Disputes and Adjudication                              Grade D
	The University Handbook guarantees faculty members access to a fair and independent process for resolving disputes involving students, staff, peers, and superiors. Disputes can be handled in either of two ways: through informal mediation, usually handled by the Ombudsman, or through adjudication, where a panel of faculty members hears the case.  There are indications that parts of this system are not working properly. We have no clear sense of how effective the mediation process has been. The Ombudsman handles upwards of 150 office consultations and uncounted phone consultations each year involving faculty. 50-60 mediation sessions also take place in that office, most but not all involving members of the faculty. The Secretary of the Faculty also handles some mediations. Everything about this is necessarily private, so we are not  in a position to judge the quality of these services. We do have reason to believe that the adjudication track is no longer fair and effective. This is a serious concern, because adjudication should be the backbone of the dispute process. Instead it has become harder and harder to get a case before an adjudication panel and with some frequency administrators have been overturning panel decisions. Problems include the following: · Delays: One case has dragged on for a year and a half with no resolution. · Improper use of attorneys:  Recently the administration has backed away from an earlier agreement specifying that no administrator who is a credentialed attorney will participate unless the faculty member is also represented by an attorney, · Interference: The president has intervened to suspend an adjudication that was already underway. · Verdict veto: In at least two recent cases, adjudication panels ruled in favor of the faculty member, but the decisions were effectively ignored and both individuals were fired. The adjudication process needs to be examined and repaired.
		What to Do?
	This is not a good report card. A student receiving these grades would be placed on probation and warned that another year like this will be the last. The University of Washington is also in a warning phase, in danger of losing faculty, reputation, and much more. What can be done? There are no simple answers but there is a simple process that can turn matters in a positive direction. Faculty members need to more involved in the governance process and be willing to take more responsibility for the fate of the university. A more vigilant faculty would strengthen the hand of the Senate and allow it to address some of the big decisions that the administration has made unilaterally: including the degradation of tenure and the turn towards privatization/balkanization. A more committed faculty would start to address the government relations challenges that face us in the next legislative session. Instead of two legislative reps we need dozens and we probably need to raise private funds for professional help. A more active faculty would be prepared to greet the new president (someday?) not with wild hopes but with clear expectations and some thoughtful plans.

Next Page Front Page Notes