A top Rutgers University athletic department official bullies employees in an often-abusive workplace and has faced two formal complaints during his 33-month tenure at the university, according to a half dozen current and former employees.

Michael Szul, who was hired as Rutgers’ senior associate athletic director for finance, administration and planning in May 2017, was accused of racial discrimination and creating a hostile work environment in separate complaints filed with the school’s human resources department, according to six sources familiar with the complaints.

Although Rutgers senior vice president for external affairs Peter McDonough said both formal complaints were “found to be meritless,” the six sources interviewed by NJ Advance Media claimed the university has allowed Szul to stay in his powerful role despite ongoing inappropriate conduct with his staff.

The employees also contend the lack of action against Szul is part of a broader trend inside the Rutgers athletics department — one that allows inappropriate and at times abusive behavior to fester unchecked.

“Anyone who he didn’t see at his level that he thought he could bully, he bullied,” said one source familiar with the inner workings of the department. “Every single person below him had enough issues that they’ve had to go to (Rutgers’) administration about him.”

McDonough said both complaints filed against Szul were “investigated thoroughly” and the university found no evidence he violated any policies. And Szul, in an e-mail Monday, said that “every claim presented to the university was reviewed and found to be without merit.”

However, in September 2018, Rutgers paid $15,500 to bring in outside consultants to improve the working relationship between the staff and Szul and “to help Mike do a better job,” McDonough said.

In addition to the incidents at Rutgers, Szul was accused of gender discrimination at West Virginia University, his previous workplace, in a lawsuit filed 13 months after he started at Rutgers.

As with the Rutgers complaints, Szul was cleared of the West Virginia allegations — in this instance because the statute of limitations expired, according to an attorney who filed the case. But, taken together, Szul faced accusations of racial and gender discrimination and hostile workplace behavior in the span of 12 months.

NJ Advance Media interviewed two current members of the athletics department, four former employees and obtained documents that show a sometimes troubled relationship between Szul and his nine-person department. The six people interviewed for this story all wished to remain anonymous for fear of retribution.

Five of the sources said Szul’s conduct in the office went beyond typical workplace disagreements. Instead, they said, Szul was abusive and inappropriate. And one source said during an alleged incident in the summer of 2017 he threw paperwork in the face of a female employee and walked away.

Szul denied throwing paperwork in the face of an employee when asked about the allegation Monday. He added that “I love the team that I work with, they are all great people and together we are striving to bring positive changes to an already outstanding athletics program.”

Szul declined to answer a series of follow up questions from NJ Advance Media Tuesday, including queries about why the university had to hire outside consultants and whether Szul could guarantee employees who wished to speak on the record would not face reprisals.

“I have answered your questions about the unfounded allegations,” Szul said.

Szul holds one of the highest-ranking positions in the Rutgers athletics department, reporting directly to athletic director Pat Hobbs. Szul oversees the finances and planning for an athletic department that spends roughly $100 million annually. He also has a hand in everything from drafting coach contracts to negotiating sponsor deals.

Among non-coaches, Szul is the third-highest paid employee in Rutgers athletics’ 167-person administrative/operations workforce, behind only Hobbs and deputy athletics director Sarah Baumgartner. He received a $6,643 raise in 2019, which increased his base salary to $228,093, according to university payroll records.

The racial discrimination complaint against Szul was filed in July 2017 shortly after he was hired by Rutgers, and the hostile work environment complaint was filed in July 2018, according to the six sources. One of the accusers who filed a complaint against Szul left for a new job, and another still works at Rutgers, according to the six sources.

Hobbs did not return a follow-up phone message Monday seeking comment after initially forwarding requests to McDonough.

“The allegations were found to not be a hostile work environment, nor to amount to racial discrimination,” McDonough said. “Every effort has been made here to improve the working relationship between Mr. Szul and others in the department.”

McDonough said the employee who filed the racial discrimination complaint had been laid off due to “a reorganization to make the department more transparent and effective.” The union’s collective bargaining agreement required the employee to be let go due to his short tenure in the department, McDonough added.

Lucye Millerand, executive vice president for the union of Rutgers administrators, expressed reservations about the move to lay off the black employee, saying “there’s a question about whether that reorganization was done with an intention to target an African American employee and promote and retain Caucasian employees who were doing the same work at the time.”

“The department at Rutgers is given a hell of a lot of autonomy, athletics even more so,” Millerand added. “So, favoritism slips in, we feel, because there is so much autonomy in management.”

The employee who filed the racial discrimination complaint declined comment when reached by NJ Advance Media.

Introducing Rutgers Sports Insider: Sign up for exclusive news, behind-the-scenes observations and the ability to text message directly with beat writers

The complaints lodged against Szul come to light as the Rutgers athletic department finishes a roller-coaster year. In October, an NJ Advance Media report uncovered allegations of widespread emotional and physical abuse in the Rutgers softball program, leading lawmakers and the university’s faculty council to call for Hobbs to resign.

The softball scandal marked the second time since Hobbs was hired in November 2015 that Rutgers coaches have been accused of abusive coaching tactics. Several softball players and parents also alleged the accusations were not properly investigated by the school and that Hobbs and other senior athletic officials failed to act when the allegations were brought to their attention.

Hobbs also came under fire when initial negotiations with new football coach Greg Schiano fell apart, prompting outrage from boosters and fans. Hobbs eventually did close the deal with Schiano, and also has earned plaudits for fundraising efforts that resulted in the building of new facilities as well as for the success of the rejuvenated men’s basketball program and pair of NCAA national champion wrestlers.

Despite the attempts to improve conditions between Szul and his employees, tensions between the staff and their boss linger, according to two sources who still work at Rutgers and another intimately familiar with the inner workings of the department.

“We have good days and bad,” said one source inside the department. “We tippy-toe around everything.”

Another source close to the department went a step further:

“Things aren’t better,” the source said. “Things are worse.”

A complaint from the past

The hiring of Szul, 44, initially generated little fanfare. He previously served as senior associate athletic director for business operations at West Virginia University. From 2010 to 2017 at WVU, he managed a $90 million athletic budget and played a key role in the school’s transition to the Big 12 Conference, according to an online bio.

In January 2017, Rutgers paid $75,000 to hire a search firm to fill the university’s important role overseeing finances and planning inside Rutgers athletics. The firm recommended Szul, who was hired in May 2017 and set out to help Rutgers with its continued transition into the Big Ten Conference.

At Rutgers, Szul is tasked with developing the long-term financial plan for the athletic department and managing a business department that includes nine employees.

But about a year after Szul’s hiring — as some employees said they were struggling with their new boss — questions emerged surrounding his behavior at his previous employer, according to a lawsuit filed in West Virginia.

A woman who worked under Szul at WVU filed a gender discrimination lawsuit in June 2018, accusing him of “unending discriminatory language and actions, which culminated in her ultimate termination as a result of her gender and/or her opposition to Szul’s conduct.”

The woman claimed Szul created a hostile work environment, asked about her personal romantic relationships, probed for details of her social life and fostered a “good old boy” culture in the department. She complained about Szul’s conduct to senior WVU officials in December 2015, the suit said — about a year and a half before he was hired by Rutgers.

The suit was dismissed on Jan. 14 due to statute of limitations, according to Edmund Wagoner, an attorney for the plaintiff.

“The case was not decided in any way on the underlying merits,” Wagoner said. “It was simply not allowed to proceed to trial based on being time barred.”

The woman who filed the lawsuit declined comment when reached by NJ Advance Media.

Szul said Monday “the claim in West Virginia was, as well, without merit, and was dismissed.”

McDonough said Rutgers was not aware of any issues between Szul and his staff at West Virginia at the time of his hiring. He added “the complaint was dismissed without prejudice and the complainant has every ability to appeal that and at this point has not done so.”

Trouble at work

Within months of Szul starting his job at Rutgers, employees in the athletic business department started raising concerns about his interactions with some employees, sources said.

Soon, a black employee who was let go alleged Szul ostracized him, laid him off and failed to promote him because of his race, according to two sources.

The university investigated the allegations and found them to be “unsupportable and baseless,” McDonough said. The employee was laid off due to “a reorganization to make the department more transparent and effective,” according to McDonough.

Millerand said she was “concerned” Szul was never punished by the university and believed the black employee’s complaint was “sincere” and he “sounded distressed.” Millerand also called into question the thoroughness of the university’s investigation into the complaint.

“We’ve observed that the investigations fall short of being fair,” she said. “Sometimes we see these investigations where the facts are strong in favor of a complainant, but the determination doesn’t accord with the facts.”

Although not every source interviewed by NJ Advance Media had firsthand knowledge of some of the alleged interactions between Szul and some staffers, the problems in the department were widely known and discussed often by many employees, the sources said.

In particular, Szul had run-ins with one female employee, sources said. During one interaction in the office, Szul cut off the woman, threw a contract that needed his signature in her face and walked away, sources said.

The woman declined comment when reached by NJ Advance Media.

University policy in part defines workplace violence as “intentional physical contact for the purpose of causing harm … or menacing or threatening behavior” that includes “throwing objects.”

Asked if throwing a folder and papers in an employee’s face violated university policy, McDonough said “after a thorough investigation, it was concluded that Mike Szul had not violated the policy on workplace violence or harassment.”

The alleged abuse was outlined by the woman in a 10-page complaint that included 17 bullet points of allegedly inappropriate or hostile behavior, according to sources.

During a spring 2018 staff meeting, Szul also humiliated the woman by yelling at her in front of several other employees, sources said.

Szul called the woman “incompetent” and asked if she was “slow” in front of a co-worker, according to sources. Szul’s abuse was so severe it drove the woman to tears, the sources said.

In addition to abusive language, Szul also made the woman uncomfortable by standing over her and looking over her shoulder when she was at her desk, or by sitting close to her on her desk, sources said.

After the 17-point complaint was filed, a university investigator responded to the accuser and asked for more information about Szul’s behavior, according to two sources.

Szul’s conduct made many employees in the athletic business office uneasy, according to five sources. The issues became so prevalent Hobbs called for a meeting in May 2018 to address the issues, four sources said.

Members of the athletic business department — including Szul — were called to the gathering. Hobbs did most of the talking, describing the alleged verbal abuse and other examples of a hostile work environment that people had raised as Szul sat silently, the source said.

McDonough confirmed the meeting, describing it as an attempt “to air out grievances and understand ways to make the work environment better.”

Hobbs did not defend Szul, the source said. But some employees in the room felt extremely uncomfortable being forced to discuss their serious grievances with Szul there in the room, according to four sources.

“Hobbs wanted us to share, but we were put on the spot,” a source who was in attendance at the meeting said. “I don’t remember (if anyone spoke).”

Since the gathering, “there has been nothing discussed” regarding Szul, the source said.

In September 2018, a few months after the off-site meeting, Rutgers hired Sharp Executive Coaching to help address issues between Szul and the rest of the department, sources said. NJ Advance Media obtained invoices paid by Rutgers showing Sandy Sharp, president of the Warren-based firm, provided consulting services from September 5, 2018, through Nov. 30, 2018. The university cut two separate checks each in the amount of $7,750.

McDonough said Sharp was hired to help Szul “better deal with people.”

“Sharp was brought in as an executive coach to help Mike do a better job as an executive, as a manager, dealing with co-workers,” McDonough added.

In an interview, Sharp declined to specify how her work at Rutgers involved Szul, but said “the fact they would bring in a leadership coach speaks volumes in terms of … their commitment to excellence (and) everybody being on the same page.”

One source familiar with the inner workings of the department described the hiring of the consulting firm as “a farce.”

“Rather than taking care of a problem,” the source said, “they threw money at someone and we got into a room and were supposed to sing kumbaya.”

Get Rutgers Sports Insider text messages from reporters: Cut through the clutter of social media and communicate directly with the Rutgers beat writers. Plus, exclusive news and analysis every day. Sign up now.

Matthew Stanmyre may be reached at mstanmyre@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @MattStanmyre. Find NJ.com on Facebook.

Keith Sargeant may be reached at ksargeant@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @KSargeantNJ. Find NJ.com on Facebook.

Susan K. Livio may be reached at slivio@njadvancemedia.com. Follow her on Twitter @SusanKLivio. Find NJ.com on Facebook.