COMMITTEE ON RULES AND JURISDICTION
The Committee considered four main issues:
Procedure for Student Grievance in Academic Affairs
Submitted by the Graduate Division, the document incorporated new wording regarding affirmative action and sexual harassment, expanded duties of the Administrative Officer, increased inclusion of the Graduate Division, and clarified that the procedure included students pursuing an academic degree and excluded students pursuing professional degrees. The Committee concurred that the changes were consonant with the Code of the Academic Senate and unanimously approved the changes. Committee members suggested a more delineated "marker" be established for when informal resolution activities transition to the formal process as well as a more clear distinction between the involvement of the Graduate Council Chair and the Administrative Officer.
Academic Senate Faculty Status with Concurrent Student Enrollment
The Committee ruled that an Academic Senate faculty member is prevented from getting any degree from the university s/he is employed at but could retain her/his Senate status at the campus of employment while undertaking an academic program at another UC campus. The Committee was of the opinion that a Senate faculty could take a leave of absence during his/her entire time of study or for the quarter in which the faculty member receives the degree. The School of Medicine Compensation Plan does not allow for leave of absence without pay. Faculty with Academic Senate standing cannot "lose" their privilege to vote but the above restriction on School of Medicine make a change in series for the entire length of study a non-viable option. Enforcement of not allowing a student-enrolled faculty member to vote lies with the department chair and the student-enrolled faculty member should excuse him/herself from voting on departmental matters.
Holding both faculty and student statuses simultaneously is very confusing and information on the issue of conflict of interest should be provided. The Committee agreed to the faculty member not taking a leave of absence nor a change in status but recuse him/herself with regard to voting on issues of merits and promotion due to conflict of interest.
Privilege and Tenure
The Committee was asked to respond to the inquiry: Although a faculty member is no longer a UCSF faculty member, is he entitled to grieve actions which occurred when he was a faculty member? Committee members discussed "when does the clock start" and were of the opinion that there needs to be a limited "reasonable time" to submit grievance complaints. The Committee ruled that once a grievance is lodged by a standing member of the Academic Senate, that member has the right to access the Privilege and Tenure process.
Clinical Affairs Bylaw
The Committee reviewed the newly proposed bylaw (175) clarifying the wording of the membership requirements and adding "Unless otherwise restricted, all members shall have the vote". The Committee interpreted this bylaw as an all-voting committee membership including ex officio members. The "unless otherwise restricted" phrase was included to cover those circumstances in which [rare] the Committee would be voting on matters which, being strict Senate matters, exclude non-Senate members from voting.
Challenge to the election rules for the faculty representative to the UCSF Stanford Health Care Board
At its February 10, 1998 meeting, the Division approved the general principles and procedures for electing the faculty representative to the UCSF Stanford Health Care Board. A motion to exclude department chairs from eligibility was also approved. Chancellor Debas requested a reconsideration of this exclusion and, at its January 25, 1999 meeting, the Division approved a campus mail ballot be conducted to ascertain a more accurate assessment of the faculty's opinion on this issue. The results of the mail ballot were 150 Yes; in support of including chairs and 227 No; against including chairs.
The Committee received a letter challenging the results of the mail ballot stating that department chairs are considered full and participatory members of the Academic Senate and exclusion from eligibility was discriminatory and an abridgement of rights as Academic Senate members. The Committee was asked to review the outcome of the vote as a violation of the Code of the Academic Senate and issue a Legislative Ruling to rescind the exclusion.
The Committee ruled the vote is considered a proper action because the Academic Senate was not acting on an Academic Senate matter but as an agent on behalf of the Chancellor and the UCSF Stanford Board of Directors as a vehicle for convenience. Thus, the outcome of the mail ballot can stand as valid. The Committee then forwarded a request to the systemwide committee for its review and comment.
During the academic year, the Committee conducted its business through memo, fax, and e-mail for the following reviews:
Amendment to Divisional Bylaw 5: Powers and Duties: "Notwithstanding other bylaws or rules, the Division may, at hte discretion of the Secretary, use appropriately secure forms of electronic communication where notification, mail ballot or other Senate business is described in these Bylaws".
This amendment allows electronic voting activities to be conducted and considered as an official voting mechanism. The Committee approved the amendment as consonant with the Code of the Academic Senate and voiced concern over the use of the word "notwithstanding." If equated to "in accordance with", the use of the word "notwithstanding" was regarded as acceptable, however, if the meaning equated to "in spite of", members suggested use an alternative word.
Amendment of School of Nursing Bylaw Part IX, 27, b., (1), b: "At least one member of the MEPN Program Sub-Council shall be a Faculty of Record for a MEPN course. The Committee found the amendment in consonance with the bylaws of the Academic Senate.
Lynn Ponton, Chair
Katherine Matthay, Vice Chair
John Greenspan, ex officio
Registrar, ex officio