Women's rowing sues UC

The University of Cincinnati women's rowing team filed a class action lawsuit Monday against UC in U.S. District Court, claiming the university violated the team's Title IX Gender Equity rights.

In the past two years, according to the team's attorney, Robert Newman, the team has not had a certified athletic trainer to attend away events, even though Athletic Department policy mandates that a trainer must be present at "all conditioning sessions and practices."

Newman also claims that UC spends almost $1 million more a year on men's scholarships than women's, citing the $2,895,249 the university spent on men's scholarships during the 2003-2004 school year compared to $1,933,790 for women.

The Education Amendments of 1972, which Title IX is a part of, prohibits discrimination based on sex in educational programs that receive federal assistance.

Both current and future members of the women's rowing team are involved in the suit, according to court documents.

Former rower Rachel Armstrong, a plaintiffs in the suit who quit the team during the summer because she didn't want to represent the university, said the Athletic Department at UC has done very little to help women's rowing.

"There is a very distinct lack of support coming from the [Athletic Department] in just about every imaginable way," Armstrong, a fourth-year psychology and communication major, said.

Armstrong also said women's rowing has repeatedly been passed over in receiving upgrades and improvements during the course of its five years as a varsity team. Those suing said they are tired of being put behind other sports.

Perhaps the largest issue in the lawsuit is a proposed boathouse in Wilder, Ky., which was never built.

In December 2000, UC Board of Trustee member Candace Kendle gave $1,032,281, the largest single amount donated, to the construction of the new boathouse UC promised to build, according documents obtained by the The News Record.

Stressing the team's point at a Monday afternoon press conference, Taryn Dyle, a fourth-year student and rowing team member acting as the team's spokeswoman, stood in the pouring rain in front of two Porta-lets and the chain link fence that separates the teams' boats from the public.

Dyle said that for 60 women there are only two places to go to the bathroom and a small trailer in which to change clothes. Her main goal, she said, is to get equal footing with the men's teams at UC.

The boathouse is included in UC's Master Plan, and was set for completion in early 2005, according to UC's Web site.

The Athletic Department scrapped the plans in 2004, however, when the cost of the boathouse jumped from $3 million to $6 million, according to court documents.

Court papers cite the recent construction of an $11 million baseball stadium and the millions spent refurbishing of Nippert Stadium as examples of unfair spending at UC since men's teams use those areas.

In court papers, Newman said that the university forgot about the promise of a rowing facility for the women rowers.

The university's legal department received the complaint papers Monday morning and, according to Associate General Counsel Mitchell McCrate, were taken aback by the situation.

"Frankly, I'm surprised by it," McCrate said Monday afternoon.

The university was in contact with members of the rowing team prior to the lawsuit.

McCrate also said the issues raised in the complaint that go beyond the boathouse are new to him, but he doesn't see the university as being in the wrong.

"I'm pretty confident that there are no Title IX violations here," McCrate said.

Dyle, however, sees the construction of a boathouse as a step in the right direction.

"As soon as we build a boathouse, our program will be better," she said. "We'll be able to recruit at a more effective level. Then we'll be able to step up the level of the program in general and step up the level of UC's Athletic Department."

Dyle also said she doesn't think the Athletic Department handled the team's grievances well in the past and hopes the lawsuit provides a speedy end to it.

The university has not officially been served with the lawsuit, McCrate said, and proceedings like these can take years to resolve.

From here on, according to McCrate, the university will follow routine legal steps in solving the lawsuit.