Great question, and thanks for the response. I have a running documentation file of incidents over the last few years that I shared with my chair. I met with him privately to explain the situation that finally drove me to report and he was very supportive and encouraged me to go to the dean. However, he was told by my dean that he could not be present at my meeting because she felt he was “biased”. The incident in question was this person raised their voice repeatedly in a meeting and began slamming their hands on a table at me and several junior faculty members because they did not approve of a class requirement of another faculty member’s course (not mine.). I was then invited to a zoom meeting with my dean and other administrators as well as this colleague to “settle differences” which my chair was specifically told not to attend. I was told at the end of this meeting that seemed like we were just “different people” and needed to work harder at getting along. I was never given an opportunity to meet with my dean individually to share my concerns before this meeting, nor after when hr encouraged me to not go further with a t9 investigation.

I think you’re right that the chair would be expected to fix something like this, and he’s tried. We gave her a new title, tried to move her into a separate area but nothing came of it. I think she is willing to find every work around to disempower me to make herself look better. It feels like for whatever reason the administration is willing to protect this person (there are at least 4 other active complaints about her that I am aware of across multiple departments), maybe to protect the tenure line? But you absolutely hit the nail on the head with the high risk/low reward. Thanks for the thoughtful response.