Faculty Grievance Committee Training October 26, 2012.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Allegation An allegation may be submitted by : Any Person. An allegation may be filed with the PLSB through: The Department of Education A Public.
Advertisements

Service Employees International Union (SEIU) California State University Employees Union (CSUEU) Association of California State Supervisors (ACSS) California.
Presented by: NC State University Office of General Counsel 2011 Faculty Review/Grievance Panel Workshop.
Honor Council Orientation Cheryl Scheid, Ph.D. Vice Chancellor Academic, Faculty and Student Affairs Dean, College of Graduate Health Sciences
Faculty and EPA Professionals Grievance Procedure Conducting an Effective Grievance Hearing Presented by: The Office of Legal Affairs 2008.
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY University of Arkansas at Little Rock Presented by: Darryl K. McGee, M.S. Office of the Dean of Students.
Staff Development Emergency Operations 1. Identify 5 purposes of the offender/student grievance process Identify 5 grievable issues Identify 12 non-grievable.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN Old and New A & P Grievance Procedures.
Faculty Forum: March 5, 2008 Shall the Collected Rules and Regulations be revised to adopt the revised Pilot Faculty Grievance Procedure recommended by.
EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE POLICY SUMMARY FACTS Goals of the Employee Grievance Policy: Provide procedural consistency across the agencies and universities of.
HEARINGS COMMITTEE 6 elected members Must have permanent tenure when elected.
Biennial Review 1. Timeframe: August 1, 2011 – July 30, 2013.
Honor Code Expectations and Proposed Revisions Faculty Senate, December 3, 2014.
An Introduction to the ABCD For the Casualty Actuarial Society Course on Professionalism Copyright © 2013 by the American Academy of Actuaries.
Using Your Faculty Manual …Talking Manual With Your Chair - Dr. Rasoul Saneifard.
Honor Council Orientation Cheryl Scheid, Ph.D. Vice Chancellor Academic, Faculty and Student Affairs Dean, College of Graduate Health Sciences
Maine Board of Tax Appeals 1. What we are: An independent Board of three individuals appointed by the Governor to resolve controversies between Taxpayers.
2015 Workshop Permanent Status and Promotion Policy and Procedures Overview.
FACULTY EVALUATION ANNUAL AND COMPREHENSIVE REVIEWS Janet Dukerich, Senior Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs August 18, 2014.
DISCIPLINE & DUE PROCESS 2007 Changes to NYS’ Special Education Laws and Regulations.
North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University College of Arts and Sciences Performance Review Committee Workshops October 27 and 28, 2014.
Special Faculty Senate Meeting January 12, 2015 Happy New Year!
North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University College of Arts and Sciences Post Tenure Review Faculty Workshop April 17, 2015.
Local Assessment of Code of Conduct Complaints. 2 Background  On 08 May 2008 – the local assessment of Code of Conduct complaints was implemented due.
Procedural Safeguards. Purpose Guarantee parents both an opportunity for meaningful input into all decisions affecting their child’s education and the.
PUC Joint-Use Dispute Resolution Process Oregon Public Utility Commission Safety & Reliability Section.
ASME C&S Training Module B7 MODULE B - PROCESS SUBMODULES B1. Organizational Structure B2. Standards Development: Roles and Responsibilities B3. Conformity.
Doc.: IEEE /1129r1 Submission July 2006 Harry Worstell, AT&TSlide 1 Appeal Tutorial Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE
NC State University Office of General Counsel Box 7008 ■ Raleigh ■ NC ■ rd Floor – Holladay Hall (919) Faculty Review/Grievance Panel.
E. DISCIPLINE THE DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM IN MISSOURI  Structure: 4 S.Ct.- appointed agencies  Advisory Committee (AC) (state-wide jur.)  at least 6 lawyers.
IFTA DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS AMENDMENT PROPOSALS Present by Rick LaRose, Chair Dispute Resolution Committee Annual IFTA Business Meeting July 18-19,
SACS and The Accreditation Process Faculty Convocation Southern University Monday, January 12, 2009 Presented By Emma Bradford Perry Dean of Libraries.
Proposed By-Law Revisions: General Additions & Changes August 2015.
Report to the Faculty Senate April 14, 2009 Bryan L. Spangelo, Chair.
Local Assessment of Code of Conduct Complaints. Background  On 08 May 2008 – the local assessment of Code of Conduct complaints was implemented due to.
Faculty Senate Meeting November 19, Agenda I.Call to Order and Roll Call - M. Bruening, Secretary II.Proposed Amendment to the Faculty Bylaws (CRR.
October 6, 2015San Antonio, Texas 2015 Attorneys Section Meeting IFTA DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS Lonette L. Turner, CEO IFTA, Inc.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION An Important Piece of IFTA. THE NEW PROCESS Streamlined Dispute Resolution Committee Appeal to IFTA, Inc. Board of Trustees.
Limited Submissions NCURA Region III Spring Meeting.
Internal Governing Policy 45 Review of Alleged Capricious Grades Joint Forum of the Council on Academic Affairs and the Council on Graduate Studies.
AMENDMENTS TO THE PROGRAM COMPLIANCE REVIEW GUIDE July 2006 IFTA Annual Business Meeting.
An Introduction to the ABCD For the Casualty Actuarial Society Course on Professionalism Copyright © 2015 American of Academy of Actuaries. All Rights.
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Division of Immigration Health Services FY 2010.
Recommendation: Accept P&T Work Group Implementation Recommendations Subject to recommended modifications.
Your Rights! An overview of Special Education Laws Presented by: The Individual Needs Department.
REAPPOINTMENT, PROMOTION AND TENURE AUGUST 26, 2016 SUE OTT ROWLANDS, PROVOST.
Elizabeth Lord Vice Provost for Academic Personnel Winter Quarter Department Chair Forum February 24, 2006.
Filing an Academic Grievance
Procedure for the resolution of grievances in the ILO
Faculty Senate Special Meeting June 12, 2014
Unit Commanders Course The Complaint Process and Your Responsibility
PAc-17 Sabbatical Leave of Absence
UAH Discrimination/Harassment Policy and Procedures
Evaluation of Tenure-Accruing Faculty
2017 Workshop Tenure and Promotion Policy and Procedures Overview
ENROLLEE DUE PROCESS for Medicaid Managed CARE 42 CFR § 438 et seq.
Faculty Performance Reviews at MSU
The Departmental Performance Review (PR)
PROCESSING SPONSORED PROPOSALS AT THE JOHN F
EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE POLICY SUMMARY FACTS
The Departmental Performance Review Committee
Life of a Dossier Redelegated Merit Non-Redelegated Merit
Appeal Tutorial Date: Authors: July 2006 Month Year
PAc-28 Educational Leave of Absence
FA Review and Clarification of Appendix 15A
Nebraska Supreme Court rules on interpreters Additions & Amendments
Sabbatical and Difference-in-Pay Leaves Office of Faculty Advancement
Faculty Grievance & Dispute Resolution Office
Presentation transcript:

Faculty Grievance Committee Training October 26, 2012

Faculty Grievance Committee

Composition and Terms Members selected by departments. President appoints 8 committee members. Members serve 2 year terms. Chair is elected by the Committee.

Possible Roles Serve as pool for random selection of 3 member Subcommittee during Informal Resolution phase of Grievance Process. Serve as pool for random selection of 3 member Review Panel during Formal Grievance phase of Grievance Process.

Bottom Line Provides recommendations only; not decision makers. Technically speaking, should not be subject of lawsuit. Just in case, defense and indemnity by UTSA/State of Texas.

Faculty Grievance Process

Key Terms Grievant Complaint Respondent Committee Printed Materials Work Days

Administrative Actions/Decisions Subject to Grievance Procedure Denial or reduction in merit award or a reduction in salary or rank Assignment or reassignment of duties Denial or withdrawal of a University benefit or privilege Suspension without pay Performance evaluations Other disciplinary actions

Non-Grievable Actions or Decisions Actions or decisions reviewable pursuant to other procedures provided by the University Actions or decisions that limit academic freedom

Major Features Informal Resolution Process (prerequisite to Formal Grievance Procedure) Formal Grievance Procedure

Informal Resolution Process Direct Conversations – Between/among Respondent, Chair, Dean and Vice Provost; initiated by Grievant – goal is administrative solution. Written Complaint – If Direct Conversations unsuccessful, Grievant submits Written Complaint within 40 work days of Administrative Action/Decision and Respondent responds within 10 work days.

Informal Resolution Process Grievance Committee Assistance – If Direct Conversations and Written Complaint do not resolve grievance, Grievant may request Informal Assistance of the Committee. – Chair of the Committee appoints a Subcommittee (3 faculty members) to conduct informal negotiations between parties and urge resolution.

Committee Assistance Subcommittee may urge resolution by appropriate administrative officers and withdrawal or modification of Complaint. Subcommittee notifies Committee Chair of results. – If successful resolution, submit written report to the Chair and the Vice Provost. – If no successful resolution, Committee Chair informs Grievant of right to initiate Formal Grievance Procedure.

Formal Grievance Procedure Administrative Resolution by Dean or the Executive Vice Provost (if Dean is the Respondent) Review Panel (may or may not include a hearing) makes findings and recommendations. Provost Resolution

Administrative Resolution Grievant submits a Written Complaint and supporting materials* to the Chair within 90 work days of the date of the administrative action or decision. Respondent can file a Written Response with supporting materials* within 15 work days of receipt of notification and materials from the Chair. *These are only opportunities for each side to submit evidence.

Administrative Resolution The Dean or the Executive Vice Provost provides a written proposal for resolution within 10 work days of receipt of all materials from the Chair. Proposal can include dismissal of the Complaint or a suggested solution. If both parties agree with the proposal, the grievance is over.

Review Panel If both parties do not accept the proposal, a Review Panel is appointed. Chair of the Committee appoints a Review Panel (3 Faculty Members – not members of subcommittee). Review Panel meets and reviews Printed Materials (each side’s submissions and the proposed resolution), and provides findings and recommendation.

Review Panel Review Panel recommends one of following 5 actions: – Dismiss the Complaint, failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted – Dismiss the Complaint, failure to meet the burden of proof – Accept the proposed resolution – Suggest a modified resolution – Schedule a limited hearing to clarify the evidence through verbal testimony

Hearing If Review Panel recommends a Hearing, must notify Grievant, Respondent and Provost of specific relevant issues that are in conflict and which need clarification. Hearing is not for full review of grievance, but only for limited purpose of clarifying written evidence. Only Review Panel Members may question witnesses.

Hearing At conclusion of hearing, Review Panel deliberates and submits written findings and recommendations to Committee Chair, who forwards them to Provost for final resolution.

Responses to Recommendations Grievant and Respondent may submit Written Responses to the Review Panel’s recommendations to the Chair and to the Vice Provost.

Provost Resolution The Provost reviews all materials and provides a final written resolution The resolution may endorse, modify, or reject the recommendations of the Review Panel. Provost’s decision concludes the grievance process.