Contents:

• Steps in a Grievance Procedure
• Steps in a Disciplinary Case
• Steps in an Early Termination Case

Steps in a Grievance Case:

(See University Senate Bylaw 335 and Davis Division Bylaw 87 for more detail.)

1. Any member of the Academic Senate may file a written grievance with the Investigative Subcommittee of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure.

   Faculty members who believe they may have a grievance are encouraged to consult with a Faculty Privilege Adviser. Communications with Faculty Privilege Advisers are confidential to the extent allowed by law.

   The faculty member may also wish to consult informally with the Chair of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure prior to filing a grievance. In order to be considered, grievances must be filed within three years of the time the faculty member knew or should have known about the alleged violation and the harm resulting from it.

2. No special form is needed to file a grievance. However, the grievance should be set out as clearly as possible. It should specifically state what action(s) is(are) challenged, how the action(s) allegedly violated the faculty member’s rights or privileges, what administrative remedies are or may be available and whether they have been pursued, and what remedy or remedies the faculty member seeks.

   Send official grievances to:
   Senate Analyst - Committee on Privilege and Tenure
   Academic Senate Office
   Voorhies Hall 303
   University of California Davis
   One Shields Avenue
   Davis, CA 95616

   Grievances with respect to tenure, promotion, or reappointment may be based only on allegations of procedural irregularity or claims that the challenged decision was reached on the basis of impermissible criteria. The Committee on Privilege and Tenure is not permitted to re-evaluate the faculty member’s qualifications or professional competence.

3. The Subcommittee may require that the faculty member exhaust all appropriate administrative remedies before the grievance will be considered.

4. If all administrative remedies have been exhausted, or the Subcommittee determines that they need not be exhausted, the Subcommittee reviews the written grievance to determine if the faculty member has made out a prima facie case. This review is limited to an examination of the grievance document only. The test for a prima facie case is whether the grievance states allegations that, if true, would constitute a violation of the faculty member's rights or privileges.

5. If the Subcommittee finds that the faculty member has not presented a prima facie case, it will so inform the faculty member in writing, and explain the basis for its finding. The grievance will then be considered closed.

   If the Subcommittee finds that the faculty member has presented a prima facie case, it will so inform the faculty member and the person or persons alleged to have violated the faculty member’s rights or privileges. The Subcommittee will then further investigate to determine if there is reasonable cause to believe that a right or privilege of the complaining faculty member may have been violated. During this review, the Subcommittee will provide the complaining faculty member with an opportunity to address the Subcommittee, orally or in writing. During its review, the Subcommittee may request files and documents from the administration. It may also offer administrator(s) with authority to remedy the complaint notice and opportunity to respond, and may seek information from other persons involved in the events that gave rise to the grievance.

6. If, on the basis of its review, the Subcommittee concludes that there is not sufficient reason to believe the faculty member’s rights or privileges may have been violated, it will provide the faculty member with a written statement of its conclusion and the basis for that conclusion.

   If the Subcommittee concludes that there is sufficient reason to believe that the faculty member’s rights or privileges may have been violated, it will communicate that finding to the faculty member and the administration.

   At any stage in the proceedings, any party may seek to informally resolve the grievance through a negotiated settlement. Also at any stage, the faculty member and the other parties involved may mutually agree to mediation.

   If the Subcommittee concludes that there is sufficient reason to believe that the faculty member’s rights or privileges may have been violated, it will attempt to promote an informal resolution of the controversy before referring the matter for a hearing. If no settlement can be reached, the Investigative Subcommittee will refer the matter to the Hearings Subcommittee for a hearing.

7. If a hearing is necessary, the Chair of the Hearings Subcommittee of Privilege and Tenure will appoint a hearing panel consisting of at least three members of that Subcommittee. No person from the department or equivalent administrative unit of any party may be appointed to the hearing panel. The panel will schedule a hearing.

8. Before the hearing, the Chair of the hearing panel will schedule a conference with the parties (or their representatives, if applicable) to define the contested facts and issues to be decided, exchange lists of witnesses and documents to be presented, and resolve any procedural issues.

9. At the hearing, each party may be represented by counsel. Each side shall have the opportunity to present evidence and conduct cross examination. The hearing is closed to the public. Typically only the parties, their representatives, and witnesses giving testimony will be present. The technical legal rules of evidence do not apply. The hearing will be recorded. The hearing panel may choose to engage a certified court reporter. If so, the administration will bear the cost of the reporter and the cost of transcript preparation.

10. The hearing panel can only consider evidence presented at the hearing and facts that are commonly known. The grievant has the burden of proving the validity of the grievance by a preponderance of the evidence.

11. Following the conclusion of the hearing, the hearing panel shall promptly produce a statement of its findings of fact, conclusions, and recommendation. The panel shall forward the statement to the parties, the Chancellor, the Chair of the Davis Committee on Privilege and Tenure, and the Chair of the University Committee on Privilege and Tenure. The panel’s statement and the hearing record shall be confidential to the extent allowed by law and U.C. policy.

12. The hearing panel may reconsider its recommendation if, within a reasonable time, either party presents newly discovered facts or circumstances that might significantly affect the recommendation and that could not reasonably have been discovered by the time of the hearing.

13. Ultimately, decisions as to the resolution of a grievance rest with the Chancellor. If the Chancellor tentatively disagrees with the recommendation of the hearing panel, the Chancellor will so inform the Chair of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure and offer to meet with the Chair or with the whole Committee prior to making a final decision. The Chair of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure ordinarily will request that the Chair of the Hearings Subcommittee and/or the hearing panel be present at the meeting with the Chancellor.

Steps in a Disciplinary Case:

(See University Senate Bylaw 336 and Davis Division Bylaw 87 for more detail.)

1. When a complaint is made about a member of the Academic Senate, the administration investigates. If it finds that the facts alleged in the complaint, if true, would justify imposition of discipline and concludes that credible evidence supports the complaint, the administration may initiate formal disciplinary proceedings. To do so, the administration provides the Chair of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure with a written statement of the charges, the facts underlying the charges, and the proposed disciplinary action. Proposed sanctions may include: written censure, reduction in salary, demotion to a lower rank or step, suspension without pay, denial or curtailment of emeritus status, or dismissal from employment. If the proposed sanction is dismissal from employment of a faculty member with tenure, security of employment, or an unexpired appointment, the procedures for early termination cases shall apply.

2. The Chair will have a copy of the statement delivered personally to the accused faculty member or sent by registered mail to the accused’s last known home address. The accused has 21 calendar days from receipt of the notice to file a written answer with the Committee. The accused may request an extension of time for filing the answer by written application to the Committee, which may grant a reasonable extension.

3. Within 21 calendar days after receipt of the answer or the deadline for receipt of the answer, the Committee shall evaluate the case. With the consent of both the administration and the accused, the matter may be referred to mediation. If a hearing is necessary, the Chair of the Hearings Subcommittee of Privilege and Tenure will appoint a hearing panel consisting of at least three members of that Subcommittee. No person from the department or equivalent administrative unit of any party may be appointed to the hearing panel. The panel will schedule a hearing. The accused shall be given at least 10 calendar days notice of the time and place of the hearing.

4. Before the hearing, the Chair of the hearing panel will schedule a conference with the accused and the administration (or their representatives, if applicable) to define the contested facts and issues to be decided, exchange lists of witnesses and documents to be presented, and resolve any procedural issues.

5. At the hearing, both the accused and the administration may be represented by counsel. Each side shall have the opportunity to present evidence and conduct cross examination. The hearing is closed to the public. Typically only the parties, their representatives, and witnesses giving testimony will be present. The technical legal rules of evidence do not apply. The hearing will be recorded. The hearing panel may choose to engage a certified court reporter. If so, the administration will bear the cost of the reporter and the cost of transcript preparation.

6. The hearing panel can only consider evidence presented at the hearing and facts that are commonly known. The administration has the burden of proving the allegations by clear and convincing evidence.

7. Following the conclusion of the hearing, the hearing panel shall promptly produce a statement of its findings of fact, conclusions, and recommendation. The panel may not recommend imposition of a sanction more severe than that proposed by the administration in the notice of proposed disciplinary action. The panel shall forward its statement to the accused, the Chancellor, the Chair of the Davis Committee on Privilege and Tenure, and the Chair of the University Committee on Privilege and Tenure. The panel’s statement and the hearing record shall be confidential to the extent allowed by law and U.C. policy.

8. The hearing panel may reconsider its recommendation if, within a reasonable time, either party presents newly discovered facts or circumstances that might significantly affect the recommendation and that could not reasonably have been discovered by the time of the hearing.

9. At any stage in the proceedings, the administration and the accused may attempt to resolve the charges through negotiations. Once written charges have been filed, the Committee on Privilege and Tenure should be consulted by the administration prior to resolution of the case.

10. Ultimately, disciplinary decisions rest with the Chancellor, with the President if the proposed sanction is demotion of a faculty member with tenure or security of employment, and with the Regents if the proposed sanction is dismissal of a faculty member with tenure or security of employment. If the Chancellor tentatively disagrees with the recommendation of the hearing panel, the Chancellor will so inform the Chair of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure and offer to meet with the Chair or with the whole committee prior to making a final decision. The Chair of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure ordinarily will request that the Chair of the Hearings Subcommittee and/or the hearing panel be present at the meeting with the Chancellor.

Steps in an Early Termination Case:

(See University Senate Bylaw 337 and Davis Division Bylaw 87 for more detail.)

1. Termination of employment of a faculty member with tenure or security of employment, or termination before the expiration of the faculty member’s appointment, shall be only for good cause and following an opportunity for a hearing before the Committee on Privilege and Tenure.

2. A faculty member facing early termination may file a written request for a hearing with the Chair of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure, who shall refer it to the Chair of the Hearings Subcommittee. The Chair of the Hearings Subcommittee shall appoint a hearing panel of at least three members of the Subcommittee. The hearing panel may not include any member of the department or equivalent administrative unit of the faculty member facing early termination.

3. Before the hearing, the Chair of the hearing panel will schedule a conference with the accused and the administration (or their representatives, if applicable) to define the contested facts and issues to be decided, exchange lists of witnesses and documents to be presented, and resolve any procedural issues.

4. At the hearing, both the accused and the administration may be represented by counsel. Each side shall have the opportunity to present evidence and conduct cross examination. The hearing is closed to the public. Typically only the parties, their representatives, and witnesses giving testimony will be present. The technical legal rules of evidence do not apply. The hearing will be recorded. The hearing panel may choose to engage a certified court reporter. If so, the administration will bear the cost of the reporter and the cost of transcript preparation.

5. The hearing panel can only consider evidence presented at the hearing and facts that are commonly known. The administration has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that there is good cause for early termination.

6. Following the conclusion of the hearing, the hearing panel shall promptly produce a statement of its findings of fact, conclusions, and recommendation. The panel may not recommend imposition of a sanction more severe than that proposed by the administration in the notice of proposed disciplinary action. The panel shall forward its statement to the accused, the Chancellor, the Chair of the Davis Committee on Privilege and Tenure, and the Chair of the University Committee on Privilege and Tenure. The panel’s statement and the hearing record shall be confidential to the extent allowed by law and U.C. policy.

7. The hearing panel may reconsider its recommendation if, within a reasonable time, either party presents newly discovered facts or circumstances that might significantly affect the recommendation and that could not reasonably have been discovered by the time of the hearing.

8. At any stage in the proceedings, the faculty member and the administration may attempt to resolve the case through negotiation or mediation. If resolution occurs after the faculty member has formally requested a hearing, the parties should so inform the Committee on Privilege and Tenure in writing.

9. Ultimately, decisions on early termination rest with the Chancellor, or with the Regents for termination of a faculty member with tenure or security of employment. If the Chancellor tentatively disagrees with the recommendation of the hearing panel, the Chancellor will so inform the Chair of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure and offer to meet with the Chair or with the whole committee prior to making a final decision. The Chair of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure ordinarily will request that the Chair of the Hearings Subcommittee and/or the hearing panel be present at the meeting with the Chancellor.