29.1 General Provisions and Definitions

1. Scope. These Faculty Dispute Procedures were approved by the Faculty Senate and the President. They are effective as of July 1, 2024, and shall apply to any matter initiated pursuant to these policies on or after that date. These procedures constitute the exclusive remedy for a faculty member to challenge university decisions and for the university to implement sanctions against a faculty member under the procedures regarding Ethics and Conduct Violations (III-29.6) or Unacceptable Performance (III-29.5). Cases alleging research misconduct, sexual harassment/sexual misconduct, or protected-class discrimination/harassment/retaliation are subject to other university processes and procedures governing those matters, and investigation of those allegations falls outside the scope of these procedures, but the resulting sanctions may be appealed using these procedures
2. Faculty tracks. Sections III-29.3 through III-29.7 of these procedures apply to tenure-track and tenured faculty in all colleges. These sections also apply to clinical-track faculty in the College of Law to comply with accreditation requirements. Section III-29.8 applies to specialized faculty, meaning faculty in the clinical, research, and instructional tracks as described in III-10, with the exception of the clinical faculty in the College of Law, as noted above.
3. University decisions. A faculty member may use these procedures to seek review of a range of final university decisions that are made at the Provost, collegiate, or departmental administrative levels. Notifications of final decisions shall be sent when faculty are under contract.
4. Standard of judgment. "Clear and convincing evidence" means that the thing to be proved is highly probable or reasonably certain. "Preponderance of the evidence" means a party must persuade, by the evidence presented, that what they are required to prove is more likely to be true than not. "Clear and convincing evidence" requires a higher degree of persuasion than "preponderance of the evidence."
5. Right to counsel. In all proceedings governed by these Faculty Dispute Procedures, a faculty member may, at the faculty member's discretion and expense, be represented by legal counsel.
6. Faculty member status. The status of a faculty member involved in a case under these procedures shall not be altered detrimentally until the proceedings are completed except insofar as the President may exercise emergency powers under the Regents' Rules or be required by a court order to do so. The status of a faculty member shall include the faculty member's tenure, rank, base salary and benefits, collegiate affiliation, and, where applicable, departmental affiliation.
7. Communications. All written communication will ordinarily be done through university email unless otherwise agreed. Communication to or from a faculty member by email is considered complete when emailed.
8. Time periods. In computing a time period under these procedures, the day that a university decision is delivered to the faculty member shall not be included. The last day of the period so computed shall be included unless general university offices are not open on that day, in which case the period continues until the end of the next day on which the offices are open. "Business days" are those days on which central university offices are open. Within the discretion of the appropriate person(s) (presiding officer, administrative officer, or faculty judicial panel), time periods designated in these procedures may be extended for good cause.
9. Costs. A faculty member who files a case under these regulations must pay the cost of the faculty member’s legal counsel, if any, as well as the expenses of any witnesses called by the faculty member, and reasonable charges for copies of documents that are made for the faculty member. Except as otherwise noted in these procedures, other costs of the investigation will be borne by the university.
10. Prior findings final. Under these procedures, faculty judicial panels may examine administrative decisions imposing measures or sanctions, but they may not reinvestigate final determinations that have been the subject of a judicial process or prior investigative processes under institutional policies.
    1. The following determinations or findings shall not be subject to review, provided the faculty member had opportunity to substantively participate in the investigative or judicial process:
       1. Investigative report by the Office of Institutional Equity;
       2. Outcomes and adjudication report under iI-4 Sexual Harassment and Sexual Misconduct;
       3. Determination by a Research Misconduct Committee;
       4. Investigative report by the Office of Employee and Labor Relations;
       5. Report of the Office of Internal Audit; or
       6. Similar offices conducting investigations pursuant to institutional policies.
    2. Court rulings and determinations by state offices such as the Attorney General or the State Auditor shall be considered final and not subject to review under these procedures. The administrative officer, in consultation with the presiding officer, will determine whether any sanctions related to such a ruling or determination may be subject to review by a judicial panel.
11. Administrative officer. Implementation of the faculty dispute procedures in III-29.3 through III-29.9 shall be facilitated by the administrative officer, who shall have a JD, and preferably also faculty or higher education experience. The university President in consultation with Faculty Senate leadership will develop a process to fill the role of the administrative officer. The individual nominated to serve in this position will either be approved by two-thirds of the members present at a Faculty Senate meeting or by two-thirds of members who participate in a special ballot of the Faculty Senate.
12. All references in this policy that impose responsibilities on the Provost shall be interpreted to allow the provost’s designee to fulfill those responsibilities in lieu of the Provost.
13. Amendments of these regulations. Proposals to amend these regulations may be initiated by the Faculty Senate, the Provost, the President, or the Board of Regents.