Committee on Charges 2006-07 Annual Report
To the Academic Senate, Los Angeles Division:
The Charges Committee reviews alleged violations of the Faculty Code of Conduct brought against members of the Academic Senate or faculty in other series who have teaching responsibilities similar to that of members of the Academic Senate. Anyone may bring a complaint to the Charges Committee if the complaint concerns an alleged violation of one or more of the provisions of the Faculty Code. The Committee’s task is, first, to determine whether the alleged behavior would be in violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct, and then, once a charge has been accepted, to judge whether or not there is “probable cause” that the violation took place. The Committee communicates its findings in a report to the Vice Chancellor of Academic Personnel. The Vice Chancellor discusses any disagreements with the Committee before she/he makes any final decision as to probable cause.
The Committee considered eight cases during the 2006-07 academic year.
Case Summary
Parties |
Alleged Violation |
Outcome |
Administration vs. Faculty (Professor) |
|
Case settled by Vice Chancellor |
Student vs. Faculty |
II. D. 2 - Discrimination |
Case closed |
Student vs. Faculty |
II. D. 2 - Discrimination |
Case settled by Vice Chancellor |
Student vs. Faculty |
II. D. 2 - Discrimination |
No probable cause – Case terminated |
Student vs. Faculty |
II. A. 1. a – arbitrary denial of access to instruction |
No probable cause |
C.7. Serious violation of University policies governing the professional conduct of faculty… C.2. Incitement of others t disobey University rules when such incitement constitutes a clear and present danger that violence or abuse against persons or property will occur… A.6. Entering into romantic or sexual relationship with any student for whom a faculty member has, or should reasonably expect to have in the future, academic responsibility (instructional, evaluative, or supervisory). C.1. Intentional disruption of functions or activities sponsored or authorized by the University. B. Violation of canons of intellectual honesty, such as research misconduct and/or intentional misappropriation of the writings, research and findings of others. D.1. Making evaluations of the professional competence of faculty members by criteria not directly reflective of professional performance. D.4. Breach of established rules governing confidentiality in personnel procedures. |
No probable cause |
|
Faculty vs. Faculty |
C. 1 – Intentional disruption of functions and activities sponsored or authorized copying of data B. 1 – Violations of canons of intellectual honesty |
No probable cause – Case terminated by Vice Chancellor |
Faculty vs. Faculty |
II. D. 2 – Sexual harassment |
Case settled by Vice Chancellor |
The Committee also reviewed, without comment, a number of proposals submitted for its perusal by various administrative offices of the Academic Senate.
It has been a genuine privilege to work with Tom Rice, Vice Chancellor for Academic Personnel, whose dedication to the principles of the Academic Senate is unwavering and unexcelled. The Chair also appreciates the assistance of Professor Robert Goldstein for his sage advice.
Respectfully submitted,
Phillip Bonacich, Sociology
David Campbell, Microbiology, Immunology & Molecular Genetics
Sander Goldberg, Classics
Nina Hyams, Linguistics
Sule Ozler, Economics
Leonard Schneiderman, Public Affairs
Jane Valentine, Public Health – Environmental Health Sciences
RICHARD WEISS, History, Chair