The University of Wisconsin Oshkosh
Policy # [####]
Appeal of Nonrenewal or Denials of Tenure (FAC 4.D)

Original Issuance Date: MMMM DD, YYYY
Last Revision Date: MMMM DD, YYYY
Next Review Date: MMMM DD, YYYY







FAC 4.D.1. UWS 3.08 {Appeal of a Nonrenewal Decision} of the Wisconsin Administrative Code, Rules of the Board of Regents.

View UWS 3.08 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code []

FAC 4.D.2. Rules and Procedures.

(1) If a reconsideration process results in affirmation of the nonrenewal decision, the faculty member may appeal that decision in writing to the chairperson of the Faculty Hearing Committee, through the president of the Faculty Senate, within twenty calendar days (twenty-five days if notice is by first class mail and publication) after the date of the document informing the faculty member of the decision. The chairperson of the Faculty Senate Hearing Committee will form a hearing subcommittee. The chairperson also has the responsibility to brief the Subcommittee on the rules and procedures applicable to the review, prior to the start of the Subcommittee’s deliberations.

(2) The hearing subcommittee shall begin its review of the appeal within twenty calendar days after receiving the notice for appeal, unless extended by mutual consent of the parties or by order of the hearing subcommittee. The subcommittee chairperson shall notify the faculty member making the appeal at least ten calendar days in advance of the beginning of the review. The subcommittee shall complete its review not later than thirty calendar days after its first meeting unless extended by mutual consent of the parties or by order of the review subcommittee.

(3) Appeals shall be submitted in writing and include documentation supporting the contention that the decision was based on factors listed in section UWS 3.08(1)(a), (b), or (c). After reviewing the written material filed with the appeal, if the subcommittee determines that there is a basis to hold a hearing on that matter, the subcommittee shall approve a motion to hold a hearing consistent with the established Faculty Senate Hearing procedures. Alternatively, if the subcommittee does not vote to conduct a hearing, it shall approve a motion denying the further review of the appeal. Copies of the subcommittee’s actions shall be sent to all concerned parties, including, the faculty member, the initial level of review, the Dean, the Provost and Vice Chancellor, the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate, and the Chancellor.

(4) If a hearing is held, the decision maker shall appear before the subcommittee to offer testimony about the nature of the consideration and the decision that was made.

(5) During its consideration of the appeal, the hearing subcommittee shall remand the case for reconsideration, with instructions, to the review level deciding nonrenewal unless the hearing subcommittee specifically finds that such a remand would serve no useful purpose. The hearing subcommittee shall retain jurisdiction pending any such reconsideration. If the subcommittee finds a remand would serve no useful purpose, the reasons for this finding must be included in the subcommittee’s final report.

(6) Within ten days after the completion of the hearing the subcommittee shall complete its findings and recommendation. The report of the subcommittee may reject the appeal, or include remedies which may, without limitation because of enumeration, take the form of a reconsideration by the decision maker, a reconsideration by the decision maker under restrictions from the committee, or a recommendation to the next higher appointing level. Once made, the subcommittee’s report shall be simultaneously sent to all concerned parties, including, the faculty member, the initial level of review, the Dean, the Provost and Vice Chancellor, the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate, and the Chancellor.

(7) The Chancellor shall act on the recommendation of the hearing subcommittee within twenty calendar days of receiving the subcommittee’s report.

(8) Notestein Provisions. This section applies to those appeals of denials of tenure that originated in an academic department (or its functional equivalent). After following the procedures listed in this chapter (i.e., after the matter has been remanded for reconsideration — with or without restrictions — or after making a finding that such a remand would serve no useful purpose), if the hearing subcommittee finds that the nonrenewal continues to be based on impermissible factors (as listed under UWS 3.08(1), the following procedures shall apply:

(a) The report of the faculty hearing subcommittee to the Chancellor must include a specific finding that one or more impermissible factors were considered by the academic department (or functional equivalent) in reviewing the credentials and in forming the recommendation that denied tenure.

The report shall also list, identify and discuss the specific impermissible factor(s), as found by the subcommittee.
On the basis of these findings, the subcommittees report shall also recommend to the Chancellor the formation (as set forth below) of an ad hoc committee to make a recommendation on tenure as a substitute for the recommendation originally offered by the department (or equivalent).
Recognizing the importance of resolving any pending appeal, the Chancellor and the involved faculty are properly expected to devote the time required to bring this further review to an expeditious resolution.
(b) The Chancellor shall approve all recommendations from faculty hearing subcommittees to form an ad hoc committee. In these instances, the Chancellor shall also inform the probationary faculty member of the specific actions that are to follow as provided under these rules.

(c) Upon receiving copies of the Chancellor’s action on the report of the subcommittee, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee will meet with the Provost and Vice Chancellor to appoint an ad hoc committee and chair, consisting of five members, to independently review the credentials of the concerned faculty member.

Members of the ad hoc committee may be appointed from within or outside the University (or a combination of both) with the stipulation (required under section 36.13(2)(b)3., stats.) that no person shall be appointed to the committee who is a member of the academic department or its functional equivalent that made the initial negative recommendation.
The committee shall consist of persons knowledgeable or experienced in the faculty member’s academic field or in a substantially similar academic field (also per section 36.13(2)(b)3., stats.).
The committee and chair shall receive a formal letter of appointment from the Provost and Vice Chancellor within 20 working days after the Provost and Vice Chancellor receives the subcommittee report, unless this time is extended for cause by the order of the Provost and Vice Chancellor.
(d) The ad hoc committee shall review the original tenure form, or, at the choice of the probationary faculty member, a revised form with all additions or comments on the original form removed. This provision does not extend, change, or modify the original probationary period in that performance data beyond that the time of the decision of the initial level of review shall not be considered or allowed. The ad hoc committee shall use the criteria for tenure as published by the University and other levels of review.

The ad hoc committee shall not base its tenure recommendation upon impermissible factors, as defined by UWS 3.08(1).
Within twenty working days after appointment, unless the time is extended for cause by order of the Provost and Vice Chancellor, the ad hoc committee shall send its recommendation concerning tenure for the concerned faculty member to the following individuals and offices: (a) the chair of the faculty hearing subcommittee, (b) the chair of the committee that made the initial nonrenewal decision, (c) the appropriate Dean or Vice Chancellor, (d) the President of the Faculty Senate, (e) the Provost and Vice Chancellor, and (f) the Chancellor.
(e) 1. If the ad hoc committee recommends the denial of tenure, the Chancellor will inform the faculty member of that decision to deny tenure. In this instance, the faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to request the reasons for the decision, and to pursue reconsideration of the decision through discussions with the ad hoc committee in a manner consistent with the general framework set forth in these rules. If the faculty member is dissatisfied with the results of the reconsideration by the ad hoc committee, they shall be afforded an opportunity to petition for further review of the decision by a second faculty hearing subcommittee formed in a manner consistent with these rules. In the event that such a request is filed, it shall be governed by the general principles set forth above, as they may be modified by agreement of the Chancellor and the Faculty Senate Executive Committee to meet and balance any unique or particular needs required due to the timing of this petition for review.

2. If the ad hoc committee recommends that tenure be granted, that recommendation shall have the force and status of the initial recommendation from the department or equivalent unit, and it should be forwarded to the other levels of review, as provided in the faculty renewal process. The only modification to the applicable rules is that the time line for each level of action shall be fifteen calendar days, unless the time is extended for cause by order of the Provost and Vice Chancellor.

If the Chancellor decides to recommend a grant of tenure, the Chancellor shall include in his or her written recommendation to the President of the University of Wisconsin System a summary of the original findings of impermissible factors and a specific notation that the recommendation for tenure was made by the ad hoc committee acting as a substitute for the department (or equivalent).