Skip to Main Content

The University of Tennessee

Office of the Provost

Frequently Used Tools:




Chapter 5: Faculty Rights of Appeal

5.1 Introduction

Faculty members are entitled to fair, impartial, and honest resolutions of problems that may arise in relation to employment. Accordingly, the following sections outline principles and procedures designed to promote fair resolutions within a reasonable time period. This chapter addresses formal appeals in the sections on general appeals and special appeals. In addition, informal grievances may be addressed through the ombudspersons. A faculty member must initiate a formal appeal under the general and special procedures outlined in this chapter within the time specified in this handbook, board or university policy, or, at a maximum, one year of the date of the employment decision in question.

The rights of appeal described in this chapter apply to all tenured, tenure-track, and non-tenure-track faculty.(1) Faculty members are encouraged to bring complaints or grievances to the lowest administrative level at which an adverse recommendation, decision, or action was taken. Every effort should be made to expeditiously resolve such matters informally, through conversation with the department head, director, or dean, before submitting a formal appeal. In all cases, faculty members are entitled to notice regarding grounds on which administrative action has been taken.

(1) For procedures for terminating tenured faculty for adequate cause or tenure-track faculty before the end of the stipulated time of appointment, see Chapter 3 and the board’s policy.

5.1.1 General Appeals

Faculty members with grievances have three options for pursuing appeals, depending on the subject matter(s) of their appeal. Prior to initiating an appeal, they may contact the ombudsperson for consultation or informal mediation (Section 5.2). If those efforts fail, they may initiate an appeal through the administrative channel (section 5.3), request an appeal through the Faculty Senate Faculty Appeals Committee (section 5.4), or bring an appeal through the Tennessee Uniform Administrative Procedures Act (TUAPA) for certain matters (section 5.5). Each of these options is described in the following sections.

The appeals procedures through administrative channels and the faculty senate appeals committee are formal but not judicial processes. Faculty members have a right to consult an attorney, but attorneys are not to participate when following these appeal channels. Faculty members may have attorney representation and participation for hearings under the TUAPA; for conflicts arising between faculty and students, Hilltopics should be consulted.

5.1.2 Special Appeals

Special procedures are provided for cases involving (1) allegations of discrimination or harassment due to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, handicap, or veteran status, (2) termination or suspension of a tenure-track faculty member for adequate cause prior to the expiration of his or her term of appointment or without the minimum advance notice specified for non-reappointment of the tenure track faculty (see Chapter 3), or (3) allegations that the non-renewal of appointment of a tenure track faculty member constitutes a violation of academic freedom.

Faculty members’ complaints of sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination (i.e. allegations of discrimination on the basis of race, sex, national origin, religion, age, handicap, or veteran status) are brought forward and investigated in accord with procedures described in the UTK Affirmative Action Plan. Copies of the plan are available in the department or college office and may be obtained from the director of the campus Office of Equity and Diversity (OED). Personnel Policies regarding Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action are posted through the University of Tennessee Office of Human Resources at: http://admin.tennessee.edu/hr/policies/220pol.html.

A tenure-track faculty member may be suspended or dismissed before the end of the stipulated term of appointment or without the minimum advanced notice specified for termination of tenure-track faculty members only with the approval of the chancellor or vice president and only for adequate cause (see section 3.11.7). The tenure-track faculty member may appeal this decision through the Faculty Senate Appeals Committee or may elect a TUAPA hearing. The university has the burden of proof. The faculty member must notify the chancellor or vice president of his or her intent to appeal within 10 days of receipt of notice of the university’s decision to dismiss or suspend.

Allegations that non-renewal of a tenure-track faculty member constituted a violation of academic freedom may be appealed through these administrative channels:

  1. The chancellor or vice president must ask the Faculty Senate Appeals Committee to review the matter solely to determine whether the notice of non-renewal establishes a violation of academic freedom
  2. The faculty member has the burden of proof that non-renewal was a violation of academic freedom
  3. The faculty member may appear before the faculty senate appeals committee to present evidence and argument on his or her behalf
  4. The committee should ask the department head, dean, and other appropriate witnesses to present evidence # The chancellor will decide who will present argument for the university
  5. The chancellor will decide who will present argument for the university
  6. The committee, after the hearing and considering the evidence presented, will make a recommendation to the chancellor or vice president, with a copy to the faculty member, within 21 days after the conclusion of its deliberations
  7. The chancellor or vice president will consider the committee’s recommendation and inform the faculty member of his or her decision within 30 days

5.2 Faculty Ombudspersons

Faculty ombudspersons are three distinguished members of the faculty selected by the chief academic officer and the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate. Faculty ombudspersons facilitate informal conflict resolution at the request of faculty members. The ombudspersons serve as consultants for faculty members needing advice to resolve problems and may serve as informal mediators if the faculty member has not started an appeal through the administrative or faculty senate channels described in sections 5.3 and 5.4.

Faculty ombudspersons are advocates neither for the faculty nor the university, but rather supporters of fair practices and mutual respect, fostering probity and timeliness in the administration of campus policies and practices. Their responsibilities do not include grievances initiated by administrators, students, or staff. They are appointed to staggered and renewable three-year terms and receive compensation as described in their appointment letters. The ombudsperson in the third year of appointment serves as lead consultant and coordinator of mediation services.

As consultants, the ombudspersons act as a resource for information on university policies, the faculty member’s rights and responsibilities, and procedures of appeal and due process. They help faculty members decide how best to solve problems early and generally at the lowest levels. If the faculty member has initiated an appeal through the administrative or faculty senate channels under section 5.3 or 5.4, he or she may continue to consult the ombudsperson for a neutral opinion and advice, but the ombudsperson will not actively participate in those appeals. Except as required by law, consultations with faculty ombudspersons shall not be communicated to a third party unless the faculty member gives his or her permission or the faculty member brings an administrative complaint or legal action against the university or another university employee

As informal mediators, faculty ombudspersons serve as mutual communications channels and dispute resolution facilitators. As used in this context, informal mediation is a flexible concept that may involve investigation by the ombudsperson and direct participation in the conflict resolution as well as the more traditional role of facilitating communication and conflict resolution. Their services do not supercede or replace appeals through administrative channels, the Faculty Senate Appeals Committee, or other university grievance or appeals procedures but may be used before those processes are initiated. The ombudspersons are independent of both the faculty member and the administration. If a faculty member requests informal mediation by the ombudspersons, the ombudspersons have sole discretion as to whether a complaint warrants mediation and the manner in which any investigation and mediation is to be conducted. Mediation by the ombudsperson should involve only those employees or others with a need to be involved in either providing information or reaching a resolution. Exceptas required by law, the ombudsperson will not communicate with individuals not involved in the mediation process without the permission of the faculty member or the faculty member brings an administrative complaint or legal action against the university or another university employee.
Faculty ombudspersons do not address matters subject to the special appeals processes described in section 5.1.2, provide legal advice, assist in problems that are unrelated to the university, or represent the faculty member in administrative appeals or faculty senate appeals committee hearings or appeals. The ombudspersons’ roles as advisors and informal mediators are separate from the administrative appeals and faculty senate appeals processes. The ombudspersons do not make binding decisions for the university or overrule administrative decisions. Rather, the ombudspersons make recommendations based upon their understanding of the situation, university policies and procedures, experience, and sense of fairness.

5.3 Appeals through the Administrative Channel

Any faculty member may initiate a written appeal with his or her administrative leader. If resolution of the problem is not achieved, the faculty member has the right to request review at successively higher administrative levels, up to the president (University Bylaws: Article V, Section 7). His or her administrative officer shall inform the faculty member of current appeal procedures to facilitate its submission. Faculty members are entitled to notice regarding the grounds on which administrative action has been taken.

5.4 Appeals through the Faculty Senate Appeals Committee

5.4.1 Jurisdiction of the Faculty Senate Appeals Committee

The function of the Faculty Senate Appeals Committee is to gather evidence and make findings and to make recommendations to the chief academic officer for the disposition of cases within its jurisdiction. The faculty senate appeals committee does not replace the role of faculty and administrators in making employment-related decisions. Instead, it is guided by the aim of maximizing the protection of the principles of academic freedom, due process, and fairness. All matters before the faculty senate appeals committee are kept in strict confidence and subject to state open records laws and other legal requirements.

A faculty member requesting the appeals committee to consider his or her complaint must submit a written statement to the chair of the committee with a copy to the chief academic officer. The appeals committee, in consultation with the chief academic officer, will determine if it has jurisdiction over the complaint. The jurisdiction of the faculty senate appeals committee regarding promotion and tenure includes complaints regarding failure to follow the procedures contained in this handbook and in collegiate and departmental bylaws. The faculty senate appeals committee will not consider matters for which a special appeals procedure is provided. See section 5.1.2.

The appeals committee is comprised of 18 tenured faculty members appointed to staggered three-year terms by the Faculty Senate Committee on Nominations and Appointments with the advice and consent of the Faculty Senate. At least one member of the committee must have legal expertise. The complete procedures for appeals through the faculty senate appeals committee are posted on the faculty senate web site.

Faculty making an appeal are encouraged to consult the faculty ombudsperson before bringing an appeal to the appeals committee. After receiving a request for an appeal review, the appeals committee will take one of four actions:

  1. recommend mediation between the faculty member and the administrator whose action is the source of the faculty member’s complaint by trained mediators, which might include faculty ombudspersons who have not been previously involved in the matter as a consultant or informal mediator
  2. take no action on the grounds that the appeal lacks merit for consideration or lies outside of the scope of the committee
  3. redirect the appeal through the administrative channel, or
  4. initiate a review panel

The chairperson will give written notice of that decision with explanation to the faculty member, the administrator(s) whose decision is being contested, and the chief academic officer.

5.4.2 Process for Appeals

Faculty member(s) have the right to initiate an appeal to the Faculty Senate Appeals Committee within one year of the administrative action that caused the complaint. The appeal must be submitted in writing and include a comprehensive statement of the complaint. After the chair of the appeals committee has consulted with the committee and the chief academic officer and they have determined that a complaint both lies within the jurisdiction of the committee and merits consideration, the committee chair will establish arrangements necessary to ensure a complete review of the complaint by a review panel.

Alternatively, when a faculty member initiated a complaint through the administrative process with a department head (director) and/or dean that has not been resolved and the faculty member remains unsatisfied after a final decision of the dean, he or she may appeal to the faculty senate appeals committee. The appeal must be submitted in writing and include a comprehensive statement of the complaint after the faculty member has been given notice of the dean’s decision and of his or her right to request consideration of the faculty senate appeals committee. The appeal will then be reviewed by the chair of the faculty senate appeals committee in consultation with the committee and the chief academic officer to determine that the complaint both lies within the jurisdiction of the committee and merits consideration. The committee chair will establish arrangements necessary to ensure a complete review of the complaint by a review panel.

The chairperson appoints a panel consisting of no fewer than three members of the committee and designates one of the three as chair of the panel. The chair of the faculty senate appeals committee provides written notification of the appointment of a review panel along with the names of the chair and the members to the faculty member, each administrator whose decision will be reviewed, and the chief academic officer. The written notification also includes a description of review procedures and a copy of the comprehensive statement of the complaint. Any objections to the membership of the review panel or the review procedures shall be made in writing to the chair of the faculty senate appeals committee, whose written decision to sustain or overrule the decision shall be final. If the objection is sustained, the chair will facilitate a resolution so that the review may proceed.

5.4.3 Hearing Results and Recommendations

At the conclusion of the review, the Faculty Senate Appeals Committee shares its findings and recommendations in writing with the faculty member, the administrator(s) involved in the appeal, and the chief academic officer. Before the final decision is made by the chief academic officer, the faculty member or the administrator(s) involved in the appeal may request reconsideration of the complaint on the grounds that the review panel made a clearly erroneous finding of fact or that there has been newly discovered evidence which was previously unavailable. This request must be submitted in writing to the chief academic officer and to the chair of the review panel. The decision of the review panel whether and to what extent to reopen the hearing shall be final. The request for reconsideration must be made within 15 working days of the findings and recommendation of the appeal committee.

If the recommendations of the appeals committee are approved by the chief academic officer, the written final decision will be provided to the faculty member making the appeal, the administrator(s) involved in the appeal, and the appeals committee.

If the recommendations of the appeals committee are not approved by the chief academic officer, the chief academic officer will then meet with the appeals committee to exchange views and determine whether the case can be resolved in a mutually acceptable manner between the chief academic officer and the committee, in which case the committee will re-issue its recommendations to reflect that position. If the chief academic officer and the committee cannot resolve the case in a mutually agreeable manner, the chief academic officer will issue a final written decision which will be provided to the committee, the faculty member, and the administrators involved. The final written decision will include the reasons for not accepting the findings and recommendations of the appeal committee.

The faculty member may appeal the decision of the chief academic officer by notifying the chancellor or vice president in writing within 10 days of receipt of the written notice of the decision of the chief academic officer.
If the committee’s review indicates that principles of due process, shared governance, and/or academic freedom as described in this handbook are not adequately addressed by existing university procedures, the appeals committee may request that the faculty senate appeals committee consider structural or systemic issues apart from the merits of the particular case that brought the issues to light.

5.5 Appeals through the Tennessee Uniform Administrative Procedures Act

A hearing under the Tennessee Uniform Administrative Procedures Act (TUAPA) is available to tenure-track and non-tenure-track faculty members under the following circumstances:

  1. termination of a tenure-track faculty member’s appointment before the stipulated term of appointment or without the minimum advance notice (see Chapter 3) or for allegations of gross misconduct or reprehensible behavior
  2. termination of non-tenure-track faculty member’s appointment before the stipulated term of appointment or for allegations of gross misconduct or reprehensible behavior

Requests for a TUAPA hearing must be brought within 10 days of the employment action that is the subject of the hearing.

5.6 Termination of Tenure-Track and Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Members Before The Stipulated Term of Employment

Termination of tenure-track faculty members before the stipulated term of appointment is under the same procedure as used for revocation of tenure and termination for tenured faculty member. Termination of non-tenure-track faculty members before the stipulated term of appointment is under the procedure in the Personnel Policies and Procedures for Exempt Employees.