Minutes of the AAUP Executive Committee Meeting of November 26, 2008

Present: C. Smith (Chapter President), E. Chudacoff, M. Crichton, K. Kearfott, J. Lee (Conference Executive Director), J. Lehman, R. Lomax, M. Thouless

C. Smith called the meeting to order at 12:10 p.m.

Agenda. The proposed agenda, as modified, was adopted by consensus.

Active Cases. J. Lehman provided updates on three active cases.

1) An assistant professor denied tenure by unanimous vote of the unit executive committee after a unanimous, favorable vote by the home department is contemplating filing a grievance.  The issue is that a member of the executive committee had significant conflicts of interest in the case, including joint grants, joint students, and some significant professional disagreements, but did not recuse him/herself from deliberations and apparently led the discussions.  The executive committee departed from written AAUP policy and injected itself into substantive review, rather than a review of procedures and judgments of professional competency at the department level.  The aggrieved member is seeking some confidential advice that must be discussed in executive session.

2) This case was discussed in executive session.

3) A research scientist visited the AAUP representative on 29 July 2008 and produced evidence of alleged scientific fraud and misconduct. The individual described a months-long history of contacts with university administrators at both unit and central levels in an attempt to reconcile the problems, which included plagiarism of the individual's work, multiple false reports to federal funding agencies, and misrepresentation of his/her own work on federal grants. Based on the names of the administrators she/he had contacted, and growing evidence of abuses at the department level, the AAUP representative advised the individual that he/she was in a very dangerous situation and should seek employment at another university as quickly as possible.

A month later the AAUP representative was visited by a distraught individual who turned out to be the spouse of the research scientist. The spouse reported that the research scientist had been physically assaulted, handcuffed, and jailed by members of the U-M DPS as she/he was submitting a letter of resignation from the department and transfer to another department within the U-M. The events that transpired on 4 September are here recounted in his/her own words:

" Less than two hours before the meeting with the Department Chair, I had a brief meeting with Dr. G, the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs of the … School. Dr. G. assured me that processing of my appointment transfer was practically completed. When I expressed my concern regarding the possibility of the intervention from my former Department at the last minute, the Associate Dean responded: "You have nothing to fear. We do not do that" and suggested me to submit the resignation letter at my "old" department. After the meeting with the Associate Dean, I went to the Human Resources Office of my Department and informed the manager that I came to submit my resignation letter."

"The Human Resources Manager, … immediately went to the office of the Department Chair and told me that I should deliver the letter of resignation to the Department Chair in person approximately in one hour, between 3:00 and 3:15 p.m.

When I returned in one hour to the Departmental office I found in the conference room … and the Department Chair and two big, stocky and physically developed gentlemen in plain clothes who were introduced to me by the Department Chair as police officers from the UofM Department of Public Safety. The Department Chair informed me that there were allegations that in the last few days (underlining is mine) I made multiple physical threats to the faculty members and staff of the department and research laboratories in … building, and threatened the administrative staff of the Departmental Office. In particular, I was told that I actively and repeatedly threatened …. "

" The Department Chair informed me that urgent measures should be taken to ensure a safe work environment and physical safety f or faculty and staff of the Department and explained that was the reason why the police officers were invited to the meeting."

"The Department Chair informed me that I had two options: to resign or to be terminated. I signed my resignation letter effective September 12, handled it to the Human Resources representative and was informed that the meeting was over. Anyway, I planned to start my new appointment in a few days next week. The Department Chair knew that I had a job offer from another Department at the University and that I intended to transfer my appointment. Thus, there was clear mutual understanding that I resigned from the Department to accept a new position rather than submitted the resignation from the University."

[The DPS officers escorted the research scientist to his/her office.]

"When we came to my office, the officers demanded my University keys and my University ID. I gave the keys and my ID to them. They told me that I was allowed to take from my office only the items that they would allow me to take. They searched my desk at my office and found my cell phone. I left the cell phone in my office before leaving for the meeting and they told me that I can take it. The officers told me that I should immediately leave the premises, that I had only 20 minutes, and informed me that I can take with me only the books with the stickers of a local bookstore because they could not determine what items in my office really were mine."

" I showed the officers the books in the file cabinet that belonged to the … Library and told them that I needed the books for my work and intended to return them on time. The officers said: "You cannot do that. The books will be returned later." I requested to invite Associate Chair for Research of the Department whose office was eight yards from mine and who was at his office at that time and told the officers that I needed to talk to my colleagues. The officers informed me that they did not allow me to leave my office because I was a trespasser and they were instructed to remove me from the building. They also did not allow me to enter my laboratory. I explained to the officers that they have no right to do that because I resigned effective September 12, rather than September 4. They responded that I resigned effective today, September 4, and was not an employee of the University."

"I told the officers that if they did not allow me to work at my office, I needed to continue my work at the library. I took my briefcase and four thin yellow standard size manila envelopes that I left before the meeting near my briefcase. The envelopes contained the work that I just completed before the meeting, a draft and illustrations of my new invited book chapter, a few reprints of my recent publications, a grant that I received to review earlier that week and my personal correspondence. I explained the officers that these are my personal papers, opened each envelope and showed the officers the content."

"The officers told me that they saw that my briefcase contained some papers, and for that reason they did allow me to take my briefcase from my office. I informed the officers that the briefcase was my personal property, opened my briefcase and suggested to inspect its content. The officers disregarded my suggestion."

"One of the officers declared that I committed a trespass and, without any explanations, said that I had no right to enter the Medical Campus and the University Campus. (!!!!?????)"

"When I made two steps toward the door, the officers yelled at me: "Drop the bag! Drop the bag!" I did not understand what they wanted from me. I stopped and again suggested the officers to inspect the content of my briefcase. It also contained some private papers, such as my child's medical and immunization history, bills to be paid and other personal papers. At that moment the officers rushed to me from behind and grabbed my hands. I dropped my briefcase because one of the officers pushed me into the wall, and my face hit the wall. At the same moment the officers twisted my right arm, painfully raising it on my back to my shoulder, pushed me again, pinned me against my desk, handcuffed me, and informed me that I was under arrest for trespass."

"My colleague whose office was located next to my office came in and found that I was handcuffed and that one of the officers grabbed me by my shirt on my chest and firmly and painfully held me in a sitting position on the corner of my desk. I asked my colleague to inspect the content of my briefcase in the presence of the officers. My colleague looked through the papers and informed the officers that my briefcase contained my manuscripts, the texts of my grant proposals, my academic correspondence saying: "It all has his name on it." "

"I asked the officers to release me because I did not violate any regulations or procedures of the University. The officers searched my briefcase and removed its content. They again informed me that was I arrested for trespass, attempted to resist and that they needed to transport me to the DPS headquarters."

" In the police report the officers stated that they warned me that if I attempted to leave my office with my briefcase, I "would be placed under arrest", and that they pulled "the bag from my hand" and placed it on a chair. These statements are not true. The officers attacked and handcuffed me without any warning."

Additional aspects of this case need to be discussed in executive session.

1. Professor Cass R. Sunstein will be giving the 2008 Davis-Markert-Nickerson Lecture on December 4. The lecture will take place in the Honigman Auditorium at the Law School at 4:00 p.m. The title of Professor Sunstein's talk is "My University.com, My Government.com: Is the Internet Really a Blessing for Democracy?"

Schedule of Meeting Dates in Winter Term: The Executive Committee agreed to the following meeting schedule: January 7, January 28, February 11, February 25, March 11, March 25, April 8, April 22, May 13, and May 27. With the exception of January, all meetings are on the second and fourth Wednesday of the month.

Minutes. The minutes of the Executive Committee meeting on October 22, 2008 were adopted.

Treasurer's Report. Between October 22 and November 26, the chapter received $241.20 in payroll deduction dues, the first of nine installments. There were no expenditures during that period. The current balance in the checking account is $1,377.52.

Faculty Governance. In her talk with the Senate Assembly, the Provost reported that the university is not too badly off. Since the university is using a 7-year rolling average of the endowments, one bad quarter does not negatively affect the university budget as much as an annual calculation of the endowment. The general counsel has been asked to look into questions of intellectual property rights with regard to on-line courses.

Fall Chapter Meeting. The Chapter meeting on October 24, 2008 was videotaped and will be placed on the chapter's website.

State Conference Developments. None reported.

National Headquarters Developments. None reported.

The meeting was adjourned at 1:22 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Edward Chudacoff

Chapter Secretary pro tem