GENERAL UNIVERSITY POLICY APM - 016
REGARDING ACADEMIC APPOINTEES DRAFT (Showing Revisions)
University Policy on Faculty Conduct and 4/3/01
the Administration of Discipline
[NOTE: The text in proposed APM - 016 derives from text that currently
appears in APM - 015]
015-0 Policy
University Policy on Faculty Conduct and
the Administration of Discipline
The University policy on faculty conduct and the administration of discipline is set forth in
its entirety on the following pages in this policy and in the Faculty Code of Conduct.
Section I - Introduction and General Policy
This Ppolicy, as recommended by the President of the University and approved by The
Regents on June 14, 1974 and XXXX, 2001, supersedes the President's interim statement on
the same subject, issued on January 15, 1971. The present policy incorporates is read in
conjunction with the Faculty Code of Conduct as approved by the Assembly of the
Academic Senate on June 15, 1971 and amended by the Assembly on May 30, 1974, and
with amendments approved by the Assembly on March 9, 1983, May 6, 1986, and May 7,
1992, and by The Regents on July 18, 1986, May 15, 1987, and June 19, 1992. In addition,
technical changes were made September 1, 1988.
The Faculty Code of Conduct is set forth in APM - 015. Part I of the Faculty Code of
Conduct notes the responsibility of the administration to preserve conditions that protect and
encourage the faculty in its central pursuits. Part II defines normative conditions for faculty
conduct and sets forth types of unacceptable faculty conduct subject to University discipline.
Part III makes recommendations and proposes guidelines to assure the development of fair
procedures for enforcing the Code.
Nothing in the Faculty Code of Conduct, or in this Ppolicy, is intended to change the various
authorities and responsibilities of the Academic Senate, the administration, and The Regents
as currently set forth in the Standing Orders of The Regents, the policies and regulations of
the University, and the By-Laws Bylaws and Regulations of the Academic Senate.
The Faculty Code of Conduct explicitly does not deal with policies, procedures, or possible
sanctions pertaining to strikes by members of the faculty. These are covered by Regental
and administrative policies external to the Code.
Except for the matter of strikes, and with recognition that Part III of the Faculty Code of
Conduct consists solely of suggested guidelines and recommendations to the Divisions of the
Academic Senate and the campus administrations, the Faculty Code of Conduct, as
incorporated into this Policy set forth in APM - 015, is the official basis for imposing
discipline on members of the faculty for professional misconduct.
With respect to the imposition of disciplinary sanctions, the Faculty Code of Conduct deals
only with professional conduct or misconduct the professional responsibilities, ethical
principles, and standards of conduct that pertain to the professional obligations of faculty
members. No disciplinary sanctions described in this policy may be imposed on faculty
members other than through the procedures pursuant to this policy and the Faculty Code of
Conduct. In addition, However, faculty members, may be subject to certain administrative
actions which are outside the scope of faculty discipline. For example, like, in common
with all other members of the University community, faculty members are subject to the
general rules and regulations of the University -- e.g., such as those pertaining to parking,
library privileges, health and safety, and use of University facilities. -- and Faculty are
subject to appropriate administrative actions sanctions for failure to comply with such rules
and regulations. Another example applies to faculty members serving in administrative
appointments who are subject to administrative actions for misconduct in their role as
administrators. Faculty members serving in administrative roles may be subject to
disciplinary sanctions under this policy in addition to administrative actions, if the faculty
member's misconduct in the role of an administrator also violates the ethical and
professional standards for faculty set forth in the Faculty Code of Conduct.
To maintain consistency in the future between the Faculty Code of Conduct, if it should be
further amended by the Academic Senate, and any new or changed Regental or
administrative policies relating to faculty conduct that might be adopted, the President will
consult with appropriate agencies of the Academic Senate, and will undertake to facilitate
any needed joint action by the Senate and The Regents or the administration.
Authority for discipline derives from The Regents. The Regents have made the Chancellor
of each campus responsible for discipline on the campus (Standing Order 100.6(a)), subject
to certain procedures and safeguards involving the President and the Academic Senate
(Standing Orders 100.4(c) and 103.9 and 103.10).
This policy regarding faculty discipline requires a spirit of active cooperation between the
administration, as embodied by the Chancellor, and the Academic Senate. In case of
disagreement between the administration and the faculty over the interpretation or
application of the Faculty Code of Conduct, conflicts will be resolved on a case-by-case
basis, with the fullest consideration given to peer judgments achieved through procedures for
discipline. In cases where a Chancellor's tentative decision to impose discipline on a faculty
member disagrees with the recommendation of the Divisional Privilege and Tenure
Committee, the Chancellor shall inform the Chair of the Privilege and Tenure Committee in
writing that he or she may disagree and ask if the Chair would like the Chancellor to meet
with the Chair or with the whole committee prior to making a final decision or
recommendation.
Disciplinary action is to be distinguished from certain other administrative actions taken as
the result, not of willful misconduct but rather, for example, of disability or incompetence.
The administration naturally bears the responsibility of assuring that the University's
resources are used productively and appropriately. In meeting this responsibility,
administrators must occasionally take actions which resemble certain disciplinary sanctions
but which are actually of an entirely different character. These actions are subject to
separate procedures with due process guarantees and should not be confused with
disciplinary action with its implications of culpability and sanction. APM - 075 on
Termination for Incompetent Performance articulates the conditions under which faculty
members with tenure or security of employment may be terminated for incompetent
performance.
Authority for discipline derives from The Regents. The Regents have made the Chancellor
of each campus responsible for discipline on the campus (Standing Order 100.6(a)), subject
to certain procedures and safeguards involving the President and the Academic Senate
(Standing Orders 100.4(c) and 103.9 and 103.10).
Section II - Types of Disciplinary Sanctions
The types of discipline that may be imposed on a member of the faculty are as follows, in
order of increasing severity: written censure, reduction in salary, demotion, suspension
(other than interim suspension with pay), demotion, denial or curtailment of emeritus status,
and dismissal from the employ of the University. In any disciplinary proceeding, the
Chancellor may not impose a type of discipline more severe than that which was set forth in
a written notice of proposed disciplinary action to the faculty member. The Chancellor may
impose additional appropriate remedial or corrective sanctions not set forth in this Code only
with the consent of the accused faculty member. Prior to the imposition of any disciplinary
sanction(s) as described above, the Chancellor may waive any or all disciplinary sanction(s)
on the condition that the accused faculty member performs some specified action(s)
designed to address the harm and/or to prevent future harm. More than one disciplinary
sanction may be imposed for a single act of misconduct, e.g. a letter of censure and a
suspension. The Chancellor may remove or terminate a sanction, either automatically or by
administrative discretion, in individual cases. The severity and type of discipline selected
for a particular offense must be appropriately related to the nature and circumstances of the
case.
1. Written Censure
A formal written expression of institutional rebuke that contains a brief description of
the censured conduct, conveyed by the Chancellor or by a Dean to whom the Chancellor
has delegated authority for this kind of disciplinary action. Written censure is to be
distinguished from an informal written or spoken warning, and must be delivered
confidentially to the recipient and maintained in a designated personnel file or files
indefinitely or for a lesser period of time specified in the writing. Informal written or
spoken warning is not an official disciplinary action.
2. Reduction in Salary
Reduction to lower salary without change in rank or step. The authority to reduce the
salary of any faculty member rests with the Chancellor. This authority may not be
redelegated. The amount and duration of the reduced salary shall be specified.
3. Demotion
Reduction to lower rank, or step with corresponding reduction in or salary. Demotion
as a disciplinary action should be imposed in a manner consistent with the merit based
system for advancement. Generally, demotion is an appropriate sanction when the
misconduct is relevant to the academic advancement process of the faculty member.
The authority to reduce the rank of a faculty member who does not have tenure or security of
employment rests with the Chancellor. The authority to reduce, within rank, the step or
salary of any faculty member to a lower step or salary rests with the Chancellor. For either
action, tThis authority may not be redelegated.
Authority for demoting a faculty member with tenure or with security of employment to
a lower rank, also with tenure or with security of employment, rests with the President,
on recommendation of the Chancellor. Demotion of a faculty member with tenure or
with security of employment to a lower rank without tenure or security of employment
is not an option.
In all cases, the Chancellor shall consult with the appropriate advisory committee(s) of
the Division of the Academic Senate prior to demoting or recommending for demotion
any member of the faculty.
2. 4. Suspension
Debarment Suspension of a faculty member without pay for some stated period of time
from the continuance of the appointment on its normal terms. Unless otherwise noted,
the terms of a suspension will include loss of normal faculty privileges such as access to
University property, participation in departmental governance, voting rights,
administration of grants, supervision of graduate students, and use of University
administrative staff, and may include loss of other campus privileges such as parking
and library privileges. The degree and duration of the suspension shall be specified.
Authority for the suspension of a faculty member rests with the Chancellor and may not
be redelegated. Suspension as a disciplinary action is to be distinguished from interim
suspension with pay involuntary leave, which is a precautionary action, but not a form
of discipline. A Chancellor is authorized to impose an interim suspension, with full
pay, on a faculty member if it is found that there is a clear probability that the faculty
member's continued assignment to regular duties will be immediately and seriously
harmful to the University community. When such action is necessary it must be
possible to impose the interim suspension swiftly, without resorting to normal
disciplinary procedures, but the Chancellor must as soon as possible explain the reasons
for the interim suspension and initiate disciplinary procedures by bringing charges
against the suspended faculty member.
5. Denial or Curtailment of Emeritus Status
Denial or curtailment of current or future emeritus status of a faculty member, including
the privileges associated with the emeritus status. The denial or curtailment of emeritus
status does not affect the faculty member's entitlement to earned retirement benefits.
Authority for the denial or curtailment of emeritus status of a faculty member rests with
the President, on recommendation of the Chancellor.
4. 6. Dismissal from the Employ of the University
The Chancellor has authority to dismiss a faculty member who does not have tenure or
security of employment. This authority may not be redelegated. Authority for dismissal
of a faculty member who has tenure or security of employment rests with The Regents,
on recommendation of the President, following consultation with the Chancellor. In all
cases, the Chancellor shall consult with the appropriate advisory committee(s) of the
Division of the Academic Senate prior to dismissing or recommending for dismissal any
member of the faculty.
Prior to the imposition of any disciplinary sanction(s) as described above, the Chancellor
may waive or limit any or all disciplinary sanction(s) on the condition that the accused
faculty member performs some specified action(s) designed to address the harm and/or to
prevent future harm. Such actions may include, but are not limited to, monetary restitution,
repayment of misappropriated resources, commitment not to repeat the misconduct, or other
act to make whole injury caused by the faculty member's professional misconduct or to
prevent future misconduct.
If the imposition of a disciplinary sanction is waived, the subsequent failure to perform the
required act or otherwise comply with the conditions of the waiver will immediately subject the
faculty member to the implementation of the underlying sanction without an additional hearing.
The authority to determine whether the faculty member has complied with the conditions of the
waiver rests with the Chancellor. The Chancellor may designate a fixed time period for
compliance with the terms of the waiver, after which the authority to impose discipline will
lapse. If a faculty member disputes the Chancellor's determination, the faculty member may
grieve under applicable faculty grievance procedures.
A Chancellor is authorized to initiate involuntary leave with pay prior to the initiation of a
disciplinary action if it is found that there is a strong risk that the accused faculty member's
continued assignment to regular duties or presence on campus will cause immediate and
serious harm to the University community or impede the investigation of his or her
wrongdoing, or in situations where the faculty member's conduct represents a serious crime
or felony that is the subject of investigation by a law enforcement agency. When such action
is necessary, it must be possible to impose the involuntary leave swiftly, without resorting to
normal disciplinary procedures. In rare and egregious cases, a Chancellor may be authorized
by special action of The Regents to suspend the pay of a faculty member on involuntary
leave pending a disciplinary action. This is in addition to the Divisional Chancellor's power
to suspend the pay of a faculty member who is absent without authorization and fails to
perform his or her duties for an extended period of time, pending the resolution of the
faculty member's employment status with the University. However, within 10 working days
after the imposition of involuntary leave, the Chancellor must explain to the faculty member
in writing the reasons for the involuntary leave and initiate disciplinary procedures by
bringing charges against the faculty member on leave. Thereafter, the faculty member may
grieve the decision to place him or her on involuntary leave pursuant to applicable faculty
grievance procedures. The Divisional Committee on Privilege and Tenure shall handle such
grievances on an expedited basis and may recommend reinstatement of pay and back pay in
cases where pay status was suspended.
Section III - Procedures for Imposition of Discipline Disciplinary Sanction
Safeguards against arbitrary or unjust disciplinary actions, including provision for hearings
and appeals, are well established in the University.
The Standing Orders provide that actions of certain types, some of them disciplinary in
character, may not be carried out without the opportunity of a prior hearing before, or
without advance consultation with, "a properly constituted advisory committee of the
Academic Senate" (Standing Orders 100.4(c), 103.9 and 103.10). In addition, Standing
Order 103.2 provides that any member of the Academic Senate may have the privilege of a
hearing by an appropriate Senate committee on matters relating to personal, departmental, or
University welfare.
The Academic Senate has established Committees on Privilege and Tenure in each of the
nine Divisions. The composition and duties of these committees are defined by the
Academic Senate. One of Tthe traditional roles of the Divisional Committees on Privilege
and Tenure is to conduct hearings on disciplinary charges initiated by the Chancellor under
this policy and make findings of fact and recommendations to the Chancellor regarding
proposed disciplinary sanctions. The procedures for disciplinary hearings are set forth in
Academic Senate Bylaw 336. are to take under consideration complaints against or by
members of the Academic Senate and in certain cases other members of the faculty. The
committees hold hearings and advise the administration.
The Faculty Code of Conduct applies to all faculty members, Senate and non-Senate. For
members of the Academic Senate, the procedures for disciplinary actions are governed by
Senate Bylaws and Divisional rules. For all academic appointees who are not members of
the Academic Senate (and this group includes certain categories of faculty members) there is
an avenue for hearings and appeals are procedures for disciplinary actions separate from that
of the Senate's committees. This avenue is provided in Section 140 Those procedures are
found in APM - 150 of the Academic Personnel Manual and relevant collective bargaining
agreements or Memoranda of Understanding. and concomitant procedures established on
each campus. Beyond these existing provisions for hearings and appeals, it is desirable to
establish clearly the procedures to be followed in initiating and carrying through the various
types of disciplinary action. It is not essential that the procedures be identical on every
campus -- for example, it is left to campus option whether a prior hearing shall be required
before the imposition of a milder form of discipline such as written censure. It is important,
however, that the same basic principles and standards prevail throughout the University.
The Faculty Code of Conduct also applies to faculty members holding administrative
appointments. Faculty members serving as administrators may be subjected to disciplinary
action under this Code for professional misconduct in their administrative role that violates
the ethical principles and falls within the types of unacceptable conduct set forth in this
Code. A disciplinary action against a faculty member holding an administrative title may
proceed in two parts. One part involves the removal of an administrative title or other
administrative action under procedures established by The Regents and the administration.
Such action need not adhere to the disciplinary procedures set forth in this policy. The other
part involves the proposed imposition of any type of disciplinary sanction set forth in this
policy, which must proceed in accordance with the procedures for discipline outlined in the
Faculty Code of Conduct and the applicable Senate Bylaws and Divisional rules. The
removal of the administrative title or other administrative action does not preclude or require
the imposition of a disciplinary sanction under this policy. Administrative incompetence
does not in itself constitute a violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct.
It is the responsibility of each Chancellor to establish procedures for the administration of
discipline on the campus, in consultation with the campus Division of the Academic Senate
and such other advisory groups as are appropriate. No disciplinary sanction for professional
misconduct shall be imposed except in accordance with specified procedures. It is not
essential that the procedures be identical on every campus. It is important, however, that the
same basic principles and standards prevail throughout the University. Requirements and
recommendations for developing campus disciplinary procedures pursuant to this policy are
set forth in the Faculty Code of Conduct and the Senate Bylaws. Chancellors are to keep the
President informed about campus procedures and to report any significant changes made in
such procedures. The President will consult periodically with the Chancellors and the
Academic Senate about procedures that are being employed in order to assure equitable
standards for discipline throughout the University.
![[RETURN TO CONTENTS]](../../back.gif)
RETURN TO CONTENTS