UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH PROCEDURE 02-02-10
CATEGORY: ACADEMIC AFFAIRS
SECTION: Faculty Appointment and Tenure
SUBJECT: Faculty Reviews and Appeals
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 8, 2001 Revised
To establish the procedure for reviews of faculty appointments and appeals from
appointment decisions. This includes provisions for both informal and formal
mechanisms through which individuals may work together to seek resolution of their
Examples include academic freedom, nonrenewal of contract, denial of tenure, or failure
III. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Administrative Review Process
The Bylaws of the University and traditions of higher education affirm the general
principle of self-governance for the faculty. In the University system of self-governance,
the role of the departmental chairman (or divisional or program chairman) is critical.
For a description of the role of chairman refer to Policy 01-03-08, School and Regional
The function of the chairman is at various times that of faculty leader, administrator,
liaison between faculty and other groups, and formal convener of faculty gatherings.
Where such positions do not exist, the dean performs comparable roles. It follows
from this that informing the departmental chairman of all grievances, problems, and
difficulties and meeting with him, in as formal or informal a manner as is agreed to be
desirable and productive, are
the essential first steps to the resolution of any
Should discussion with the chairman fail to resolve the problem, bringing the matter to
the attention of the dean is the next step in the process. Some deans have formed
committees to assist them in these matters.
D. Provost or the Senior Vice Chancellor for the Health
When a dean does not or cannot resolve an appeal or dispute, the Provost or the
Senior Vice Chancellor for the Health Sciences remain available to discuss and
attempt to resolve the concerns of the faculty members involved. On serious matters,
the Provost or the Senior Vice Chancellor for the Health Sciences, may at his
discretion, establish an Appeals Panel or other faculty panel to assist him in resolving
a dispute. If advice of a panel is sought, the appellant must specify in writing the
grounds of the dispute and the relief
E. The University Senate Committee on Tenure and Academic Freedom
Consultation with the Senate Committee is separate from, and may be collateral to,
the established administrative appeal
procedures established herein.
A faculty member may at any time seek counsel from the University Senate Committee
on Tenure and Academic Freedom (TAFC) concerning a grievance. In addition, the
University administration may request the opinion or the advice of the Committee.
Typically, a faculty grievance will involve some matter directly pertaining to, and
adversely affecting the conditions of employment including academic freedom. A
faculty member thus may seek the opinion of the Senate Committee on procedures
applied in reference to matters such as the faculty member's nonrenewal of contract,
tenure, or failure of promotion.
The TAFC role complements formal appeals channels. It may contribute informally to
the constructive resolution of faculty grievances regarding tenure and academic
making a formal appeal unnecessary.
Additional information on other TAFC functions may be obtained from the Office of the
A. Evaluation for Faculty Contract Renewal or Promotion
1. Standards and Criteria
Every faculty member should become familiar with substantive and procedural
standards generally employed in decisions affecting renewal and tenure, as
published in the Policy Manual (Category 02, Section 02 - Faculty Appointment
and Tenure). Any special standards adopted by the department, school, or other
academic unit shall
be brought to the faculty member's attention.
The minimum criteria for appointment and promotion to the various academic
ranks are described in the Policy Manual (Category 02, Section 02 - Faculty
Appointment and Tenure). Most schools and some departments have developed
additional criteria for appointment, promotion, and tenure appropriate to their
discipline. Copies of these are available in the office of the dean
The work of the University requires a wide variety of talents, balanced among
specialized fields. Because these needs change over time, the University must
be capable of responding to these changes. Therefore, all recommendations of
appointment and promotion not only must be evaluated in terms of the individual
merits of the candidate but also must take into account the current standards of
the relevant discipline or profession at large and the requirements of the
candidate's department or school at the time of the recommendation and for the
foreseeable future. Because it is necessary to retain flexibility within the
anticipated resources of the University, the proportion of tenured to nontenured
faculty must not rise to a
level that would impair the University's or school's
capacity to respond to changing demands for its services. When a faculty
member becomes eligible for promotion with tenure, this factor may be important
to those who participate in the decision on whether or not tenure will be awarded.
2. Evaluation Process
There will be periodic review by the chairman or dean (at least annually) of the
faculty member's situation
during the probationary service. There should be a
record of that review, and the substance of that review should be provided in
writing to the faculty member. The faculty member will be advised of the time
when decisions concerning renewal and tenure are to be made, and have the
privilege of submitting material in order to ensure adequate consideration of
renewal and tenure.
The nontenured faculty member should seek advice and assistance from senior
colleagues. The ability of
senior colleagues to advise, assist, and ultimately to
make a sound decision on renewal or tenure will be enhanced by an open
opportunity for regular review of the qualifications of nontenured faculty members.
A total separation of the senior faculty roles in counseling and evaluation will not
likely be possible, but review of a faculty member can be presented by a
colleague and received by the subject faculty member in such a manner as to
assist the subject faculty member's professional development. The initial locus
of consideration for faculty appointment is at the department or school level, by
peers. However, concurrence by the dean and the Provost is required. In
addition, only the Chancellor can award tenure.
A department or school may establish a promotion review committee in order to
assist the chairman or dean in evaluating candidates for tenure, promotion, or
3. Notice of Nonrenewal
The notice of nonrenewal must be given to the faculty member in writing prior to
the date specified by the
statement on Appointment and Tenure policies (see
Policy Manual, Category 02, Section 02 - Faculty Appointment and Tenure). The
dean or departmental chairman should keep the faculty member informed of the
status of the approval process.
In each case of renewal or nonrenewal of an appointment, the appropriate
authority (i.e., departmental chairman or committee) will make a recommendation
to the dean, which recommendation will be accompanied by a statement of
factors supportive of the recommendation, together with any written material which
the faculty member may have submitted. If it is the decision of the dean that the
appointment should not be renewed, he will notify the faculty member of this
decision in writing. Upon request, the faculty member will be advised orally of the
reasons for that decision. The dean or the departmental chairman will, if the
faculty member requests, provide the faculty member with a written statement of
the reasons which
formed the basis of the nonrenewal decision, as set
If the recommendation to the dean proposes that the faculty member should be
reappointed and the dean decides that the faculty member should not be
reappointed, all documentation must be forwarded to the Provost or the Senior
Vice Chancellor for the Health Sciences for information or review. The Provost or
the Senior Vice Chancellor for the Health Sciences will then instruct the dean as
to the steps he should take.
4. Written Statement of Reasons
Upon request, the faculty member will receive written confirmation from the dean
of the reasons given in
explanation of nonrenewal.
The statement will be sufficiently specific to identify pertinent matters, such as
school or departmental size and balance, or standards of performance which the
faculty member has failed to achieve.
A faculty member's request for a written statement of reasons must be presented
to the dean within 30 days
after receiving written notice of the decision not to
reappoint. At the regional campuses, the campus president will discharge such
functions as are here
described to be those of deans.
5. Action by Senior Administrator
A dean may recommend to the Provost, the Senior Vice Chancellor for the Health
Sciences, and through them, the Chancellor, that a faculty member be reappointed.
Their consideration of that recommendation will conform to the aforementioned
standards and criteria.
A dean has the authority to deny a faculty member's reappointment, but may only
recommend reappointment. The Provost has authority for reappointment not
involving the granting of tenure. The Chancellor has authority for reappointments
which confer tenure. Thus, the Senior Vice Chancellor for the Health Sciences,
for example, would review and recommend nontenured reappointments of faculty
in the Health Sciences area to the Provost, and appointments with tenure to the
Chancellor. If, in a school of the
Health Sciences, the decision of the Senior Vice
Chancellor for the Health Sciences is not to renew, promote, or recommend
tenure, such decisions may only be appealed to the Chancellor, and not the
Provost. However, concurrence of the Provost is required to renew, promote,
and recommend tenure. The evaluation made by the Provost and the Chancellor
in the respective cases will be based upon the same University-wide standards
referenced above. Their evaluations will also be concerned with questions of
overall policy, including changes in University mission. Should the Provost or
Chancellor, as the case may be, decide not to reappoint, the faculty member will
be provided with written notice of that decision, with the right to a written
statement of the senior administrator's reasons, as described above, upon
The faculty member will be afforded the opportunity to request that the senior
administrator reconsider the nonrenewal decision. Any such request for
reconsideration should describe the basis therefore. Other appeals are
described in III.B., which follows.
B. Appeals from Decision of Nonrenewal or Denial of Promotion or Tenure
1. Appeals Within Academic Units
Any school or regional campus may adopt internal procedures for reviewing its
nonrenewal decisions, so long as such procedures are consistent with University-
Any school that chooses to establish an appeals panel to hear cases involving
decisions not to promote, reappoint, or grant tenure may do so, if the practices
established conform to the underlying principles of the procedures described
herein. In such cases, the school should submit its proposed procedures in
writing to the
Provost for his approval.
Appeals Panels must be established in a responsible manner to ensure that a fair
panel without prejudice or
prior involvement in that faculty case is selected.
To be effective, any such internal review procedures must not have the effect of
unreasonably postponing the final resolution of a faculty member's appointment;
nonrenewal may be unpleasant, but indecision serves neither the faculty member
nor the University.
If a school believes that it has too few tenured faculty who were not already
involved in a tenure case to establish a fair and objective pool of persons to
constitute a properly disinterested panel to hear that case, that school should so
notify the Provost. For such schools, an Appeals Panel drawn from faculty of
other schools will be established by the Provost.
2. Matters for Review by an Appeals Panel
The purpose of the hearing by the Appeals Panel is to decide on the basis of
evidence put before it whether the decisions by the department, the review
committee, and the dean were reasonable. The Appeals Panel shall also seek
to determine whether there were any inadequacies or improprieties in the
treatment of the aggrieved faculty member's case, and, if there were such
inadequacies or improprieties, whether these were of such moment as to have
prejudiced the outcome of the
On many issues, an Appeals Panel can operate initially on an informal, fact finding
and mediating basis, as
a. Allegations of Academic Freedom Violations or Discrimination
If a faculty member who has requested and received a written statement of
reasons for nonrenewal alleges a violation of academic freedom or
discrimination on the basis of race, national origin, or sex, he may institute
an Appeals Panel. The Panel's functions may first
(1) to determine whether or not the notice of nonreappointment constitutes
on its face a
violation of academic freedom or an act of
(2) to seek to settle the matter by informal methods, and if no accord is
(3) to decide whether the evidence submitted in support of the petition
warrants their decision that a formal proceeding should be conducted,
with the burden of proof resting
upon the complaining faculty member
b. Allegations of Inadequate Consideration
A faculty member who requests and receives a written statement of reasons
may institute proceedings for review of nonreappointment by alleging that the
appropriate faculty body gave inadequate consideration to the case. The
functions may be:
(1) to determine whether the decision was preceded by adequate
consideration by the appropriate faculty body, in terms of the relevant
standards (but the Panel will refrain from substituting its judgment on
the merits for that of the faculty body), and if it finds that inadequate
given to the faculty member's qualifications,
(2) to request reconsideration by the faculty body (the Panel will indicate
the respects in which it believes the consideration may have been
inadequate), and in all cases
(3) to decide whether the evidence submitted in support of the petition
warrants their decision that a formal proceeding should be conducted,
with the burden of proof resting
with the complaining faculty member
If the above preliminary steps do not resolve the case in academic freedom or
discrimination charges, and for appeals based on allegations not covered by
Appeals Panel will move into its formal proceedings.
3. Establishment of Appeals Pools and Appeals Panels
a. Establishment of the Appeals Pool in each school shall be by a means that
ensures election of persons who are tenured to be available to serve on
Appeals Panels. They will be elected by their departments (or on a school-wide
basis) by all
b. If a school elects to not establish its own Appeals Pool, a central Appeals Pool
will be available so that faculty from one school may serve on individual
Appeals Panels for faculty in other schools. These central Appeals Panels
will function as surrogate school-level Appeals Panels, and make it possible
for smaller schools to allow their faculty to appeal to a panel of tenured faculty
who have not been involved in earlier
c. All schools of the University that do not establish their own school-level Appeals
Panels as approved by the Provost will be considered to be subject to the
central Appeals Pool, from which
individual Appeals Panels will be drawn.
d. The central Appeals Pool will be composed of all full-time tenured faculty of the
schools that do not have an approved school-level Appeals Pool. As a general
practice, faculty who are considered primarily administrators, with the rank of
chairperson or higher, will not be included in the central Appeals Pool. Faculty
on leave of absence
or sabbatical also will be excluded.
e. Faculty who serve on appeals or grievance panels will be excluded from the
central Appeals Pool for
a period of three years following the date of filing the
Panel report. Faculty in the school where an appeal originates are not eligible
part of the Pool for the selection of that panel.
f. To select members of the central Appeals Pool to serve on any individual
Appeals Panel, the Secretary of the University will advise the faculty member
and the dean involved of the date, hour, and place at which the secretary will
draw eleven names by lot (deleting any names drawn from the Appellant's
school) from the names of the central Appeals Pool. Both parties or their
representatives may witness this drawing. Each party may choose to
challenge up to two names so drawn until seven remain. If four names are
not challenged, the Secretary of the University will draw seven names from
the names remaining, and the first five will constitute the Appeals Panel, and
the remaining two will serve as alternates.
Appeals Panels chosen as described above will be considered as surrogate
school-level Appeals Panels, even though drawing upon faculty outside the
school involved and even though the process is
facilitated by the Provost.
g. Procedure for faculty appeals to address cases in which discrimination is
alleged and the appeals panel drawn by lot in accordance with 3.f. does not
include a member of that class which is the basis of the discrimination charge.
The procedure will apply only:
when an appellant alleges discrimination as one of the basis of
appeal and the appellant is a member of one of the following three
protected classes: women, minorities, and handicapped persons.
"Minorities" include four subclasses: Blacks, Hispanics, Asian/
Pacific Islanders, and American
when no one of the normally chosen members of the panel is a
member of the class which serves as the basis of the allegation of
(1) When requested by an appellant, two additional tenured nonvoting members
will be added to the appeals panel. These two additional members will be
selected from a University-wide pool of persons who are members of the
class which serve as the basis of discrimination and who did not have
previous involvement in this case.
(a) Such pools will be constructed by the University Affirmative Action
Office from the names of people who declare themselves to the
Affirmative Action Office to be members of one or more of those
classes, and agree to have their names in such a pool to serve as
(b) Four separate pools of minorities will be constructed by the
University Affirmative Action Office; that is, pools of Blacks,
Hispanics, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and American Indian/Alaskans.
If an appellant is a member of a minority subclass which does not
contain at least four persons in the specially constructed pool, the
appellant will have the option of having members of other minority
nonvoting members of the Appeals Panel.
(2) The additional nonvoting members of the appeals panel will be chosen by
lot from the specially constructed pools. Six names will be drawn. The
appellant and administrative officer involved will each have the right of
one challenge as follows: If no challenge, or one challenge occurs, the
first two nonchallenged names will be the regular members, and the next
two names chosen will
be the alternates.
(3) The two additional nonvoting members will participate in all deliberations
of the panel, and will provide a written report to the Provost or the Senior
Vice Chancellor for the Health Sciences on issues relating to the
allegation for discrimination.
4. Procedures for Appeals Panels
a. Calling the Hearing
(1) When a faculty member has received written notice of nonrenewal or
nonpromotion, and wishes to appeal that decision, he may elect either
of two courses of action:
(a) He may ask for a reconsideration of his case by the Dean of his
school. Such a request must be made within 30 days of receipt of
the notice of nonrenewal or nonpromotion; and the faculty member
may accompany his request with any additional materials in support
of his case he may wish to submit. This consideration must be
completed within 90 days of its request. If, upon reconsideration of
the faculty member's case, the dean reaffirms the original decision,
he shall so notify the faculty member and, on the request of the
faculty member, he shall furnish the faculty member with a written
statement of reasons for nonrenewal or nonpromotion within 90
days of the original request for reconsideration. If the faculty
member has reason to believe he has been treated unjustly, he may
request a formal hearing by an
(b) He may elect not to ask for reconsideration but may, instead,
immediately request that the Dean of his school provide him with a
written statement of reasons for nonrenewal or nonpromotion. Such
a request must be made within 30 days of receipt of the notice of
nonrenewal or nonpromotion; and the written statement or reasons
for nonrenewal or nonpromotion must be furnished to the faculty
member within 14 days of his request. If the statement is not
provided within 14 days, the faculty member may then request that
an Appeals Panel be
(2) Upon receiving a written statement of reasons for nonrenewal or
nonpromotion, the faculty member has 30 days in which to submit to the
Dean of his school for a hearing, stating the
grounds for the appeal.
(3) The Dean of his school shall inform the Secretary of the Appeals Pool
(group of tenured faculty selected and available to serve as members of
Appeals Panels for that
school) or the Provost that a hearing has been
requested. The Secretary of the Appeals Pool (or the Secretary of the
University, if that school does not have an Appeals Pool), in the presence
of the aggrieved faculty member and the dean, shall choose members
(see 3.f. above) of the school Appeals Pool (or the central Appeals Pool)
to serve as an Appeals Panel in the case. No member of the aggrieved
faculty member's department, nor of any review committee that has
previously considered the faculty member's case, shall serve on the
Appeals Panel. A member of an Appeals Pool who has served on an
Appeals Panel in a given year may not normally serve again in the same
year until all other members have served. This Appeals Panel shall
normally be convened within 30 days of the faculty member's request,
and in no case
later than 60 days following such request.
(4) These hearing procedures shall not be used to handle grievances
concerning salary, teaching, assignments, or other aspects of work load
unless they are related to
allegations of inadequate consideration,
academic freedom violations, or discrimination affecting tenure or
(5) These hearing procedures may be used to review an actual decision not
to promote a tenured associate professor but may not be invoked if there
had not been a prior
evaluation at the departmental level.
b. Panel Procedures
(1) Each Appeals Panel shall elect a chairman and keep an account of its
proceedings. This shall be stored in the Office of the Provost for as long
a period of time as the
University Counsel may specify.
(2) The Appeals Panel may request the department chairman concerned and
the dean to give testimony. If the case has been previously considered
by a review committee, a copy of the review committee's report shall be
furnished to the Appeals Panel, and the Appeals Panel may ask the
chairman of the
review committee to give testimony.
(3) The appellant has the right to present documents, evidence, supporting
and advocates in his behalf. The aggrieved party shall also
have the right to receive a summary of the substance of other materials
presented as evidence or testimony in the case, but the source of such
(4) The Panel will meet in closed session. When appearing before the Panel,
the appellant may be accompanied by one advocate or observer of his
(5) All witnesses will appear individually and in closed session.
(6) During those sessions in which they appear, witnesses will be allowed to
make an oral presentation and members of the Panel may question the
(7) The Panel reserves the right to limit the length of the oral presentation
made to the
Panel by each witness. Witnesses may present additional
testimony in writing.
(8) The Panel requests the appellant to submit a list of witnesses he would
like the Panel to
hear, together with a brief statement of the topic(s) each
witness will wish to discuss. The Panel has the right to limit the number
of witnesses who, in their judgment, would
give similar testimony.
(9) It is University policy that deliberations concerning personnel actions
remain confidential. In order to conform to this policy the Panel will not
admit media or tape
recorders to any sessions of the proceedings. Any
evidence for the record should be submitted in writing. Further, members
of the Panel will make no public statement regarding this appeal prior to
the final report of the Panel.
5. Action by the Appeals Panel
The Chairman of the Appeals Panel shall submit the findings of the Appeals Panel
in writing to the Provost, together with the written record of the Panel's proceedings.
The findings shall be in the form of a summary of determination of the facts,
by one of the following recommendations:
a. that the dean's decision be allowed to stand
b. that the case be reconsidered at the departmental
or school level
c. that the Provost ask the dean to reconsider his decision
d. that the Provost reconsider the dean's decision
A copy of the findings shall be provided by the chairman of the Appeals Panel to
the dean, the chairman of the department concerned, and the aggrieved faculty
The timeliness of nonrenewal shall be considered to be adequate if the original
notification was sent within
the required period even if requests for consideration,
for written reasons, or for a hearing are made after the required period for
C. Appeals from Decisions of Nonrenewal for Non-Tenure-Stream Faculty
1. Notice of Nonrenewal
The notice of nonrenewal must be given to the faculty member in writing prior to
the date specified in the
Policy Manual (Category 02, Section 02 - Faculty
Appointment and Tenure).
2. Written Statement of Reasons
A faculty member may request from the dean a written statement of reasons for
nonrenewal within two weeks of
receipt of the written notice of nonrenewal.
3. Grounds for Appeal
The two grounds for appeal of a decision not to renew a faculty member's
a. a violation of academic freedom or discrimination
b. inadequate consideration
The second ground may be invoked only by those who have had two full years of
4. Appeals Procedure
A faculty member wishing to appeal must apply to the Provost within two weeks
of receiving a written
statement of the reasons for nonrenewal.
Upon examining the evidence presented by the appellant, the Provost will either
convene an Appeals Panel to make a full investigation of the charges or may
report to the appellant that he or she has produced insufficient evidence of an
improper ground for
nonrenewal to warrant further investigation of the
The Appeals Panel shall follow the same procedure in these cases as it would if
a tenure stream, nonrenewal decision were being reviewed. The Appeals Panel
shall make as expeditious a review of the charges as is practicable under the
circumstances, recognizing the
shortened time available for review.
D. University Hearing Board
Upon completion of review by an Appeals Panel and final action by the Provost (or
Senior Vice Chancellor for Health Sciences), a faculty member may submit to the
Chancellor a request that formal review proceedings be initiated under the By-Laws
of the Board of Trustees of the University.
A request for such a review must be submitted in writing to the Chancellor who will
make the determination whether the request for a formal hearing should be granted
or denied. The nature of the issues involved (and particularly their relation to
academic freedom and nondiscrimination) and the nature of the report and findings of
an Appeal Panel are among the factors that may be considered in acting upon the
request. If the faculty member's request for formal review is granted, hearings will be
held before a committee selected in accordance with procedures set forth below.
Such hearings will be conducted in accordance with principles applicable to hearings
involving termination of appointments for cause, provided, however, that the burden
of persuasion will be upon the complaining faculty member.
1. A Hearing Board hears the faculty member's appeal, and reports to the
Chancellor and the Chairman of the Board
2. Such a hearing board must be convened in cases of a tenured member of the
faculty, but is discretionary with the Chancellor in cases of nonrenewal of
appointment. Such application may be made only upon completion of all prior
proceedings, and within 30 days of receipt by the member of the faculty of written
notification of the decisions following the prior proceedings. It must set out with
specificity compelling reasons to believe that there has been an unfair practice
with regard to failure to reappoint. The faculty member may withdraw his appeal
at any time
in this process.
3. Termination of any appointment or other action short of termination may be made
for cause. The University recognizes the right of the individual concerned to be
informed in writing of the reasons his dean or other administrators request the
termination of his appointment; the right of the individual to respond to that
statement in writing; and the duty of the University to sustain the burden of
establishing cause as stated. Prior to taking final action to terminate the faculty
member's appointment, the Chancellor will
request advice from a Hearing Board.
4. The procedure for selecting the membership of the Hearing Board is as follows:
a. The Hearing Board will be composed of five members of the faculty, selected
from the elected faculty
on the Senate Council, and a chairman appointed by
the Chancellor who may, but need not be a member of the faculty. The
chairman may not vote on the
outcome, but otherwise may participate fully in
b. When a Hearing Board is needed, the Chancellor shall ask the President of
the Senate to select
twelve nominees from among the elected faculty on the
Senate Council. The faculty member and the senior administrator involved
shall each have three peremptory challenges against any of the twelve
persons selected, and the Clerk of the Senate shall reduce the list by lot to
5. The Hearing Board shall transmit its findings to the Chancellor and to the Chairman
of the Board of Trustees
for consideration and action by the Chancellor after
review of the process by an appropriate committee of the Board of Trustees.
6. The burden of proof before such Hearing Board in a case of nonrenewal shall be
upon the individual faculty member to prove that such unfair practice as claimed
has taken place.
7. In a case of nonrenewal where charges are brought by the individual faculty
member, normally the dean
(rather than the department, the chairman or any
individual faculty member) shall be considered the responding party.
8. The Hearing Board shall be conducted with due regard for procedural rights,
including but not limited to counsel and cross-examination, adherence to
reasonable rules of evidence, a written record of testimony, and a written opinion
by the Board. In addition, it should be noted that observers may be present only if
individually agreed to by both sides. Further rules and interpretations may be
made by the Hearing Board.
9. Upon receipt of a final written report from the Hearing Board, with its findings and
disposition of the case, the Chancellor shall determine what
further action is required.
10. If the Hearing Board recommends that the University not reappoint an individual;
on receipt of the written findings of the Hearing Board by the Chairman of the
Board of Trustees, the Chairman will appoint a special committee of the Board of
Trustees to review the
written record to determine whether due process has been
afforded the faculty member, determine whether the conclusions of the Hearing
Board are consistent with the testimony, and whether the action recommended is
in keeping with the conclusions of the Hearing Board. The Trustee Committee
receives no new testimony, nor are witnesses heard, and its meetings are closed.
Its report will be provided to the Chairman of the Board, the Chancellor, the dean,
and the faculty member.
11. The Chancellor shall act in each case in accordance with the provisions in the
By-Laws that, "The power of appointment and correlative power of dismissal of
any member of the faculty are committed to the Board of Trustees. However, it is
the policy of the Board to delegate those powers to the Chancellor and Chief
Executive Officer as head of the University Faculty, who may redelegate these
powers except in the case of tenured faculty." The Chancellor shall take into
account the recommendation of the Provost or Senior Vice Chancellor concerned
and, when the appointment is to any school, the dean of that school. The dean,
in turn, shall take into account the recommendation of the chairman of the
departments and the faculty concerned.
The Chancellor shall take such action as is appropriate with due consideration of
the findings and recommendations of the Hearing Board, and consistent with the
information provided by the Committee of the Board of Trustees. Such action
of the University appeals procedures.
Policy 01-03-08, School and Regional Campus Governance
Faculty Appointment and Tenure Policies, Category 02, Section 02
Policy 02-02-10, Faculty Reviews and Appeals
University of Pittsburgh of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education - BYLAWS,
Chapter II, Article II, Section III, Paragraph D, "Termination of Appointment for Cause,"
adopted by the Board of Trustees, January 14, 1969 as amended