Committee on Privilege and Tenure 2004-2005
Annual Report
To the Academic Senate,
The Committee on Privilege and Tenure investigates
grievances filed by faculty members who allege that their rights and/or
privileges have been violated (generally by administrative actions). When the Committee finds a prima facie case in a grievance it
attempts to informally mediate a settlement.
If a settlement cannot be achieved, the Committee holds a formal hearing
to determine whether the faculty member’s rights and/or privileges have been
violated. If the Committee determines
that a faculty member’s rights and /or privileges have been violated, it
recommends a settlement to the Vice-Chancellor for Academic Personnel.
The Committee also holds formal hearings in disciplinary
cases where a) the Charges Committee has found probable cause that a faculty
member may have violated the Faculty Code of Conduct and, b) the Office of the
Vice-Chancellor has sustained the decision of the Charges Committee and sought
to resolve the matter through a formal hearing.
If, at the conclusion of the hearing, the Committee finds that a faculty
member has, in fact, violated the Faculty Code of Conduct, the Committee
notifies the Chancellor and recommends a maximum sanction relative to those
that were suggested by the Vice-Chancellor when the case was presented to the
Committee.
Cases Received from Faculty Members During
2004-2005
1. A faculty member alleged that the Department had
infringed on faculty rights by altering voting procedures to disenfranchise
faculty on sabbatical. The Committee
found that, while some department members had proposed such a change, it had
not actually been enacted. The
Department was reminded of the need to maintain the voting rights of all faculty and the necessity of having by-law changes reviewed
and approved by the appropriate Senate Committees prior to implementation.
2. A faculty member alleged that the Department Chair and
School Dean had refused to carry out a “merit equity review” to which the
faculty member was entitled. The
situation was resolved informally after an investigation by the Committee.
3. A faculty member being reviewed for promotion to tenure
alleged the Department had violated their rights and not followed clear
University procedures by refusing to allow the candidate to list the names of internal
reviewers who the candidate believed might be biased against them. Further violations were alleged regarding the
Department’s refusal to allow the candidate to sign the data summary before the
case was presented at the Department meeting for a vote. After an investigation the Committee found in
favor of the faculty member and recommended a remedy to the Vice-Chancellor.
4. A faculty member alleged that the Charges Committee had
erred in allowing an ineligible member to participate in a matter being brought
against him/her. After an investigation
the Committee found no substantial or consequential error on the part of the
Charges Committee.
5. A faculty member alleged that the Charges Committee had
erred in refusing to solicit direct testimony from them regarding a matter
before that Committee. After an
investigation and review of the regulations under which the Charges Committee
operates, the Committee found that the allegation was without merit.
6. A faculty member
alleged that his/her ability to carry out his/her work as a teacher and
researcher had been unfairly restricted by disciplinary restrictions on their
ability to move and interact freely on the Campus that had been put in place by
the Administration. After an
investigation, the Committee found in support of the faculty member. However, as the restrictions were inextricably
entwined with other matters then before the Charges Committee, we were unable
to determine if the restrictions were reasonable or unreasonable. THIS MATTER IS STILL PENDING.
Cases Reviewed by the Charges Committee and Forwarded by the
Vice-Chancellor
1. A series of 17 charges against a faculty member for
violations of the Faculty Code of Conduct relating to the integrity of research
were forwarded to the Committee. A full
hearing was held on this matter in Winter of
2004. The findings of the hearing
committee supported the allegations on some of the charges, and rejected other
of the charges. The hearing committee
recommended sanctions to the Vice-Chancellor.
2. A complex set of charges against
a faculty member for violations of the Faculty
Code of Conduct
were forwarded
to the Committee in Spring of 2005. The
Committee
is currently
preparing to hold a full hearing on these matters during Fall, 2005.
Additional Committee Actions
1. The Committee Chair held informal consultations with four
faculty members regarding the possibility of bringing charges against the Administration
for violations of their rights during the promotion process, and consulted with
one faculty member regarding his rights to extend a non-paid leave.
2. The Committee held extensive discussions on its role in
consulting with the Administration on matters concerning disciplining faculty
when action must be taken on a rapid basis.
The Committee was unanimous in its view that such consultation is
appropriate on matters of policy, but not on matters relating to specific cases
where the matter may eventually come before the Committee. The Committee recommended a set of procedures
by which the Administration could consult with past Committee Chairs on such
matters, thus maintaining the important precedent of shared governance, while
avoiding any potential for conflict of interest. The Committee’s recommendations were accepted
by the Vice-Chancellor.
Respectfully submitted,
Scott Chandler, Physiological Science
Richard Korf, computer Science
Leon Letwin, Law
Albert Moore, Law
Debora Shuger, English
Tim Solberg, Radiation Oncology
MICHAEL S. GOLDSTEIN, Community Health Sciences, Chair
September 10, 2005