This browser does not support basic Web standards, preventing the display of our site's intended design. May we suggest that you upgrade your browser?
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-EAU CLAIRE
UNIVERSITY SENATE MEETING
VOL. 44, NO. 10
April 8, 2008
Members Present:
Rose Battalio, Ned Beach, Judy Blackstone, Janice Bogstad, Jacqueline Bonneville, January Boten, Michael Carney, Patrick Day, Gary Don, Martha Fay, Leslie Foster, Mitchell Freymiller, Andrea Gapko, Susan Harrison, Ann Hoffman, Robert Hollon, Robert Hooper, Rosemary Jadack, Debra Jansen, Dale Johnson, Lia Johnson, Harry Jol, Heather Kretz, Amanda Krier, Lisa La Salle, Kate Lang, Brian Levin-Stankevich, Bruce Lo, David Lonzarich, Barbara Lozar, Carmen Manning, Sean McAleer, Mike Morrison, Jill Pastrana, Jill Prushiek, Donna Raleigh, Rick Richmond, Scott Robertson, Sherrie Serros, Earl Shoemaker, Jeanne Skoug, Nick Smiar, Linda Spaeth, Charles Tomkovick, Sharon Westphal, Scott Whitfield, Marty Wood, Deborah Wright
Members Absent:
Robin Baker, Jennifer Brockpahler, Barbara Davis, Margaret Devine, Jeff Erger, Larry Honl, Jeffrey Janot, Fred Kolb, Brian Mahoney, Karl Markgraf, Sue Moore, Tarique Niazi, Geoffrey Peterson, Mehdi Sheikholeslami, Laurie St. Aubin-Whelihan, Steve Tallant, Troy Terhark, Charles Vue, Rebecca Wurzer
Guests:
Donald Christian, Bernard Duyfhuizen, Chip Eckardt, Jennifer Lee, Gail Scukanec, Aaron Wingad
The regular meeting of University Senate was called to order by Chair Wood at 3:04 p.m. on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 in the Tamarack Room of Davies Center.
Second Reading – Motion 44-FP-02 from Faculty Personnel Committee
Appeal Procedures: Promotion
APPEAL PROCEDURES: PROMOTION SUBCOMMITTEE DECISIONS
A faculty member may request an administrative review of the decision of a departmental promotion subcommittee not to recommend promotion provided that the faculty member meets the minimum degree and experience requirements for consideration for promotion to the rank sought.
The administrative review shall be conducted by the next highest administrative level not involved in the contested decision. During the course of this review, it shall be the responsibility of the faculty member to show cause why the issue of his/her promotion should receive further consideration. After reviewing the statement of the faculty member, the qualifications of the faculty member, and the facts relating to the promotion subcommittee's review, the reviewer may direct the promotion subcommittee to reconvene and to reconsider the issue on its merits. After reconsideration the promotion subcommittee shall submit a report to the reviewer including a recommendation and the justification for the recommendation. After considering the subcommittee's report, the reviewer shall make a report and a recommendation to the next highest administrative level not involved in the appeal. (US 10/99)
APPEAL PROCEDURES: ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS
A faculty member may request the Chancellor to review administrative decisions not to recommend promotion provided that the following conditions have been met:
1. The faculty member meets the minimum degree and experience requirements for promotion to the rank sought.
2. The faculty member has been recommended for promotion by the appropriate promotion subcommittee in each of two separate years, and a negative recommendation has been recorded each year by any subsequent level of administrative review. (US 12/91)
RECONSIDERATION AND APPEAL OF DENIALS OF PROMOTION
Upon receiving written notice of a decision to deny promotion, a faculty member who meets the minimum degree and experience requirements for promotion to the rank sought may within 10 days formally request reconsideration of the negative decision. A reconsideration is not a hearing, or an appeal, and should be non-adversarial in nature. The reconsideration shall take place within 20 days of the faculty member’s request, and the faculty member shall be given at least 10 days advance written notice of the time and place of the reconsideration. It is the faculty member’s obligation to provide good reasons why the negative decision merits reconsideration. The reconsidering party shall give fair and full consideration to all relevant materials, and shall, within 5 days of the reconsideration, inform the faculty member in writing of the results of reconsideration.
If reconsideration rescinds the initial negative decision, the application for promotion shall be forwarded to the next higher administrative level, if any, though the faculty member may not request reconsideration of a subsequent negative decision of the current application for promotion.
If reconsideration affirms the initial negative decision, the faculty member may, within 10 days of receiving the result of the reconsideration, formally appeal the negative decision to the next highest administrative level not involved in the contested decision. The faculty member’s appeal shall be heard within 20 days of its initiation. It is the faculty member’s obligation to provide good reasons why the negative decision should be overturned. After reviewing the relevant facts, the reviewer shall, within 5 days of hearing the appeal, decide the appeal and shall promptly inform the faculty member in writing of his or her decision and the reasons for it.
If the party hearing the appeal reverses the negative decision, the application for promotion shall be forwarded to the next higher administrative level, if any, though the faculty member may not appeal a subsequent negative decision of the current application for promotion. If the party hearing the appeal reaffirms the negative decision, the faculty member may neither request reconsideration of this reaffirmation nor appeal it.
Continued Debate
Accordingly, last meeting’s MOTION by Senator McAleer to amend the motion in the second paragraph to add the wording “or appeal” unanimously defeated
MOTION by Senator McAleer to replace the original motion with the language as amended to replace FASH 5.28 seconded and PASSED without dissention
Debate
CURRENT LANGUAGE
APPEAL PROCEDURES: PROMOTION SUBCOMMITTEE DECISIONS
A faculty member may request an administrative review of the decision of a departmental promotion subcommittee not to recommend promotion provided that the faculty member meets the minimum degree and experience requirements for consideration for promotion to the rank sought.
The administrative review shall be conducted by the next highest administrative level not involved in the contested decision. During the course of this review, it shall be the responsibility of the faculty member to show cause why the issue of his/her promotion should receive further consideration. After reviewing the statement of the faculty member, the qualifications of the faculty member, and the facts relating to the promotion subcommittee's review, the reviewer may direct the promotion subcommittee to reconvene and to reconsider the issue on its merits. After reconsideration the promotion subcommittee shall submit a report to the reviewer including a recommendation and the justification for the recommendation. After considering the subcommittee's report, the reviewer shall make a report and a recommendation to the next highest administrative level not involved in the appeal. (US 10/99)
APPEAL PROCEDURES: ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS
A faculty member may request the Chancellor to review administrative decisions not to recommend promotion provided that the following conditions have been met:
1. The faculty member meets the minimum degree and experience requirements for promotion to the rank sought.
2. The faculty member has been recommended for promotion by the appropriate promotion subcommittee in each of two separate years, and a negative recommendation has been recorded each year by any subsequent level of administrative review. (US 12/91)
PROPOSED LANGUAGE (striking all language related to reconsideration)
APPEALS OF DENIALS OF PROMOTION
Upon receiving written notice of a decision to deny promotion, a faculty member who meets the minimum degree and experience requirements for promotion to the rank sought may within 10 days formally appeal the negative decision to the next highest administrative level not involved in the contested decision. The faculty member’s appeal shall be heard within 20 days of its initiation. It is the faculty member’s obligation to provide good reasons why the negative decision should be overturned. After reviewing the relevant facts, the reviewer shall, within 5 days of hearing the appeal, decide the appeal and shall promptly inform the faculty member in writing of his or her decision and the reasons for it. If the reviewer reaffirms the negative decision, the faculty member may not appeal it. If the reviewer reverses the negative decision, the application for promotion shall be forwarded to the next higher administrative level, if any, though the faculty member may not appeal any subsequent negative decision of the current application for promotion.
Continued debate
MOTION by Senator Hollon to move to amend the proposed language on line 7 to state “After reviewing the relevant facts, the reviewer shall, within 5 days of hearing the appeal, decide the appeal and shall promptly inform the faculty member and all previous levels of review in writing of his or her decision and the reasons for it.” seconded and passed without dissention.
Vote on Motion 44-FP-02: Motion PASSED as amended to replace FASH 5.28 by University Faculty Senators without dissention.
MOTION by Senator Serros that the University Senate endorse the formation of a Faculty/Staff coalition whose voluntary members pledge to become familiar with the laws and campus policies about alcohol; know about programs and services for students seeking help for alcohol problems and post a sticker or magnet on office doors identifying their participation in the pledge; and promote “safe and responsible” attitudes toward alcohol in classroom or office discussions seconded
Deliberation on the motion
MOTION by Senator Freymiller that we suspend the rules and vote on this today seconded and PASSED by two-thirds vote
MOTION passed without dissenting vote
Without objection, meeting adjourned at 4:03p.m.
Submitted by,
Tanya Kenney
Secretary to the University Senate