1. FA-012-910 Minority Reports in the RTP Process

2. Resources Proponent Proponent CFA Representative CFA Representative Academic Affair Representative Academic Affair Representative

3. Background Minority report was issued, as allowed by University Policy (Appendix 16), and was added to the RTP package of a candidate during the evaluation process. Minority report was issued, as allowed by University Policy (Appendix 16), and was added to the RTP package of a candidate during the evaluation process. The candidate complained to CFA and filed a grievance. The candidate complained to CFA and filed a grievance. The report was removed from the RTP document. The lower levels were not informed of the decision. The report was removed from the RTP document. The lower levels were not informed of the decision.

4. Why Did it Happen? CFA Position: CFA Position: –The minority report lacked objectivity, contained hearsay, was not based on facts and evidence in PAF. Administration Position Administration Position –Reviewed the grievance and agreed with the assessment –URTP was informed.

5. Does it Happen Frequently? No. This case was an exception. No. This case was an exception.

6. Was it Justifiable? Contractual Issues take precedence over Appendix 16. Contractual Issues take precedence over Appendix 16. Both CFA and Administration assured the committee that there was no intention to silence the voice of dissent. Both CFA and Administration assured the committee that there was no intention to silence the voice of dissent. Lower RTP evaluation levels were not informed to protect faculty member’s reputation and rights. Lower RTP evaluation levels were not informed to protect faculty member’s reputation and rights.

7. Are There Sufficient Safe Guards? Section 305.105 of Appendix 16 states that: Section 305.105 of Appendix 16 states that: “A specific deadline shall be established by campus policy at which time the RTP package is declared complete with respect to documentation of performance for the purpose of evaluation. Insertion or deletion of material other than responses and/or rebuttals to official evaluations after the date of this declaration must have the approval of the University RTP Committee (“URTPC”) and shall be limited to items that became accessible after this declaration”. “A specific deadline shall be established by campus policy at which time the RTP package is declared complete with respect to documentation of performance for the purpose of evaluation. Insertion or deletion of material other than responses and/or rebuttals to official evaluations after the date of this declaration must have the approval of the University RTP Committee (“URTPC”) and shall be limited to items that became accessible after this declaration”.

8. Recommendation CFA acted to preserve the faculty rights CFA acted to preserve the faculty rights Academic Affairs acted in the best interest of the University and integrity of the process Academic Affairs acted in the best interest of the University and integrity of the process There are sufficient contractual and policy safeguards to address normal circumstance There are sufficient contractual and policy safeguards to address normal circumstance No change to policy is necessary. No change to policy is necessary.