New Utah Tech president allegedly fired 2 employees after they accused the school of being a hostile workplace

Two employees already suing Utah Tech University in a high-profile harassment case against the school’s top leaders say they have since been fired in retaliation for their claims.

The employees — Becky Broadbent and Jared Rasband — say in a new lawsuit filed Wednesday that they were both let go from their positions by the university’s new president on May 8. The decision was allegedly one of Shane Smeed’s first moves on the job, just seven days into him taking the helm of the southern Utah school.

“Despite the fact that Smeed had never met or even talked to Ms. Broadbent or Mr. Rasband, he stated that Utah Tech had lost trust in them through its administrators,” the filing alleges.

Being dismissed after alleging misconduct in the workplace, the two employees argue in the new case in district court, should be ruled illegal due to their previously filed federal lawsuit that is still pending. They have also updated that lawsuit to include the information on their terminations.

They are calling for more than more than $300,000 in wages and benefits to be repaid. And Broadbent, specifically, asks to be reinstated in her position.

Rasband has since been hired as the deputy city attorney for Washington City in southern Utah, according to his LinkedIn page. He is not asking for his position back at Utah Tech.

The school has removed both of their employee profiles from its website.

In the filing, Broadbent said she was notified through an email about her termination; she had been the university’s top attorney until she reported concerns of harassment last year. At that point, she alleges in the lawsuit, she was placed on administrative leave — which is not standard practice when an individual reports allegations of misconduct.

Rasband was the second-in-command attorney at the St. George-based university. He said Smeed fired him during their first meeting together.

In a letter provided as an exhibit to the new lawsuit, Smeed wrote to both employees that he was concerned about their “personal animosity and distrust of the university and many of its employees.”

Smeed then named several senior campus administrators who he said he’d spoken to; many of those individuals are also named in the original lawsuit for having allegedly harassed Broadbent and Rasband.

The new president didn’t point to any specific issues, the two say in the filing, so they infer Smeed was referring to their claims in the lawsuit.

He wrote instead: “The effective operation of this university requires you to interface with and have the trust of your client, Utah Tech University, through its administrators. You cannot operate effectively in your position as the university’s attorney without this foundation of trust.”

Smeed specifically also questions their “loyalty” to the school.

In response, Broadbent and Rasband are now specifically suing Smeed and the school’s HR director in the new lawsuit on their firing. And they have also added Smeed to the original case, alleging that his hiring was meant to address deep-seated issues at the school but he instead added to those problems. They allege he is now part of the same retaliation they say they have long faced.

Both declined to speak to The Salt Lake Tribune for this story, pointing instead to the filing as their comment.

Smeed previously spoke to The Tribune’s editorial board on May 21, about two weeks after he allegedly fired Broadbent and Rasband. He declined at the time to answer any questions about their employment status.

“From my perspective, really, I don’t have as much history about what’s happened in the past,” he said then.

He added: “I wouldn’t be in a position to speak about any pending litigation matters or personnel matters.”

In a statement for this story, the university’s spokesperson said the school “cannot speak to the specifics of personnel matters.”

But the school said: “All HR decisions are made to align institutional policies and priorities with those tasked with implementing them.”

The first lawsuit from the Utah Tech employees was originally filed about a year ago — in November 2024 — by Broadbent, Rasband and a third staff member, Hazel Sainsbury. Sainsbury is Utah Tech’s Title IX coordinator, who is tasked with responding to complaints of sexual misconduct. She currently remains in that position.

That case centers on a phallic gag gift left by the previous president, Richard “Biff” Williams, for an administrator who’d recently had surgery. The gift included two eggplants and a long zucchini, arranged like male genitalia, alongside a note. Williams signed that note as if it was from the three plaintiffs — which he later bragged was a joke. They felt it was “payback” for trying to clean up the school and address harassment, their lawsuit states.

Williams left the school in January 2024 as an investigation into his conduct was underway, signing an agreement that allowed him to continue receiving his full presidential salary in Utah until that July, when he took a new job leading Missouri State University.

The governing board at his new school voted to retain Williams after the Utah allegations came to light.

He has since apologized, acknowledging that he was responsible for the display and that he now knows it “was not appropriate.”

The investigation into his actions concluded with no “sustained findings,” according to the university.

Meanwhile, Broadbent had been placed on leave — which doesn’t follow federal law, as she was the complainant and not the alleged perpetrator; reporting harassment is supposed to be a protected activity, as is filing a lawsuit.

She was never allowed to return to her position, even after the investigation was finished, according to the lawsuit. When she asked the school this April about returning now that the investigation into Williams was done, Broadbent alleges in the new filing that she was told there was still an ongoing investigation into her grievances.

When she was fired, she alleges Smeed offered no process for her to appeal the decision, which is standard practice outlined in university policy.

University policy also states that initial corrective action plans are supposed to be offered to employees ahead of any final determination decisions — which are only supposed to be based on “serious misconduct.” Neither Broadbent nor Rasband said that happened.

Both employees argue they did nothing to merit being fired and had exemplary performance evaluations for every year at the university.

“The termination of Ms. Broadbent or Mr. Rasband’s employment violated due process by failing to follow the proper procedures; failing to give notice of the reasons for termination; failing to provide an opportunity to be heard; infringing upon their fundamental rights; and lacking justification,” the new lawsuit states.

Broadbent and Rasband filed termination grievances — despite Broadbent not being offered that opportunity — and both of those were denied by the school. The university allegedly told them they were not protected as whistleblowers.

In addition to their concerns with the gag gift, Broadbent, Rasband and Sainsbury also allege that their employee trainings on avoiding sexual harassment were often ignored or ridiculed. That included a party held by administrators and faculty who allegedly passed around a fake book titled “Title IX for Dummies.”

They also say they faced pushback from other employees for taking down a Post-it display that featured more than 200 inappropriate quotes allegedly said by staff, all stuck to a metal break room cabinet. The vice president of the department where the messages were displayed recently stepped down from his position.

And the lawsuit alleges Sainsbury, who is Black, was the target of “racially charged language” in emails from one administrator, Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs Michael Lacourse, who was put on administrative leave for three months and has since returned.

The university changed its name in 2022, in part because of its former name’s associations with racism.

Utah Tech and the defendants in the lawsuit have argued for immunity under state law, saying they cannot be held liable based on Utah’s wide protections for government workers.

Note to readers • This story is available to Salt Lake Tribune subscribers only. Thank you for supporting local journalism.