Charges
Committee 1996-97 Annual Report
To The Academic Senate,
The task of the Charges Committee is to review charges of alleged
violations of the Faculty Code of Conduct brought against members of the
Academic Senate or faculty of other series who have teaching responsibilities
similar to that of members of the Academic Senate. Our responsibility is to
make an initial review of the complaint and consider first, whether the
behavior, if it actually occurred would be in violation of the Faculty
Code. Once it is accepted as an actual
charge, the Committee holds a hearing to judge whether or not there is
'probable cause' that the violation took place. We prepare our report and
communicate our findings to the Vice Chancellor of Academic Personnel. If the
Committee finds 'probable cause' we additionally submit recommendations for a
level of a proposed sanction and whether the case should be settled or referred
to the Committee on Privilege and Tenure.
The Committee received eleven cases during the 1996-97 academic year. The Committee declined to consider one case because it
dealt with a faculty member's personal characteristics and means of
communicating with the student bringing the charge. The Committee declined to
consider a second case because the charge involved a combination of faculty and
staff but the Committee intervened and successfully resolved. Two additional
cases were put on hold at the request of the individual bringing the charge to
attempt resolution at an informal level. One was settled with the assistance of
the Ombuds office and the second is still on hold.
Seven cases were heard by the Committee. Four cases involved sexual
harassment issues. Four cases involved violations by faculty against students.
Five of the cases were extremely complex and required multiple witnesses and an
extensive investigation. Of the seven cases heard, 'no probable cause' was
found for three cases. A fourth case was settled with the assistance of the
Vice Chancellor, and two cases were referred to the Vice Chancellor with
findings of 'probable cause' and a recommendation that they be referred to the
Committee on Privilege and Tenure. For the final case a finding of 'no probable
cause' was made but concern was voiced about procedural issues raised in the
submitted charge and the Committee recommended that the case be referred to
Privilege & Tenure for consideration as a grievance.
The Committee was asked to comment on two task force reports regarding
disciplinary procedures. The first report was the Joint Senate-Administration
Task Force on Faculty Disciplinary Procedures at UCLA. The second report was
the Statewide Disciplinary Procedures Task Force Report. Both reports raised
procedural changes, which will affect the workings of the Charges Committee.
The intent of the UCLA report is to streamline the procedures and eliminate the
regrettable process of requiring up to three hearings for cases, which involve
sexual harassment and scientific misconduct. The Committee discussed possible
changes in composition, working arrangements and level of responsibility. The
Committee will have to work closely with both the Vice Chancellor of Academic
Personnel and the Vice Chancellor of Research to arrive at a workable process
which maintains the Senate's autonomy and protects faculty rights while
streamlining a lengthy process.
The chair expresses her gratitude to the members of the Committee for
their strength of convictions, patience and cooperation with this very
important year of work. She also thanks Ms. Judy Nawa
for her efficient, and always pleasant assistance, and Vice Chancellor Norman
Abrams for his patience and assistance in interpreting rules, which were not
always clearly defined.
Respectfully submitted,
Paul Bergman, Law
Scott Chandler, Physiological Science
Kym F. Faull, Psychiatry & Biobehavioral
Science
Patricia Ganz, Health Services
Michael S. Levine (W & S), Psychiatry & Biobehavioral
Science
Maximillian Novak, English
Paul Torrens (F), Health Services
Debora Shuger, English
KATHRYN
October 14, 1997