Intranet
Faculty Handbook
Appendix IV—Faculty Grievance Procedure
Faculty Grievance Procedure Purpose
The following procedures are intended to provide a process for resolving faculty grievances in a prompt and equitable manner without prejudice, discrimination or malice toward the person or persons initiating the complaint. Fundamental to the process is the principle that all parties make a good-faith effort to resolve the grievance at the lowest possible administrative level.
Definitions
For purposes of these procedures, the definition of a faculty member is found in the preface of the Faculty Handbook. Faculty members who are assigned administrative duties may not utilize the faculty grievance procedures to resolve disputes with the administration arising out of his/her administrative function. Faculty members in this category should consult the appropriate non-faculty grievance procedure. Any grievance brought by a University employee who does not meet the definition of faculty contained in the preface of the handbook shall be governed by the policies and procedures of the University Grievance Committee for non-faculty members, regardless of whether the employee has teaching responsibilities.
In general, a grievance is a disagreement between faculty or a disagreement between a faculty member and a department head or other University administrator. For example, a grievance might be an allegation by a faculty member that there has been a violation or improper application of the terms and conditions of the Faculty Handbook. A grievance can also be an allegation regarding improper, arbitrary or discriminatory application of West Texas A&M University’s policies and practices relating to the terms and conditions of employment as stated in the employee’s appointment letter. Specifically excluded from these procedures are disagreements arising concerning promotion and tenure, salary issues including merit raises, faculty dismissal, non-reappointment, terminal appointment, sexual harassment or EEO complaints which should seek remedy through normal administrative review channels as listed on pages 7–8.
The Peer Hearing Committee is advisory. Its primary purpose is to inform the grievant of the validity of the grievance and to give guidance concerning continuation of the grievance. A mediator is one who has professional training in mediation techniques to attempt to resolve differences through negotiation by finding a satisfactory solution to the grievance and then obtaining commitments from both parties.
Initial Procedures
Faculty must try to resolve any differences that they have with any other University employee. Within 30 working days of the most recent incident, the grievant must present a written statement of the grievance to the respondent and the immediate supervisor if both parties are in the same department, to the dean if both parties are in different departments of the same college or to the provost/VPAA if both parties are in different colleges. A meeting of the grievant and respondent should be arranged by the immediate supervisor within 10 working days. Neither the grievant nor an administrator at any level may be represented by any person or organization at these initial meetings unless previous agreement is secured by all parties involved. The purpose of this process is to resolve the issues not to create a contentious environment. This process continues through administrative channels to the provost/vice president for academic affairs.
Peer Hearing Committee
If the problem is not resolved through meetings (“Initial Procedures”), then, to continue the process, the grievant must present a formal written grievance within 10 working days of the final meeting to the provost/VPAA (or the University president if the provost/VPAA is the respondent). The aggrieved faculty member may seek legal counsel in drafting the formal written grievance, and legal counsel may be present at the peer hearing to offer counsel and advice but may not actively participate. Included in the formal grievance should be a description of the grievance, how the grievant has been injured, copies of documents that would support the claim, a documented list of voluntary witnesses, a summary about how the grievant has tried to resolve the problem and what the grievant would regard as a satisfactory solution. The respondent will have 10 working days to respond, in writing, to the grievant’s written statement. Upon receiving the respondent’s reply, the provost/VPAA (or University president if the provost/VPAA is the respondent) shall notify the president of the Faculty Senate, who shall randomly select five faculty from the Grievance Committee to serve as the Peer Hearing Committee. Each committee shall select its own chair and determine its own operating procedures consistent with this policy. All discussion is to be confidential. Upon completion of the hearing, the committee chair shall submit, within 10 working days, a written report of the committee’s findings and recommendations to both parties and to the provost/VPAA (or the University president if the provost/VPAA is the respondent). Each member of the committee shall sign the report and indicate individual agreement or disagreement with it.
Mediation
If the grievant or respondent continues to pursue the grievance through mediation, the next step would be to notify the president of the Faculty Senate and the provost/VPAA (or the University president if the provost/VPAA is the respondent) within 10 working days. Before mediation can be arranged, the University president must certify the availability of funds for mediation costs. If the president does not so certify, then the grievant has exhausted all administrative remedies and the faculty grievance procedure ends. If funds are available, the president of the Faculty Senate and the provost/VPAA would:
- Notify the individual against whom the grievance has been filed;
- Check with the Peer Hearing Committee to make sure the grievance and response are unamended from the form in which they were evaluated, and;
- Arrange to bring in a professional mediator. The mediator shall have the authority to establish operating
rules for the proceedings. Legal counsel may not be present at the mediation. Within 10 working days after the conclusion of mediation, the mediator will report the outcome to both parties and the University president (or the chancellor if the president is the respondent). The president would have 10 working days to accept or reject the mediator’s report in a written response.
Approved December 9, 1996