Hearing Committee Procedures for Appeals of Non-Renewal Decisions
All complaints shall be filed with the Chairperson of the Hearing Committee
in accordance with UWS and UWL 3.08
I. Committee Selection
- The committee will initially consist of the nine permanent members.
- After a complaint has been filed with the Hearing Committee, members who wish to remove themselves from the case for any reason shall do so. Vacancies occurring on the permanent committee will be filled by moving first or second alternates horizontally into active positions. This committee will then be referred to as the Active Hearing Committee.
- Each party will be provided a list of the Active Hearing Committee and their alternates. Each party then may challenge for cause any committee member or alternate. The Active Hearing Committee will meet to vote on these challenges. A challenged member is eligible to vote on that challenge. A majority vote of the committee is needed to remove an active member from the case.
- After challenges for cause have been resolved, vacancies on the active committee will be filled by moving first or second alternates horizontally into permanent positions. When a vacancy is not successfully filled with a first or second alternate, it shall be filled by randomly selecting from the pool of remaining first alternates. If this pool becomes empty, the names of second alternates will be used.
- Once the selection process has been completed, each party may strike up to two members or alternates from the committee without cause. These names must be submitted simultaneously to the Chairperson of the Committee. The committee will then be increased to nine members using the procedures described in D) above.
- In the event that the committee does not have nine active members and there are none available in the pool, the Chairperson of the committee will request from the Senate Executive Committee the names of five alternates. The alternates are subject to challenge as in C) above or may be struck from the committee with any remaining pre-preemptive strikes described in E).
II. Pre-Hearing Procedure
- The complaining party submits a written complaint (UWL 3.08(2)) to the Chairperson of the Hearing Committee.
- The Chairperson notifies the other party of the complaint and asks for a response in writing within seven days.
- The Committee meets and begins the process to form an Active Hearing Committee for the case. Challenges for just cause are resolved and an active committee is formed. A date is set for the hearing. The hearing is determined to be open or closed. If a meeting is closed, the committee will allow each party to have one advisor in attendance.
- Once the complaining party submits the original complaint, as described in A), no additional allegations will be considered. All written communications with the committee concerning the appeal will be transmitted through the active committee chairperson to both parties and committee members. There will be no distribution of written material during the 48 hours that precede the hearing.
III. The Hearing
- The following timetable will be used for presentation of pertinent material. No new allegations will be considered.
- Appellant (five-minute introduction)
- Department Response (five minutes)
- Appellant Presentation (one hour)
- Department Response (one hour)
- Appellant Closing (ten minutes)
- Department Closing (ten minutes)
- General questions by committee
- Each party may have one person assisting them.
- The time used to entertain questions from the committee during presentations shall not count toward the party’s time allotment.
IV. The Committee Report
- The Chair of the Active Hearing Committee is responsible for filing the committee report.
- The report shall list all the findings of the Committee.
- The report must state whether the Committee finds for the appellant or for the department.
- In order for the Committee to find for the appellant, the Committee must:
- Find that the appellant has proved that the decision was based on one or more of the non-permissible factors cited in UWS 3.08(1)(a), (b), or (c).
- Find that the department’s use of at least one of these factors was significant in the non-renewal decision.
- If the Committee finds for the appellant, the report must make recommendations for remedy to either the department or to the Chancellor. As per UWS 3.08(3) recommendations to the Chancellor will be made only if the Committee also finds that no useful purpose will be served by remanding the case to the department for reconsideration.
- Recommendations to the department shall include a recommendation for reconsideration in such a manner that the non-permissible factor(s) cited in D) are excluded or remedied.
- If the Committee finds for the department, its recommendation must be that the non-renewal decision be upheld.
- Copies of the report are to be delivered to both parties and to the Chancellor.