Grievances and Charges

The processes described below involve allegations against or grievances by Academic Senate Faculty.

If you are not sure what policy or process applies, the following information is meant as a guide. You may also contact the Senate Judicial Analyst, Marian Olivas: [email protected]

Any member of the University community may file a charge that a member of the Academic Senate Faculty has violated the Faculty Code of Conduct (Charges). Charges then become disciplinary/personnel cases against the faculty member charged.

A student can file a grading grievance only if it is based on an allegation that a grade has been assigned for other than academic reasons. 

A grievance, on the other hand, seeks a remedy. The Senate only hears grievances from Senate faculty members. See "Grievances" below for procedures for other University community members. 

General Guide

    A.   Definition

    A complaint that a specific administrative act was arbitrary or capricious or violated applicable University rules, regulations, or personnel policies and adversely affected the individual’s then-existing terms or conditions of employment or academic rights.

    B.    Result

    A grievance seeks a remedy that restores, insofar as possible, the lost rights or privileges.

    C.    Complainant

    The individual who was adversely affected.

    D.   Grievance Procedures Applicable to Academic Appointees
    1. Members of the Academic Senate

    Members of the Academic Senate have access to the Privilege & Tenure Committee to file a grievance. Procedures for a Senate grievance are outlined in the systemwide bylaws:

    2. Non-Senate Academic Appointees

    For all grievances except early termination, a non-Senate faculty member should refer to Academic Personnel Manual (APM) 140.

    When facing early termination, a non-Senate faculty member (under Regents SO 103.9) may choose to grieve by APM-140 or request a hearing before Privilege and Tenure Committee as their grievance mechanism. Senate Bylaw 337 governs early termination hearings. 

    3.  Postdoctoral Scholars
    4. Teaching Assistants, Readers and other Academic Appointees covered by a Contract:
    Current Contract (including a link to grievance and arbitration procedures): 
    E. Grievance Procedures Applicable to Staff
    1. Non-represented staff: 
    PPSM 70
    2. Represented Staff: 
    For other Union Contracts, see: 
    F.    Grievance Procedures Available to Students

    UCLA Procedure 220 - re student records

    UCLA Procedure 230.1 – re discrimination

    UCLA Senate Reg. A-306 (d) – re grades

    Graduate Division Standards and Procedures for Graduate Study at UCLA

  • A. Definition

    1. Academic Senate Member: Charge

    A complaint with the Academic Senate Committee on Charges that a Senate Member engaged in misconduct in violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct.

    2. Other Academic Appointees: Corrective Action/Dismissal 

    A  complaint that an academic appointee deserves corrective action for good cause, including but not limited to misconduct, unsatisfactory work performance, dereliction of duty, or violation of University policy including the Faculty Code of Conduct.

    B. Result

    Imposition of disciplinary sanctions against charged Senate member or corrective action of the non-Senate Academic Appointee up to and including separation from the University.

    C. Complainant

    Any member of the University community.

    D. Policies Applicable to Faculty
    1. Members of the Academic Senate

    SBL 336

    APM 015:  Faculty Code of Conduct

    APM 016: University Policy on Faculty Conduct and Administration of Discipline

    Appendix XII to UCLA Academic Senate Manual: Campus Procedures for Implementation of University Policy on Faculty Conduct and the Administration of Discipline

    2. Non-Senate Academic Appointees (faculty and non-faculty)

    Academic Appointees are defined in APM 110-4(2) and include among others, senate and non-senate faculty, medical residents, and research appointees, 

    APM 015:  Faculty Code of Conduct

    APM 150: Corrective Action and Dismissal

  • Per UCLA Academic Senate regulations, only the course instructor of record has the responsibility and right to determine and assign a final grade. (Senate Regulations A-306 ff)

    A student who decides to file a grading complaint should  provide written documentation to support their claim that a grade was assigned for other than academic reasons. The Judicial Committees make a determination based on the written documentation submitted by the grievant. See "Filing Forms" for a Grading Grievance Form.


    The P&T Committee is available to review Senate grievances. The Committee first reviews the written grievance, but the grievant can request to meet with the Committee as well.


    GAC Committee members are available to review the Senate judicial processes for individuals considering filing a grievance or charge as well as for Senate members who have been charged with a violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct.


    The Charges Committee receives Charges of violations by Senate members of the Faculty Code of Conduct.


    The R&J Committee can answer questions about bylaws (including school and departmental bylaws).

  • Grievance

    The Academic Senate's Committee on Privilege and Tenure (P&T) has authority under Systemwide Senate Bylaws (See SBL 335) to hear grievances by Senate faculty that their rights and privileges as a faculty member may have been violated. A grievance seeks a remedy for the individual filing (the complainant).

    When a grievance is filed, the Privilege and Tenure (P&T) Committee will first review the written grievance and discuss it at their next meeting. If the written grievance establishes a prima facie case, the committee will either advise the administrator with authority to provide a remedy (without sharing a full copy of the grievance), or arrange to investigate further. If there is a queue of grievances, the grievance may be held over to a following meeting. If the grievance goes forward, see Senate Bylaw 335 for a general idea of timing.


    A complaint against a Senate faculty member that seeks discipline for violation of professional responsibilities, ethical principles, and/or standards of conduct that pertain to the professional obligations of faculty members (as listed in the Faculty Code of Conduct) is a charge and is filed first with the Charges Committee ("Charges"). Charges is responsible for sending a determination to the Vice Chancellor of Academic Personnel as to whether there is probable cause that a violation occurred. A finding of probable cause initiates the formal disciplinary process.

    The complaint may originate with any member of the University community, including a Dean or a Department Chair and should include evidence the complainant believes supports their allegations that the individual violated the Faculty Code of Conduct. The complainant may include a narrative, but is also responsible to provide evidence they believe supports the allegations. This evidence may include an investigation report conducted by Title IX, the Equity Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Office, or the Research Misconduct Office.

    Once a formal complaint is filed, the charge and supporting evidence are sent to the person charged to give them an opportunity to be heard on the matter. Charges typically allows 14-21 days to file a response. Once a response is received, Charges will review the case at their next scheduled meeting. For cases involving a formal investigation with one of the above-listed offices, Charges may need to wait for a report of that investigation before making a recommendation regarding probable cause. For other cases, the committee may decide based on the written file and response or may request additional information or request that the parties individually speak to the committee.

    Once a charge is sent to the Vice Chancellor, s/he has 30 days to respond (UCLA Bylaws, Appendix XII.7.A). If probable cause is found, the Vice Chancellor (of Academic Personnel) forwards the complaint to the Privilege and Tenure (P&T) Committee for a formal disciplinary hearing. The timing and process for a P&T hearing is described in Senate Bylaw 336.

    If no probable cause is found, the Vice Chancellor has the opportunity to review the recommendation and the file. In these cases, the Vice Chancellor has the option to concur with or to disagree with the recommendation. Should the Vice Chancellor reverse and find that there is probable cause, these cases will be forwarded to P&T as well. P&T conducts a formal adversarial hearing where the faculty member may confront the witnesses.

    Both a grievance and a charge may be filed based on the same facts.  

    Judicial committees are composed of faculty who serve on a voluntary basis and try to keep a set schedule of availability. As a general rule, the committees operate on a reduced schedule in the summer.