PART I - GENERAL
Sec. 1 Purpose
The purpose of this document is to ensure full and consistent compliance with federal and state laws and The University of Texas System Board of Regents’ Rule 31008 and to provide procedures for termination and summary dismissal initiated under Regents’Rule 31008.
Sec. 2 Applicability
This policy covers policies and procedures for the termination for good cause or for summary dismissal of a (1) tenured faculty member; (2) term-tenured faculty member during the term of appointment; or (3) non-tenured faculty member during the term of appointment.
Rule 31008, Section 7, applies when an institution decides not to renew or reappoint a non-tenured or term-tenured faculty member at the end of their appointment pursuant to Regents’ Rule 31007, Section 5, or Regents’ Rule 31002, Sections 1 and 2.
The procedures in Rule 31003 apply when a faculty member’s employment is terminated due to an institutional financial exigency or due to an institution’s decision to eliminate occupied academic positions or abandon academic programs.
Sec. 3 Chief Academic Officer Initial Review
Upon receipt of an allegation of misconduct, the Chief Academic Officer, or the designated administrator (hereinafter “the CAO” for either), shall review the allegation and determine whether if true it justifies recommending proceeding with the good cause procedures (Part II, below) or through the summary dismissal procedures (Part III, below).
The CAO may determine that recommending initiation of the summary dismissal procedures is proper at any point during the CAO’s investigation and review of an allegation.
Sec. 4 Good Cause
“Good cause” for termination may be found when the faculty member has engaged in one of the following forms of conduct and the faculty conduct is sufficiently serious in nature such that the president determines it is in the best interest of the institution to separate the implicated faculty:
(a) professional incompetence;
(b) continually or repeatedly failing to perform duties or meet professional responsibilities of the faculty member’s position, including, but not limited to, maintaining membership in good standing of the institution’s medical staff for clinical appointments;
(c) failure to successfully complete a required post-tenure review professional development program;
(d) conduct involving moral turpitude that adversely affects the institution or the faculty member’s performance of duties or meeting of responsibilities;
(e) violation of laws or System or institution policies substantially related to the performance of the faculty member’s duties;
(f) conviction of a crime affecting the fitness of the faculty member to engage in teaching, research, service, outreach, clinical activities, or administration;
(g) unprofessional conduct that adversely affects the institution or the faculty member’s performance of duties or meeting of responsibilities;
(h) falsification or misrepresentation of the faculty member’s academic credentials, scholarly work, or research data, or other research or academic fraud or misconduct, including but not limited to fabrication, falsification, plagiarism or misrepresenting publications;
(i) failure to maintain credentials or licenses required to perform job duties; or
(j) sexual misconduct.
Sec. 5 Grounds for Summary Dismissal
Summary Dismissal procedures may be initiated, in accordance with applicable procedures, when the allegations made against the faculty member are sufficiently serious in nature such that the president determines it is in the best interest of the institution to have the faculty member immediately removed from their position because the alleged conduct (1) creates a serious safety threat to students, faculty, staff, or members of the public; (2) creates a significant threat to national security; or (3) creates a significant adverse impact on the operation of the institution.
Sec. 6 Meetings and Hearings Venues and Timelines
The institution may choose to conduct all meetings and hearings outlined in this policy in person or virtually.
The institution may impose reasonable deadlines for any of the steps outlined in this policy and may modify this policy’s specified deadlines except for the deadlines in Part II, Sections 3(b) and 4.
Sec. 7 Definitions
Business Days - business days are weekdays during which normal institution business is conducted. This excludes weekends, holidays, and days on which the institution is closed except for essential services (skeleton days).
Faculty member – a Faculty Member is any individual holding an academic title listed in Regents’ Rule 31001, Section 2, with the exception of Assistant Instructors, Teaching Associates, and Teaching Assistants.
Tenure – tenure is the entitlement of a faculty member to continue in the faculty member’s academic position unless dismissed by the institution for good cause, including by summary dismissal. The granting of tenure may not be construed to create a property interest in any attribute of a faculty member’s academic position beyond a faculty member’s continued employment, including the faculty member’s annual salary and any privileges incident to status as a tenured professor.
PART II TERMINATION FOR GOOD CAUSE
Sec. 1. Review of Allegations for Termination for Good Cause.
(a) Notification to Faculty Member of Allegations.
When the CAO reviews allegations against a faculty member that involve the potential for termination, the CAO shall present the faculty member with written notice of the allegations and an explanation of the evidence supporting termination.
If the CAO’s review involves an investigation into the allegations, the CAO has discretion as to when to notify the faculty member of the allegations. The CAO must notify the faculty member of the allegations prior to the interview and grievance opportunity as described in Section 1(b).
During the pendency of a Rule 31008 matter, a faculty member may be placed on leave of absence with or without pay, if it is determined the allegations warrant it. If the faculty member is placed on leave with or without pay, the faculty member will be entitled to an appeal of the decision pursuant to the institution’s faculty grievance procedure, separate from this policy. A faculty member placed on leave without pay must be given notice and an opportunity to respond before the unpaid leave becomes effective. If an institution places a faculty member on a leave of absence without pay and later restores the faculty member to their position, the institution has discretion to determine whether to award back pay and in what amount, depending on the circumstances.
(b) Faculty Member Meeting Opportunity.
As part of the review process, the CAO shall set a date to meet with the faculty member and provide an opportunity for the faculty member to respond to the allegations and to present to the CAO a grievance (see (c) below) related to the allegations under review.
The faculty member may choose to be represented during the meeting by a representative or an attorney retained by the faculty member (“Advisor”). If the faculty member chooses to be represented by an Advisor, the faculty member must provide written notice to the CAO at least five business days prior to the scheduled meeting. The CAO may attend the meeting with an attorney from the institution and/or from The University of Texas System Office of General Counsel (UT System OGC).
In lieu of or in addition to the meeting, the faculty member may submit to the CAO a written response to the allegations and supporting documents before and/or after the meeting within a reasonable time set by the CAO.
If the faculty member elects not to meet or to submit a written response, the CAO may rely on any relevant evidence.
(c) Faculty Member Grievance Opportunity.
The faculty member will have the right to present a grievance, directly or through a representative, to the CAO on an issue or subject related to the allegations under review. If the faculty member elects to exercise the right to a grievance, the faculty member must present the grievance no later than five business days prior to the meeting with the CAO. The faculty member may request one extension of time from the CAO, if needed.
The faculty member has discretion to present the grievance during the meeting described in Section 1(b) or separately in writing, directly or through a representative.
The CAO shall take the grievance, if any, into consideration prior to deciding whether the allegations are supported by evidence that justifies termination proceedings.
If the grievance includes credible allegations against the CAO, the president shall designate another individual to review the allegations related to termination proceedings as well as the grievance and decide whether the allegations are supported by evidence that justifies termination proceedings.
If a faculty member does not present a grievance to the CAO, the faculty member will not be precluded from presenting an issue or subject to the president or faculty hearing panel in defense of charges in termination proceedings.
(d) CAO Options upon Review of Allegations.
Upon completion of the review of allegations of good cause, the CAO may:
(1) Recommend to the president that good cause exists to proceed with the termination process under Part II;
(2) Conclude that the allegations may constitute Serious Misconduct that warrant initiating the Summary Dismissal process under Part III;
(3) Conclude the Rule 31008 process and impose discipline less than termination;
(4) Conclude the Rule 31008 process and refer the matter to another department or dean to impose discipline less than termination; or
(5) Conclude the Rule 31008 process with no disciplinary action taken.
When termination is not recommended but disciplinary action is taken, the faculty member may choose to grieve the discipline under the institution’s faculty grievance procedure, as applicable.
Sec. 2. President’s Review of Chief Academic Officer’s Recommendation of Termination for Good Cause.
(a) President Notification to Faculty Member of Good Cause for Termination.
If after review, the president determines that the CAO recommendation provided pursuant to Section 1(d)(1) does not establish good cause for termination, the president shall provide written notice to the faculty member that a lesser or no disciplinary action will be imposed in accordance with institution policies.
If after review, the president determines that the CAO recommendation provided pursuant to Section 1(d)(1) establishes good cause for termination, the president shall provide written notice to the faculty member, specifying the allegations for termination, and provide the faculty member with an opportunity to respond.
(b) Faculty Member Opportunity to Respond.
No later than 10 business days after receipt of the president’s written notice, the faculty member may respond to the president orally or in writing. The faculty member may request one extension of time from the president, if needed.
In lieu of or in addition to the meeting, the faculty member may submit to the president a written response to the allegations and supporting documents before and/or after the meeting within a reasonable time set by the president.
If the faculty member elects not to respond to the president, the president will rely on the CAO’s recommendation, the faculty member’s response to the CAO, if any, and any relevant evidence.
If the faculty member meets with the president, the faculty member may choose to be accompanied during the meeting by a representative or an attorney retained by the faculty member (“Advisor”). If the faculty member chooses to be represented by an Advisor, the faculty member must provide written notice to the president at least five business days prior to the scheduled meeting. The president may attend the meeting with an attorney from the institution and/or from UT System OGC.
(c) President Termination Recommendation.
At any point, if the president decides termination is not warranted, the president may end the Rule 31008 proceedings and may impose a lesser disciplinary action in accordance with institution policies.
When the president decides to impose lesser disciplinary action, the faculty member may choose to grieve the discipline under the institution’s faculty grievance procedure, as applicable.
If the president recommends termination, the president shall convene a faculty hearing panel to hear the charges against the faculty member in accordance with Section 3.
The president shall provide the faculty member written notification of any decision or recommendation described in this section.
Sec. 3. Termination Hearings Procedures
(a) Process for Appointing Faculty Hearing Panel.
In cases that proceed to a hearing based on a termination recommendation by the president, the president shall appoint a faculty hearing panel (Hearing Panel). The Hearing Panel shall be composed of three faculty members. The president may also appoint alternates. The academic rank of each member of the panel must be at least equal to that of the accused faculty member.
The president shall appoint the hearing panel members from a standing panel (Standing Pool) of members of the faculty:
- 50% of the Standing Pool shall be selected by a procedure established by the institution’s faculty governance organization, or an existing faculty organization with oversight for institutional faculty committee selection (Faculty-Selected Pool Members).
- The president shall appoint the remaining 50% of the Standing Pool (President-Selected Pool Members).
- The president must appoint to the Hearing Panel a minimum of one Faculty-Selected Pool Member.
- The president shall appoint the Panel Chair.
The Hearing Panel shall not include any accuser of the faculty member.
The Hearing Panel shall be advised by a UT System OGC attorney, who may advise the panel jointly with an institution attorney.
(b) Notice to Accused Faculty of Hearing Panel.
The accused faculty member shall be notified in writing of the names of the Panel Chair and all other faculty members selected for the Hearing Panel. The faculty member shall also be notified of the date, time, and place for the hearing. The written notifications will be made at least 8 business days prior to the hearing.
If the accused faculty member is not satisfied with the fairness or objectivity of any member or members of the Hearing Panel, the faculty member may submit a written challenge to the Panel Chair regarding the alleged lack of fairness or objectivity no later than 3 business days prior to the date for the hearing. The accused faculty member will have no right to disqualify any member or members from serving on the Hearing Panel. It will be up to each challenged member to determine whether they can serve with fairness and objectivity in the matter. If any challenged member should voluntarily disqualify their self, the president will appoint either an alternate or a substitute member of the panel from the Standing Pool described in Section 3(a).
(c) Hearing Procedures.
(1) Burden to Prove Good Cause.
The institution has the burden to prove good cause for termination by the greater weight of the credible evidence.
(2) Parties and Representatives.
A representative of the institution (Institution Representative) will appear before the Hearing Panel to present charge(s) against the faculty member. The institution is entitled to be represented by an administrator, an attorney from the institution and/or an attorney from UT Systems OGC.
The faculty member has a right to appear at the hearing and be represented by an Advisor or Advisors (no more than two) retained by the faculty member. If the faculty member and/or their Advisor refuses to appear as requested by the panel, the panel may proceed with the hearing and make findings and recommendations.
(3) Oral and Written Evidence.
The Panel Chair will have the discretion to determine the length of the hearing and the form and scope of examination during the hearing. The Panel Chair will preside over the hearing and ensure the order of presentation as well as rule on evidentiary matters.
The Institution Representative and Faculty Member, or their attorneys or Advisors, will have the right to appear before the Hearing Panel to present oral and written evidence in support or in defense of the charge(s) against the faculty member.
Each party has the right to confront and cross-examine the other party’s witnesses.
The faculty member has the right to testify, but may not be required to do so. If the faculty member chooses to testify, the Institution Representative, or their attorney, has the right to cross-examine the faculty member.
(4) Closed Hearing
The hearing shall be closed.
(5) Exchanging Documents
The Panel Chair shall set a reasonable time prior to the hearing for the parties to exchange exhibits and witness lists. The faculty member challenging the proposed termination shall be afforded the opportunity to obtain relevant evidence within the control of the institution, except for evidence that is confidential or exempted from disclosure by law.
(6) Record of Proceeding.
A stenographic or electronic recording of the proceedings will be made, and a copy of the record will be made available to the faculty member and the president.
(d) Hearing Panel Findings and Recommendations.
(1) Findings:
(i) The Hearing Panel, by a majority of its total membership, shall make written findings on the material facts and shall make a recommendation as to the continuance or termination of the faculty member’s appointment.
(ii) Where there has been a finding of sexual misconduct or research misconduct (i.e., fabrication, falsification, plagiarism) through an investigation conducted in accordance with institution policy, the facts of the finding shall be accepted by the Hearing Panel. The Hearing Panel, by a majority of its total membership, shall provide a written recommendation as to the continuance or termination of the faculty member’s appointment based on the provided factual findings.
(2) The Hearing Panel, by a majority of its total membership, may make any supplementary suggestions it deems proper concerning disposition of the case.
(3) The Panel Chair shall deliver the majority’s written findings, recommendations, and any supplementary suggestions to the president, along with a copy to the faculty member, within 30 days after the hearing. If additional time is required, the Hearing Panel must request an extension from the president. If minority findings, recommendations, or suggestions are made, they will also be delivered to the president and the faculty member.
(4) The Panel Chair shall also deliver the original transcript or electronic recording of the testimony and the exhibits to the president.
Sec. 4. President’s Report.
Within 14 business days after receipt of the Hearing Panel’s findings and recommendations, the president shall make one of the following decisions based solely on the evidence in the hearing record and submit a written report of that decision to the accused faculty member:
(a) The president may decide to dismiss the matter or impose sanctions less than termination. In this case, the president’s decision is final, and the Board of Regents will not review the matter.
(b) The president may recommend termination to the Board of Regents if the president determines that the greater weight of the credible evidence establishes good cause for termination.
If so, the president shall forward the findings and recommendations of the hearing panel, the original transcript or electronic recording of the testimony and the exhibits to the Board of Regents for its review, along with the president’s report.
If the president’s recommendation is not the same as the majority recommendation of the Hearing Panel, the president shall state the reasons for the president’s decision to recommend termination in the president’s written report.
The accused faculty member may, within 7 business days after receiving the president’s report, submit a written response to the Board of Regents. The response must be based solely on the evidence of record in the proceeding.
Sec. 5. Board Review.
The Board of Regents, by a majority of the total membership, will approve, reject, or amend such findings, recommendations, and suggestions, if any, or will recommit the report to the same panel for hearing additional evidence and reconsidering its findings, recommendations, and suggestions, if any. Reasons for approval, rejection, or amendment of such findings, recommendations, or suggestions will be stated in writing and communicated to the accused and the president.
PART III SUMMARY DISMISSAL
Sec. 1. Review of Allegations for Summary Dismissal.
(a) Notification to Faculty Member of Allegations.
When the CAO reviews allegations against a faculty member that may justify summary dismissal, the CAO shall seek approval from the president before proceeding.
If the president agrees that summary dismissal is appropriate based on a review of the allegations, the president shall confer with the Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs or the Executive Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs. If approved, the president shall direct the CAO to present the faculty member with written notice of the allegations and an explanation of the evidence supporting summary dismissal.
A faculty member subject to these summary dismissal procedures shall be immediately placed on a leave of absence without pay. A faculty member placed on leave without pay must be given notice and an opportunity to respond before the unpaid leave becomes effective. If an institution places a faculty member on a leave of absence without pay and later restores the faculty member to their position, the institution has discretion to determine whether to award back pay and in what amount, depending on the circumstances.
(b) Faculty Member Hearing Opportunity.
The CAO shall promptly set a date for the faculty member to have an opportunity to respond to the allegations in a hearing before the CAO.
If the faculty member elects to appear before the CAO, the CAO shall hear the faculty member’s response to the allegations. The faculty member may choose to be represented during the hearing by a representative or an attorney retained by the faculty member (“Advisor”). The CAO may attend the hearing with an attorney from the institution and/or from UT System OGC. If the faculty member chooses to be represented by an Advisor, the faculty member must provide written notice to the CAO at least two business days prior to the scheduled hearing.
In lieu of or in addition to the hearing, the faculty member may submit to the CAO a written response to the allegations and supporting documents. The written response must be submitted to the CAO at least two business days prior to the scheduled hearing.
If the faculty member is unable or elects not to meet or to submit a written response, the CAO will rely on the evidence gathered during the review and investigation.
(c) CAO Options upon Review of Allegations.
Upon completion of the review of allegations of serious misconduct for summary dismissal, the CAO may:
(1) Recommend summary dismissal to the president if the allegations involve serious misconduct as identified in Part I, Sec. 5, above. If the president accepts the recommendation, the CAO will communicate the decision to the faculty member. The decision must clearly state that the faculty member is subject to summary dismissal and include the effective date of the dismissal and information regarding the faculty member’s opportunity for a post-dismissal appeal in accordance with Section 2, below;
(2) Recommend to the president that sufficient cause exists to initiate the Part II termination hearing process;
(3) Conclude the process and impose discipline less than termination;
(4) Conclude the process and refer the matter to another department or dean to impose discipline; or
(5) Conclude the process with no disciplinary action taken.
When termination is not recommended but disciplinary action is taken, the faculty member may choose to grieve the discipline under the institution’s faculty grievance procedure, as applicable. If an institution had placed a faculty member on a leave of absence without pay and later restored the faculty member to their position, the institution has discretion to determine whether to award back pay and in what amount, depending on the circumstances.
Sec. 2. Summary Dismissal Appeal
A former faculty member who has been summarily dismissed may appeal the dismissal decision. If the former faculty member appeals, the president shall convene a faculty hearing panel in accordance with Section 3.
To initiate an appeal, the former faculty member must notify the president in writing of the request for a hearing no later than five business days after the CAO issues the summary dismissal decision. The hearing request will include the grounds for the appeal, such as whether the material weight of the credible evidence failed to establish serious misconduct or whether the CAO’s decision was in error; however, the written appeal does not need to include all the evidence the former faculty member will rely upon to support the appeal.
Sec. 3. Process for Post-Dismissal Appeal Hearings
(a) Process for Appointing Faculty Hearing Panel.
In cases that proceed to a hearing based on a summary dismissal appeal, the president shall appoint a faculty hearing panel (Hearing Panel). The Hearing Panel will be composed of three faculty members. The president may also appoint alternates. The academic rank of each member of the panel must be at least equal to that of the accused former faculty member.
The president shall appoint the hearing panel members from a standing panel (Standing Pool) of members of the faculty:
- 50% of the Standing Pool will be selected by a procedure established by the institution’s faculty governance organization or an existing faculty organization with oversight for institutional faculty committee selection (Faculty-Selected Pool Members).
- The president shall appoint the remaining 50% of the Standing Pool (President-Selected Pool Members).
- The president must appoint to the Hearing Panel a minimum of one Faculty-Selected Pool Member.
- The president shall appoint the Panel Chair.
The Hearing Panel will not include any accuser of the former faculty member.
The Hearing Panel will be advised by a UT System OGC attorney, who may advise the panel jointly with an institution attorney.
(b) Notice to Former Faculty Member of Hearing Panel.
The president shall notify the former faculty member in writing of the names of the Panel Chair and all other faculty members selected for the Hearing Panel. The former faculty member shall also be notified of the date, time, and place for the hearing. The written notifications will be made at least 5 business days prior to the hearing.
If the former faculty member is not satisfied with the fairness or objectivity of any member or members of the Hearing Panel, the former faculty member may submit a written challenge to the Panel Chair regarding the alleged lack of fairness or objectivity no later than 3 business days prior to the date for the hearing. The former faculty member will have no right to disqualify any member or members from serving on the Hearing Panel. If any challenged member should voluntarily disqualify their self, the president shall appoint either an alternate or a substitute member of the panel from the Standing Pool described in Section 3(a). If a new member is appointed, at least one of the three Panel members must be from the Faculty-Selected Pool.
(c) Hearing Procedures.
(1) Burden to Prove Sufficient Cause.
The institution has the burden to prove sufficient cause for summary dismissal by the greater weight of the credible evidence.
(2) Parties and Representatives.
A representative of the institution (Institution Representative) will appear before the Hearing Panel to present charge(s) against the former faculty member. The institution is entitled to be represented by an administrator, an attorney from the institution, and/or an attorney from UT Systems OGC.
The former faculty member has a right to appear at the hearing and be represented by an Advisor or Advisors (no more than two) retained by the former faculty member. If the faculty member refuses to appear as requested by the panel, the panel may proceed with the hearing and make findings and recommendations.
(3) Oral and Written Evidence.
The Panel Chair shall have the discretion to determine the length of the hearing and the form and scope of examination during the hearing. The Panel Chair shall preside over the hearing and ensure the order of presentation as well as rule on evidentiary matters.
The Institution Representative and former faculty member, or their attorneys or Advisors, shall have the right to appear before the Hearing Panel to present oral and written evidence in support or in defense of the charge(s) against the former faculty member.
Each party has the right to confront and cross-examine the other party’s witnesses.
The former faculty member has the right to testify but may not be required to do so. If the former faculty member chooses to testify, the Institution Representative, or their attorney, has the right to cross-examine the former faculty member.
(4) Closed Hearing
The hearing shall be closed.
(5) Exchanging Documents
The Panel Chair shall set a reasonable time prior to the hearing for the parties to exchange exhibits and witness lists. The faculty member challenging the proposed termination shall be afforded the opportunity to obtain relevant evidence within the control of the institution, except for evidence that is confidential or exempted from disclosure by law.
(6) Record of Proceeding.
A stenographic or electronic recording of the proceedings shall be made, and a copy of the record shall be made available to the former faculty member and the president.
(d) Hearing Panel Findings and Recommendations.
(1) Findings:
(i) The Hearing Panel, by a majority of its total membership, shall make written findings on the material facts and shall make a recommendation whether to uphold the summary dismissal or reinstate the former faculty member’s appointment.
(ii) Where there has been a finding of sexual misconduct or research misconduct (i.e., fabrication, falsification, plagiarism) through an investigation conducted in accordance with institution policy, the facts of the finding shall be accepted by the Hearing Panel. The Hearing Panel, by a majority of its total membership, shall provide a written recommendation as to the reinstatement or continued dismissal of the former faculty member’s appointment based on the provided factual findings.
(2) The Hearing Panel, by a majority of its total membership, may make any supplementary suggestions it deems proper concerning disposition of the case.
(3) The Panel Chair shall deliver the majority’s written findings, recommendations, and any supplementary suggestions to the president, along with a copy to the former faculty member, within 10 business days after the hearing. If additional time is required, the Hearing Panel must request an extension from the president. If minority findings, recommendations, or suggestions are made, they shall also be delivered to the president and the faculty member.
(4) The Panel Chair shall also deliver the original transcript or electronic recording of the testimony and the exhibits to the president.
Sec. 4. President’s Decision.
Within 10 business days after receipt of the Hearing Panel’s findings and recommendations, the president shall make one of the following decisions based solely on the evidence in the hearing record and submit a written report of that decision to the former faculty member:
(a) The president may reinstate the former faculty member, with or without sanctions. If the president reinstates the faculty member, the president has discretion to determine whether to award back pay and in what amount, depending on the circumstances. This is a final decision and may not be appealed.
(b) The president may uphold a summary dismissal if the president determines that the greater weight of the credible evidence establishes serious misconduct for summary dismissal. This is a final decision and may not be appealed.
(c) If the president’s decision to impose summary dismissal is not the same as the majority recommendation of the Hearing Panel, the president shall forward the findings and recommendations of the hearing panel, the original transcript or electronic recording of the testimony, and the exhibits to the Chancellor for their review, along with the president’s report. The president’s report shall state the reasons for the decision and shall submit it to the Chancellor for review.
Sec. 5. Chancellor Review and Decision.
The Chancellor may uphold summary dismissal or return the matter to the President for further action. The Chancellor’s decision is final.
