[The following are MODEL procedures for faculty/administration dispute resolution, including grievance procedures, approved by SACUA, Senate Assembly, the Provost and the Academic Program Group (Deans).]

[In 1998, each academic unit on the University's Ann Arbor campus formally approved these procedures.  However, a few units made modifications appropriate for their particular needs.  For more accurate reference, please obtain current Faculty Appeals Procedures for your unit through the office of your dean or with the assistance of the Faculty Senate Office at 764-0303.]

[In 2003, the Academic Program Group (APG), the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs (SACUA), and Senate Assembly have approved the underlined sections of this document.  Still to be determined is if the revised document with the underlined sections needs approval by the faculty in each of the schools and colleges.]

 

MODEL FACULTY APPEAL PROCEDURES
FOR SCHOOLS, COLLEGES, AND ACADEMIC UNITS

[1998 version with 2003 revisions and 
April 2006 change in the FACULTY GRIEVANCE APPLICATION FORM]

 

The appeal procedures outlined below are available to instructional staff members, both regular and supplemental, and primary research staff, qualifying as faculty members under Regental Bylaw 5 (revised March, 1998): "The term faculty shall include members of the teaching and research staff together with the executive officers, the directors of various teaching, research, and library units, research scientists, curators, and persons with similar duties."

These procedures are available, under the conditions specified below, to faculty members of the academic units (defined as the schools, colleges, research units or related unit), hereinafter referred to as faculty, who have disputes or complaints concerning the way decisions have been made about any aspect of their employment.

It is the intent of these appeal procedures to provide a prompt and humane review of academic unit or departmental action so that, if mistakes have been made, they may be corrected, or alternatively, if action taken was proper, it may be better understood by the person affected.  It is intended that informal consultation will resolve most problems and that these appeal procedures will apply only when informal methods have failed.

These procedures are not the proper forum to address issues that arise between faculty members, or groups of faculty members, or between faculty members of one unit in regard to treatment by another unit or by administrators of another unit.  The SACUA Faculty Hearing Committee, although infrequently used, was created by the Senate Assembly in 1987 to address complaints of this nature.

INFORMAL PROCEDURES

Role of Faculty Ombuds

A member or members of the tenured faculty will be elected by the academic unit faculty to serve a two-year term as Faculty Ombuds.  The academic unit Faculty Ombuds exists to assist in the resolution of disputes.  On request the Ombuds will provide information about grievance procedures. The Dean may, in addition, direct the department or the college Executive Committee to reconsider a dispute if the Dean thinks a mistake in evaluative judgment may have occurred.  No action by the Ombuds or the Dean, however, will deny a grievant continuing access to the prescribed appeal procedures.

Role of Consultation and Conciliation Services [Mediation Services]

The Consultation and Conciliation Services [Mediation Services] provides a neutral, informal, and private avenue for University faculty to discuss work-related conflicts, explore non-adversarial problem-solving, and resolve disputes.  Continuation with this Service is voluntary on behalf of all parties to a dispute.  No action by The Consultation and Conciliation Services [Mediation Services] will deny a grievant continuing access to the prescribed appeal procedures.

FORMAL PROCEDURES

General Principles

Full and truthful participation.  These procedures are designed to provide a fair internal mechanism for resolving disputes of faculty members.  The success of these procedures depends upon willingness of all members of the University community to participate when asked and to participate truthfully.

Uniform treatment throughout the University.  All units are encouraged to adopt the procedures outlined in this document, amended as necessary to conform with unique features of a unit.

Confidentiality.  As an internal review related to individual employment-related problems, all aspects of the review under these procedures are intended to be confidential.  All parties and participants will hold these matters in confidence, to the extent permitted by law.

Respondents.  When the grievance involves a decision made by a group of persons (e.g., a department or committee), there will still normally be only one respondent.  The respondent will be the person who has the current ultimate authority to make decisions in that matter in the group (e.g., the current chair or the dean; the person whose signature authorizes a decision).  Individuals may be named respondents only for issues in which they are alleged to have had direct involvement or responsibility.

A.  Access to the Grievance Procedure

A-1.     Eligible grievants.  These procedures are available to personnel of the academic unit qualifying as faculty members under Regental Bylaw 5 (revised March, 1998).

A-2.     Grievable matters.  These procedures are available when there is a charge that the academic unit or department has reached a decision concerning any aspect of an eligible grievant's employment, including in particular discrimination and violations of academic freedom, that is illegal or manifestly unfair.  The academic unit is, and departments are, expected to rely consistently on decision making procedures that are fair and commonly known.

Grievances brought pursuant to this document may challenge all aspects of the decision-making process, except judgments about professional competence, which shall remain the province of a grievant's units of appointment.

These procedures shall be available only in the context of matters of concern to a specific individual; challenges to unit or University policy should be handled through normal governance and/or administrative processes.

These procedures are not available for claims that are patently frivolous or without merit.

A-3.     Timing of request.  Within 180 calendar days of the date the grievant first knew or could reasonably have been expected to know, on the basis of documentation, of the decision or event that gave rise to the grievance, the grievant must request the formation of a formal review board, by filing a Faculty Grievance Application Form.  In extraordinary cases, a Grievance Review Board may extend the deadline for initiating a formal review.

B.  Informal Discussion Required for Formal Proceeding

B-1.     A grievant must first try to resolve a dispute by discussing it informally with the person (or persons) who made or affirmed the disputed decision or who, within the relevant unit or units, has the authority to provide redress.  The college Ombuds who exists, among other reasons, to provide information about grievance procedures will, on request and with the consent of all parties concerned, attempt to resolve disputes at this level.

B-2.     The grievant should read the grievance policy of the academic unit and must explore resolution through the Consultation and Conciliation Services [Mediation Services] in the Human Resources and Affirmative Action Office.

B-3.     Efforts to resolve a dispute informally may continue despite the commencement of formal review under Section D., below.

C.  Definition of Roles and Responsibilities

C-1.     Grievant
The grievant agrees to abide by all procedures outlined in this document, to participate in good faith, and to respect the confidentiality of the process.

C-2.     Respondent
The respondent agrees to abide by all procedures outlined in this document, to participate in good faith, and to respect the confidentiality of the process.

C-3.     Grievance Review Board (GRB)
The GRB is a committee of faculty whose composition is described in D-4.  The GRB's first role is to decide whether a case is grievable (see D-5), and if so, it hears the case in a fair and timely manner according to the procedures outlined in Section D.

C-4.     Director of Academic Human Resources (DAHR) is the Provost's representative in this process.  The DAHR maintains the confidential files, ensures that any documents used in the hearings and procedures are available to both respondent and grievant, notifies in writing all relevant parties of failure to meet subscribed deadlines and seeks compliance.  If one party repeatedly fails to meet deadlines, or if the DAHR in consultation with the FGM (defined in C-5) decides that there are undue delays, and they believe no further attempts on their part will be productive, they will notify the Provost in writing.

C-5.     The Faculty Grievance Monitor (FGM) is a tenured member of the instructional faculty who is appointed annually by SACUA to monitor all grievances.  He/she receives a copy of the Faculty Grievance Application Form (FGAF), and monitors timing of deadlines at each step of the process listed in C-6.  If the FGM identifies unacceptable delays, then he/she notifies the DAHR in writing.  The FGM will not be actively involved in the process, but will collect the data listed in C-7.

C-6.     The DAHR will provide written notification to the Executive Assistant to SACUA,  for use by the FGM (described in C-5), of the following:

  1. date of establishment of GRB

  2. date of decision by GRB to proceed or not to proceed with a review

  3. letter notifying the grievant and respondent of the first day of the hearing

  4. dates of meetings, and extensions, if granted

  5. date that the GRB issues a provisional recommendation to the grievant and respondent

  6. date that the GRB issues a final decision

  7. date of Dean or Director's response to GRB decision

  8. notice of any appeals and whether the appeal is procedural or substantive

  9. date of establishment of Appeal Board

  10. if a procedural appeal, then date of action of Appeal Board

  11. date of Dean or Director's response to Appeal Board decision

  12.  if a substantive appeal, then date of response by Dean or Director

  13. date of filing a final written appeal, if made

C-7.     In order to allow for the independent monitoring of the adequacy of the process by  the FGM and with the concurrence of the grievant (as noted on the FGAF), the  DAHR will promptly provide copies of the following documents to the Executive Assistant to SACUA, for the confidential use by the FGM:

  1. GRB final decision

  2. Dean or Director's response to GRB decision

  3. procedural appeal decision

  4. Dean or Director's response to procedural appeal decision

  5. substantive appeal decision

  6. Dean or Director's response to substantive appeal decision

  7. final decision

These documents will be used solely by the FGM for the purpose of creating an independent institutional memory of the process and assessing the adequacy and performance of the process across all units and over time.

D.  Formal Review

  D-1.    Grievant's request.  The request must be submitted to the Dean and Director of Academic Human Resources (DAHR) with a copy to the SACUA Faculty Grievance Monitor (FGM) in writing on the Faculty Grievance Application Form (FGAF).

D-2.     Level of Forum.  While the grievant may have the option of having a grievance heard within the department, if departmental rules provide for this, the procedures in this document pertain to grievances handled at the academic unit level.

D-3.     Action by the academic unit.  Upon receipt of a Faculty Grievance Application Form (FGAF) for a formal Grievance Review Board (GRB), the Dean or Director must notify the grievant and the respondent and the Director of Academic Human Resources (DAHR) in writing within ten working days and initiate the process to designate the academic unit members for the Board, (as provided for under section D-4.b. below).  Within ten working days of receipt of the grievant's request, the Dean or Director also notifies the Provost or designee that a cognate member is required (D-4.b.).  Once the Board is established, it shall meet within 15 working days.  If ten working days have passed after the request for a formal Grievance Review Board and the Dean or Director has not: a) notified the grievant and respondent that the GRB has been established; b) has not set in motion the process of designating the academic unit members of the GRB or; c) has not notified the Provost that a cognate member is required, then the grievant may submit the request for a formal GRB to the Provost.  The Provost must then notify, in writing, the respondent and the Dean or Director of the grievant's request and inform all parties, in writing, of the steps taken to set in motion a similar process of designating the academic unit members for the GRB within ten working days of receipt of the FGAF.

D-4.   Composition of the Grievance Review Board

         a.   Two members of the GRB shall be chosen from among the faculty of the academic unit of the grievant.  Each academic unit shall formulate written rules for establishing a list of potential grievance review panel members, taking into consideration the composition of its faculty in the different tracks (e.g., instructional, clinical, primary research scientist).  In the case of a grievance brought by a librarian, the GRB panel shall be chosen from a list of faculty established in accordance with written rules promulgated by the University Library.

Within ten working days of receipt of the notice of a pending grievance from the Dean or Director, the grievant and respondent shall each nominate five members (or fewer if the number of unit faculty members is quite low, as specified in their written grievance reviewer panel rules) from the list of potential panel members, and each shall within a further ten calendar days of receipt of the other's slate of nominees select one of the other party's nominees plus two ranked alternates.

b.      A cognate member of the tenured instructional faculty (Regents' Bylaw 5), from outside the academic unit, shall chair the GRB.  Within 20 working days of notification by a Dean or Director of the need for a chair, the chair shall be selected by lot by the Provost or designee from a list of at least 20 individuals, drawn from the University faculty.  Individuals shall be appointed to the list of potential chairs by the Provost following consultation with SACUA regarding nominees.

c.       At the request of a member of the GRB, that member may be excused from serving on the GRB by the remaining members.  Members are expected to request to be excused if they have a family or significant personal or especially close professional association with one of the parties, or if they believe they cannot render an impartial and fair judgment.  Excused members will be replaced.

D-5.   Grievance Review Board's decision to review the case.

a.   The GRB, the grievant, the respondent, or the Dean or Director may initiate in writing a one-time review of the issues to be considered, in order to focus the process and make it more efficient.  Such communications must be directed only to the DAHR or designee, and may be made at any time in the hearing process, but just once.  Communications from the grievant, respondent or the Dean or Director may not be shared with the GRB until the other party has had ten working days to respond in writing. During those ten working days, the GRB shall only be informed that correspondence regarding focus or limitation of issues is taking place, without otherwise revealing the substance of the communication.  If facts or other issues remain in dispute and are not resolved in this exchange of correspondence, the GRB shall initiate hearings.

b. The first meeting shall begin with an executive session of the three members of the GRB, at which the GRB will decide whether the grievant's complaint is grievable within the scope of Section A, above.  The GRB may also suspend formal review for up to 30 working days while the grievant and respondent, with the assistance of the chair of the GRB, pursue alternative resolution of the complaint pursuant to Section B, above, or while a review as outlined in Section D-5.a. takes place.  In addition, the GRB may dismiss the grievance without hearings or review of evidence if, on the basis of the FGAF, additional grievance materials, the responses and other evidence before the GRB, with all questions of fact assumed in the grievant's favor and all such evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the grievant, there is no basis for deciding the grievance in favor of the grievant.

c. Within ten working days of its first meeting, the GRB must advise the grievant, the respondent, and the Dean or Director in writing whether it will proceed with the review.  If it decides the complaint is not grievable, it must state its reasons.  If it decides to proceed, it shall specify in writing where and when the review will be held and the issues it will consider, along with the reasons for declining to consider any issues raised by the grievant.  The GRB shall then confirm that the grievant and the respondent, have been furnished a copy of this document.

D-6.   Parties' rights. For formal GRBs, the grievant and the respondent shall have the following rights:

a.  To have access to all relevant evidence except confidential evaluations and evidence that would infringe upon the privacy interests of third parties (see paragraph 14., below).

         b.   To appear and present their cases, including evidence and witnesses, to the GRB.

      c.   To question all witnesses who testify before the GRB.  Anyone called to testify or otherwise participate is expected to comply, and to state truthfully and completely all information known first-hand to them that is requested by any of the participants during a grievance review session.

     d.   To be accompanied before the GRB by advisers, who may be attorneys.  Except for advising their clients, the advisers may not participate at the review.

      e.   The GRB may request legal advice, to be provided by the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel.  The Office of the Vice President and General Counsel assumes responsibility for ensuring that the attorney who advises a GRB can and will provide unbiased legal advice and be free of any conflict of interest.

D-7.     The grievance review sessions shall be private, attended only by members of the GRB, the principal parties or designees approved by the GRB, and the Director of Academic Human Resources or designee.  Witnesses will attend only during the period of their testimony.  Legal counsel, if requested by the GRB, and advisors of principal parties may attend.  The GRB chair, grievant, respondent, the DAHR or designee and all members of the GRB shall attend all sessions of the GRB at which evidence is taken or arguments heard.  The GRB members shall not discuss the case or evidence presented except at a regular GRB session.   The GRB chair may invite appropriate observers or others having a substantial interest in the outcome of the case, upon mutual consent of the grievant and respondent.  All proceedings will be confidential.

D-8.     Those portions of the review at which testimony is taken shall be recorded verbatim, which recording may be by voice tape recorder, etc.  Both grievant and respondent may also record the testimony.

D-9.     As a general rule any evidence or testimony attributed to a witness must be personally presented by the witness.  Under no circumstances will evidence be considered that is presented outside a GRB hearing.  Because of the informal nature of the hearing process under these procedures, both the grievant and respondent should be given as much latitude as possible in presenting their cases.  However, in weighing evidence and testimony the GRB should give greater weight to documents and firsthand knowledge as opposed to second-hand or hearsay testimony.  The GRB shall abide by generally accepted rules of confidentiality, collegiality, and privilege.  Unduly repetitious or irrelevant evidence may be excluded.  The chair of the Grievance Review Board shall decide what evidence will be heard or excluded.

D-10.  The GRB may consult with the DAHR or designee at any time concerning questions of procedure.

D-11.  The Chair of the GRB has full authority to assure an orderly and expeditious proceeding.  Any person who disrupts a review or who fails to adhere to the rulings of the GRB may be excluded from the proceedings.

D-12.   The GRB shall be permitted to call its own witnesses and request documents.

D-13.   In reviewing the grievance, the GRB may address specific instances where there appears to be a violation of academic freedom, or discriminatory, illegal or manifestly unfair conduct, even if the grieved action appears to be in conformance with existing unit or University policies.

D-14.   The grievant, the respondent, and the GRB may not have direct access to confidential department or academic unit files.  However, anyone of them may request - and the department or academic unit shall permit - the Chair of the GRB to examine relevant confidential files in their entirety and to provide the GRB with summary of their contents as they relate to the grievance, giving due consideration to protecting confidential aspects of the material.  In instances where the GRB Chair believes it is critical for the GRB, grievant or respondent to examine a confidential document in its entirety, the GRB Chair should consult with legal counsel and may provide the document only when it has been determined that to do so is legally permissible.

D-15.   After the review at which testimony is taken and arguments are heard from the grievant, respondent, and witnesses, the further deliberations and discussions of the GRB shall be private and confidential and shall not be recorded.  In its report and any accompanying exhibits chosen by the GRB to substantiate its report, the GRB shall delete such portions of any record, as needed, to protect the interest of third parties or the confidentiality of evaluations.  Such deletions must be noted in the report.

D-16.   The GRB shall deliver only to the grievant and to the respondent a provisional decision within 15 working days after completion of testimony.  At the same time, the Dean or Director will be notified of the delivery.  The provisional decision shall include a written summary of the testimony, a statement of factual findings, and, if appropriate, a recommended remedy.  Decisions of the GRB shall be made by a majority vote.  The reasons for a dissenting vote must be stated in a minority opinion.  The grievant and the respondent shall have ten working days after receipt of the provisional decision to submit a written response to the GRB.  The content of the provisional decision shall remain confidential and may not be shared at anytime with any other parties except those defined in D-7., and the formal advisors of the grievant and respondent defined in D-6.d. and e.

D-17.   The GRB shall consider any responses to the provisional decision and shall deliver its final decision within ten working days after receipt of those responses.  The final decision shall include a written summary of the testimony, a statement of factual findings, and, if appropriate, a recommended remedy.  Decisions shall be made by a majority vote of the GRB.  The reasons for a dissenting vote must be stated in a minority opinion.  This confidential advisory decision and recommendation shall be presented by the GRB only to the grievant, the respondent, the Dean or Director, the DAHR and, if appropriate, the Review Committee of the academic unit and/or the department chair.

D-18.   If the respondent or the grievant believes that the review was not conducted in accordance with Section D., above, the respondent or the grievant should notify the Dean or Director immediately so that the Dean or Director can take this information into consideration before responding pursuant to E. (below).  If the Dean is a respondent, the grievant or respondent should additionally notify the Review Committee.

E.   Response by the Dean or Director

      In cases where the Dean is not a respondent, the Dean shall respond in writing explaining the reasons for accepting or rejecting the GRB recommendation within ten working days of receiving the recommendation from the GRB.

      In cases where the Dean is a respondent, within ten working days of receiving the GRB recommendation, the Dean shall designate as a Review Committee any standing committee of elected faculty members (e.g., Executive Committee).  In the case of the Law School, which has no standing committee of elected faculty members, the standing committee on tenure will serve as a Review Committee.  The Review Committee shall review the GRB decision and advise the Dean, in writing within ten working days, as to whether he/she should accept or reject the GRB decision.  If the grievant and/or respondent are members of the Review Committee, they will recuse themselves from this review.  Within ten days after receiving the receiving the recommendation of the Review Committee, the Dean shall respond in writing explaining the reasons for accepting or rejecting the recommendations of the GRB and Review Committee.

      Whether the Dean is a respondent or not, the recommendation of the GRB will represent the thorough consideration of all the facts and circumstances, and should be rejected only after very careful consideration.

      The response of the Dean or Director's and/or Review Committee shall go to the grievant, the respondent, the GRB, the Provost, the DAHR, and, if appropriate, the department chair.  If the response has not been delivered within the allotted time, the FGM shall consult with the DAHR, and if the response is not immediately forthcoming, the DAHR and FGM shall report this to the Provost who shall have the Dean or Director respond within five working days.

F.  Procedural Appeal

F-1.     Party's request.  If either the grievant or the respondent, or the Dean or Director, believes the GRB's review was not conducted in accordance with Section D., above, any one of them may request review by an Appeal Board.  If the Dean is not a respondent, the request must be submitted in writing to and/or by the Dean or Director within 30 working days of the final decision of the GRB.

            If the Dean is a respondent, the request for appeal shall be submitted to the Provost, and the Provost shall fulfill the responsibilities assigned to the Dean in Sections F-2 through F-7.  The written appeal must include the nature of the complaint, the facts supporting it, and the remedy sought.

F-2.     Appeals Process.  Within 30 working days of receipt of the request, the Dean or Director shall appoint as an Appeal Board any standing committee of faculty members, including the Executive Committee, or an ad hoc committee of faculty members or faculty members and administrators.  If the grievant and/or respondent are members of the designated Appeal Board, the Board shall be reconstituted to exclude them during consideration of the appeal.  At the same time, the Dean or Director shall notify the grievant, the respondent, the members of the GRB, the DAHR, and, if appropriate, the Executive Committee of the academic unit in writing of the reasons for appeal.

F-3.      Action by the Appeal Board.  Upon receipt of an appeal, the Appeal Board must meet within ten working days of its establishment by the Dean or Director.

F-4.      Appeal Board Review.  The Appeal Board shall consider the record of the formal review and written or oral statements submitted by the grievant and the respondent.

F-5.     Scope.  The appellate review shall be limited to determining whether proper procedures were followed in the original review.  If proper procedures were followed, the Appeal Board must so indicate, and the original GRB findings stand.

Alternatively, cases may be returned to the original GRB or to a newly constituted GRB if specified procedural errors were substantial or if new and significant evidence became available that could not have reasonably been discovered before or during the original review.  No other actions are within the province of an Appeal Board.

F-6.     Appeal Board Decision.  The Appeal Board shall deliver its confidential decision within 30 working days of its first meeting.  The decision shall be written and include a statement of factual findings.  The reasons for a dissenting vote must be stated in a minority opinion.  This advisory decision and recommendation shall be presented to the grievant, the respondent, the Dean or Director, the GRB, the DAHR and, if appropriate, the Review Committee of the academic unit and/or the department chair.

F-7.     The Dean or Director must respond in writing to this Appeal Board Decision within 14 working days from its receipt, explaining the reasons for accepting or rejecting its recommendations to all parties listed immediately above.

G. Substantive Appeal

G-1.     Party's Request.  In the event the grievant or respondent believes that there has been a substantial inequity in decisions, the grievant or the respondent may petition for redress.  If the Dean is not a respondent, the petition must be submitted in writing to the Dean or Director by the grievant or the respondent within 30 working days of the date of receipt of the decision that is being appealed.  If the Dean is a respondent, the petition shall be submitted to the Provost, and the Provost shall fulfill the responsibilities assigned to the Dean in Sections G-2 through G-3.

G-2.     Scope.  The Dean or Director may make further inquiry, seek advice from the unit's Executive Committee or other appropriate standing committee, allow the decisions to stand, return the matter to the original GRB (which shall be for the last time) or duly establish a new GRB (for a single review), which must be established using general procedures as outlined in D.

G-3.     Action by the Dean or Director.  The Dean or Director must respond in writing to the petition within 30 working days of receiving it, stating the action to be taken and the reasons for it, and must supply on the same date a copy of the response to the members of the GRB, grievant, respondent, and the DAHR.

H.    Final Appeal

After exhausting academic unit grievance procedures and considering any consistent pattern to the prior decisions and appeals, if the grievant or respondent believes that there has been a substantial inequity, that person may petition by a single final written appeal to the Provost within 15 working days of the Deanís or Director's written response to the appeal.  The Provost may direct further inquiry, allow the decision to stand, or take other appropriate action.  The Provost's recommendations will be approved by the President.

I.     Extension of Deadlines for Events Listed in C-6

            In extraordinary cases, or if the parties are attempting an informal resolution of the matter, the DAHR in concurrence with the FGM may grant a reasonable extension of any of the deadlines established in C-6. when any of the parties, the GRB, or the Dean or Director requests the extension and adequately substantiates the need for it. As a general rule, extensions shall not be granted purely for convenience in scheduling.

Grievance Application Notes

It is the intention of these procedures to provide a prompt and humane review of disputes arising from actions affecting employment conditions, so that if mistakes have been made, they may be corrected, or alternatively, if action taken was proper, it may be better understood by the person affected.  It is intended that less formal consultation will resolve most problems, and that these appeal procedures will apply only when less formal methods have failed.  If at all possible, one should avoid requesting a GRB just before the summer, because of the difficulty of getting all necessary parties together during the summer period; however, if that is not possible, one should act as promptly as possible at any time, realizing the likelihood that meetings will have to be continued on a timely basis later during a regular academic unit term.

In disputes involving principally office or research space, salary equity, etc., disputants are encouraged to explore mediation through an ombudsperson or the University's Conciliation and Consultation Service [Mediation Services], Academic Human Resources Office.  For disputes that principally involve charges of harassment or discrimination, etc., other forums within the University may be more appropriate for the resolution of those issues, and disputants are encouraged to contact the Academic Human Resources Office for advice on the most appropriate venue.  The same dispute may not be appealed simultaneously through more than one formal venue within the University. However, issues remaining unresolved after completing one venue may be appealed through another, without loss of entitlement to access based on the 180 day limitation, if the initial appeal to any formal venue (other than ombudsperson or Consultation and Conciliation Services [Mediation Services]) was within those time limits.

When a grievance involves a decision or recommendation made by a group of persons (e.g. a department or a committee), there still normally will be only one respondent.  The respondent will be the person who has the current ultimate responsibility and authority to make decisions in that matter in the group (i.e. the current department chair or Dean or Director; the person whose signature authorizes a decision).  Other persons with first-hand knowledge of importance to the dispute may be identified and called to testify by the disputants or the GRB in the course of the taking of testimony by the GRB.

Suggested resources for preparation for grievances, most of which are or will be available on line:

AAUP Policy Documents & Reports (Red Book), American Association of University Professors, most recent edition, available from the Library, the local AAUP Chapter, the national office in Washington, DC, and from the SACUA Office.

Faculty Handbook, most recent edition, available from the Provost's Office  and on-line [The University of Michigan Faculty Handbook].

Office of Academic Human Resources.

Regents' Bylaws, most recent edition, available from the Library, the Provost's Office, the Office of the Secretary of the University, and on-line [Board of Regents OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN Bylaws].

SACUA (Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs) Office and officers, including the Academic Affairs Advisory Committee, and the Civil Liberties Committee; U-M, Ann Arbor, AAUP Chapter officers or Executive Secretary; or your college ombudsperson.

Standard Practice Guide, most recent edition, available from the Library, the Provost's Office, and on-line [The University of Michigan Standard Practice Guide].

FORM TO WITHDRAW INITIATED FACULTY GRIEVANCE

Date:

____________________________

Name (please print or type):

_________________________________________________________________

Rank:

_________________________________________________________________

Academic Unit:

_________________________________________________________________

Action(s) Disputed Regarding Aspects of Your Employment:

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

Date of Written Notification of Action(s) Disputed:

_________________________________________________________________

Respondent Designated In Disputed Action(s):

_________________________________________________________________

Resolution of Dispute(s) Requested:

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

Did You File The Dispute(s) In Another Forum (such as might occur with Sexual Assault or Sexual Harassment)? If so, what agency(ies)?

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

This form should be filed with your Dean or Director and the other offices indicated below as soon as possible after you decide to withdraw this grievance you have initiated. Filing this form will have no effect on your employment status, neither prolonging nor shortening it. Be sure to read carefully and thoroughly any appended instructions and information, and please keep a copy of this Withdraw Form.

Signature of Grievant:

_________________________________________________________________

cc: Dean or Director
      SACUA Faculty Grievance Monitor
, 6048 Fleming Administration Building, 503 Thompson, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1340 
      Academic Human Resource Office
, 2072J Administrative Services Building, 1001 Greene St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1432

FACULTY GRIEVANCE APPLICATION FORM

Date:

____________________________

Name(please print or type):

_________________________________________________________________

Rank:

_________________________________________________________________

Academic Unit:

_________________________________________________________________

Action(s) Disputed Regarding Aspects of Your Employment:

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

Date of Written Notification of Action(s) Disputed:

_________________________________________________________________

Respondent Designated In Disputed Action(s):

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

Did You File The Dispute(s) In Another Forum (such as might occur with Sexual Assault or Sexual Harassment)? If so, what agency(ies)?

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

This form must be filed with your Dean or Director, with copies to the offices indicated below, within 180 days of the date written notification of the action(s) you dispute was received, or reasonably could be assumed to have been received, by you.  The process is available to all regular and supplemental instructional and primary research staff qualifying as faculty members under Regents' Bylaw 5.  Your signature below indicates that you have read the faculty grievance policy of your academic unit (available at the Dean or Director's or the SACUA office) and understand it, and that you will explore (or have explored) resolution of these disputed matters through your unit ombudsperson and through the University's Faculty Consultation and Conciliation Service [Mediation Services], Academic Human Resources Office, even though requesting formal meetings with the Grievance Review Board (GRB) which now will be established.  You need have no more written exposition of your circumstances in dispute to initiate your grievance than is possible on this brief form, but you will need as extensive documentation as you wish by the time your GRB first meets formally.  Note that the first meeting of the GRB will be without either grievant or respondent present and will deal with grievability of the issues, technical matters of procedure, establishing meeting times, etc.  Neither further communications not known in advance by you, nor counsel or representatives of you or the respondent, will be present at that initial meeting.  Filing this form will have no effect on your employment status, neither prolonging nor shortening it.  Be sure to read carefully and thoroughly all of the appended instructions and information, as well as your unit faculty grievance policy; and please keep a copy of this application.

Signature of Grievant:

_________________________________________________________________

With your concurrence, this procedure requires the transmittal of copies of the GRB final decision, the Dean or Director's response to the GRB decision, the procedural appeal decision, the Dean or Director's response to the procedural appeal decision, the substantive appeal decision, the Dean or Director's response to the substantive appeal decision, and the final decision to the Executive Assistant to SACUA for the confidential use by the Faculty Grievance Monitor (FGM).  These items are used solely by the FGM for the purpose of creating an independent institutional memory of the process and assessing the adequacy and performance of the process across all units and over time.  I concur that the above documents shall be provided to the FGM.  

Signature of Grievant:

_________________________________________________________________

If the final decision of this grievance procedure ultimately finds in your favor, the FGM shall contact you three months after the final decision to ascertain whether, in your opinion, the provisions of that favorable final decision have been adequately enforced and implemented.  To assure such compliance and the valid authority of the grievance process, the FGM will convey your opinion to the Provost (along with copies to you and your Dean) for further action if appropriate.  I consent to the above inquiry and reports.

Signature of Grievant:

_________________________________________________________________

cc:
SACUA Faculty Grievance Monitor, 6048 Fleming Administration Building, 1340  
Academic Human Resource Office, 2072J Administrative Services, 1432

 

Return to Faculty Governance Home Page