Hook Logo

Genoways stays: UVA’s VQR investigation a whitewash?

by Dave McNair
(434) 295-8700 x239
published 5:00pm Thursday Oct 21, 2010
Bookmark and Share letter Write a letter to the editor

snap-teresa-sullivan-smAlthough UVA President Teresa Sullivan allowed VQR editor Ted Genoways to keep his job, she’s called for University-wide changes by which “employee complaints about their supervisors can be taken, registered, and followed up.”
FILE PHOTO BY LISA PROVENCE

The same day the Hook published a cover story [Conflicting Tales: The unfolding tragedy at the VQR] on the conflicting tales surrounding what went on at the Virginia Quarterly Review before the July 30 suicide of its managing editor, UVA released an anticipated audit report (with responses written by UVA President Teresa Sullivan) on the magazine’s finances and management that presents even more conflicting information.

While editor Ted Genoways and other staff members will not be losing their jobs, unspecified “corrective action” will be taken regarding Genoways’ handling of VQR finances, his poor management style, his failure to provide his staff with the information they needed to do their jobs, and his failure to adhere to UVA policies in the treatment of his staff.

In addition, what was revealed about the inner workings of the magazine has prompted the creation of a University-wide “task force” to “strengthen the institution’s policies and structure with regard to acceptable workplace conduct,” which includes “developing a structure within Human Resources in which employee complaints about their supervisors can be taken, registered, and followed up.”

The report concludes that while complaints were received about Genoways’ management of the magazine, no “specific allegations of bullying or harassment” were made before Morrissey’s death. However, as the report later recommends, “the current structure for receiving employee complaints needs to be re-evaluated by the University.”

Essentially, the report appears to have ignored the numerous complaints made after Morrissey’s death, as well as charges of harassment made by one former VQR staff member, 30-plus-year veteran Candace Pugh, in 2005. However, as UVA spokesperson Carol Wood points out, the audit report covers operations at the magazine only during the last two years.

hotseat-genoways1“I can’t see any situation in which Molly [Minturn] and I would work with Ted [Genoways] again,” says VQR assistant editor/circulation manager Shelia McMillen.
FILE PHOTO BY JEN FARIELLO

The report did cite reports of Genoways “not being courteous or respectful with some contributors and colleagues,” and “problems with certain employees” in the past, but concluded that no reports “ever seemed to rise to the level of a serious, on-going concern.” However, that conclusion appears to conflict with comments made by Genoways himself, who has said that office tensions since the beginning of the year had “grown poisonous,” and that he hadn’t known until recently “how severe” the complaints that his staff had lodged against him before he took leave in June for a fellowship had become.

The report also concluds that it is “sometimes difficult to define where the line gets crossed between a tough manager and an unreasonable one,” but, as already mentioned, recommends that the University take “corrective action” with regard to Genoways concerning his financial dealings (including $2,000 in VQR funds used to subsidize the publishing of his own poetry, numerous undocumented credit card purchases, and careless spending of the magazine’s endowment) and management style. Sullivan did not specify what kind of correction action would be taken, saying only that it was a personnel issue that would be handled confidentially.

And while the report finds that that “UVA personnel responded to employee concerns in accordance with institutional policies and procedures,” it cites flawed oversight of VQR’s operations and later recommends that the University give HR personnel more authority to enforce UVA policy and intervene when employee complaints arise.

In September, Genoways told the Hook that the “real problem” concerning continued financing of the VQR was the falling stock market between 2007 and 2009, which affected the magazine’s invested endowment payouts. However, while the audit report says that “some decreases” in the endowment were caused by the economy, it alleges that financial strain was “largely the result” of Genoways having spent $475,000 from the principal amount of an estimated $800,000 “rainy day” fund established by former editor Staige Blackford (which was created from savings Blackford had accumulated over the 28 years he served as editor) between 2006 and 2009.

Genoways has said he was told to “spend down” that endowment, but UVA’s Wood has said the University was unaware of such a directive, and that it was not consistent with UVA policy. As for the management of VQR’s finances, the audit report is pretty clear: “The investment funds arguably were not spent in a judicious manner with regard for the needs of the future. There was more of a focus on generating new investment funds than on being frugal with the current funds.”

“There are a number of details still to be worked out with individual employees,” Wood says in the aftermath of the audit report’s release.  “Employees will be given the time they need to decide whether they wish to remain with VQR or pursue other options.”

For remaining VQR staffers Shelia McMillen and Molly Minturn, who’ve been unequivocal in their condemnation of Genoways’ leadership and his treatment of Morrissey, that doesn’t present much of a choice.

“I can’t see any situation in which Molly [Minturn] and I would work with Ted [Genoways] again,” says McMillen, who says she found the audit report “extremely disappointing.”  McMillen has a storied past with the VQR herself, having been a reader for former editor Blackford for many years (McMillen discovered many writers, including Christopher Tilghman, who now teaches in UVA’s creative writing program) and was the co-editor, with late UVA prof George Garrett, of one of only two VQR anthogies, Eric Clapton’s Lover and Other Stones from the Virginia Quarterly Review (University Press of Virginia, 1990).

“The University will help me find another job,” says McMillen. “I just hope it’s not editing the newsletter of the Department of Plastic Surgery.”

Updated 10/22/2010

Download files »

  • http://www.virginia.edu/president/documents/20OctoberReport.pdf
open

10 comments

  • meanwhile... October 21st, 2010 | 9:33 pm

    There are so many issues that come to light as a result of this story. My comment is regarding only two.

    The first issue is the audit report’s release.

    I think President Sullivan is doing a very smart thing by responding to the audit and defending current HR personnel. From a leadership perspective, she is binding these employees to her and earning their loyalty. The message will be sent to all employees (excluding those that used to work at VQR, of course) that she is one of them and will defend them when a defense of their actions can reasonably be made.

    The other issue is the way that local media outlets are treating this story.

    This is no getting around the fact that this is a small town and everybody knows everybody else. That there would be two free weekly papers in a town this size is a fluke. But the contrast in how these papers are treating this story is instructive.

    Reading the articles and editorials in the C-Ville Weekly leads me to believe that a prior personal or professional relationship between Ted Genoways and C-Ville Weekly staff has colored their reporting.

    Cathy Harding wrote in an editorial that she believes Ted Genoways was treated unfairly and that there was a rush to judgment. The article in that issue of C-Ville Weekly is recapped above and speaks for itself. C-Ville Weekly’s blurb (and it’s hard to call it more than that) on the audit report was essentially a recap of the report with little to no analysis.
    Today there is an “update” on this blurb which amounts to printing Ted Genoways’ lawyer’s response to the audit report, as if a lawyer’s words somehow casts light on the facts of the case.

    It seems as if C-Ville Weekly simply does not care to know what the truth is regarding the tragedy of Ted Genoways’ management, nor to perform any sort of analysis of the audit report. It certainly looks like C-Ville Weekly has chosen sides with Ted Genoways and that all reporting on this story will reflect this choice.

  • shempdaddy October 22nd, 2010 | 7:21 am

    Meanwhile–no surprise on the c-ville issue. The Hook has been eating their lunch in the investigative journalism department for years–it isn’t even close–and C-ville is far and away in second place in this department. The kids who inhabit the newsdesks at the Progress and the tv news outlets in this town compile internet reports and write summaries of press releases. At least they do a pretty decent job with High School football.

  • Bystander October 22nd, 2010 | 8:31 am

    As usual, the University’s written response to the VQR’s circumstances–and particularly Sullivan’s interpolations in the auditor’s report–is an exercise in derriere-covering, veneer application, and bureaucratic twaddle.

    And unless I missed it, there’s no mention of the gross violation of university policy entailed in the hiring of Alana Levinson-LaBrosse, which was one of the precipitating factors in the whole sorry mess.

  • Unsurprised October 22nd, 2010 | 8:37 am

    This is an unfortunate outcome, but sadly typical. We’ve all seen it happen, the boss is a problem, so you follow the rules and then somehow they’re given a “confidential corrective action” while you are labled the “problem.” It’s also why no one actually ever trusts an HR department, you know that no matter what they say, they’re there to help the management, not the employees, even when it’s as blatantely obvious that management was wrong, as in this case. Even here, where there’s an entire staff and former employees saying this, this man gets to keep a six-figure job while everyone else is left with the decision to either find another job or go back to dealing with him.

    It seems to be the normal response for UVA, as I know of another person (no, not me) with a similarly “poisonous” boss who, after several complaints and a near breakdown, was given the same option. She was fortunate to move, but the boss is still there, making people miserable.

    As for the C’ville, I stopped reading it long ago due to it’s poor reporting and lousy content.

  • Sam Towler October 22nd, 2010 | 8:54 am

    This story has shown us that the reason why the management job of this literary magazine gets paid more than the manager of the City of Charlottesville is because its so much harder to run and complex than the whole City of Charlottesville. (At least its my understanding that the new City manager will not start out at 170K a year)

  • Whateva! October 22nd, 2010 | 9:04 am

    I was truly hoping that Sullivan would make a difference, I see now my hopes have been dashed beyond any type of repair. So goes it for UVa and their employees until the next “change of the guard”. Unfortunately, I am sure another Casteen/Sullivan will be chosen to steer the helm. UVa could have been a trailblazer in the field of “workplace bullying” or bullying of any type for that matter, yet the administration has chosen to stick their head in the sand…..unfortunate and sad.

  • Howard former UVa staffer October 22nd, 2010 | 9:57 am

    Read the UVA report,read a number of media accounts of the case. Most mature, fair-minded people will I hope agree, this report, not addressing Pugh’s case or the full spectrum of available testimonies,is a typical UVa admin whitewash: protect the institution is always Mission One. Second, do not criticize the former Great Helmsman and Earth-Mover, President Casteen, Genoway’s boss.
    Item, the mag was in financial trouble and never fully self-supporting.How did UVa justify a $170K editor’s salary? higher than nearly all Humanities chaired professorships.

  • Col. Forbin October 22nd, 2010 | 11:38 am

    Typical UVA response: nothing (couched in the language of a report). What is UVA doing to protect students after dark? The same nothing (report to come, I’m sure).

  • JJ Malloy October 22nd, 2010 | 12:35 pm

    Col

    Would you have them declare martial law? Increase the police force by 500? Racial profiling? What more can they do to protect students after dark?

  • Col. Forbin October 22nd, 2010 | 12:59 pm

    Security cameras. And frankly, how about a couple of cops walking the Corner between 10pm and 2am on Friday and Saturday nights? I don’t think that’s too much to ask. As it is, they do nothing and this has gone on for years.

Leave a reply

* People say the darndest things, but language stronger than "darn," insulting words like "stupid," ethnically or racially disparaging language, and comparing people to Hitler usually results in deletion of the comment and may get you blocked from further commenting. Ditto for posting unverified and/or potentially libelous allegations, and even off-topic digression. And to avoid spam, any comment containing more than two weblinks gets eaten by Bigfoot.

Comments for this post will be closed on 20 November 2010.

login | Contents ©2009 The HooK