Faculty Handbook
Faculty Grievance Procedure
(As proposed by the Committee on Faculty Subcommittee on Faculty Appeals in May, 1990)
Preamble
The Marquette University Faculty Grievance Procedure is designed to establish a process for the prompt, efficient and just resolution of faculty grievances. Although formalistic in structure, it embodies a flexibility appropriate to the nature of individual grievances. Its processes are intended to complement informal approaches to resolving faculty complaints and not to substitute for them.
Article 1. General Provisions
1.01 - Administration of Grievance Procedure. The Marquette University Faculty Grievance Procedure is administered by the Committee on Faculty Subcommittee on Faculty Appeals (hereinafter "the subcommittee").
1.02 - Definition of "Grievance." As used in the Marquette University Faculty Grievance Procedure:
(1) A "grievance" is a written complaint submitted under section 4.02 below alleging that an administrative decision affects the grievant and is either unfair, unjust, or in violation of established policies, procedures, or statutes of Marquette University.
(2) The term "grievance" includes a complaint lodged in response to a denial of promotion and/or tenure or the termination of an untenured faculty member, which alleges procedural irregularities in the promotion and tenure or termination processes.
(3) The term "grievance" does not include a complaint lodged in response to a denial of promotion and/or tenure or a termination of an untenured faculty member which challenges the validity of assessments made by a complainant's superiors or colleagues on the substantive merits of the complainant's bid for promotion and/or tenure or reappointment.
(4) The term "grievance" does not include a complaint about the suspension or termination of tenured faculty which, under provisions of the Faculty Statutes, is within the competence of the Faculty Hearing Committee.
1.03 - Definition of "Normal Channels of Authority." As used in the Marquette University Faculty Grievance Procedure, the term "normal channels of authority" means the Provost, the grievant's dean or director, and the grievant's department chair (if any), if the grievance complains about an administrative decision in the grievant's own academic unit. Otherwise, the term means the Provost and the dean or director of the unit in which the administrative decision complained about was made.
1.04 - Who May File Grievance. The Subcommittee on Faculty Appeals is a subcommittee of the Marquette University Committee on Faculty (hereinafter "COF"). Accordingly, any faculty member or librarian whose interests are represented by the COF may file a grievance with the subcommittee under the procedures outlined in this document.
1.05 - Prejudice Not to Accrue by Filing Grievance. Submission of a grievance shall not in any way prejudice the grievant nor shall it cast any adverse reflection upon the grievant's professional standing within the university.
Article 2. Informal Resolution of Complaints
2.01 - Some complaints may be more effectively addressed and resolved by informal means than by invoking the formal grievance procedure. The grievance procedure should not be construed as a substitute for informal attempts to resolve complaints nor should its existence be taken to minimize the potential effectiveness of informal processes.
2.02 - An attempt to informally resolve a complaint is not a prerequisite to invoking the formal grievance procedure.
Article 3. Initiation of a Grievance.
3.01 - A complaint becomes a grievance at the point it is reduced to writing and submitted to the administrator identified in section 4.02 below.
3.02 - The grievance document should identify the person filing the grievance and his or her employing unit. It should describe the nature of the complaint, the evidence in support of it, and the remedy sought. Supporting documentation (if any) should be attached.
3.03 - Prompt Submission of Grievances.
(1) If the formal grievance procedure is to be invoked, the grievant should initiate the process as soon as reasonably possible after he or she becomes aware of the basis for the complaint and after any efforts to resolve the matter informally under Article 2 above prove unsuccessful. Normally, a reasonable period of time within which to file a formal grievance is one month after learning the basis for it.
(2) If the grievant complains about a denial of promotion and/or tenure or about a termination of an untenured faculty member, the grievance document must be submitted under section 4.02 below within one month of the date on which the grievant became aware of the basis for the complaint.
Article 4. Processing a Grievance Within the Normal Channels of Authority
4.01 - A grievance must first be pursued through the normal channels of authority before it may be filed with the subcommittee.
4.02 - Grievances should initially be submitted to administrators in the normal channels of authority as follows:
(1) If the grievance arises from a denial of promotion and/or tenure, it should be submitted to the Provost.
(2) If the grievance arises from the termination of an untenured faculty member, it should be submitted to the grievant's dean or director.
(3) If the grievance arises from any other administrative decision in the grievant's academic unit, it should be submitted to the administrator in the normal channels of authority who made the decision complained about.
(4) If the grievance complains about a decision by an administrator in a unit other than the grievant's own academic unit, it should be submitted to the dean or director with jurisdiction over that unit.
4.03 - Timetable for Processing a Grievance within the Normal Channels of Authority.
(1) Upon submission of a grievance, it is desirable that the matter be resolved with the administrator who received the grievance within two weeks from the date of submission.
(2) If the matter is not resolved by the conclusion of the second week and the grievant wishes to pursue the matter further, he or she must submit the grievance to the next higher administrator within the normal channels of authority within one week after the expiration of the two-week period identified in section 4.03(1) above.
(3) The three-week cycle established by sections 4.03(1) and (2) above should be utilized at each successive level in the normal channels of authority until all levels have been exhausted.
(4) If the grievance is not resolved within the normal channels of authority, it may then be submitted to the subcommittee under section 5.01 below.
Article 5. Processing a Grievance Before the Subcommittee on Faculty Appeals
5.01 - The grievance procedure is initiated before the subcommittee by filing a grievance document with the chair of the subcommittee within three weeks after the matter was first submitted to the Provost under the provisions of Article 4 above.
5.02 - The grievance document filed with the subcommittee should meet the requirements of section 3.02 above and should further describe the grievant's efforts to resolve the matter within the normal channels of authority.
5.03 - Submitting a grievance to the chair of the subcommittee constitutes the grievant's certification that a duplicate copy of the grievance has also been submitted to the Provost and to the chair of the Committee on Faculty.
5.04 - Upon receipt of a grievance the chair of the subcommittee shall calendar the matter for a preliminary review before the subcommittee as soon as possible. If prompt preliminary review involves the necessity of a meeting during the semester or summer break, it is in the sole discretion of the subcommittee to schedule a meeting during the break or to wait until the university is back in regular session. The chair of the subcommittee will invite the Provost to submit a written response to the grievance (with a copy of the response to the grievant) in advance of the subcommittee's preliminary review.
5.05 - Preliminary Review of Grievance.
(1) At the preliminary review session(s) the subcommittee will determine:
(a) Whether the matter complained about is grievable under the grievance procedure;
(b) Whether relief has been sought through the normal channels of authority as required by Article 4 above;
(c) Whether the grievance document states adequate cause to proceed further with the matter and, if so, what procedures will be utilized by the subcommittee; and
(d) Whether the grievance has been mooted by subsequent action of the university and/or the grievant and, if so, whether a full investigation is nonetheless warranted.
(2) Unless otherwise directed by the subcommittee, the preliminary review is conducted in an executive session and may be attended only by subcommittee members.
(3) As part of the preliminary review the subcommittee may request additional documentation from the grievant and/or the university. Each party is expected to provide information relevant to a material issue as is within his or her competence.
(4) A quorum of five subcommittee members is required for the preliminary review.
(5) Following the preliminary review, the subcommittee will proceed to a full investigation of the grievance unless a majority of the subcommittee present and voting decide that, under the criteria outlined in section 5.05(1) above, the matter should be terminated without a full investigation. A decision to terminate at this juncture concludes the subcommittee's involvement in the matter.
(6) Decisions reached upon preliminary review will be reduced to writing and transmitted to the Provost, to the chair of the Committee on Faculty, and to the grievant.
5.06 - Full Investigation of Grievance. If the subcommittee undertakes a full investigation of the grievance, it may utilize any procedures it deems appropriate to the nature of the complaint, including any of the following:
(1) It may appoint one or more of its members to serve in a fact gathering capacity.
(2) It may hold a hearing in accordance with the following procedures:
(a) The hearing is closed to all persons except as the subcommittee may otherwise direct.
(b) The grievant and the Provost (or his/her designee) have the right to be heard personally.
(c) Subcommittee members may participate actively in the hearing to such extent as they deem appropriate.
(d) Technical rules of evidence do not apply at the hearing, but the subcommittee will endeavor to assure that the hearing is conducted in a fair manner and that only reliable evidence is presented.
(e) The subcommittee shall summarily determine all questions of procedure; and the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the subcommittee are not impeachable by reason of procedural irregularities, errors, or omissions.
(f) In addition to the above procedures, the subcommittee may make such further procedural rules as it considers helpful and fair.
5.07 - During the course of all proceedings described in Article 5 of the grievance procedure, each party is expected upon the call of the other or upon the request of the subcommittee to provide information relevant to a material issue as is within his or her competence.
5.08 - Subcommittee Report on Grievance.
(1) Upon completion of an investigation under section 5.06 above, the subcommittee will develop a written report stating its findings and recommendations. The report shall indicate the names of subcommittee members assenting to it. Dissenting members may also submit a report.
(2) The subcommittee should submit its report on the grievance within six weeks of the date on which the preliminary review was completed or as soon as possible thereafter.
(3) The chair of the subcommittee shall cause copies of the report to be transmitted to the Provost, to the chair of the Committee on Faculty, and to the grievant.
5.09 - Submission of its written report concludes the involvement of the subcommittee in the matter.
Article 6. Action by Provost on Subcommittee's Recommendations.
6.01 - Within one week after receipt of the subcommittee's report, the Provost shall notify the subcommittee chair that the report has been received.
6.02 - Unless notified under section 7.01 below that the grievant has asked the Committee on Faculty to review the grievance, the Provost shall indicate the university's response to the subcommittee's report by written communication to the subcommittee chair, to the chair of the Committee on Faculty, and to the grievant, within four weeks of the date on which the subcommittee's report was received.
Article 7. Review of Grievance by the Committee on Faculty.
7.01 - Within two weeks of receiving a subcommittee decision under section 5.05(6) not to proceed with a full investigation, or within two weeks after receipt of the subcommittee's report under section 5.08(3) following a full investigation, the grievant may, if he or she disagrees with the subcommittee's position, submit a written request to the chair of the Committee on Faculty requesting COF review of the grievance.
7.02 - A request under section 7.01 should include a copy of the grievance document originally submitted to the subcommittee under section 5.01 above as well as the final report of the subcommittee (including any appendices) filed under section 5.05(6) or 5.08(3) above. It should also explain why the Committee on Faculty should undertake a review of the matter.
7.03 - Filing a request under section 7.01 constitutes the grievant's certification that a duplicate copy of the request has also been submitted to the appropriate vice president and to the chair of the subcommittee.
7.04 - Upon receipt of a request under section 7.01, the chair of the Committee on Faculty will convene the committee as soon as possible consistent with COF rules. A simple majority of the COF shall constitute a quorum. In order for the Committee on Faculty to grant the request for COF review of the grievance, three-fourths of the COF present and voting must agree to do so.
7.05 - If the Committee on Faculty agrees to review the grievance, it may fashion procedures for doing so that it deems appropriate under the circumstances. The procedures may include a review confined to the facts as found by the subcommittee and included in its report, the appointment of its own fact gatherers, the conduct of its own hearing using procedures described in section 5.06(2) above, etc. The COF may not, however, refer the matter back to the subcommittee.
7.06 - The chair of the Committee on Faculty shall transmit a report communicating COF rejection of the grievant's petition for COF review, or stating the COF's findings and recommendations upon completion of the COF review to the Provost, to the chair of the subcommittee, and to the grievant.
7.07 - Within one week after receipt of the COF report, the Provost shall notify the COF chair that the report has been received.
7.08 - The Provost shall communicate the university's response to the reports of the Committee on Faculty and the Subcommittee on Faculty Appeals by written communication to the chair of the Committee on Faculty, to the chair of the subcommittee, and to the grievant, within three weeks of receiving the report of the Committee on Faculty.
Article 8. Conflicts of Interest
8.01 - A member of the Committee on Faculty or the Subcommittee on Faculty Appeals who was involved in the formal decision-making process that occasioned a grievance may not participate in the processing of the grievance under the Marquette University Faculty Grievance Procedure.
8.02 - A member of the Committee on Faculty or the Subcommittee on Faculty Appeals whose impartiality might be compromised by participating in the processing of the grievance ought to recuse himself or herself from consideration of the grievance.
Article 9. Confidentiality
9.01 - Confidentiality is important to the success of any grievance procedure. Accordingly, it is expected that those who participate in the grievance process and thereby become privy to a grievant's allegations, the university's response, information obtained in the course of any investigation, the final reports of the subcommittee and the COF, and the university's final report, should respect the confidentiality of matters disclosed to them.
9.02 - The confidentiality referred to in section 9.01 above is designed as a protection for the grievant. Thus, should the grievant choose to make public that which would otherwise be deemed confidential, the university, the COF, or the subcommittee may respond by disclosing related matters that ought, in fairness to the university, the COF, or the subcommittee, be disclosed.
|
