Does New Harassment Policy Give Managing Partner too Much Power?

In an article that actually came out last summer, a Tampa law office called Holland & Knight decided to change their sexual harassment policy to give the managing partner of the firm sole discretion in determining the accused’s guilt or innocence, and imposing penalties on them. Here is an excerpt from the article…

The women, all young lawyers in the Tampa office of Holland & Knight,
were irate.

An internal committee investigating their claim against Tampa partner
Douglas A. Wright found he had violated the law firm's sexual harassment policy.
But managing partner Howell Melton Jr. disputed some of the committee's findings
and chose not to impose the toughest punishments it recommended.

The resulting clash eventually helped push Holland & Knight into a
public controversy and Melton into the thick of a leadership crisis.

It's a scenario that's unlikely to happen again.

Shortly after Holland's internal committee completed the Wright case last
summer, the firm's director's committee revised the sexual harassment policy to
give the managing partner sole discretion in the outcome of such cases. Under
the new policy, the Fair Employment Practices Committee serves only a
fact-finding role, no longer reaching conclusions or recommending penalties.
Instead, the managing partner alone determines the accused's guilt or innocence
and what punishment, if any, is appropriate.

I believe that this new policy gives too much power to the managing partner of the firm. The article does say that this new change in policy is supposed to bring the sexual harassment policy in lines with current legal trends, and other outside experts see this change as for the better.

But I just can not see how this is the case. It seems to me that giving the managing partner sole discretion could be a risky move. Melton has already let one of his fellow partners go (Wright) with an easier punishment for his sexually harassing behavior. Melton even promoted Wright to be the firm’s third ranking officer just months after reprimanding him for sexual harassment! I think giving one person all the power in situations like that is a bad idea. But if that person runs the company I guess they can do so however they want anyway.