home today after her first day back at work after summer vacation, and in tears, she told me about how demoralized she is working onthe campus. This should have been a good day.

On her first day back, her first task was to chair a Department meeting in the College of Engineering and Computer Science. She had nobusiness chainng such a meeting. That task is way outside her pay grade. But the fact is that in E&CS, she is routinely recognized and reliedupon to perform tasks that far exceed her personnel classification. She was asked to chair the meeting because she is recognized as being aneffective professional and an independent subject matter expert.

Last Spring, she went through the process of seeking reclassification, for the third time. And once again, her application was denied for reasonsthat can only be viewed as bogus and arbitrary. As a forensic psychologist, I happen to be an expert in the task of interpreting data relative tocriteria. More so than any academician facing a journal review board or defending a dissertation, I am routinely examined live and in Court in aprocess that can be likened to an "oral defense on steroids." It is from that perspective that I am confident in saying that Cici met the criteria forreclassification and that the final decision involved what are politely referred to as °extra-criterial considerations." I think you Know what thatmeans in less polite language.

Also last Spring, Cici learned that the campus has no intention of paying any serious attention to her complaints against E&CS ProfessorMarkovic This is a guy who has for years been sexually harassing students and otherwise abusing staff members. If s well documented.

Despite her complaints, it has remained "no never mind" that he continues to do so. He's a professor, so what can you do? The students he hasassaulted want to get on with their lives, or they are embarrassed, and so they are not going to step into any mess on the campus they leftbehind. Never mind that he remains a threat.

Cici never sought to expose Markovic. She never had an agenda with him. Students and graduates came to her with complaints about Markovicand she did what you told her she should do in the training you insisted she complete. Ifs her issue only because she is the person in E&CS towhom people bring their complaints. Never mind that he has slandered her repeatedly. Never mind that in an ideal world, the things Markovichas said about Cici would provide a basis for a complaint.

Today, on her first day back on campus, Cici learned that a valued staff member is intending to resign. The staff member's reason is that he canno longer stand the ongoing abuse he receives from Markovic.

Cici came home demoralized. She knows that CSUS provides her with no prospect for advancement, that CSUS is intent on ignoring hercontribution to the campus, and that CSUS is intent on turning a blind eye towards complaints from women on campus.

I want you to know that I am entirely prepared to provide you with a complete history of the events involved in Cet's feelings of demoralization. Itgoes way back and before your tender.

But for now, you should know that I am disappointed in CSUS's performance in recognizing employee contributions and in responding tocomplaints about staff behavior.

Sincerely

paul g mattiuzzi, ph.d

22.1

Exhibit 23

"paul g. mattiuzzi, ph.d." <pgm8693@gmail com>Markovic: putting you on noticeAugust 28, 2008 9:12'21 PM PDTmarkovic@gaia [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Markovic.

I don't know if you think you were being clever this afternoon when you bumped into my wife Cici, not once but twice, and withpurpose and intention.

The fact that you decided to annoy, harass and intimidate her is a matter that the campus could deal with. Or perhaps, as youseem to have learned, the campus will not.

You should know, however, that you just stepped over a line (a line that is written in the law) and now you have to deal with me

This is a warning and you are only going to hear it once.

Don't you ever again come anywhere near my wife. Don't you ever speak to her and don't speak about her If as today you happento be in a room where you are both present for some meeting, stay on the other side of the room. If you see her walking down thehall, turn around, walk away and wait till she passes. If you see her, don't even look at her. And again, dont you dare comeanywhere near her.

Here is what will happen, I will march down to the Sacramento Superior Court and file a "Petition for Injunction ProhibitingHarassment and Application for Temporary Restraining Order." I work in jails and in courts and with sociopaths, so I am down thereall the time anyway, and I know how to fill out and file the forms. If s about what1 s called "Civil Harassment." Be aware that if youslur her name again, even behind her back, that constitutes actionable harassment.

To make the case for the order, I will air your dirty laundry. And I will ask for a "stay away order," barring your presence at herplace of work (the Engineering Building). I am in the business of persuading judges and juries, and for me, this is a no-brainer.

You will have your hearing in front of a Judge, and you will have a chance to explain yourself. Good luck.

Don't reply to this message and dont contact me. You will not hear from me again,

paul mattiuz?i

23.1

Exhibit 24

Paul Mattiuzzi, 9/2/08 7:18 AM ^00, Fwd: FW: Somewhat importar .. FW: Markovic:

To: paulFrom: Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>Subject: Fwd: FW: Somewhat important FW: Markovic: putting you on noticeCc:

Reply-To: <[email protected]>From: "Emir Macari" <[email protected]>To: '"Cici Mattiuzzi'" <[email protected]>Subject: FW: Somewhat important FW: Markovic: putting you on noticeDate: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:49:44 -0700Organization: CSUSThread-Index: AckJjW9aFvsWvAVXQYyTqtkQyeUAZgAAj63gABRSWVAAAVzPkA==X-Virus-Status: NoX-Virus-Checker-Version: clamassassin 1.2.4 with clamdscan / ClamAV .0.92/811 6/Fri Aug 2907:39:23 2008

From: Porter, Kentrmailto:porterk(5)saclink.csus.edu]Sent: Friday; ^^^ f 7:15 AMTo: [email protected]!eduCc: [email protected]; Wagner, David L; Sheley, Joseph; Lau, PeterSubject: RE: Somewhat important FW: Markovic: putting you on noticeImportance: High

Emir -Thank you for this information. Does Cici want to pursue this matter since apparently there wasphysical contact? Is she willing to speak with someone about this incident? We need specifics todetermine how to proceed. Also, were there any witnesses to the "bump?" Please advise.KentKent R. PorterAssociate Vice President, Human ResourcesCalifornia State University, SacramentoTel (916) 278-6169FAX (916) 278-7153Confidentiality Notice: This communication with its contents may contain confidential and/or legallyprivileged information. It is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized interception,review, use or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws, including the ElectronicCommunications Privacy Act. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender anddestroy all copies of the communication.

Printed for Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]> 24 i

Exhibit 25

X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: trueX-IronPort-Anti-Spam-ResUlt: AkMBAIYuvUjRVcbzlGdsb2JhbACCNDCPLD4BAQEBCQMKBxEDmj0wCYZBAQJshCoX-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,317,1217833200";

d="scan'208";a="148048848"DKIM-Signature: v=l; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;

d=gmail.com; s=gamma;h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;

bh=QL4uTx554nnTm3YYjPB25VVuyZFzSELPiQPocHehfzs=;b=rgiyA9k64lqmLUTY0PjXMJiTuvrGVrG/9oYKBJ08b8nz5rkjfC3vtTQs6C2AjT0t+ptQqoJHN8gD8NZsMn/4gQCuxHwmw43UvuYxPXDpmTu4vLESxBzpO/q/f88Y6AOWFeEMKhrMBnRaYRNWWByiKwr6XPWb0Xw4g4+ybWV3PX0=

Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 12:18:29 -0700From: "paul g. mattiuzzi, ph.d." < >To:Subject: Re: FW: Somewhat important FW: Markovic: putting you on noticeCc: , , ,

X-Virus-Status: NoX-Virus-Checker-Version: clamassassin 1.2.4 with clamdscan / ClamAV 0.92/8141/Tue Sep 208:52:21 2008

Kent:

This is not a matter for Cici to pursue. It's your problem.This goes back to May of 1991 when Markovic stalked and harassed a graduating student who hadspurned his advances, and when he intervened with that'student's employer, trying to retaliateby derailing his career. Cici became involved because in her position, she is the one theemployer contacted. Before Cici could respond, the employer contacted Dean Gillott, who alsoturned to Cici for assistance.Cici was drawn into it again in 2002 when Markovic sent bizarre and intimidating letters to PG&Eand when students were complaining about being bullied by him. I believe that was the firsttime she heard 'a student say that they felt physically threatened. It was in the context ofthat incident that a student documented comments Markovic had made, about Cici, indicating thatshe had (.in the student's words) either "slept or prostituted her way" into her position.In subsequent years, students would come to her with their concerns about Markovic. She alwaysfaced the conflict: tell the students that he's a sexual predator (that could be deemedharassment according to her mandatory on-campus training) or instead, fail to warn them.Whether she complained or didn't, it created distress on her part and constituted a hostilework environment. While not directed towards her, his episodes of explosive behavior on campuswere of a similarly distressing nature.In 2007, when a staff member came to her and warned her about Markovic, it was not becauseMarkovic had called her a bitch, it was because the staff member thought she might be at risk.In January 2008, it was only by coincidence that Cici learned that Markovic was once again"chicken hawking" a student. On her first day back at work last week, a staff member came toher and told her about being intimidated by Markovic. Again, it was not about her, but it wasunsettling none-the-less and a reminder that it's a hostile work environment.Cici has pursued this before. There is no reason she should pursue it again. The final outcomeof her complaints is that he seems to have become emboldened. If you bump into a person once,that could be an accident. If you bump into a person twice Cand make no effort at all to atleast pretend that it was an accident), that's intentional and it's a message. And because theperson has to decide whether to pursue it, and has to decide whether to talk about it, and isconfronted with the demand to produce evidence, and has to wait and watch to see if anythinghappens, it's like mission accomplished. It's a clever, common and devious move.

25.1

What's different this time is not that it was physical, but that it was direct and intentional,We are no longer talking about the broad and ambiguous definition of hostile work environment.Whether you choose to restrain him or not, I will. I've defined the behavior to which I willrespond and I've outlined the intended action steps. It will happen off-campus and in public.My petition to the Court will include the history. It will include an argument that aninjunction is necessary because he has been given license-by the campus,paul mattiuzzi

25.2

Exhibit 26

Page 1 of 1

From "Porter. Kent" «mailto ponerk<&$3<->in.k < »i«> Kji^portfrK jS&g':iini : :-.i.

To "Mattiuzzi. CiCi" «mailto cJaSisaclink cm *clu>ricu.gsacim>< csus tn .>

CC' "<mailto ij rnollkigicsus odu>burn?ftKi;gcMi3,edu" «mailto banMii>.*., ,i .

"Revelez, Gregorio"

«mailto gnu^saclink csu«,sau>3nng;sariiiik cius 6*.i>,

H<mailtoa(Tiac«n@(»cs csus cdu>t?rnacsnêc5.csu5 eclu" «marfto -vr.t 7

"Wagner. David L" «maclto wagnej.diSsl'yrri?!! C?uj..aiu>w_a3n9rcl!i-'k/raii qsus,e<iii>

Date Fn. 19 Sep 2008 08 20 09 -0700

Subject Follow-Up to Report of Incident

Thread-Topic Follow-Up to Report of Incident

Thread-Index ActeazPAsf+l8Z28R7W2OZ|+aqWUkA==

Accept-language en-US

accepUanguage en-US

X-vlrus-Status No

X-Virus-Checker-Version damassassm 1 2 4 with damdscan / ClamAV 0 92/8287/Fn Sep 19 01 13 26 2008

Dear Cid •

Since the incident late last month involving Miroslav Markovic that was brought to the attention of the College Dean, who in turn contacted Human Resources and PublicSafety, it is my understanding you have not spoken with anyone to formally report the incident

The University does not treat such matters lightly We are concerned and we wish to properly deal with this matter To do so, however, we need your assistance Weneed to obtain from you specific information about the incident. You should expect to be contacted by Greg Revelez, an investigator from our Public Safety Department

Your kind cooperation in this matter is appreciated If you have any questions or concerns, you are welcome to contact either Mr Revelez (278-7245) or me

Sincerely,

KentR Porter

Associate Vice President. Human Resources

California State University, Sacramento

Tel (916)278-6169

FAX (916) 278-7153

Confidentiality Notice This communication with its contents may contain confidential and/or legally privileged Information It is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s) Unauthorized interception, review, use or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws, including the Electronic Communications Pnvacy Act If you are notthe intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the communication

26.1

http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=bsp&ver=lqygpcgurkovy 8/4/2009

Exhibit 27

Cici -If you had spoken with Mr. Revelez and provided him with details about the incident, he could have assessed whether theincident was a matter for Public Safety. If Mr. Revelez would have assessed the incident to be an administrative matterfor HR to address, however, at least by now my office would have more information about what happened than itcurrently has.Regardless of whether the incident might be criminal or civil or something else, the University needs specific informationfrom you about the incident. Without specific information, HR cannot initiate any action. I would respectfully invite youto meet with a representative from HR to tell us what happened, or if you prefer, you can submit a written statementdescribing the incident. In either case HR would need as much specific information about the incident as you can provide.You are welcome to contact me if you have questions or concerns, or if you would like to schedule a meeting.Sincerely,

Kent R. PorterAssociate Vice President, Human ResourcesCalifornia State University, SacramentoTel (916) 278-6169FAX (91 6) 278-71 53

Confidentiality Notice: This communication with its contents may contain confidential and/or legally privilegedinformation. It is solely for the use of the intended rea'pient(s). Unauthorized interception, review, use or disclosure isprohibited and may violate applicable laws, including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. If you are not theintended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the communication.

27.1

Exhibit 28

Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>RE: Follow-Up to Report of Incident

• §eptember; 4;'2008;8:48:36 AM PDT"Porter," Kent" <p'[email protected]>[email protected], [email protected]

Kent,

I am not sure why you are using the word "if" in your email. As I indicated in the last email Idid speak to Greg Revelez. I spoke with Greg over two weeks ago. He called me at the behest ofDean Macari. I did give him all of the details. It was he who indicated that it wasadministrative.

1. He wanted to know if anyone witnessed the bumping event. Cnot that I am aware)2. Then he wanted to know if there was a verbal threat, (no)3. Then he told me that it didn't rise to the level of a criminal matter. He seemed frustrated.He said it was an administrative HR issue not a matter for Public Safety. I reminded him at thispoint that he called me- I did not initiate the call.

Perhaps it was unclear in my last email that I was paraphrasing Greg's comments.

For the record- in my own words- the email you received from my husband, Paul Mattiuzzi, isextremely accurate. Pull out the records. This campus does not take harassment seriously.

In addition to my own observations, I have repeatedly heard from students and staff that thiscampus does not take harassment seriously. I have wished to believe otherwise I have written 7 or8 formal letters and I have been pulled into numerous investigations. At this point I amcompletely demoralized. My husband and I are offended by the response of the campus on numerousoccasions regarding the harassment issues. Filing a complaint on this campus causes one to losecredibility and to feel isolated and more harassed.

Recently, Dr Markovic threatened a pregnant staff member, shouting that he was going to shoot her.Her response is that since no one heard him so no one will believe that it happened. She does notplan to report it, she does not believe anyone will do anything and that it will put her infurther danger. I learned this this morning. She told me that she is afraid all of the timehere. So am I. She said to me "I am glad that you are complaining, I don't think I can". Shetoo has observed the harassment of young males at Dr. Markovic's hands.

The staff member who told me that Dr. Markovic made threats towards me and was extremely fearfultold me that he was told he should not have told me "because it just makes me angry."

The student who heard the comments at the same time said he continues to be afraid for me. Hetold me this recently even though the event happened over a year ago.

When I shared the threat event with another person in management here he said "he is a fullprofessor", indicating that no full professor will every be removed no matter how significant thethreat or harassment.

When I discussed the 2007 issue with the proper authority he told me he was "aware that I have apersonality conflict with Dr. Markovic".

During this last go around, Peter Lau spoke with numerous alumni who after finally getting theircareers to a level that they were no longer afraid that Dr Markovic could harm them told theirstories. He wrote me that those events occurred too long ago.

A staff member in the Dean's Office asked me why I would complain. When she complained that shewas stalked and harassed by a CSUS staff member she was told by HR "but he planted the treeshere."

28.1

A professor who is now in administration told me to change my hours so that I am not in thebuilding alone with Dr Markovic. He told me he was afraid for my safety and that I should stopcomplaining because Markovic is a "loose cannon".

The reason I choose not to write out a formal complaint regarding the bumping event to HR isbecause in my last meeting with Peter Lau, in January of 2008, he indicated that although he wouldreluctantly investigate my complaint, there was very little that the university could do. "Thebest we can hope for is that he might take early retirement."

I cannot begin to tell you how disruptive this continues to be to my work and my life.

Cici

28.2

Exhibit 29

cici mattiuzzi <[email protected]>. . Thank you and another event

September 24, 2008 526:46 PM [email protected] Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>

Dear Kent,

Thank you for speaking to me and Lynne today. I appreciate your willingness to listen.

I ran into an international student on the way out today who was quite upset. I asked him whatwas wrong and he indicated that he was being abused and belittled by Dr Markovic for being aforeigner. He indicated that he didn't understand why the university would tolerate this and thatit is common knowledge among the Indian students. He said he, like others, was afraid tocomplain. It was very much like what Lynne had told you. The student is from India and speaksperfect, clear English. Markovic ridiculed him by saying he could not understand him and to"learn English". I told him to send email to me with all of the information and I would get theinformation to the right person. He said he would but that he didn't want to have his name used.I expect email from him tomorrow morning.

This is relentless. The situation is getting worse and the incidents are more extreme and morefrequent. I do believe that he is becoming bolder and more aggressive. I tried the number onyour email but it was not a direct line. I realized that you had not given that to me.

I am writing from home to preserve my memory.

Cici Mattiuzzi

29.1

Exhibit 30

Porter, Kent, 10/2/08 12:08 PT V700, filed police report and new in nt

To: Kent_PorterFrom: Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>

Subject: filed police report and new incidentCc: vadhva, emacari

Bcc: [email protected], lynne-ecs.csus.edu, paul, brannanp, wimpleAttachments:

Kent Porter, VP Human Resources

Kent,

I just finished filing a police report for the bumping event that occurred on August 28th. I was promptedto do so because of a new-disturbing incident that happened this week on Tuesday 9/30/08. The policehave given me a case number - 08-0581 for the incident.

I have been informed this morning that Dr. Markovic, in another outburst, threatened to shoot an IT staffmember and his wife on Tuesday. I do not have the details, but Lynne, who you spoke with last Wednesday(9/24) on speaker phone was upset by the event. As you will recall Lynne is the pregnant staff memberwho was threatened (7/15) by Markovic. He said that he was going to shoot her in a verbal tirade. Shewas afraid to file a report for fear that she would be in greater danger if she did so.

The police officer indicated that the other two members in the ECS IT staff would have to share theirexperience directly with the police. He advised me to have call directly.

Officer Nguyen (278-6851), who took the report today indicated that he could take the report but that itdid not rise to the level of a criminal complaint unless he verbal threatened me or physically assaultedme. He indicated that it was a Civil matter.

Both Officer Nguyen and I recorded our conversation.

I find it incredibly difficult to perform my work under the stress of the continued outbursts Dr.Markovic against my fellow staff and the intimidation he directs towards me. Once again, I do not feel safein my work environment.

I left a phone message with your staff member Lorena at 278-6779. She indicated that you would callme at 11 am. I left a message with her last week also. I have not heard from you so I am putting this inwriting.

Cici



Printed for Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]> -ft .

Exhibit 31

From: S K Ramesh <[email protected]>DateflfelQ 'C' f'S'-iSSiSS PM PDTTo: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>Subject: Dr. Markovic

Cici and Paul

I was saddened to hear about the recent threats by Dr. Markovic towardsyou and other members of the staff. During the time I was at SacramentoState there was more than one occasion where his behavior andinteraction with our students raised serious concerns. I brought these tothe attention of Donna Selnick (University Legal Counsel) and the Office ofFaculty Affairs in November 2002 and subsequently to the President'sOffice in February 2003.

As far as ,l,fen©wm©:a£^©n was taken on this mailer as of the time I leftSacramento State in 2006. My concern then and now is for the welfare ofour students, faculty and staff and it is imperative that appropriate stepsare taken to ensure their safety at all times.

Sincerely,

Ramesh

S. K. Ramesh, Ph.D.Dean,College of Engineering and Computer Science &Professor of Electrical and Computer EngineeringCalifornia State University, NorthridgeCA 91330-8295Tel: 818-677-4501 Fax: 818-677-2140e-maii: [email protected]

31.1

10,200'8'

Peter LauAffirmative Action OfficerCSU, Sacramento

Dear Peter,

I am writing once again to inform you about me behavior of Dr. Miroslav Markovic. I have personallyexperienced harassment and I am aware of four other very disturbing events. I hesitate to complain since Ihave complained to no avail so many times in the past and I have been involved in so many investigationssince the first stalking incident in 1991. I will outline the latest events in this letter.

On Thursday, August 28th, I was at a fall reception for faculty and staff. I did not notice that ProfessorMarkovic was there until he forcefully bumped into me on his way to the drink table. He passed withoutsaying anything and without making any pretense that this was an accident. The room was not so crowdedchat bumping was understandable. A number of moments later, on his way back past me, he againforcefully bumped into me and made no effort to dismiss his actions as accidental. Once might be anaccident, twice is a pattern I have never had direct contact with Dr. Markovic in the past. I have notspoken to him in many years.

I perceived this as an intentional effort to annoy, harass and intimidate me, and as a direct message. He isaware that I had complained about him and reported the student harassment incident during the previoussemester and other incidents in the more distant past and that nothing was done. I perceived him as havingput me on notice that he can act with impunity. My view is that he has been emboldened by the failure ofthe campus to restrain him and that he is in fact more threatening by virtue of having been granted license.

What was different about the above is that it was it was an intentional, deliberate and direct act of physicalharassment taken against me. It was subtle but devious. It left me in the position of having to decidewhether to pursue it and talk about it, and if so, with a demand to produce "evidence," and to be leftwondering again if anything will be done in response. As an act of harassment, it was "missionaccomplished"

1 decided not to complain. My husband decided to act otherwise. My husband wrote a very pointed emaillo Markovic and informed him that if he harassed me again in any way, he would pursue a TRO andprotective order. This is the first time that I felt that anyone was acting on my behalf in dealing with Dr.Markovic.

1 am aware that some of his actions are subtle and ambiguous and that they give rise to innocentexplanations. But taken together with the history, even if it is dismissed as simply boorish, impolite andinconsiderate, his behavior serves to create a hostile work environment that causes me to be substantiallydistressed and disturbed.

After my husband's pointed email to Dr. Markovic, which was copied to various campus authorities, Ireceived email from Associate VP of HR, Kent Porter requesting that I speak to the campus police. I haddone so pnor to receiving Kent's email. My boss, Dean Emir Macari, after learning of the incident withDr. Markovic, contacted the campus police to have them follow up. I spoke to Officer Greg RevelezOfficer Revelez indicated that it was a "human resources" rather than a "criminal matter" and thereforenot a police matter and "should be handled by the HR department". I did not feel that filing a policereport was going to be productive after speaking to Officer Revelez. (I later filed a police report as Iindicate below).

Later in early September, after the bumping incident. I was informed that Dr. Markovic had verballyharassed the campus telephone installer:, Brandon had come to the building to replace all ofthe old phones and Dr. Markovic was excessively unhappy about the change. Several staff members and astudent assistant observed a most ugly and humiliating tirade and spoke to me about it at length. One

32.1

individual told me that he was inclined to search for a job elsewhere given the constant tirades. Heindicated that "a faculty member on tkis campus could do anything and not be held accountable". 1encouraged staff to report the incident They indicated that it would be a waste of time given the campus'response lo numerous other reports about Dr. Markovic.

On Wednesday the 24th of September, I was visibly upset about the bumping experience with Dr Markovicand the continuing hostile environment. A fellow staff member who is pregnant, Lynne Onitsuka, askedwhy 1 was upset and then proceeded to tell me that on July 15th, while she was fixing his computer Dr.Markovic had gone into a rage over her routine work on his computer and among other things and inexceedingly harsh tones, said to her: "I'm going to shoot you," (This happened when she was 6 monthspregnant).

Although she stated that she was afraid for her safety and that of her unborn child, Lynne had not reportedthe incident because she felt she had good reason to believe that,any complaint to campus authorities 1)would be futile, 2) that it would put her in greater danger, 3) that she would jeopardize her pregnancy and4) that she believed that complaining would impede her career on this campus. (She is the sole incomeearner in her family). She further indicated that none of the male IT staff members are witling to go intoDr. Markovic's office to update his computer because they are afraid of him. This was not the firstincident for her, but it was the most disturbing.

On the same day as my conversation with her (9/24) and at my urging, Lynne Onitsuka, agreed to speak toKent Porter, the VP of HR He had seemed concerned and had called me to discuss the bumping incidentthat day (9/24) after I had emailed him about the threat to Lynne. She happened to come into my officewhile I was on the phone with Kent and I asked if she would share her experiences with Kent She and Ispoke at length (for 45 minutes to an hour) on the phone to Kent Porter about the fears that we have andgave him detailed information on the bumping incident and the "threat to shoot incident" described aboveDuring our long phone conversation with Kent Porter, Lynne shared the long history of her observationsof Dr. Markovic's tirades with the IT staff, and her observations of his sexual harassment of engineeringmale students, as well as all of the information in the preceding paragraph. We both indicated to Kentduring our discussion that we are afraid all of the time, f indicated to Kent that I am afraid when I amwith -students for their safety as well as my own.

On Thursday, October 2nd I learned of a second shooting threat. On September 29th Dr. Markovic wentinto a rage and threatened to "shoot " 01*4 "make his wife a widow". The day 1learned of the second shooting threat, I immediately called Kent Porter and left two urgent messages thatwe were afraid and that another threat had been made. To this day I have not received a returned call fromKent Porter I contacted my union, which referred me to a labor attorney. I told the attorney about thesecond shooting threat and he instructed me to immediately uhang up and call the police". I hung up and 1made a police report to the campus police (Officer Douglas Nguyen) of my bumping incident. The two ITstaff members, Lynne Onitsuka and - also filed police reports of the shooting threats.

Officer Nguyen came and took my report and later that day he came back and took Lynne's report. I waslater told that an international student who had witnessed numerous incidents, was in the room when Lynnegave her report and it was decided that he should not give a report because of his international status andhis hope of remaining in this country for employment after graduation.

' __has filed a police report. He did so after check with me. The technical staff believed thatif they filed reports or complained that it would put me in jeopardy. He told me that they had discussed the.situation in a staff meeUng and it was presumed that if they complained the campus administration mighttake retaliatory action against me.

Dr Markovic's behavior serves to create a hostile work environment that causes me to be substantiallydistressed and disturbed. The intensity and frequency of the complaints from staff and students and thewarnings from students and faculty who fear for my safety have reached a new level of intensity since myreturn to campus this fall. Dr. Markovic's behavior and threats are alarming to me and to others.

32.2

This letter is the forth time I have personally given this information to a campus authority. To enumerate.1) to Officer Greg Revelez (phone conversation); 2) to Associate Vice President of Human Resources, KentPorter (phone conversation and in email copied to appropriate authorities); 3) to Officer Douglas Nguyen ina formal police report; 4) and now in writing to you.

It seems that the campus cannot figure out if the threatening and intimidating behavior that Dr. Markovicdisplays is a police matter or a human resources issue. In the mean time staff are left to wonder if anyone isin charge of sorting out this type of problem or cares about protecting staff from treats and intimidation.

Six staff members on this floor have observed threats and tirades or been directly threatened or intimidatedby Dr. Markovic. Three staff members of the College of Engineering and Computer Science filed policereports in October 2008. We have heard nothing. I have been unable to get a copy of the police reportalthough I have asked three times.

As you have observed in your previous investigations, it is very difficult to get students, faculty and staff tocome forward for fear of reprisals. The fact that three of us have come forward and that a student sharedhis numerous observations with Officer Nguyen is remarkable. The climate of fear and intimidation, andprevious inaction by the university are difficult obstacles to overcome.

I trust that you find my letter helpful as you once again are called upon to investigate the hostile workenvironment here in the College of Engineering and Computer Science.

Sincerely,

Cici Mattiuvczi916-278-7091/ cicifficsus edu

Maria Santos, Senior Director, Employee Relations, CSUAlexander Gonzalez, President, CSUSJames McGIamery, Attorney at LawBarbara Peterson, Labor Representative, APC

32.3

Exhibit 33

LAW OFFICES OF

JAMES E. McGLAMERY555 Capitol Mall, Suite 600

Sacramento, California 95814Telephone (916) 446-623SFacsimile (916) 446-6218Paralegal (916) 489-79SS

gDecember 16, 2008 '

Dr. Alexander GonzalezPresident CSUS6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819

Re: Cecilia Mattiuzzi

Dear Dr. Gonzalez:

I have been retained by a long-term employee of California State University Sacramento(hereafter "CSUS"), Cecilia Mattiuzzi, with regards to issues of sexual harassment, gender-based discrimination and personal safety, caused by a professor at CSUS.

Ms. Mattiuzzi has attempted to resolve her concerns through informal and formalcomplaints with the Affirmative Action Office, however, these complaints have not resultedin any resolution of this severe problem. In fact, since Ms. Mattiuzzi made her concernsknown to the Affirmative Action/Human Resources Departments, she has experiencedretaliation in the form of reduction of her job duties.

The purpose of this letter is to inform you of the basis of our conclusions that CSUS hasviolated the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. We would like to resolve thismatter without resorting to litigation; however, we are prepared to pursue this matter in acourt of law if necessary to obtain a fair and just resolution on behalf of Ms. Mattiuzzi.

The following sets forth a summary of the factual issues that compelled Ms. Mattiuzzi toretain my office for assistance; and, a discussion of pertinent evidence that supports herclaims of harassment and retaliation, followed by a discussion of the pertinent law and ademand for resolution.

SUMMARY OF FACTUAL ISSUES AND EVIDENCE

Ms. Mattiuzzi has worked for CSUS since 1 978. She is the Director of Career Services inthe College of Engineering and Computer Science. Her contributions to CSUS during hertenure with the College of Engineering and Computer Science have been substantial. HerEmployee Performance Evaluations have been "outstanding." The following commentsfrom her evaluator and Supervisor, Dean of College Engineering, Emir Macari, reflect Ms.Mattiuzzi's dedication and service to CSUS:

33.1

"Ms. Mattiuzzi is an outstanding employee. Her work quality, quantity,professionalism and contributions to the campus and CSUS community areall exceptional. She runs a unique and exemplary program that is of greatbenefit and demonstrated efficacy. In this position, she has developedsophisticated programs that are essential to our recruitment, retention andgraduation rates. The benefits of the Career Services Office that she runsprovide the campus with a solid and beneficial connection with the localcommunity.

'The benefits that students receive are considerable. She has pioneered inthe design, development, and implementation of sophisticated careerservices, alumni networks, alumni tracking web-based services that extendthe reach of our career Services Office well beyond what might be expectedfrom resources dedicated.'"

The Professor that is the subject of this letter is Milosic Markovic (hereafter referred to as"Markovic"). In 1991, Ms. Mattiuzzi learned of allegations that Markovic had stalked andharassed a graduating student who had spumed his advances and, tried to retaliateagainst that student by derailing his career. Ms. Mattiuzzi became involved because shewas contacted by the student's employer to inform CSUS about Markovic's conduct.

In early Spring of 2003, Ms. Mattiuzzi delivered a copy of a letter from a CSUS alumnus,who had expressed significant concerns about the behavior of Professor Markovic. Thisalumnus, a former student of Markovic, noted in the letter that Markovic had displayedbehavior toward students that was erratic and frightening and "eclipses any of hisinstructional abilities." That alumnus also revealed that when the alumnus asked Markovicabout whether Ms. Mattiuzzi, as the Career Counselor, might be helpful in securingemployment for that alumnus (who at that time was a student), Markovic replied with adefamatory tirade against Ms. Mattiuzzi. Markovic stated that Ms. Mattiuzzi would be ofno help, and that Markovic believed that Ms. Mattiuzzi had slept or prostituted her way intothe position of ECS Career Counselor. The alumnus also expressed the belief thatMarkovic "might be a loose canyon and a danger to students." A copy of this letter isattached hereto as Exhibit "A."

Shortly after Ms. Mattiuzzi delivered the letter that is attached as Exhibit "A" to theAffirmative Action Department in the Spring of 2003, Braja Das, former Dean of the CollegeEngineering and Computer Sciences, began to act in a hostile fashion towards Ms.Mattiuzzi. This hostility continued after the Summer break when Dean Das verballyattacked Ms. Mattiuzzi on August 27, 2003. Dean Das informed Ms. Mattiuzzi that he haddecided not to sign her contract to teach CS 194 for the upcoming semester, as scheduled.Ms. Mattiuzzi was convinced that the decision by Dean Das to withhold this contract wasretaliation for her submitting the letter from the CSUS alumnus to Braja Das. That issuewas ultimately resolved when Dean Das received instructions from Campus Personnel thatthe Contract was to be renewed and that Ms. Mattiuzzi would be allowed to teach thecourse. Unfortunately, however, Dean Das continued to be angry at Ms. Mattiuzzi for her

33.2

report of this harassment. He did not speak to Ms. Mattiuzzi at all during the last threeyears of his tenure at CSUS, despite the fact that he was her direct supervisor and theirpaths frequently crossed.

Markovic's intimidating, threatening and abusive behavior has by no means been limitedin its scope to Ms. Mattiuzzi and a few students. A thorough and complete investigationwould reveal that the following individuals either have knowledge of harassment have beenvictims of harassment by Markovic, or can attest to the continuing gender-baseddiscriminatory practices at CSUS.

(1) Lynn Onitsuka, IT Consultant for CSUS, has filed a police report this yearagainst Markovic for threatening her, particularly stating, "I am going to getmy gun and shoot you. Tell your husband he better get a new wife." Thisstatement was made while Ms. Onitsuka was six months pregnant.Furthermore, Department records should verify that approximately six toeight students, or student assistants, have experienced romantic or sexualadvances by Markovic. Ms. Onitsuka feels that Markovic has created a veryuncomfortable and intimidating work atmosphere.

(2) Ben Schaffer, Systems Analyst for CSUS, heard the May 2007 tirade ofMarkovic toward Ms. Mattiuzzi, including Markovic's reference to Ms.Mattiuzzi as a "bitch." (See Exhibit "B," attached hereto).

(3) Suresh Vadhva, current Chair of the EEE Department, has knowledge aboutthe numerous outbursts and threats by Markovic.

(4) S. K. Ramesh, former Chair of the EEE Department, and currently the Deanat CSU Northridge is also aware of the threats, outbursts and harassment byMarkovic. Dr. Ramesh became extremely frustrated by the lack of action byCSUS to take remedial action against Markovic. (See Exhibit "G").

(5) James Wilson, former Secretary of the EEE Department observed severalyears of Markovic's intimidating and harassing conduct.

(6) ', Associate Electrical Engineer, and a former Engineeringstudent of Markovic knows about incidents of harassment by Markovic.

(7) was a student who was dropped by Markovic from his classwhen she was pregnant, because she was sick and missed class. Ms.

has knowledge about how Markovic routinely belittled the women inclass and how Markovic favored men. She reported this information, but wasinformed that the Campus would not take any action.

33.3

(8) Nathan Laye is an alumnus CSUS who wrote the letter attached as Exhibit"A."

(9) David Black is an alumnus of CSUS and heard Markovic make derogatorycomments about Ms. Mattiuzzi. Mr. Black also has information about sexualharassment by Markovic.

(10) Barbara Peterson, Union Representative, has expressed concern about thelack of affirmative action on the part of CSUS to take effective remedialaction to end harassment and possesses knowledge of gender-baseddiscrimination against Ms. Mattiuzzi.

(11) Amir Macari, Dean of the College of Engineering and Computer Science, andMs. Mattiuzzi's Supervisor has knowledge about Ms. Mattiuzzi's claims ofgender-based discrimination and harassment.

As noted above, Markovic again attempted to destroy the reputation of Ms. Mattiuzzi duringthe week of May 14, 2007. At that time, Markovic referred to Ms. Mattiuzzi as a "bitch" toBen Schaffer and two student assistants. (See Exhibit "B" attached hereto).

On October 9, 2007, Ms. Mattiuzzi wrote to Peter Lau, Affirmative Action Officer for CSUS.in that letter, Ms. Mattiuzzi noted that it was the seventh time she was writing to complainabout Markovic. Three of those times concerned harassing behavior by Markovic towardMs. Mattiuzzi. Four of those times concerned harassing behavior by Markovic towardsstudents and major employers. Ms. Mattiuzzi noted, "I have never received a response andI have no idea what action has been taken in the past. I just know that the behavior doesnot stop." (See Exhibit "C" attached hereto).

In November of 2007, Ms. Mattiuzzi received a letter dated November 16, 2007, from Mr.Lau, which noted that Mr. Lau had discussed Ms. Mattiuzzi's complaint with Dean Macari,who decided to investigate the complaint himself. Mr. Lau noted, "He [Dean Macari] hasinformed me that he has concluded the investigation, and has taken action to prevent anyfurther occurrence of similar behavior from Dr. Markovic (See Exhibit "D" attached hereto).Neither the scope of this investigation, nor the form of remedial action, was relayed to Ms.Mattiuzzi.

On January 30, 2008, Ms. Mattiuzzi again wrote to Mr. Lau, expressing serious concernsabout the behavior of Markovic. In this letter, Ms. Matttuzzi revealed that she continuedto receive information about Markovic "that is disturbing and unsettling and causes me toexperience stress in the work environment." Ms. Mattiuzzi noted that Dr. Gonan, aProfessor in Engineering, had received a complaint from a student about being harassedby Markovic, but that the student was unwilling to file a formal complaint. Ms. Mattiuzzi

33.4

further stated that a student told her on January 10-2008, that Markovic had invited thestudent to his home on various occasions to work on Markovic's car. Ms. Mattiuzzi notedthat this action was reminiscent of Markovic's involvement with another student. (SeeExhibit "E" attached hereto).

On February 25, 2008, Dave Black, a CSUS) Engineering graduate, wrote to Ms. Mattiuzzi,informing her about another incident of inappropriate behavior by Markovic. Thisinappropriate behavior was directed towards a CSUS intern. (See Exhibit "F" attachedhereto).

On May 1, 2008, Union Representative, Barbara Peterson, wrote to Peter Lau, askingabout the status of the investigation that Mr. Lau had told Ms. Mattiuzzi he was conducting.Mr. Lau noted in a response email that new information had come up and he needed tointerview additional witnesses.

In a letter dated June 4, 2008, to Ms. Mattiuzzi, Mr. Lau indicated that he had completedhis investigation into her complaint against Markovic. Mr. Lau noted that he had talked to"a number of witnesses, and only one, a former student, 'confirmed some of the facts'."With regards to Ms. Mattiuzzi's allegation of harassment against her by Markovic, Mr. Launoted that Dean Macari had investigated that allegation, "confirmed the incident" and hadtaken action based on his investigation. Ms. Mattiuzzi was not informed of the scope ofthis investigation, nor was she informed of any remedial action.

On August 28,2008, Markovic encountered Ms. Mattiuzzi and went out of his way to bumpher two times. This caused her to fear for her personal safety. Ms. Mattiuzzi reported thisincident to Campus Police and the Affirmative Action Office; yet, no action has been takenagainst Markovic regarding that incident.

ANALYSIS OF THE LAW

The California Fair Employment and Housing Act expressly prohibits workplaceharassment based on sex. Government Code Section 12940(j)(1) dictates that, "It shallbe an unlawful employment practice for an employer... because of. . . sex... to harassan employee ... harassment of an employee ... by an employee other than an agent orsupervisor shall be unlawful if the entity, or its agents or supervisors, knows or should haveknown of this conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. Anentity shall take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment from occurring."

Sexual harassment is defined as conduct of a sexual nature, including, but not limited to:

(A) Verbal harassment, e.g., epithets, derogatory comments or slurs on a basisenumerated in the act; or

33.5

(B) Physical harassment, e.g., assault, impeding or blocking movement, or anyphysical interference with normal work or movement, when directed at anindividual on a basis enumerated in the act. (See California GovernmentCode Section 129400), California Code Regs. Tit. 2, Section 7287.6(b)(A-D)and 7291.1(f)(1)).

Conduct that is not sexual in nature, but is otherwise based on a person's gender, will alsoconstitute sexual harassment in violation of California and Federal law. For example, inFuller v. City of Oakland (9th Cir. 1995) 47 F.3d 1522, the Court found that repeated "hang-up" telephone calls, intrusion into the employee's personnel files, and threats to plaintiffand her boyfriend's physical safety violated Title VII. In Accardi v. Superior Court (1993)17 Cal.App.4th 341, 350, the Court held that comments that women do not belong in theworkplace created an actionable claim of hostile work environment under the FairEmployment and Housing Act.

In Hall v. Gus Construction Company (8th Cir. 1988) 842 F.2d 1010, 1014, the Court heldthat a sexual harassment, hostile environment claim was established under Title VII wherefemale traffic controllers at all male construction sites were subjected to name calling; malecrew members urinated in one female employee's water bottle and another in plaintiffs car,gas tanks; and, the defendant failed to fix the truck females were forced to drive until oneof the males had to drive it. Finally. Birschtein v. New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc.(2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 994, 1001-1002, the Court held that a male co-worker's repeatedacts of staring at his female co-worker, after being rebuked for his prior harassment of her,may qualify as actionable sexual harassment.

Incidents of sexual harassment directed towards employees in the workplace other thenthe complainant, but observed or known to the complainant, are admissible to determinewhether a reasonable person in the complainant's position would find the conduct severelyhostile or abusive. A reasonable person may also be offended by knowledge that otherworkers are being sexually harassed in the workplace, even if he or she does notpersonally witness that conduct. Bevda v. City of Los Angeles (1988) 65 Cal.App.4th 511,519. It is not a defense to a hostile environment claim that the harasser did not intend thebehavior to be offensive or harassing. (See Ellison v. Bradv [9th Cir. 1991] 924 F.2d 892,961).

Once an employer receives a report of sexual harassment, an employer is required toinvestigate the claim promptly and thoroughly. (See American Airlines v. Superior Court[2003] 114 Cal.App.4th 881, 890; EEOC Compliance Manual CCH, Section 615, If 3114,pg. 3284). Furthermore, the Fair Employment and Housing Act imposes on employers anobligation to take immediate and appropriate corrective action to end the harassment.(California Government Code Section 12940(j)).

Under both State and Federal law, effective action is action that satisfies the twin purposesof ending the harassment and deterring future harassment by the same offender or others.

33.6

(See e.g., Swenson v. Potter [9th Cir. 2001] 271 F.3d 1184, and Ellison v. Brady T9lh Cir.1991] 924 F.2d 892, 881, held, continued counseling, warnings and an attempt at informalseparation were insufficient when it was apparent that these disciplinary measures wereineffective in terminating the harasser's behavior). While it may be reasonable for anemployer not to want to discipline a highly productive employee, the employer is statutorilyobligated to do so if harassment occurs. If the only appropriate remedy is to separate theharasser and victim, the employer may be required to demote or transfer the harasser,even if it is an "unreasonable" management decision to do so - under no circumstancescan the victim be penalized in response to a finding of harassment. Steinerv. ShowboatOperating Company (6th Cir. 1994) 25 F.3d 1459.

Our concern regarding the harassment issue focuses on three areas: (1) CSUS did nottake reasonable steps to prevent harassment against Ms. Mattiuzzi and other employeesand students from taking place; (2) CSUS did not conduct thorough and completeinvestigations into the allegations of harassment by Markovic after complaints ofharassment were made; and, (3) CSUS did not take effective remedial action to end theharassment by Markovic against Ms. Mattiuzzi and others, once CSUS Managementlearned of this harassment. Markovic continues to threaten, intimidate and frightenemployees, including the heinous act of threatening to get his gun and shoot a femaleemployee while she was in the middle of her pregnancy. Without question, a SacramentoJury would be outraged by the fact that the Campus allowed Markovic to conduct himselfin such an arbitrary and capricious fashion.

We are also concerned with retaliation that Ms. Mattiuzzi has experienced because shereported the harassment against herself and others at CSUS. The courts have held thatan employee engages in "protected activity" and may not experience any adverseemployment action for that "protected activity," when the employee opposes in good faiththe harassment of a co-worker (Hernandez v. Space Labs Medical, Inc. [9th Cir. 2003] 343F.3d 1107, or opposes in good faith the perceived sexual harassment of another, even ifthis belief is mistaken. See Flait v. North American Watch Corporation [1992] 3Cal.App.4th 467, 477).

In late October, or early November of this year, Human Resources and CampusAdministration for CSUS declared that Ms. Mattiuzzi would no longer be allowed to teachthe Career Planning class that she has taught for 30 years. Ms. Mattiuzzi was told by herSupervisor that he has been informed by the Provost and Human Resources that now, onlyemployees in academic-related classifications can teach. Ms. Mattiuzzi has been seekingto be reclassified to Student Services Professional Academic-rRelated Services (SSPAR)for approximately 25 years. Ms. Mattiuzzi's Supervisor supports this reclassification andthe APC Union has stated that it does not object to her reclassification. We consider theremoval of Ms. Mattiuzzi's teaching responsibilities by Human Resources to be retaliationfor submitting complaints about Professor Markovic's illegal activities. The refusal toreclassify Ms. Mattiuzzi's position, when such reclassification is fully warranted, constitutesat a minimum, gender-based discrimination, in violation of the California Fair Employmentand Housing Act.

33.7

Ms. Mattiuzzi has experienced significant distress and trauma, including nightmares,sleeplessness, and anxiety as a result of the harassment and retaliation that she hasexperienced.

IV.

DEMAND FOR RESOLUTION

In order to resolve this case without resorting to litigation, and in exchange for signing aRelease of all Claims for all acts or omissions that have taken place to the date that thesettlement and release agreement is signed, the following must take place:

Dr. Markovic should be terminated. At an absolute minimum, he should betransferred out of Riverside Hall and, away from the staff so that Ms.Mattiuzzi and other staff members do not have regular contact with him.

Ms. Mattiuzzi must be reclassified as a SSP AR III. There is no legitimatereason why this reclassification cannot take place.

Sexual Harassment training for the faculty and staff must occur.

Ms. Mattiuzzi must be reimbursed for all attorneys fees.

Payment of $50,000.00 must be made to compensate Ms. Mattiuzzi for thesevere emotional distress that she has been subjected to, and to help covercosts of therapy and counseling, which we estimate, at this point, to beapproximately $7,500.00 to $10,000.00.

We filed a Complaint of Discrimination with the Department of Fair Employment andHousing and have obtained a "Right-to-Sue" letter, allowing us to resolve this matter in theSacramento Superior Court, if necessary. As previously noted, we would like to resolvethis matter without resorting to Court intervention, if possible. If, however, we are not ableto resolve this matter informally, through either discussions, a meeting, or mediation, wewill pursue this matter in Court.

We would like to remind CSUS that there must be no retaliation against Ms. Mattiuzzi forreporting these acts of harassment. This includes, but is not limited to, changes in workassignments, transfers or changes in work schedules.

33.8

Please contact me or have CSUS University General Counsel contact me within two weeksfrom the date of this letter to discuss these issues. We look forward to hearing from youand thank you for your attention to this matter.

Respectfully,

James E. McGlamery, Esq.EnclosuresJEM:mdd

33.9

2870NEHogaa.E#475Gresham, OR 97030

I>r. DosaM R. GerthPresident

6000 J StteetSacsafaent-e, CA 95819

Dr. Gertfa,

I am writing to discuss recent actions of Dr. Miroslav Markovic.

In Noveaaber, I spoke with Dr. Kamesh, liie Chair of the KEE department regarding theseincidents. I wanted to follow up that oral conversation with a written statement.

I have taken several classes from Dr. Markovic during die past three semesters. He hasalways bees, good instructor as far as academics are concerned. However, his recent

industry V^£ been erratic ^v« fiigHtemog, ftrxj it

Dr. Markoyip's actions daring the1 fall semester of 2002 have uaderMned tfeb efforts ofstudeats seefcbjg;eraployjaeal •fee after-'- graduation; arxj have created bad relations betweenpoteatial ea loyers and the CoSege. This has created a great deal of stress for severalstudents, including myself.

In October 2002, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) conducted several on-campusmterviews of .electrical eogmeeriug stodents. Two of these students, Z^LJ: - ^ — L__aad

TOPTP stife>se{|ueGdy chosen for secondary interviews that were coadtieted atPGE's cefj^Qfafee offices in San Praaeiseo. The secondary interviews lasted all day, andhappened to conflict with Dr. Markovic's classes.

A professor should be expected to allow students who are in the process of obtainingemployment hi their chosen field of industry to miss class for interviews. Such was not thecase whii Dr. Markovic. He anBO«aaced in class that students who west to interviewsduring class time would be failed. In what seemed Kke a rant, he said that industry needsto respect aeaderaia, and that PG&E needed to change its interview dates to avoidinterfering with his class tones. (He repeated these statemeots in the next class period.)

>

At fast, I just thought Dr. Maifcovic was simply frustrated for some unknown reason, andtiiat fee was vesting in front of the class. However, in subsequent conversations with Mr.

( pad j8dSr _ I learned ttmt Dr. Markovic had said that he would make good onhis t&reats aad that he would not pass them if they went to the interviews. Mr. ,actually !?sfent to Dr. Markovic's office to plead his case, and he received the sameresponse: "Attend the interview and you wiD fail this class."

33.10

This caused both of them considerable mental -stress. Mr.., said to me: "The reasonI go to scfcoolistp getajob. I can* get the job if I dont go to the interviews and I cant getthe job if I desalt pass fee dass." Mr. and Mr contimed to be upset aboutthis situation mail after graduation.

Dr. Maricovic's statements were also quite upsetting to me, for several reasons. First, hisactions caused a lot of stress for my classmates and me. I felt that this behavior crossed theline and that he was bullying and brow beating students. Second, a few weeks before thisincident, I Ired informed Dr. Markovic that I would be missing class for an interview with acompany. At the time, he seemed to have no problem with it. However, after hisstatemeats in dass regarding the P<3&£ interviews, I became concerned that. I would notpass the dass. I contiE»edto wony abont this for a number of weeks before graduation.

On 11-19-2002, Dr. Maaiovic took written roll in a manner I'd never seea him use before.He sent a^peee-ofgajiier around tfie class asd asked us aH to write dowc 0£ff names. At theend of tihis process, he made a veitoal comment tj«tf Mr _aad Mr ;w?eFeabsent '("Etas w#s tfa^ day of theit PG£ interviews.)

On several later occasions, Dr. Maitovic made comments in class that seemed to be avefled threat, relating to this same issue.

Near the end of the semester, when the instructor comment sheets were distributed to theclass, Dr. Markovic told us that he had conflicts with staff and with the College in the pastHe said that he had weathered these difficulties without problem, and that "negativecomments about instructors are often reflected back on the writer." I took this to be athreat to the class that negative comments regarding Dr. Markovic would do no good, andmay coose back to haunt us. (I considered this a very real threat. In the ElectricalEngineering speciafcy of power engineering, there are very few instructors available for thearea. Dr. Maricovie teaches most of the power classes. I have heard, bat carniotsufestaatiate, titat Dr. Markovic would give very low grades to those who somehow got oabis bad side.)

I also believe that Dr. Markovic is a detriment to CSUS in his reJatioas with companyrecruiters. Daring a SBCHB interview that I attended, the recruiter commented negativelyabout Dr. Mafcfco'vic's attitude aM behavior. (Dr. Maifejvie himself stated in class thai hehad coiorBtfflieaiiem wifli seares-al recruiters and :had written several letters regardiag whenthey could .eoadact interviews. To me it sounded more Eke harassment of the recruitersaad their sapejriors. E&her way, I feel that this would make a potential employer less likelyto bother to recruit at CSUS.)

There are a few other things that have caused me to be concerned about Dr. Maricovic'sbehavior.

In the week of 12/7/20€>2, Dr. Markovic said that per a memo from the CSUS president(Dr. GeriiX he could sot see students during finals week outside of dass "due to safety

33.11

reasons" aad "because aeektesis to/t occurred at other campuses." I don't know if such amem© exists, bta it sounded Kfee be was- saying, that students might have reason to beconeeiBed about IMS menial stab3&y, and that others might have considered him to be somekind of a safety threat

Finally, during aa office, visit about two semesters -ago, I asked Dr, Markovie about severalcareer issoejs. One qaestiod was -cyke&er or not the ECS career eoBasei&r, Cicinaght be keJp&l in seeming exoiôjffleat. I had expected a simpie yes or no answer OBwfaedier or IK* she co«M help. I>. Markovic replied with a tirade. He said that she wouldbe of no help, and that he beEeved that she had eêntiafly slept or prostituted her way intotfce positioa of ECS career counselor. I was so surprised by this response that h stuck himy trcmd for a long time. (I did not mention this conversation to asyone until speakingwith Dr. Ramesh regardiag Dr. Markovic's student relatioHS. I bad assumed that Dr.Markovic was merely sexist, but later came to think that he might be a loose cannon aad apotential daager to students. I could not imagine a professor speaking about a staffmember in that way.)

I should say again that as far as technical knowledge is concerned, Dr. Markovic is anexcellent instructor.

However, in light of the behaviors I have observed, his propensity to intimidate students,and his erratic and sometimes fiighteaiog actions, I'm wondering if he should be removedfrom his position.

Cordially,

Nathan Laye

cc: Dr. SJKRamesh

33.12

Layei§70 NE Hogan Rd E#475Iresham, OR 97030

7001 2S10 Q Q O b f lOHQ 4833\

SK RameshDcpattuient of Electrical EngineeringCSU, Sacramento6000.1 StreetSacramento, CA 95819

11,1Illillll l i u l l l l



"Dr. Markovic stopped by my work area in 2016. A student assistant and I were both sitting in the room atthe time this occurred.

"He asked me about a retractable cordless mouse that I had been using in the past. I made a light-heartedcomment about Cici Mattiuzzi having "stolen" it.

*ln response to this comment, Dr. Markovic went into a small tirade:-He referred to Ms. Mattiuzzi as a "bitch"-He said I was a young employee and that he would handle getting my mouse back

-Ben Schaffer

33.14

October 9, 2Q©7•ii » fr* • •»

Peter LauAffirmative Action OfficerCSU, Sacramento6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819

Dear Peter,

For the seventh time I find myself writing to complain about Dr Miroslav Maikovic. Three times 1 have come toyou about his harassing behavior towards me to request that you take action. Four times I have come to you andprevious persons in authority regarding harassing behavior towards students and major employers.

1 have never received a response and I have no idea what action has been taken in the past. I just know that thebehavior does not stop. I am aware that past department chairs in the department that Dr Markovic reports to haveon numerous occasions come to you and your predecessors seeking relief from Dr. Markovic. 1 believe that there isa, failure to protect individuals from this type of behavior on this campus.

Attached please find a document given to me in late May. I was made aware that Dr Markovic was speaking in ahostile and threatening fashion about me once again.

In the spring when the event surfaced, three people in this College, all in positions of authority, told me that it wouldserve no useful purpose to complain because no action would be taken. Upon my return to campus for the fallsemester, I find the problem distracting and I feej unsafe in my work environment A little over a week ago myoffice had been entered and my computer was on when I came to work. Things were moved around. I checked withthe IT support staff and the student assistants who work for me, and none of them had been in my office during theprevious period. While I cannot prove that Dr Markovic was in my office, I am aware, as you are aware, that DrMarkovic has on other occasions destroyed labs and student projects.

! find the continuing harassment embarrassing and humiliating. Once again I am requesting your assistance withresolving the problem.

I would appreciate a response to this letter.

Sincerely,

Cici Mattiuzzi916-278-7091/ cicifficsus edu

cc Emir Macari, Dean College of Engineering and Computer ScienceSuresh Vadhva, Chair, Electrical EngineeringBarbara Peterson, Vice President, Academic Professionals of California

33.15



*Dr. Markovic stopped by my work area in 2016. A student assistant and I were both sitting in the room atihe time this occurred.

"He asked me about a retractable cordless mouse that I had been using in the past. I made a light-heartedcomment about Cici Mattiuzzi having "stolen" it.

*ln response to this comment, Dr. Markovic went into a small tirade:-He referred to Ms. Mattiuzzi as a "bitch"-He said I was a young employee and that he would handle getting my mouse back

-Ben Schaffer

33.16

California State L jrsity, SacramentoOffice of Human Resources6000 j Street • Sacramento, CA 95819-6032httpy/www.csus.edu/hr

November 16, 2007

To. Cici MattiuzziCollege of Engineering & Computer Science

From.

Re:


Harassment Complaint

This is a follow-up to my Oct. 19, 2007 email to you. I have discussed your complaintwith Dean Macari. Dean Macari has decided to investigate the complaint himself. Hehas informed me that he has concluded the investigation, and has taken action to preventany further occurrence of similar behavior from Dr. Markovic. As I said in my email,should you encounter any more harassment from Dr. Markovic, please inform me as soonas possible.

Sincerely yours,


«'. . AUI-ORNIA STATt UNIVtHSlfY Bakersfield • Channel Islands • Cnieo • Domingue* Hills • East Say • Fresno • Fullerton • Humboldt • Long Beach • LosAngeles • Maritime Acadtmy • Mo->

<iO"n'idae • Pomon* • Socramenio • San Bernardino • San Diego • San Francisco • San Jose • San Luis Obisoo • San Marcos • Sonoma • Scanislaus

33.17

January 30, 2@©8

Peter LauAffinnativc Action OfficerCSU, Sacramento6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819

Dear Peter,

As in the past, I continue to receive information about Dr. Markovic that is disturbing and unsettling andthat causes me to experience stress in the work environment.

I have recently been told that Dr. Gonan, a professor in EEE has received a complaint from a student aboutbeing harassed by Dr. Markovic and that the sTnQent is'unwilling to file a formal complaint. Myunderstanding is that this was brought to Dr. Gonan's attention last semester.

On January I Oth, a student tofd me directly that Dr. Masfcovic has nrafeekksa 6s>Ais.fea»e OB Hssjerousoccasions to work on Markovic's car. The student is quite unaware of the implications. This type ofpersonal involvement with a student 'may not be appropriate. It is definitely reminiscent of DrMarkovic'sinvotveraeat with Peter ôbiao. You will recall that this was a situation in which Markovic ingratiatedhimself with a student over a period of time, apparently attempted to develop a distinctly inappropriaterelationship, and then stalked him and actively sought to disrupt the student's employment The Robino .matter is well documented.

As you know, I was recently required to complete the CSU sexual harassment on-line workshop. Theworkshop's instruction is that if a staff member has reason to believe that any type of harassment is takingplaee, it must be reported. My experience, however, is that the effort is futile and feat effective action willnot be taken by fee campus. In addition, my experience has been that negative conseqaeaees-will followfrom having made the required report The workshop also stressed that making negative comments aboutanother employee could be actionable. So I am in the position of having to decide whether or not I shouldwarn a student about a faculty member who might be grooming him as prey, as he has done before. Eitherway, 1 am subjected to a conflict that should not be present in my work environment. And, it necessarilybrings back to mind the fact that Markovic has'directed hostility tow^s-me, and that he is still just downthe hall. And, it brings back to mind the fact that my former supervisor immediately stoppedcommunicating wife me in almost any way, after that supervisor learaed feat I bad fifed a cemptaJHt aboutM&3eevic. Before communications with mat supervisor ceased, he subjected me to an irratSSraafteajsaBigue.In addition, he stopped supporting my reclassification and tried to remove an area of responsibility. I wasdircctlytote tketiay supervisor thwarted my recfess after I reported tfese,2©83 etflM.

Indeed, the workshop itself and the requirement that I take it gives reason for me to experience distress.The workshop's injunctions put me in a bind. The workshop's assertion mat matters such as this willbe resolved correctly defies reality as I know it

Sincerely,

Cici Mattiuzzi916-278-7091/ [email protected]

33.18

From: [email protected]: Fwd: Dr. Markovic

Date: February 25, 2008 7:39:18 AM PSTTo: [email protected]

Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 07:38:19 -0800To: [email protected]: Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>Subject: Fwd: Dr. MarkovicCc: [email protected], [email protected]:X-Attachments:

X-lronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: trueX-lronPort-Anti-Spam-Result:Ao8CAEaFwUdMYD4Yb2dsb2JhbACCOzKNbgEKBAQEBQoRBYEPX-lronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,398,1199692800";

d="scan'208,217";a="130056239"From: "David Black" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Subject: Dr. MarkovicDate: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:56:28 -0800Thread-Index: Ach3OHzNYrvHAdW8RXq2YfxEOGoz3A==X-Virus-Status: NoX-Virus-Checker-Version: clamassassin 1.2.4 with clamdscan / ClamAV 0.92/5977/Sun Feb 24 13:56:542008

Cici,

During the summer of 2007,1 worked with a CSUS intern named __^ He informed me that hewas a student of Dr. Miroslav Markovic and that there had been some strange behavior exhibited by Dr.Markovic involving another male power student was close friends with the power student and wastold that Dr. Markovic had offered to purchase a laptop (for the student) and offered to take the student toHawaii during the summer so that they could spend some time on the beach and grade papers together.The student did, not feel comfortable with the situation because he was also a student of Dr. Markovic andapproached iwith advice on what to do. • ladvised his friend to notify campus security about thesituation because he thought that this behavior was not appropriate. The student filed a complaint withcampus authorities and_l was under the impression that an investigation had begun and that Dr.Markovic would be reprimanded for his inappropriate behavior.

That is all that can remember from what told me last summer concerning Dr. Markovic. It is very sadthat this type of behavior has been tolerated throughout the years at CSUS. That fact that Dr. Markovic is atenured professor does not give him the right td sexually harass unsuspecting young students. I personallyfind this behavior intolerable and cannot understand why CSUS has not stepped in to permanently 'diffusethe situation. An educational facility should foster and support a harassment free environment as does anyprofessional work place.

Sincerely,

Dave Black P.E.CSUS EE Power Graduate, 2003

Cici MattiuzziDirector, Career Services OfficeCollege of Engineering & Computer ScienceCSU, Sacramento6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819-6023 33.19

From: S K Ramesh <[email protected]>Datef©Gfober 6; 20©i 3:33:38 PM PDTTo: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>Subject: Dr. Markovic

Cici and Paul

I was saddened to hear about the recent threats by Dr. Markovic towardsyou and other members of the staff. During the time I was at SacramentoState there was more than one occasion where his behavior andinteraction with our students raised serious concerns. I brought these tothe attention of Donna Selnick (University Legal Counsel) and the Office ofFaculty Affairs in November 2002 and subsequently to the President'sOffice in February 2003.

As far as l.k-n-ow no action was taken on this ma<tfeer as of the time I leftSacramento State in 2006. My concern then and now is for the welfare ofour students, faculty and staff and it is imperative that appropriate stepsare taken to ensure their safety at all times.

Sincerely,

Ramesh

S. K. Ramesh, Ph.D.Dean,College of Engineering and Computer Science &Professor of Electrical and Computer EngineeringCalifornia State University, NorthridgeCA 91330-8295Tel: 818-677-4501 Fax: 818-677-2140e-maii: [email protected]

33.20

Exhibit 34

Forwarded messageFrom: cici mattiuzzi <cicima2z(o)/gmail.com>Date: Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 7:15 PMSubject: Fwd: Markovic StatementTo: kiraking@,sbcglobai,net

Forwarded messageFrom: James Wilson <james.i [email protected]>Date: Tue, Nov 4,2008 at 1:15 PMSubject: Markovic StatementTo: cicima2z(o),gmail.com

My name is James Wilson, and from November 2005 to February 2007,1 wasthe Administrative Support Coordinator in the Electrical andElectronic Engineering Department at Sacramento State University.During that time, there were numerous incidents that occurredinvolving Dr. Miroslav Markovic that were disturbing, if notfrightening.

The beginning of every semester was sure to bring complaints into myoffice as Dr. Markovic adhered to a self imposed policy of only 12students per class. Even after being warned by the department, andpleaded with to admit more students into his classes, he steadfastlyrefused. Not only did he refuse, but he made threats to students sothat they would drop the class and lower his class size to hissatisfaction. There is one instance that sticks out in my mind inwhich he told a student he would hit him in the head with a baseballbat if he returned to another lecture. Complaints ranged from verbalharassment to sexual harassment. The threats were so common at thebeginning of every semester that, sadly, the staff became accustomedto hearing them and would joke about what the next student through the .,. .

i

door would have to say about their experiences trying to add a courseof Dr. Markovic's.

Even students that were allowed to stay in Dr. Markovic's class weresubjected to verbal abuse and often times had their grades adverselyaffected. Of those that were brave enough to come forward with gradeappeals against Dr. Markovic, they were always afraid that theirappeal would enrage him enough to try to derail their careers. Dr.Markovic had made attempts to contact companies that were hiring someof his former students to have them "blacklisted" from being hired.Once he gained a reputation for doing that, it was sufficient to scaremany of his prospective students away and to keep those that weresubject to his abuse silent.

Imagine being an undergraduate student and having to withstand beingberated and threatened, and knowing that you had to put up with it orface receiving a bad grade or even having your career threatened aftergraduation.

Dr. Markovic's demeanor also presented problems for the Electrical andElectronic Engineering Department as a whole as well. As a seniormember of the Faculty, he was one of the few members eligible to serveon the department's, Retention, Tenure and Promotion committee. As amember of that committee, he had sway over whether junior facultymembers would receive tenure within the department. Since juniorfaculty almost always served on committees such as the Grade AppealsCommittee, the department was left with the political decision of whatto do with the constant flow of grade appeals that Dr. Markovic'sstudents generated. Junior faculty felt uncomfortable with theposition of determining to grant a student a grade appeal, fearingthat overturning one of Dr. Markovic's grades would affect theirchances of tenure within the department, and hence, jeopardize the 4to 6 years of hard work that they had put in to try to be awardedtenure as a professor.

Although Dr. Markovic can come across as a soft spoken, humble andalmost genteel person, he has a capricious side that has been welldocumented by students through complaints and grade appeals.

Dr. Markovic was rarely seen at mandatory department meetings (overthe almost two years I was there, he attended two meetings to myknowledge), and frankly was not missed. No one in the department,from the department chair to the faculty wanted to confront him aboutwhy he did not attend the mandatory meetings. His temper forexploding when questioned about his actions, or in this case,inaction, was well known by all the faculty, and most people just lefthim alone.

As you can see, not only students are afraid of Dr. Markovic, but hiscolleagues as well are afraid of him, either via intimidation oractual threats that he has levied. And not without reason. At one 34 2

point, Dr. Markovic was in a dispute ^ vêr lab use with anotherprofessor. After the department chair had decided to let anotherprofessor use the same lab Dr. Markovic uses for instructionalpurposes, Dr. Markovic flew into a rage and removed all of theelectrical equipment from the lab and tossed it into the bushes behindthe building. The sprinklers ruined the equipment all weekend longand when it was discovered the following Monday, nearly $30,000 inelectrical equipment was considered a total loss. The police werecalled and a report was filed, but no action was taken against Dr.Markovic.

I hope this brief narrative illustrates that Mrs. Mattiuzzi'sexperiences are not unique and that it is part of a larger pattern inthe way Dr. Markovic has treated colleagues.

Regards,James .1. Wilson

34.3

Exhibit 35

Subject: ECS Career Planning ClassDate: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 19:55:10 -0800Thread-Topic: ECS Career Planning ClassThread-Index: Acll ++WaOWnlovHARM+NgiaOdayKjQ==From: "Macari, Emir" <[email protected]>To: "Cici Mattiuzzi" <[email protected]>T <[email protected]>X-Virus-Status: NoX-Virus-Checker-Version: clamassassin 1.2.4 with clamdscan / ClamAV0.92/8861/Tue Jan 13 08:09:19 2009

Dear Cici,

Starting with this semester, ECS Department Chairs will be the faculty of recordfor the workshops we offer to our ECS students (CE 194, ME 194, EEE 194 andCSC 192) Career Planning.

This is in compliance with the new regulations of Bargaining Unit 4.

Students do enjoy and get a lot of these workshops and I want to make surethat we continue with our tradition of focusing of what is best for our students.

Thanks for all your work and I look forward to continuing to work with you formany years to come.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Best wishes,

Emir

Emir Jose Macari, DeanCollege of Engineering and Computer ScienceRiverside Hall 2014California State University, Sacramento6000 J StreetSacramento, CA 95819-6023(916) 278-6127 phone(916) 278-5949 [email protected]://www.ecs.csus.edu

35.1

Exhibit 36

From: Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected] edu>Subject: response to your email re: ECS career classes

Date: January 20, 2009 11 43:29 AM PSTTo: [email protected]: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Emir:

I am writing in response to your note and our discussion regarding CE 1 94, ME 194, EEE 1 94 and CSC 192 - the classes Iordinarily teach and have taught for 25 years as a regular part of my job description.

You indicated that in an effort to comply with agreements with Unit 4 (sic), "ECS Department Chairs will be the faculty ofrecord" for these classes. I have spoken with representatives of both Unit 3 and Unit 4. This solution does not meet withtheir approval.

Be that as it may, I have no problem continuing to teach these classes, consistent with my job description. These classesare essential to the academic mission of the College. They are essential components of a student service programdeveloped in the the College over the course of 25 years and under the leadership of four different Deans. These classescannot simply be described as "workshops," as you suggested in your note. And they are not simply something that"students enjoy," as you also suggested. These classes have been and continue to be an integral part of the studentservices program in which I work.

Last semester, I had 59 students enrolled. For this semester, there are 34 students currently registered (early January).Historically, my classes fill during add/drop. Given the early enrollment figures, and given the current economic crisis, Iexpect unusually high numbers of registrations for this Spring's semester.

Ordinarily, I attract a number of students who are simply seeking to fulfill their two-unit career planning requirement in CS.More often, students enroll in my classes to obtain the information and skills necessary to translate their academic traininginto a career action plan.

\s

In these classes, I am not simply providing information I have gathered in the absence of extensive academic research andprofessional training. These classes depend on the fact that I am an authoritative and independent subject matter expertin the fields of career development, labor market economics, and the ever changing technologies and industries associatedwith engineering and computer science. In these classes, I rely on my extensive and ongoing research program relating tohiring trends and hiring practices in the fields of engineering and computer science. For these classes, I have developedcurricula and written a textbook that is published and in it's third edition. I am working on a second book.

ABET accreditation teams have repeatedly noted that the CSUS College of E&CS provides a model of excellence withrespect to its career services office. They review our program and they say that it is model to be emulated, particularlyciting the credit classes. The benefit to the College and to our students is recognized.

Removing me as the instructor of record would substantially alter my job description and the terms of my employment.Canceling these classes would do great harm to the students and to the College's student service program. You suggestedthat perhaps I could teach these classes "after hours." That is not an option.

The current problem is not the result of Unit 3 demands. The current problem is that I have for years been working "out ofclass" and beyond the expectations for my classification. This is not just about the classes I teach. The entire College ofE&CS Career Services Program depends on my continued willingness to work beyond my classification level.

I have repeatedly sought to be classified correctly. I greatly appreciate the energy and enthusiasm you have expended inseeking to rectify and resolve this administrative error.

On October 14th, 2008, President Alexander Gonzalez signed off on the campus Affirmative Action report, where it wasnoted that: "promotion and advancement at the University are encouraged and will continue to be based solely on explicitcriteria."

36.1

His assertion notwithstanding, I have repeatedly been denied reclassification and promotion for arbitrary reasons,irrespective of the stated criteria, and specifically in response to gender discrimination.

CICI

36.2

Exhibit 37

Original MessageFrom: Cici Mattiuzzi [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 3:09 PMTo: [email protected]: need updated student rostersImportance: High

Hi,

I notice that I can no longer access my classes on My Sac State.

I have 4 classes that are cross listed in all engineering majors andone CS class. I teach a total of 5 classes with 13 classes feedinginto those 5. I will need you to print me updated class rosters eachweek for the next three weeks. Many students are adding my class andI am not able to update the lists.

I know that this is an in convenience to each of you. It is alsovery difficult for me. I am sorry for this problem. I expect thatat some point the problem will be resolved one way or another.

Thank you for your assistance.

Cici


phone: 916-278-7091fax: 916-278-5949

Printed for Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>37.1

Exhibit 38

fe'braary 4, 2009*

Peter LauAffirmative Action OfficerCSU, Sacramento

^Dear Peter,

I am coming to you for the 10th time to inform you about the disturbing behavior of Dr.Miroslav Markovic. I spoke on Friday, January 30th, to a recent graduate in ElectricalEngineering who now works for Pacific Gas and Electric. Her name is ] ' , Sheand ' •• were students in Dr Markovic's EEE 145 class and were falsely accusedof cheating. According to Madeline Fish, Director of the Minority Engineering Program, bothstudents had A's and B's in all of their classes and received a D in Dr Markovic's class.

c told me that Dr Markovic repeatedly stated in class that he "hates women" andthat "women do not belong in engineering". She stated further that Dr. Markoviccontinuously belittled and deg-Faeted the women in the class and held the women to adifferent standard than the men. She indicated that she andj worked feverishly todeliver to Dr Markovic what he required, but even when it matched the work of the men inclass, their work was given a failing grade. She stated that Dr Markovic gave more.pointsto the men and called the women cheaters.

_,also indicated that Dr. Markovic requires all students in his class to purchase thecourse text directly from him and to pay in cash ($65). The text is an assembledcompilation (i.e., photocopied) and not a published work or a compilation sold through thebookstore.

______ told me that the semester after they took his class, Dr Markovic demanded thatthe women provide him with copies of their Sr. Project documents. When they refused, hepressured them with repeated, menacing phone calls. There is no apparent academicreason for him to have needed access to their work from another class according to

Both women went to numerous persons in a position of authority on this campus and weretold that they "should just graduate and get out of here". They were told that there wasnothing that could be done.

jndicated that she is willing to make statements about the treatment she and.received at the hands of Dr. Markovic. She stated that there are other women at PG&E thatshe has met who have been belittled or harassed by Dr Markovic. She also indicated thatshe is very familiar'with a male stalking incident. She is willing to document the above.

I am providing this information to you consistent with my responsibilities.

Cici Mattiuzzi

38.1

Exhibit 39

?:March 23, 2009

Peter Lau, Affirmative Action Officer

CSU, Sacramento

Dear Peter,

Once again I am coming to you to inform you about the behavior of Dr. MiroslavMarkovic. This oast week I spoke to Shalveena Dayal (Shalve) .; ^ who was referred to me through Mariana Rivera of theMinority Engineering Program regarding her treatment in Dr. Markovic's classes. Shehas taken 3 classes from Dr. Markovic. She is currently in EEE 131 and took EEE143 and EEE 145 last semester.

Shalve indicated that she fainted in class in the fall of 2008 because she was afraidto ask Dr Markovic to leave his class. She was in a 3-hour lab and felt ill butbecause of the intimidating climate she felt that Dr Markovic would belittle andridicule her if she asked to leave. She stated that Dr. Markovic "does not makesense" and that "he shakes chairs and throws pens in a threatening way" creating aclimate of fear and anxrety in class. She indicated that he displays anger also in hisoffice hours by throwing pens. She stated that he frequently tells students that theyare too stupid and should change their majors. She indicated it is veryuncomfortable in class. She stated that if a student asks to leave he very angry.

Shalve further states that she received a lower grade than the men in 145 spite ofthe fact that she did better in class and understood the material better. She got a C+and men who did poorly got a B-. When she asked the men what they got in theclass they indicated that they were amazed that they had received a B- and theywere surprised to have received such a high grade.

Shalve is currently taking EEE 131 from Dr. Markovic. She indicated that she wouldnot be taking it but she absolutely must have the class for her major. She iscurrently the only woman in the lab. She stated that Markovic holds women to adifferent standard than he hold the men indicating that the women are gradeddifferently.

It should be noted that when women receive lower grades they frequently receivelower offers at graduation. Both government and private industry use GPA to decideon starting salaries.

Once again, I am providing this information to you consistent with myresponsibilities.

Cici Mattiuzzi

39.1

40

fft'arch 24, 2009-f'f

Peter [,au, Affinnative Action OfficerCSU, Sacramento

Dear Peter,

li has recently come to my attention that I was incorrect in my letter dated December 10, 2008. I told you that Dr.Markovic threatened to shoot two people. IB fact, he threatened to shoot three people.

in his tirade on September 29th, Dr Markovic not only threatened to shoot T , he also threatened ChetanKrishna, the international student from India who was in the room at the time.

i'o correct the record, he.threatened to shoot three individuals: staff members Lynne Onitsuka and ' , andstudent Chetan Krishna.

Fioin my original letter of December 10, 2008:

On Thursday, October 2nd I learned of a second shooting threat. On September 29th Dr. Markovic went into arage and threatened to "shoot ". ' '• • ' • and "make his wife a widow". The day I learned of thesecond shooting threat, I immediately called Kent Porter and left two urgent messages that we were afraid andthat another threat had been made. To this day I have not received a returned call from Kent Porter I contactedmy union, which referred me to a labor attorney. I told the attorney about the second shooting threat and heinstructed me to immediately "hangup and call the police". I hung up and I made a police report to thecampus police (Officer Douglas Nguyen) of my bumping incident. The two IT staff members, Lynne Onitsukaand ' also filed police reports of the shooting threats.

Officer Nguyen came and took my report and later that day he came back and took Lynne's report. I was latertold that an international student who had witnessed numerous incidents, was in the room when Lynne gaveher report and it was decided that he should not give a report because of his international status and his hope ofremaining in this country for employment after graduation.

Chetan Krishna was the student who was discouraged from filing a formal police report to protect his ability to obtainemployment. Me informed me on Thursday, March 19th of the shooting threat he experienced when he told me that he-had been called and had spoken with the campus's investigator, Kira King. Chetan was not merely an observer of DrMarkovic's tirades, as I had believed; he was also a victim of Dr. Markovic's threats.

1 found myself overcome with sadness after Chetan's revelations. I returned to my office hi tears and unable to work.Che fact that he was threatened is horrifying. The fact that he was discouraged from disclosing the facts is even morehorrifying

i am providing this information to you consistent with my responsibilities (as outlined in the campus mandatoryharassment reporting training) and to create an accurate record of the events of fall 2008.

Cici Mattiuxzi

CO

Mana Santos, Senior Director, Employee Relations, CSUAlexander Gonzalex, President, CSUSJames McGlamery, Attorney at LawKira King, Attorney at LawBarbara Petersen, Labor Representative, APC

40.1

Exhibit 41

From: cici mattiuzzi <[email protected]>Subject: Earlier unreported assault by Markovic

Date: April 2, 2009 7:28:08 AM PDTTo: Kira King <[email protected]>, [email protected]: "James E. McGlamery" <[email protected]>

Bcc: [email protected]

Kira,

I received a call yesterday from : .who worked in the College of Engineering andComputer Science several years ago and she told me she was assaulted by Dr Markovic. He shovedhis hand in her face and pushed her out of his way as he was exiting the elevator with hisbicycle. He spoke harshly to her as he shoved her. She was new and young and was seriouslyfrightened by him. No action was taken according to her. She later found out that he thought shewas a student as if that justified "the assault". She still works on campus and she is stillfrightened by Markovic. She stated that she walks away when she sees him to avoid him. Shefurther stated that Markovics "hates women".

She reported "the assault" to multiple people in the Dean's office including the office manager.She believes the Dean was informed. No report was written and she was not instructed to go toPeter Lau or any other person in a position of authority in the administration. She stated thatwhen she left the College of Engineering and Computer Science the then dean- Braja Das stated thatshe was a "trouble maker".

's husband works in the College and was aware of my law suit.

Contact info:

@csus.edu

Cici

41.1

42

From: Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>Date: April 28, 2009 10:50:37 AM PDTTo: "Jason Conwell" <[email protected]>Cc: [email protected]. [email protected]. [email protected]. [email protected]: thank you and

Jason,

As I mentioned to you yesterday it is very difficult to run my classes as they are now structured. I have 13classes listed across 4 disciplines of engineering and computer science. I actually teach 5 classes but they arecross listed for the convenience of the students.

CE 194- Four sectionsEEE 194 - Four sectionsME 194 - four sectionsCS 192-one section

I have taught these classes for 30 years. I wrote a book in 2006 and I have a new book close to publishing date.Previously I taught Career Planning for Engineers as Engineering 194 and Computer Science Career Planning

as CS 192. The class became part of every engineering discipline a number of years ago allowing students totake the class (and see it) under each of the respective engineering and CS majors.

In past years these classes have been listed under my name exclusively. This semester for the first time theclasses are all listed under the respective department chairs.

It should be noted that if I were correctly classified as an SSP AR this would never have happened. Because theuniversity refuses to correctly classify me as an SSP AR I am required to operate in this fashion or discontinuethe classes all together. That is an unacceptable option particularly in the midst of a recession. This class is anintegral part of my job and and the College of Engineering and has been for three decades.

For me this semester's change has created a logistical nightmare. As you requested I am documenting this byway of this email.

Some of the difficulties I am experiencing with this change include:Removal of access privileges to class listsFailure to receive book ordering email regarding the textbook from the book storeDenial of access to the computer system for classes, students, class lists and grading. I have no updated lists forthe class without pestering the secretaries in four departments or the secretary in the Dean's office for the info

i 42.1

which they are instructed to print foi .ae. It became so embarrassing to me arid the third or fourth week of thesemester-1 stopped doing it.I have no student ID numbers for grading. Many students finish the class after the semester ends. This meansthat I will have to have department chairs do the final grades as well as any and all change of grades that occurup to one year later after the class has ended. I will have to repeatedly pester department chairs to do the changeof grade forms as the students complete the class assignment or make up for missed classes.Students hoping to take the class in the upcoming semester have repeatedly asked me why I will not be teachingthe class in the Fall of 2009 since they cannot see my name on the schedule of classes.

This entire semester has been embarrassing, humiliating and infantilizing.

I was recently interviewed, rather extensively, by the local public television station for a 30 minute program ondemand for the graduates of the College of Engineering and Computer Science. One of the highlights of theprogram was explaining how students in technical fields can take a one unit course specifically designed to planand manage their professional careers. I also spoke with 350 potential students and their parents about theCollege of Engineering and Computer Science Career Services Office and the care with which we deliverinnovative, cutting edge career services and career planning classes.

I am attaching my recently updated resume with my educational background, professional work experience,publications, papers, programs and projects so you can understand my continuing dismay with the failure tocorrectly classify me.

Cici




42.2

Cici MattiuzziCSU, Sacramento • College of Engineering & Computer Science6000 J Street •Sacramento, CA 95819(916) 278-7091 • [email protected]://www.ecs.csus.edu/career

AREAS OF EXPERTISE• Employment and Labor Market Information• Employment Systems Development• Career Counseling and Vocational Choice• Career and Employment Related Classes, Workshops and Seminars• Disabilities and Employability in Technical Fields• Transferability of Skills and Technical Expertise

EDUCATIONMaster of Arts in Social Science

Concentration: EconomicsCalifornia State University, Sacramento. December 1981

Bachelor of Arts in PsychologyCalifornia State University, Sacramento. June 1974

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCEDirector, Career Services

College of Engineering & Computer ScienceCalifornia State University, SacramentoSeptember 1984 to present

Consultant: Labor Market, Career/Vocational, Employment IssuesMay 1984 to present

Career Counselor, Schools of Business and EngineeringCareer Development and Placement CenterCalifornia State University, SacramentoMay 1978 to August 1984

Employment Development OfficerEmployment Development DepartmentState of CaliforniaJuly 1974 to May 1978

PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIESSecretary, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Sacramento ChapterEmployment Editor, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Sacramento CircuitMember, Executive Committee, Institute of Electrical and Electronic EngineersMember, Institute of Electrical and Electronic EngineersHonorary Member, Golden Key International Honour SocietyOutstanding Staff Award, CSUS College Of Engineering and Computer Science 1999

42.3

SELECTED PUBLICATIONS• Book: The Serious Job Seeker, Publishing Date, June 2009• Web Site: seriousjobseeker.com, April 2009• "Moving On: Leaving campus is not always easy!" Career Updates, April 2009• "What are your salary requirements? Never answer this question!" Career Updates, April2009• "Leaving Gracefully" IEEE Circuit, May 2009 and Career Updates, March 2009• "Slobs Don't Get Jobs!" Career Updates, March 2009• "Networking Your Way to the Perfect Job!" Career Updates, February 2009• "Economic Pain is Less Severe for College Degreed Technical Professionals" CareerUpdates, February 2009• "Erroneous Assumptions" Career Updates, October 2008• "Healthcare - It is Infrastructure" Career Updates, October 2008• "Economic Shock Waves Change Everything" IEEE Circuit, October 2008 and CareerUpdates, September 2008• "Multidimentional Engineers" Career Updates, September 2008• "Equal Pay: Not Just a Women's Issue" Career Updates, May 2008• "Employers Enticing Employees to Join and Stay" Career Updates, May 2008• "Do You Qualify?" Career Updates, April 2008• "Sorting the Offers- Career/Life Planning" Career Updates, April 2008• "Economic Uncertainty- Is a Storm Brewing?" Career Updates, March 2008• "State Dominates Hiring for Engineers and Computer Scientists! How to Study for StateExams" Career Updates, February 2008• "Economy Melt Down Provides Opportunity and Pitfalls" Career Updates, November 2007• "The Perfect Candidate Has the Right Stuff Career Updates, November 2007• "What Way is the Wind Blowing?" Career Updates, September 2007• "Job Seeking is the First Job a New Grad Needs Master!" Career Updates, May 2007• "Figuring Out What You Want to Do in Life" Career Updates, March 2007• "What is a Good Reference and What Should You Give Your References?" Career Updates,February 2007• "Got Help?" Emir Jose Macari & Cici Mattiuzzi Sacramento Bee, February 2007• Book: The Ultimate Career Planning Manual for Engineers and Computer Scientists,Published by Kendall Hunt, January 2006• "Drug Testing: a Costly Prescreening" IEEE Circuit, April 2006• "Blog Alert" Career Updates, April 2006• "Planned to Perfection" Sacramento Bee, February 19,2006• "Huge Public Works Project for California?" Career Updates, November 2005• "Got Balance?" Career Updates, November 2005• "What Distinguishes CSUS Students" Career Updates, October 2005• "Life Guarding Your Future" Career Updates, September 2005• "Why Training is Important for Career Success" Career Updates, May 2005• "Embrace Change!" Career Updates, May 2005• "Following Up Works!" Career Updates, March 2005• "Fear of Applying" Career Updates, March 2005• "Develop a Professional Image!" Career Updates, March 2005

42.4

• "Advice for Foreign Students" Career Updates, November 2004• "Do You Have a Question" Career Updates, November 2004• "Dangers of Globalization" IEEE Circuit Newsletter, October 2004• "Direct Contact is Required for Job Seeking" Career Updates, May 2004• "Job Seeking is a Forty Hour Per Week Job!" Career Updates, May 2004• "Why a Summer Job is the Best Thing Since Sliced Bread" Career Updates, April 2004• "Bad Times Don't Last Forever" Career Updates, February 2004• "Get Help!" Career Updates, February 2004• "Must Walk on Water" Career Updates, February 2004• "Lets Get Rolling on the Day" Career Updates, December 2003• "Goal Setting and Time Management" Career Updates, October 2003• "Where Will the Jobs be When the Economy Improves?" Career Updates, September 2003• "Show Up on Time!" Career Updates, September 2003• "Being Positive is Efficient" Career Updates, May 2003• "Costly Errors that Kill Job Offers" Career Updates, May 2003• "Enthusiasm Gets the Job" Career Updates, May 2003• "The Winds are Changing", Career Updates, March 2002• "Layoffs Effecting Demand" Career Updates, September 2002• "Networking Your Way to a Job" Career Updates, October 2002• "How Bad is the Economy?" Career Updates, October 2002• "High Tech Jobs Leaving the Country" Career Updates November 2002• "Sacramento's Best Sources for Company Info" Career Updates, November 2002• "Technical Interviews Done Right!" Career Updates, December 2002• "Closing the Loop: Industry Site visits for Program Outcomes Assessment" ASEE/IEEEFrontiers in Education Conference, October 10-13,2001, Reno, NV (with SK Ramesh, PhD)• "Industry Visits as an Assessment Tool" ASEE Conference, June 2001, Albuquerque, NM

(with Fred Reardon, PhD)• "You Want Some Help?" Sacramento Circuit, March 1997.• "The Candy Bar Question" Sacramento Circuit, October 1996.• "Could it Get Any Better?" (Annual survey of technical employers) Sacramento Circuit,

June 1996.• "Is that Salary Negotiable?" Sacramento Circuit, April/May 1996.• "The Occupational Outlook to 2005. What is Hot!" Sacramento Circuit, February/March

1996• "Will You be Left in the Dust?" Sacramento Circuit, December 1995.• "Just do it! (Stop Procrastinating)." Sacramento Circuit, November 1995.• "Time to Move?" Sacramento Circuit, October 1995.• "The Market for Engineers is Flying." (Annual Survey of Technical Employers) Sacramento

Circuit, March/April 1995.• "So You Think You are Stressed? Who cares..." Sacramento Circuit, February 1995.• "Portfolios for the Professional Job Search." Sacramento Circuit, November 1994.• "Predicting the Future." Sacramento Circuit, January 1994.• "A Ticket to Ride: the importance of professional activities." Sacramento Circuit,

February/March 1996• "Shoot Yourself in the Foot: mistakes job seekers make." Sacramento Circuit,

September/October 1993.• "Can You Thrive in the New Organizational Structure of the 21st Century?" Sacramento

Circuit, April/May 1993.42.5

• "Have you considered self-employment?" Sacramento Circuit, January/February 1993.• "Electronics Engineers Find Opportunity in the Transportation Field," Sacramento Circuit,

October/November 1992.• "How to Take Advantage of an Improving Market," Sacramento Circuit, September 1992.• "What if the Unthinkable Happens to You?" Sacramento Circuit, May/June 1992.• "Job Seeking in the Midst of a Recession," Sacramento Circuit, March/April 1992.• "How To Do a Job Fair," Sacramento Circuit, January/February 1992.

PAPERS, PROGRAMS & SELECTED ADDRESSES"Patent Your Idea!" IEEE Special Workshop for Engineering Students and Professionals, April27, 2009"The Search for Talent: Attracting and Retaining Technology Professionals" Sacramento AreaRegional Technology Alliance (SARTA), CTO/CIO Roundtable, April 9, 2009."Quality Software Development Conference" College of Engineering and Computer Science,October 2008."Computer Security Seminar- Emerging Field" College of Engineering and Computer Science,

January 2008."Sacramento Regional Engineering Workforce Summit" College of Engineering and ComputerScience, January 2007."Last Shot at Improving Writing Skills of Computer Science Majors" Reading and WritingAcross the Curriculum Conference, February 2006."The Five Elements of Good Career Planning" Key Note Address, Golden Key National HonourSociety, March 2001.

"The Future and How to Plan Yourself into It" IEEE Spring Workshop, February 2000."Engineering in the Millennium" IEEE Spring Workshop, February 1999."Why Choose Engineering or Computer Science" High School Invitational CSUS, February1998."Career Management in the 90's and Beyond: Thriving in a Climate of Constant Change."Sacramento Chapter Institute of Electrical & Electronic Engineers, January 1994."Job Hunting in A Shifting Economy," Society of Women Engineers, Regional ConferenceFebruary 6, 1993.

"Preparing for a Tough Market: What Can You do to Make Yourself More Marketable?"Golden Key National Honor Society, Statewide Conference, April 4, 1992."Job Seeking Techniques Forum," IEEE Spring Workshop, May 16, 1993."Getting an "Attitude": How to Handle the Stress of a Job Loss and Job Search in aRecession." Alumni Job Club Seminar, March 9, 1992.

PROJECTS• ABET Industrial Visit Reporting System• Interview Advantage System• Interview Scheduling System• Career Services homepage http://www.ecs.csus.edu/career• Job Environment Tracking System -Computerized Job Listings• Alumni Tracking System• Coordinate the Annual CSUS College of Engineering and Computer Science Career Day• Conduct annual employer survey of regional hiring plans• Editor, Career Updates Weekly Newsletter, distributed electronically to 10,000 students and technical

42.6

Professionals throughout California.

42.7

43

from Cici Mattiuzzi <[email protected]>

to [email protected]

cc [email protected],

[email protected],

[email protected]

date Wed,!®^ 6,- 2fi09.,at 2:16 PM

subject endless anxiety

mailed-by ecs.csus.edu

Reply

Follow up message

Peter,

1 went home sick with anxiety on Monday. I visited my doctor because I amdistressed and depressed in response to Dr. Markovic's frightening behavior. I amroutinely worried and afraid while at work. I do not go out of my office withoutbeing wary. I constantly worry that he will hurt students or other staff. Every time Ihost a major event, bringing people to the campus or students together, I amconcerned that he might come in shooting. I cannot ignore the threat that exists. Asyou know, 1 have repeatedly been told about his haviBg harassed, abused andintimidated students. This knowledge continues to weigh on me and constitutes ahostile work environment

I contacted you Monday after Lynne Onitsuka spoke with me. Lynne maintains acheery disposition and she makes an effort not to let it show how this situationaffects her. Her demeanor might make some think that she is not troubled ordistressed by the hostility present in our work environment I know this is not thecase. In late March, I received a phone call at home from her husband. He told methat she has been depressed about work and that the situation weighs on herconstantly.

43.1

The reason I called most recently was to tell you that Lynne has been instructed togo to Markovic's office and to fix his computer. She told me that she was not happyabout having to do so, but that she felt powerless and that she was afraid to refuseor to protest She told me she does not feel comfortable talking to her supervisorabout her concerns. Markovic causes her distress (as you know, he has threatenedto shoot her) and when she has complained to her supervisor, Mike Wimple, he hastold her to "just suck it up." She said because she is too afraid to go into Markovic'soffice on her own, she would be bringing a student assistant along with her.

I was distressed on Monday because it just doesn't stop. You have known and thecampus has known for months and for years that Markovic scares people. You knowthat he threatens and insults staff and abuses students. He is a noxious presence.People have been hurt and people are in pain, and the administration has failed tointervene. It is unconscionable that Wimple would send Lynn back into Markovic'soffice - as if he doesn't know - and even more unconscionable and irresponsible forthe administration to have failed to have instructed Wimple to refrain from doing so.irrespective of whatever process the campus believes it must pursue, the campushad an immediate responsibility (by which I mean at least nine months ago) tomitigate the threat and the harm.

I have a right to a healthy work environment You have a responsibility to provideit. In a healthy work environment, employees do not have to listen to endless horrorstories. I cannot escape exposure to such stories. I cannot escape my thoughtsabout these episodes at home or in the gym or even in my sleep. And it is made allthe worse by the failure of this administration to make good on its duty to me as anemployee. I did not attend the recent ceremony at which I would have received my30 year award. The thought of being thanked by the campus for my service, whileknowing that the campus has in every way failed to respond to my complaints - thethought of it made me sick.

i have been told by my Dean, "just forget about it... move on." I can't do that Thestories 1 have heard from students are gut wrenching. What am I supposed to dowhen an alum comes to me and tells me that her career has consistently been offtrack because Markovic cheated her out of the grades she deserved? What am Isupposed to say when I hear that the young student that Markovic stalked andpreyed upon 17 years ago has never gotten over it? Do I just "forget about it" whenI hear that a staff member has been terrorized? What do I do when a manager atPG&E says to me, out-of-the-blue, "I hear Markovic's doing it again?"

43.2

And how can I perceive my work environment as being healthy after complainingand finding that I have become "radioactive." As I have told you, some years agowhen I complained about Markovic, Dean Braja Das didn't speak to me for three fullyears. For the past six months, Dean Emir Macari has said hardly a word to me atall. I am no longer included in the planning of major projects and events that haveemployment implications. It's happening again. The victims are the problem.

! am upset not just because the campus has failed in its duty. It goes beyond thatRight now, the campus is expecting to receive millions of dollars in a "smart grid"proposal funded by the Federal stimulus package. Markovic has been written in tothe proposal as if nothing about his status on campus is ever going to change. And ifhe is part of the team, he will have an even more powerful perch from which to preyupon students. Already, it seems, he has again been told that he can act withimpunity.

In fact, I do not believe that he will remain on the "smart grid" team. It seems morelikely that he will in someway derail the project Just last week, I was speaking witha PG&E manager (not the same one I mentioned above). He said that he had heardthat Markovic has continued to be a problem (it's well known in the large alumnicommunity at PG&E). In speaking with me, he recalled the events in 2003 whenPG&E was engaged in discussions with CSUS to create a large and significantpartnership. He recalled that Markovic had been calling relentlessly and displayedrude and aggressive behavior with a number of PG&E staff and that PG&E requesteda meeting to resolve the issue (believing that there must have been somemisunderstanding). During that meeting, Markovic was abusive towards a PG&Emanager and a VP, and Braja Das stood by and watched. PG&E withdrew theirproposal, viewing it as too risky to partner with CSUS.

1 interact with the community on behalf of the campus on a regular basis. I amembarrassed when people off campus ask about this. I help recruit students and Italk to parents about why they should send their kids here to CSUS. I feel depressedat the at the prospect of answering the question of why didn't the campus doanything to protect my child. Do we have to wait for the unthinkable to happen.

This continuing situation has the potential to embarrass the campus well beyondChe confines of Riverside Hall.

Cici

43.3

Cici Mattiuzzi

Director, Career Services Office

College of Engineering & Computer Science

CSU, Sacramento

6000 J Street

Sacramento, CA 95819-6023

phone: 916-278-7091

fax: 916-278-5949

email [email protected]

web site: http://www.ecs.csus.edu/career


43.4

Exhibit 44

California State University, SacramentoOffice of Human Resources6000 J Street • Sacramento, CA 95819-6032http://www.csus.edu/hr

S-MaylS, 206$ "*

Ms. Cici MattiuzziCollege of Engineering & Computer Science(Also sent via email)

Dear Ms. Mattiuzzi:

I have completed my review of your harassment and retaliation complaint. An investigation wasconducted by Ms. Kira King under Chancellor's Office Executive Order 928(http://www.calstate.edu/eo/EO-928.html). In order to sustain a finding of violation ofUniversity policy:

1. To be unlawful harassment, the conduct must be:

a. Unwelcome;b. Directed at gender, race or other protected categories, or in sexual harassment cases,

be sexual in nature;c. Offensive to both the recipient and to a "reasonable person"; andd. Severe or pervasive.

2 To be unlawful retaliation an employee must suffer an adverse employment action forengaging in protected activities.

The following summarizes the findings by Ms. King:

1 You alleged that Dr. Miroslov Markovic harassed you by intentionally and forcefullybumping into you twice at a department event.

Based on the description of event, the witness interviews, and the fact that an intentionaland/or aggressive move would have been noticed by others, particularly Dr. Oldenburg, Ms.King concluded that the event was accidental. This finding was further supported by yourpolice statement by which you stated that it might have been an accideitf at the time.

2. You alleged that the University retaliated agaiast you fer raJsiag,claims against Dr.Markovic. Specifically you alleged that you were removed ^fe>m year teaebiag duties andwere deaied reclassifibatKTs is&? the SSF-AR ciassMeation because you filed complaintsagainst Dr. Markovic.

'• •'"' HNivfKM'* ililtpnheld • ChannelIsland-. • Chico • DominyuezHills • EasiBay • Fr«no • Fullenon • Humboldt • Lonq Beach • LosAngtilei • M^nnm*Aimlrmy • MUM I

it !'..M'on, • (,,jd.viu m. '<aii Bcrn.ml'nu • San Diego • San Francistu • San Jose • *Un Luis Ohispo • San Marcos • Sonoma • Stanislaus

44.1

Ms. King concluded that there was HO-evidence of any coaaeetkra between the removal ofyour teaching position and your c©B3f>kints against Dr. Markovic. This was based on thefollowing facts:

a. The July, 2008 collective bargaining agreement between CSU and APC prohibitedUnit 4 employees from teaching for-credit courses as part of their job assignment.The parties agreed to a one-time continuation of teaching duties by Unit 4 employeesfor the Fall semester, 2008 only.

b. You were not the only Unit 4 employee whose teaching assignment was modified oreliminated under the collective bargaining agreement.

c. The two employees you indicated have continued to teach are either not in Unit 4, orhave not taught for-credit courses since this prohibition was agreed to.

Ms. King also concluded that there was no evidence supporting a fmding of retaliation inthe decision to maintain you current classification. This was based on the followingfacts:

a. Ms. Margaret (Blair) Georgie was not aware of your complaints against Dr.Markovic.

b. Neither Ms. Elizabeth Redmond nor Mr. David Wagner had any input into Ms.Georgie's decision that your SSP TV classification was appropriate.

c. Neither Ms. Redmond nor Mr. Wagner discussed your allegations of harassmentagainst Dr. Markovic with Ms. Georgie.

d. Ms. Georgie was not toM by former Dean Das that he had withdrawn his support ofyour 2002 reclassification effort.

e. Your 2007 application for reclassification was processed in a timely manner. It wascategorized as a "Management Scheduled" application and was thus not subject to the180 day deadline as an "Employee Initiated" application.

3. You alleged that the University refiises to hire women into the SSP-AR classification.

The University currently employs 16 SSP-AR classified employees. Eight are females, andeight are males. Since SSP-ARs were removed from Unit 4 in the early 1990s, no SSP hasbeen reclassified to SSP-AR.

4. You alleged that the University failed to adequately investigate past complaints regardingDr. Markovic's behavior.

Ms. King found that the investigation and follow-up regarding your 2007 complaint againstDr. Markovic was appropriate. Ms. King also looked into your concerns regardingcomplaints by others (former and current students and employees) against Dr. Markovic.Due to the privacy interests of fee individuals involved, the University cannot give you anydetails regarding those actions. However, we can tell you that any findings will be reviewedand the University will take any actions that are necessary.

44.2

Based on Ms. King's findings, I find no support specifically for your allegations of harassmentand retaliation. Therefore I am cIosing-.B-by Level I investigation into your complaint against Dr.Markovic. If you are not satisfied with the outcome at Level I, you may file a Level II complaintwith the Office of the Chancellor no later than ten days after this Level I response. Please referto http ://www. calstate. edu/eo/EO-928. html for specific procedure if you wish to file a Level IIcomplaint.

I want to remind you that retaliation against someone for filing a complaint or for participating inan investigation is against University policy. Should you be subjected to any retaliation forengaging in this conduct, you should contact this office. In addition, this investigation and therelated findings are considered a confidential matter. You may expose yourself to discipline orliability should you disclose or discuss these findings with others not legally authorized todiscuss these matters.

Sincerely yours.

'•JPeter Lau, DirectorEqual Opportunity/Affirmative Action

44.3

Exhibit 45

From: [email protected]: Dr. Appointments

Date: May 21, 2009 8:21:40 AM PDTTo: [email protected]

Mike,

Due to the continued anxiety attacks and nightmares related to thethreat last summer from Dr. Miro Markovic that he would get a gun ashoot me, I am going to start a series of depression classes and therapysessions with a psychologist. It is unfortunate that this incident ishaving such long term effects. It was difficult enough to have mylife threatened while pregnant. It is more difficult to see and interactwith Dr. Markovic daily now that my child is born. This has forced me togo on anti-depressants and risk the health of my baby, who is stillnursing. Long term effects of anti-depressants received through amother's breastmilk is still unknown. When the day comes that I amshot and killed at work, I trust that you will tell my son how much I lovedhim.

My appointments so far are:

June 9, 2009 at 9:00am - therapy sessionJune 9, 2009 at 2:30pm - depression classJune 16, 2009 at 2:30pm - depression classJune 23, 2009 at 2:30pm - depression class

Thank you,Lynne

45.1

Documents

Engineering department lawsuit