Stanford Confidential: Sex, Lies And Loathing At The World’s No. 1 B-School by: Ethan Baron on September 14, 2015 | | 407,399 Views September 14, 2015 Copy Link Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email Share on LinkedIn Share on WhatsApp Share on Reddit Stanford GSB senior associate dean for academic affairs Madhav Rajan ‘POLICIES ARE FOR OTHER PEOPLE’ Etchemendyās emailed response to Saloner appears to grant the dean authority to make decisions about Phills. āI am absolutely supportive of anything you decide wrt Jim,ā Etchemendy writes. In a Facebook chat with Gruenfeld that divorce court filingsĀ indicate took place shortly after Saloner’sĀ correspondence with Etchemendy, Saloner discusses his and Gruenfeldās relationship – āCanāt risk letting your kids walk in on usā and āI could meet you on your street for one late night hug, but I know better than to think we could limit ourselvesā – then reports to Gruenfeld on his disclosure to Etchemendy. āHe basically ignored what I said about the two of us and, not in these words, that he trusts me to make any decisions regarding Jim . . . I think it is his way of saying āyou have done what the policy says you have to do, I appreciate it, but the policy wasnāt written with you/this in mind and so Iām respecting your privacy and ignoring it.āā THE āDISCREET AND RESPECTFULā PROVOST Gruenfeld replies, āLove that. So discreet and respectful,ā and after the pair exchange a few more comments, Saloner declares, āI want to hold you,ā and Gruenfeld responds, āI want you to hold me.ā Later, in what Phillsā lawyers say is a reference to āEtchemendyās lack of concern about Salonerās ongoing role as Dean supervising both Gruenfeld and Phills,ā Saloner writes to Gruenfeld to say, āAs predicted, Etch is totally cool,ā a court filing says. Lawyers for Saloner and Stanford refer on multipleĀ occasionsĀ to a recusal by Saloner, saying in two filingsĀ that it occurred at “the outset” of the relationship between the dean and Gruenfeld. In a MarchĀ filing, the lawyersĀ provideĀ a more specific time-frame.Ā āIn October 2012, Dean Saloner timely and properly recused himself as to employment decisions concerning Phills and Gruenfeld,ā the lawyers state. āPhills alleges that Dean Saloner did not in fact recuse himself from involvement in decisions that affected the terms and conditions of Phillsā employment, including those related to university housing…Ā At no time did Dean Saloner comment on or āapproveā any decision related to the repayment of the exceptional loans.ā WHEN IS A RECUSAL NOT A RECUSAL? Etchemendy alsoĀ maintained that Saloner had fully recused himself from duties involving Phills. In a letter last year to Phills over Phillsās employment status, Etchemendy says that āthe dean recused himself from all supervisorial duties in October 2012. Those duties have been handled by Senior Associate Dean Madhav Rajan in consultation with me or by me alone since that time.ā On Nov. 8, 2012, about a week after Salonerās exchange with Etchemendy and his report to Gruenfeld, Saloner agreed withĀ a decision to deny Phills the $250,000 in exceptional loansĀ that had been granted to Gruenfeld when the couple jointly signed for the loans, startingĀ the process in which the GSB demanded repayment, court records show. Rajan had emailed Saloner to tell him that he and the other senior associate deans (SADs) unanimously opposed granting housing-loan exceptions toĀ Phills. āI wanted to find out whether you wanted me to do anything different, and in particular if you felt that we should give Jim the housing exceptions,ā writes Rajan, who according to documents filed in the lawsuit had not at the time been informed of Salonerās affair with Gruenfeld. Saloner replies, āI agree with the view of the SADs on this.ā The same day, Rajan informs Phills of the decision. āAs for the housing exception, Iām afraid this is not going to be possible,ā Rajan writes in an email. āI have now spoken to the other SADs, to Claudia (associate dean Claudia Morgan) and to Garth . . . about the matter. The deanās office is not willing to petition the university for an exception to the standard Stanford housing program.ā SALONER LAWYER ADMITS CLIENT’S INVOLVEMENT IN ONE DECISION Phillsās complaint also refers to an email from Rajan to Phills, about the schoolās demand for loan repayment. The messageĀ purportedly says all decisions Rajan communicated to Phills represented the ācollective opinion of everyone in the deanās office.ā Phills’s lawyers italicized “everyone” in their court filing. Saloner lawyer LuceyĀ concedes in his Sept. 12 statement to Poets&Quants that Saloner had been involved in theĀ decision about Phills when the dean “agreed” with his SADs to deny Phills the loan exceptions, but Lucey says Saloner’s was not the lastĀ word. “Dean Saloner forwarded that decision to the Provost, who made the final decision,” Lucey says. “No non-tenured faculty at the GSB has ever received these special loans, so the decision was routine.” Phills argues in his complaint that under Stanford’s faculty loan policy his position on the university’s Academic Council makes him eligible for the extensions, so denying them violated the policy. Previous Page Continue ReadingPage 9 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Questions about this article? Email us or leave a comment below. Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.