A new faculty conflict and mediation process may be in the works after the Faculty Council voted at its first meeting of the 2014-2015 academic year to create a special committee to study this potential. The vote followed a presentation by Sheryl Heron, professor at the School of Medicine, and Michael Sacks, associate professor at Goizueta Business School. They noted that costs associated with unresolved conflict include lower job motivation, lost work time, departure from the university, increased health care costs, and damage to the university’s reputation. They also called for a program tailored to faculty needs, which currently are being unaddressed through existing options (including consultations with the Faculty-Staff Assistance Program and with the general counsel’s office). Council chair Kathryn Yount suggested that a faculty process for mediation could enhance the capacity to improve working relationships. Marc Bousquet, associate professor of English, and Deb Houry, past council chair, suggested that the committee involve faculty from different ranks.
Category: Faculty Grievance Policies
Campuswide Faculty Grievance & Hearing Processes Considered
James Hughes, chair of the Faculty Hearing Committee, reported on his review of grievance processes across the university, from school-based processes and policies to the purview of the Office of Equal Opportunity Programs. While a 2012 committee recommended the appointment of a university ombudsperson to mediate grievances that “fall through the cracks,” Hughes concluded that the mechanisms on campus relating specifically to termination, suspension, or transfer of employment are “fairly robust.” The problem, he added, is the challenge of locating this information: “We haven’t done a good job of letting folks know about school-level grievance policies,” as well as existing resources to manage minor conflicts. The Faculty Council website offers a list of appointment, tenure, and promotion appeals and other grievance mechanisms at the school level, though the list may not be complete.
Gray Book Feedback, Ombuds Office Endorsed
Senior Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Claire Sterk offered an update and clarification on the proposed revisions to the “Gray Book,” the statement of principles governing faculty relationships with the university, a document “owned by the Board of Trustees,” as she explained. Council members shared feedback gathered from their respective constituen- cies, which will be shared with the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees. Provost Lewis promised to return to the Council to “offer an accounting” of the Board of Trustees’ further deliberations.
The Council also voted unanimously to endorse the recommendations of the ad hoc committee on faculty grievance policies and procedures. The committee recommended an ombuds office to help resolve conflicts that do not involve illegality. It would “provide a listening ear for faculty . . . and also serve as a resource to train university personnel in conflict resolution and about university venues for resolution of various sorts of faculty workplace problems.” The endorsement has been presented to the president and provost for further consideration.
Grievance Policy Committee: Ombuds Office
An ad hoc committee formed in 2010 to examine faculty grievance policies and procedures around the university recommended that Emory create an Ombuds Office to “provide a listening ear for faculty, provide a venue for effots to resolve . . . workplace conflicts, and also serve as a resource to train university personnel in conflict resolution and about university venues for resolution of various sorts of faculty workplace problems,” according to the committee’s report. Emory currently has structures to address serious problems around promotion and tenure, claims of illegal discrimination and other illegality, and research misconduct. But committee chair Bill Buzbee called Emory “completely an outlier” among peer institutions for the absence of a structure to address other conflicts, most of which arise in hierarchical relationships, so that they might be prevented or alleviated before they escalate. President Wagner asked that he and Provost Lewis be permitted to return to the Council to respond to the recommendations at a subsequent meeting.
Examining Grievance Policies Across Campus
In fall 2010, the Council formed an ad-hoc subcommittee to examine faculty grievance policies and procedures in place in the various schools within the university. Noting that the Faculty Hearing Committee, a subcommittee of the Council, examines disputes concerning contract terminations only, the Council began the examination because clear information on resolving disputes that do not fall into that category is not easily or readily available. Professor of Law William Buzbee chairs the subcommittee, which is charged with identifying existing resources and policies at Emory and options for a possible mediation process or ombuds role for faculty. The subcommittee, which aims to report to the Council in mid-fall 2011 with research results and recommendations, includes Cheryl Crowley (Russian and East Asian Languages and Culture), Steve Everett (Music), Sharon Lewis (Psychology, Oxford), and Randy Strahan (Political Science).
Ad Hoc Committee on Grievance Policies Begins Work
Professor of Law William Buzbee spoke during the March meeting about the preliminary work of an ad hoc committee of the Faculty Council to examine the various faculty grievance policies and procedures in place in the various schools within the university. Buzbee, who is chairing the committee, suggested that tentative tasks for the committee included identifying the current policies and procedures at Emory; considering the possible need for a changed conflict or grievance process or an ombudsperson role on campus; gathering information on other universities’ analogous structures or procedures; and identifying best practices and structures for possible use at Emory. The committee members are Cheryl Crowley (Russian and East Asian Languages and Culture), Steve Everett (Music), Sharon Lewis (Psychology, Oxford), and Randy Strahan (Political Science). The committee, Buzbee said, aims to report to the Council in mid-fall about research results and recommendations.
Click here to read all Council Concerns reports on Faculty Grievance Policies.
Discussions of Grievance Policies Continue
Continuing an examination begun at its September meeting, Faculty Council chair Steve Everett (College) presented a model for a faculty conciliation and mediation program from Case Western Reserve University, developed by that institution’s Faculty Senate and underwritten by its provost’s office. Drawing a distinction between a mediation process and a hearing process, Emory’s Faculty Hearing Committee chair James Hughes (Law) noted that “it’s difficult to find information to invoke the [hearing] process” and suggested that faculty may have rights they are not aware of because of a lack of accessible information. It was also noted that while a faculty hearing process was approved in 1998, a simultaneous proposal for a mediation process was shelved. Having approved the formation of an ad-hoc subcommittee on the issue, the Council agreed to appoint that committee and begin the task of identifying existing resources and policies at Emory and models and options for revisiting the possibility of a mediation process for faculty.
Subcommittee to Examine Grievance Policies
During its September meeting, the Faculty Council elected to appoint an ad-hoc subcommittee to examine the various faculty grievance policies and procedures in place in the various schools within the university. This subcommittee will gather information and examine options for improving and clarifying the processes and policies available to faculty involved in disputes. The Faculty Hearing Committee (a subcommittee of the Faculty Council) is charged with examining disputes concerning concerning contract terminations only. And in 1998 the Council passed a resolution outlining a mediation procedure limited to questions between a faculty member and his or her dean.
“There are places where we can get certain questions answered,” said Council President Steve Everett, “but there is not a clear sense for how to deal with grievance at this university. Many other universities have a clear website that points you to a team of people who are the first step in handling a dispute on campus.”