4.4 Administrative Procedures
The Office of Research (OR) (http://www.kennesaw.edu/ogc/), an organizational unit under Academic Affairs, is the service and support office for external funding activities. This office provides services to support faculty throughout the proposal and grant process. The OR is responsible for all pre-award and post-award functions and provides a full array of services such as identification of funding sources, interpretation of guidelines, project/program development, technical writing and editing, budget development, proposal submission, award and contract negotiation, technical reporting, and project accounting and billing. The earlier the OR is informed about an upcoming submission, the more comprehensive these services can be. All proposals for external grant or contract funding must be routed through the OR and should be forwarded to the OR at least five working days prior to the submission date. The proposal must be accompanied by a Proposal Routing Form (PRF) which is available online at http://www.kennesaw.edu/ogc/preaward_toolkit/forms.htm. The PRF must be signed by the project director, department chair, and dean; other signatures may be required, if applicable. Prior to submission, the OR will review the proposal for compliance with all federal, state, and University regulations; obtain the final signatures on the PRF and proposal (if applicable); and complete the submission process.
Once a grant or contract has been awarded to the University, the OR negotiates and finalizes the terms and conditions of the award with the sponsor. The OR works closely with faculty in the fiscal management of grants and contracts awarded to the University. Once an award has been finalized, the staff contacts the project director and sets up a meeting to go over the award conditions. The OR is responsible for insuring that the business interests of the University are protected and that the University complies with award provisions. The staff maintains auditable records in support of direct and facilities and administrative charges to contracts and grants and prepares and files fiscal reports required by the sponsor.
A few reminders:
- Kennesaw State University is the legal applicant for all proposals submitted by faculty.
- Funds and resources of the University cannot be obligated without the required approvals explained above.
- The Vice President for Operations (or his designee) is the official authorized representative for signing all contracts.
- Line-item budgets that include facilities and administrative costs (indirect costs) must accompany all proposals and awards; contact OR for assistance.
From time to time, students may feel that they have legitimate complaints against a faculty member. It is important that they and the accused faculty member have a common understanding of how such complaints may be resolved. To alert students, faculty, and administration to channels available for complaints, the following procedure is presented. This procedure is not applicable to cases involving discrimination, sexual harassment, or violation of stated grading policy. In those instances, the established KSU procedures (see KSU undergraduate catalog) should be followed.
It is the responsibility of the student to bring his/her concerns or complaints for resolution.
Complaints against a faculty member should be resolved at the lowest level possible. When a student has a complaint, s/he should follow the procedures below in the order stated. Attempts to circumvent the procedure will be redirected to the appropriate level of resolution. For example, the president, Provost and vice president, or dean will refer grievants to the faculty member or to the department chair as the first level of resolution.
Whenever a student has a complaint against a faculty member, s/he should first talk with the faculty member and attempt to reach a solution.
If the student has attempted to resolve the complaint with the faculty member and fails to reach a resolution or if s/he feels uncomfortable discussing his/her problem with the faculty member because of the highly sensitive nature of the complaint, s/he may bring the complaint to the department chair.
If the issue is not resolved at the level of the department chair, the student may direct his/her complaint, in writing, to the dean of the college.
If the issue is not resolved at the level of the dean, the student may direct his/her complaint, in writing, to the Provost and vice president for academic affairs.
If the issue is not resolved at the level of the Provost and vice president, the student may direct his/her complaint, in writing, to the president of the University. The president’s decision is final as far as institutional grievance procedures are concerned.
Just as students may file a written appeal of a decision to the next level, faculty may also appeal a decision, in writing, to the next level of review. The faculty member will receive copies of any written documents produced during the complaint resolution (at any level) and will be given the opportunity to respond to each document. The faculty member will be informed at any point at which written documents concerning the complaint are placed into his/her personnel file and will be allowed to respond, in writing.
Section I - Introduction
Kennesaw State University is committed to the prompt and fair resolution of the concerns of administrative and teaching faculty. Kennesaw State University does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, or veteran status in its recruitment, employment, practices, programs, or activities.
The Faculty Conflict Resolution Procedures described below have been formulated to ensure fairness and consistency in the University’s relations with its administrative and teaching faculty. No person’s status with Kennesaw State University will be adversely affected in any way as a result of using these procedures. Retaliatory actions taken against a person using these procedures will not be tolerated.
I-B. Purpose of Faculty Conflict Resolution Procedures
The purpose of the University Faculty Conflict Resolution Procedures is to assure that there are venues where complaints may be heard and resolved at the lowest level possible. The procedures in this document allow for an immediate attempt to resolve all types of conflicts informally at the level where they occur. In addition, these policies also provide for an administrative review at the department, division, college, and University level when requested.
All faculty members are strongly encouraged to work through conflicts informally beginning with the person with whom they have differences. If a faculty member is not able to resolve an issue he/she is strongly encouraged to meet with the Ombuds as soon as possible for assistance in seeking an informal resolution. All faculty are required to utilize the Ombuds in an attempt to resolve any complaint(s) with the respondent before initiating a formal complaint. The University System Consortium on Negotiation and Conflict Resolution (CNCR) is also available for use in this process.
I-C. General Information
These procedures assure that any faculty member within the University community who has a complaint will have access to an internal process that provides elemental fairness to all Parties involved and that has as its objective the resolution of the conflict.
These procedures are not intended to discourage faculty from attempting to resolve a conflict themselves through discussion with the involved parties. These procedures should not be interpreted as a means to eliminate or weaken first-level supervisory or administrative roles of individuals or to prevent them from attempting immediate and impartial resolution of conflicts that develop within their areas of responsibility. Nothing in these procedures should be interpreted as providing a forum for an institutional-level hearing before the Kennesaw State University Faculty Grievance Panel on matters involving the exercise of the legitimate discretionary authority of administrators or supervisors, except where it is alleged that a) some unlawful discriminatory factor has influenced the exercise of such authority, or b) actions have been taken in an arbitrary manner, or c) academic freedom, as defined by the American Association of University Professors, has been violated.
These procedures do not in any way restrict the right of aggrieved Parties to seek resolution of their grievances, either through the courts, or through agencies of the State or Federal government within limits imposed by the concurrent jurisdiction of the University System of Georgia Board of Regents and other agencies of the State of Georgia. However, a formal grievance hearing is not available once a formal complaint has been filed with a governmental agency or if legal action has been initiated dealing with the same complaint.
The formal hearing procedures (Section IV) will be used only after the aggrieved party has consulted with the Ombuds and has exhausted the administrative review procedures (Section III-C) in attempting to resolve a complaint.
I-D. Timeframe for Filing a Complaint in Preparation for a Formal Grievance Hearing
A formal complaint must be filed within six (6) months of the occurrence of a grievable action or the last occurrence of a pattern of grievable actions.
Arbitrary: for the purposes of these procedures, actions and decisions can be considered
- decisions or actions result from a failure to comply with established policies and/or procedures as adopted by a department, division, college, the University, or the Board of Regents of the University System and/or
- no rational connection between the evidence and the actions and/or decisions can be found. Complaint: a complaint is any problem or issue that needs to be resolved between two Parties. Complaint Form: see Section III.C.
Conflict Resolution File: a Conflict Resolution File contains all written documentation associated with the complaint or grievance.
CNCR: Consortium on Negotiation and Conflict Resolution provides external mediators throughout the University System of Georgia on request.
Faculty: includes any member of the administrative or teaching faculty as defined in Section 1.1 of the Faculty Handbook.
Complainant: a faculty member who has a complaint or grievance.
Grievance: a complaint that has not been resolved through informal means or alternative dispute resolution and has been judged worthy of a grievance hearing by the Grievance Oversight Committee.
Grievance Oversight Committee: a Standing University Committee that determines whether a complaint warrants a grievance hearing, according to the criteria described in Section II. The committee is also responsible for proposing changes in these policies and procedures.
Grievance Panel: five (5) individuals selected from the Grievance Pool (Appendix II) for the purpose of hearing the grievance presented.
Grievance Pool: a pool of administrative and teaching faculty eligible to serve on grievance panel.
Ombuds: provide facilitation and mediation services to members of the University community in order to resolve disputes.
Parties: refers to the Complainant and the Respondent(s).
President: refers to the President of Kennesaw State University.
Petition for grievance hearing: see Section IV-A, step 1.
Resolved: a complaint or grievance is considered resolved by KSU when both the Complainant and the Respondent(s) agree to a particular solution or when a final decision is rendered by the President or by the Board of Regents in those cases that are appealed.
Respondent(s): individual(s) against whom a complaint is brought.
Review Administrator: person who has immediate responsibility for the respondent and to whom the completed Complaint Form is first submitted.
Section II - Grievable and Non-Grievable Actions
II-A. Grievable Actions
The following complaints/grievances are appropriate for review using the Faculty Conflict Resolution Procedures:
- Complaints/grievances of alleged discrimination under that portion of the following acts that prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, gender or sexual orientation1:
- Executive Order 11246/Revised Order No. 4;
- Titles VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended;
- Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972;
- Equal Pay Act of 1963 (prohibits discrimination based on gender with regard to wages when jobs require substantially equal skill, effort and responsibility and are performed under similar working conditions within the same establishment);
- Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (prohibits discrimination based on age with respect to individuals who are at least 40 years of age);
- Sections 503 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (prohibits discrimination based on disabilities);
- Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 (protects the rights of individuals providing military service in terms of re-employment rights, retention in employment, and entitlement of other benefits of employment, which would otherwise accrue, to any other faculty member);
- Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (prohibits discrimination against a qualified individual with a disability who can perform the essential functions of a job, with or without accommodation);
- Other laws relative to illegal discrimination that may be appropriate.
(See the appropriate resource officials, listed in Section III, for more detailed, current information).
1 Although sexual orientation is not a class protected by law, University policy also precludes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Complaints/grievances by administrative and teaching faculty administrative and teaching faculty alleging arbitrary actions/decisions dealing with:
- the implementation of procedural and policy matters related to the following:
- performance requirements
- performance assessment
- reassignment or suspension (with or without pay);
- the denial of access to department, division, college or university resources; and/or
- Persistent and recurrent patterns of actions that indicate alleged arbitrary assignment of duties and scheduling;
Complaints/grievances alleging abridgment of academic freedom (as defined by the American Association of University Professors).
II-B. Non-Grievable Actions
Except when such decisions are alleged to be unlawful discrimination or the arbitrary conduct or infringement of academic freedom, the actions/decisions based on the following are considered to be non-grievable and are not subject to the procedures outlined in Sections III and IV below.
- The legitimate, non-arbitrary exercise of judgment by supervisors in keeping with University policies and procedures;
- Non-renewal of a contract of a non-tenured faculty member;
- Decisions based on the University System of Georgia Board of Regents Policy concerning Illicit Drugs. (Business Procedures Manual, Volume 3A Revised, Personnel Policies and Procedures, Page 11-A and Page 12);
- Tenure and Promotion Decisions that have been upheld by appropriate application of approved T&P policies and procedures;
- Dismissal for cause of tenured faculty members in accordance with Board of Regents Policy 8.3.9.
Section III — Informal and Administrative Review Procedures
III-A. Role of Resource Officials
Administrative and teaching faculty must utilize the steps outlined below. If the faculty member is unable to resolve the complaint by working with the person involved, he/she should consult with the identified Resource Officials in an attempt to resolve a complaint. A Resource Official is a University employee or external mediator who is available to assist the Complainant. The Resource Officials who handle various types of complaints are listed in the table below.
TYPE OF GRIEVANCE
Administrative and teaching faculty alleging discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, disability or veteran status
Director of EEO and Diversity Programs
Any teaching faculty member with a complaint/grievance
Administrative and teaching faculty alleging failure by the institution to provide access to facilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
Director of Plant Operations
Administrative faculty alleging failure by the institution to provide non-facility accommodations for a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
Director of Human Resources
Teaching faculty alleging failure by the institution to provide non-facility accommodations for a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs
Any administrative or teaching faculty member with complaint/grievance that cannot be resolved on campus
University System Consortium on any Negotiation and Conflict Resolution (CNCR)
All faculty are strongly encouraged to work through conflicts informally beginning with the person with whom they have differences. If a faculty member is not able to resolve an issue he/she is strongly encouraged to meet with the Ombuds as soon as possible for assistance in seeking an informal resolution. All faculty are required to utilize the Ombuds in an attempt to resolve any complaint(s) with the respondent before initiating a formal complaint. The University System Consortium on Negotiation and Conflict Resolution (CNCR) is also available for use in this process.
III-B. How to Resolve a Complaint - Informal Process
The initial step in this Conflict Resolution Procedure is for the faculty member to attempt to resolve the matter with the Respondent(s). If the Respondent is the faculty member’s first line supervisor or some other person that the faculty member does not wish to approach directly, the faculty may talk with the appropriate resource official (as described in Section III-A above).
If initial discussions do not serve to resolve the complaint, the Complainant must bring the matter to the Faculty Ombuds before formal procedures are initiated. The Ombuds, consistent with the authority entrusted to the office, will assist the Parties in seeking a fair resolution of the matter through facilitation and/or mediation. If no means of resolution can be found, the complainant may initiate an Administrative Review of the complaint.
III-C. How to Resolve a Complaint - Administrative Review Procedures
Complaints that are not resolved informally may be submitted by the Complainant to the individual who has immediate administrative responsibility for the Respondent(s) for review and possible resolution. At this time:
1.1 The Complainant must submit a completed Complaint Form to the individual who has administrative responsibility for the Respondent(s) (herein after referred to as the “review administrator”). The Complainant must also send a copy of the form to the Respondent(s). The Complaint form is available from the Center for Conflict Management and includes the following:
- the name of Complainant,
- the name(s) of the Respondent(s),
- a description of the nature and effect of the alleged actions/decisions that have resulted in the complaint,
- substantive evidence supporting the complaint,
- a statement of the desired outcome
- Signature of Complainant and date.
1.2 Within ten (10) working days of receipt of the completed Complaint Form, the review administrator will create a Conflict Resolution File and notify the Respondent(s) and the Complainant that a complaint form has been received.
1.3 Within ten (10) working days of notification, the Respondent(s) must provide a written response to the review administrator and send a copy to the Complainant;
1.4 Upon receipt of the written response, the review administrator will place it in the Conflict Resolution File and notify the Complainant that a response has been received.
1.5 Within 10 working days of receiving a response from the respondent(s), the review administrator will:
- review the Conflict Resolution File,
- meet with both Parties to develop an understanding of their views,
- consult with the appropriate Resource Official(s), as needed, for clarification of any policies or procedures
- review appropriate written policies and procedures,
- render a written decision to the Complainant and
- provide a copy of the decision to the Respondent(s) and the Conflict Resolution File.
2.1 Upon receipt of the review administrator’s written decision, either party may appeal that decision. Appeals should be made in writing and will be added to the Conflict Resolution File. Appeals are allowed at each Administrative level up to the Appropriate Vice President or Chief Informational Officer. If the decision is appealed, the review administrator will forward the complete Conflict Resolution File to the next person in the chain of responsibility within 5 working days.
2.2 Within 10 working days, the next review administrator will:
- review the Conflict Resolution File,
- meet with both Parties to develop an understanding of their views,
- consult with the appropriate Resource Official(s), if necessary
- review appropriate written policies and procedures, and
- render a written decision to the Complainant and provide a copy of the decision to each Respondent and the Conflict Resolution File.
If the complaint advances to the appropriate Vice President or Chief Informational Officer and the Review Administrator is unable to resolve the complaint, the Complainant may request a formal hearing before a Faculty Grievance Panel (Section IV).
The completed Conflict Resolution File will be retained as a case file in the Center for Conflict Management.
Section IV—Formal Hearing Procedures
If a conflict is not resolved through the Administrative Review Procedures outlined in Section III, the Complainant may petition for a formal hearing. The Grievance Oversight Committee will make the decision regarding whether a specific complaint is grievable. The Complainant may request a formal hearing by submitting a Petition for Grievance Hearing (forms can be obtained from the Center for Conflict Management). The Complainant may only petition once per grievance for a formal hearing.
IV-A. Filing a Formal Complaint
The Complainant submits a copy of the Complaint Form and a completed Petition for a Hearing to the Chair of Grievance Oversight Committee. The Petition for grievance hearing form will include:
- Name of Complainant
- Name(s) of the Respondent(s)
- Request for specific representation on the hearing panel from protected classes (e.g., Gender, African-American, Hispanic, Native American, Disabled, Veteran etc. see Section II above)
- Signature of Complainant and date.
The Chair of the Grievance Oversight Committee will schedule a confidential meeting of the Grievance Oversight Committee within ten (10) working days of receipt of the Petition for a Grievance Hearing.
The Complainant and respondent will be invited to meet with the Grievance Oversight Committee to encourage an informal resolution of the complaint. The oversight committee meetings will be closed proceedings.
If no informal resolution is effected, then the committee will determine whether the conflict is grievable using the information in the Conflict Resolution File and the criteria outlined in Section II.
- The full committee of 5 members (or their respective alternates) must participate in the discussion and must vote.
- No committee member who is directly involved in the conflict may participate in the Grievance Oversight Committee discussions. Therefore the Dean of the complainant’s College must not participate. Faculty members or Chairs from the complainant’s college must recuse themselves if there is an actual or perceived conflict of interest. Alternate committee members will be available to serve for principal committee members who are unable to participate.
- All votes of the committee will be cast by secret, written ballot. The recommendation of the Grievance Oversight Committee must be based on a majority vote.
The committee will provide all parties with a written copy of their decision within 5 working days after the decision is made and decision of the committee will be added to the Conflict Resolution File.
If the committee determines that the issue is not grievable, the complainant may again seek mediation of the conflict with the help of the Ombuds. If the committee decides that the issue is grievable, then the complainant will be offered a formal hearing before a Faculty Grievance Panel (Section IV-B).
IV-B. Outline of Activities for a Formal Hearing Before a Grievance Panel
(See Section IV and Appendix I for detailed procedures)
Within ten (10) working days of a recommendation by the Grievance Oversight Committee, the Chair of Grievance Oversight Committee will meet with both the Complainant and the Respondent(s) to select a Grievance Panel.
An initial organizational meeting of the Grievance Panel with both the Complainant and Respondent(s) present, will be called within ten (10) working days from the date of selection of the Grievance Panel.
A formal Grievance Hearing takes place before the Grievance Panel.
The Grievance Panel submits written recommendation(s) to the President.
The President considers the recommendation(s) of the Grievance Panel and renders a decision within 10 working days .
Under policies of the University System of Georgia, Presidential decisions may be appealed to the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia within twenty (20) working days of receipt of written notification from the President (The Policy Manual, Article IX, Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia).
IV-C. Formal Hearing Procedures
Formation of a Grievance Panel
A Grievance Panel will consist of five (5) individuals selected from the Grievance Pool (Appendix I) for the purpose of hearing the grievance presented. Steps in the selection of a Grievance Panel are outlined below:
- Within ten (10) working days of a recommendation by the Grievance Oversight Committee, the Chair of Grievance Oversight Committee will meet with both the Complainant and the Respondent(s) to select a Grievance Panel. The names of all eligible administrative and teaching faculty will be placed in the appropriate pool (see Appendix I).
- From the appropriate pool(s) a total of five (5) potential Grievance Panel members will be selected as follows:
- Four (4) names will be randomly drawn from the pool (administrative or teaching faculty) representing the peer group of the Complainant. Of the four (4) individual selected, two (2) can be randomly chosen from one of the protected categories if the Complainant so desires and if there are members of the protected class available. The remaining two (2) will be selected from the Complainant pool at large. (Individuals with teaching faculty status but who are assigned administrative duties more than one-half time may identify their pool as either administrative or teaching faculty.)
- Three (3) names will be randomly drawn from the pool representing the peer group of the Respondent.
- Both the Complainant and Respondent(s) must each strike one (1) of the randomly selected Grievance Panel members bringing the total number of Grievance panel members to five (5). Whether the Complainant or Respondent(s) makes the first strike will be determined by the flip of a coin.
As soon as the composition of the Grievance Panel is determined, the Chair of Grievance Oversight Committee will specify a time and place for the organizational meeting of the Grievance Panel. Notice of the hearing will be made in writing at least ten (10) working days prior to the organizational meeting. This notice will be sent to the Complainant, Respondent(s) and Grievance Panel members.
The Chair of Grievance Oversight Committee will proceed to make all arrangements for a formal hearing before a Grievance Panel and assure that all materials submitted are available to the Complainant, the Respondent(s) and Grievance Panel members in advance of the formal hearing. The initial organizational meeting of the Grievance Panel will be within ten (10) working days from the date of selection of the Grievance Panel. Upon convening the Grievance Panel, and in the presence of both the Complainant and the Respondent(s), the Chair of Grievance Oversight Committee will give a brief charge to the Grievance Panel, specifying the allegations and summarizing the University policy. The Grievance Panel will elect a Chair by majority vote. The meeting will then be turned over to the Grievance Panel Chair who will preside over all the meetings of the Grievance Panel until the review is completed. The Chair of Grievance Oversight Committee will remain available to respond to procedural questions but will not be present during the hearing.
Conduct of the Hearing
- The hearing will be closed because of the confidential nature of many of the issues raised.
- During the proceedings, both Parties will be permitted to have a personal advisor in attendance. Personal advisors must be chosen from current KSU employees. The Ombuds and principals in the grievance may not serve as the personal advisor to either party in the grievance proceeding. With the approval of the Grievance Panel Chair, the personal advisor may be called upon to question witnesses. During the hearing the Parties will be given reasonable time to consult with their advisors.
- Each party will be permitted to have one observer in addition to the personal advisor. The observer will not be allowed to participate in the proceeding. Observers must be chosen from current KSU employees.
- An audio tape recording or complete transcript of the proceedings will be kept and made available, upon request, to both Parties. Tapes and records of the hearings will be deemed confidential but may be subject to disclosure under the Georgia Open Records Act. These records will be stored in the Center for Conflict Management.
- The Grievance Panel may grant breaks to enable either party to investigate evidence if a valid claim of surprise is made or, if in the opinion of the Grievance Panel, an interruption in the proceedings would be desirable.
- Both Parties will be given an opportunity to obtain necessary witnesses, documentation or other evidence. Witnesses will be admitted to the hearing only when their personal participation is required.
- Both Parties will have the right to question all witnesses. When the witness cannot appear and the Grievance Panel determines that the interests of fairness require the admission of his/her statement, the Grievance Panel may, by affidavit, record the sworn testimony of the witness. The Grievance Panel will identify the witness, disclose his/her statement, and if possible, provide for follow-up questions to which the witness may respond.
- The Grievance Panel will not be bound by formal rules of legal evidence. However, the Panel may admit any evidence it deems of value.
- The findings and the decision of the Grievance Panel will be based solely on the record of the hearing.
- There will be no public statements by any persons involved in the hearing until the grievance has been resolved.
- Grievance Panel members must be present for hearings and voting. Any recommendation of the Grievance Panel must be based on a majority vote. All votes will be cast by secret, written ballot. The precise Grievance Panel vote will be reported to the President and both Parties.
- The Grievance Panel Chair will submit the Panel recommendation(s) to the President with copies to both Parties.
The President will review the Grievance Panel recommendation(s) and render a written decision for the institution within ten (10) working days. If the President does not agree with the recommendation, he/she may state the reasons, in writing, to the Grievance Panel before rendering a final decision. The President will send a written decision by certified mail to the Complainant and Respondent(s). A copy of the written decision will be added to the Conflict Resolution File. The Complainant or Respondent may appeal the President’s decision to the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia within twenty (20) working days of receipt of the President’s decision.
Section V — Amendment Process
These Conflict Resolution Procedures can be altered and/or amended only if presented in writing to the University Senates and University Council and approved by an affirmative vote of the majority of the Senate. The Grievance Oversight Committee has the responsibility of reviewing these procedures and recommending appropriate changes. No amendment or alteration will be in effect until it has been approved by the President.
APPENDIX I — FORMATION OF GRIEVANCE POOLS
A grievance hearing will be heard by a five (5)-member grievance panel to be selected from the appropriate Grievance Pools. Membership of the Grievance Pools will be determined as follows:
A) Grievance Pool
The Grievance Pool will consist of all eligible administrative and teaching faculty. Any regular, full-time administrative or teaching faculty member at Kennesaw State University (except as noted below) is eligible for inclusion in the Administrative Faculty Grievance Pool or Teaching Faculty Grievance Pool, respectively. These pools will be based on the following categories:
- Administrative Faculty: Persons who are identified as members of the President’s Cabinet, Deans, Directors, Department Heads or other individuals with administrative faculty-status.
- Teaching Faculty: Teaching faculty holding non-administrative positions.
B) Employees Not Eligible for Inclusion in a Grievance Pool.
The following people are not eligible for inclusion in a Grievance Pool and therefore cannot serve on a Grievance Panel:
- The Chief Informational Officer, Vice Presidents and President will not be included in the Grievance Pool because these Offices may be involved at other levels in resolving a campus grievance.
- The Ombuds, EEO and ADA officers as Resource Officials.
- Principals involved in the grievance including any administrative faculty who have been in the line of appeal.
- Any faculty member who may be called to testify on behalf of the Complainant or Respondent(s).
- Any administrative or teaching faculty member currently serving on another Grievance Panel (i.e., a person may serve on only one panel at a time).
- Current members of the Grievance Oversight Committee
Any questions regarding a person’s eligibility for membership on the Grievance Panel will be resolved by the Chair of Grievance Oversight Committee. Individuals selected as members of the Grievance Panel who believe their impartiality or ability to render an objective judgment might be in question may ask to be excused from service. In addition, persons may be excused from service because of illness, scheduled travel, or other acceptable circumstances that in the sole discretion of the Chair of Grievance Oversight Committee would delay completion of the process.