The Catholic University of America

Faculty Handbook Part II Archived

 

Archived Nov, 1, 2010

Appeal From Adverse Decisions

 

II-E-1: Grounds for Appeal

.163 A Faculty member may appeal the non-renewal of a probationary appointment, a recommendation against conferral of continuous tenure or against promotion in rank, or termination of service because of termination of a program. The appeal may be made on three grounds: 1) inadequate evaluation, i.e. inadequate process or inadequate consideration of the credentials of the candidate in relation to the requirements of the academic unit, or 2) violation of principles of academic freedom, or 3) unlawful discrimination.

 

II-E-2: Appeal on Grounds of Inadequate Evaluation

.164 An appeal for reconsideration must be made in writing to the Provost within thirty days[1] after the candidate receives notice of the adverse decision (C-12.123) or within thirty days after receiving a written statement of reasons for the decision (C-12.125-126). The request for reconsideration must articulate the grounds on which it is based.

.165 The Provost, after such consultation as he or she deems appropriate and no later than thirty days after the appeal is received, may grant the request for reconsideration or, on the basis of insufficient grounds for the appeal, reject it.

.166 If the appeal is rejected, the adverse decision stands, and the Provost will so advise the Faculty member.

.167 If the appeal is granted, the Provost so informs the candidate and transmits the request for reconsideration, with an explanation and any pertinent documentation, to the appropriate reviewing body. Depending on the reasons for the appeal, at the discretion of the Provost the case is referred for reconsideration either directly to the CAP of the Academic Senate or first to the Department and/or the School and then to the CAP of the Senate.

.168 A favorable recommendation resulting from reconsideration is forwarded in the usual manner as provided in C-7, C-8, C-9.

.169 If the original adverse recommendation by a Department and/or School is sustained on appeal by the CAP of the Academic Senate, the appeal fails. Upon receiving a report in confidence from the Chair of the Senate CAP on its action and supporting reasons, the Provost may nevertheless make a positive recommendation to the Academic Senate, which then makes the final decision.

.170 If the adverse recommendation originated from the CAP of the Academic Senate and is sustained on appeal by the CAP of the Academic Senate, the case must be referred to the Academic Senate for the final disposition.

 


[1]"Thirty days" means "thirty University business days"; all subsequent references to time limits are to be similarly understood

 

II-E-3: Appeals on Grounds of Academic Freedom

.171 A Faculty member who alleges that an adverse decision violated principles of academic freedom, shall appeal to the Provost in writing within thirty days after he or she receives notice of the adverse decision (C-12.123) or within thirty days after receiving a written statement of reasons for the decision (C-12.126). The appeal must articulate the grounds on which it is based.

.172 Informal Resolution. If the Provost, after appropriate consultation, determines that a decision may have been influenced by considerations that violate principles of academic freedom, he or she shall meet with the parties involved and attempt to resolve the matter informally.

.173 Faculty Grievance Committee. If the matter has not been resolved within thirty days of the date that the Provost has received a written complaint from the Faculty member, the Faculty member may request a review of the matter by the Faculty Grievance Committee. Such a request shall be made within ninety days of receipt of the original adverse decision.

.174 A request for a review by the Faculty Grievance Committee should be made according to Faculty Grievance procedures (Faculty Handbook, Part III).

.175 After receiving the report of the Grievance Committee, the Provost may (1) reject the appeal; (2) if the original adverse decision was the outcome of reviews at the level of the School, refer the case for consideration by the CAP of the Academic Senate following normal procedures as provided in Section C. Procedures for Appointments and Promotions; (3) refer the case to the Academic Senate for further process as provided in E-5.

 

II-E-4: Appeals on Grounds of Unlawful Discrimination

.176 A Faculty member who alleges that an adverse decision resulted from unlawful discrimination, shall appeal to the Provost in writing within thirty days after he or she receives notice of the adverse decision (C-12.123) or within thirty days after receiving a written statement of reasons for the decision (C-12.126). The appeal must articulate the grounds on which it is based.

.177 Informal Resolution. If the Provost, after appropriate consultation, determines that a decision may have been influenced by considerations that constitute unlawful discrimination, he or she shall meet with the parties involved and attempt to resolve the matter informally.

.178 Equal Opportunity Officer. If the matter has not been resolved within thirty days of the date that the Provost has received a written complaint from the Faculty member, or if the Faculty member chooses to end the informal resolution process with the Provost, the Faculty member may bring the matter to the Equal Opportunity Officer according to procedures applicable to that office (Personnel Manual).

.179 The Equal Opportunity Officer may attempt to resolve the dispute informally.

.180 If the matter is not resolved informally, the Equal Opportunity Officer shall determine, according to procedures applicable to that office, whether there is reason to believe that there has been unlawful discrimination, and so report to the Provost.

.181 After receiving the report of the Equal Opportunity Officer, the Provost may (1) reject the appeal; (2) if the original adverse decision was the outcome of reviews at the level of the School, refer the case for consideration by the CAP of the Academic Senate following normal procedures as provided in Section C. Procedures for Appointments and Promotions; (3) refer the case to the Academic Senate for further process as provided in E-5.

 

II-E-5: Ad Hoc Review Committee of the Academic Senate

.182 If the Chair of the Academic Senate receives the conclusion of the Provost that there is reason to believe an adverse decision regarding renewal, promotion, or tenure may have violated principles of academic freedom or may have been the result of unlawful discrimination, the Senate shall appoint seven Tenured Ordinary Professors to serve as an Ad Hoc Review Committee. The Senate shall designate one member of the Committee to serve as Chair.

.183 The Ad Hoc Committee shall review the case solely on the basis of academic merit and shall follow the same procedures, and apply the same criteria, as govern the reviews conducted by the Committee on Appointments and Promotions of the Academic Senate.

.184 If the original adverse recommendation by the CAP of the Academic Senate is sustained by the Ad Hoc Review Committee, the appeal fails, and the Provost so informs the Faculty member.

.185 If the Ad Hoc Review Committee recommends that promotion in rank or conferral of tenure be granted, it forwards the recommendation to the Academic Senate for its consideration and action as provided in C-8 and C-9, or, in the case of renewal of appointment, to the Provost (see C-7.091).