Common use of Non-Contractual (JRB) Grievance Clause in Contracts

Non-Contractual (JRB) Grievance. i. If the Faculty member files a non-contractual grievance, the JRB shall rule on procedural matters identified in the 2016 SIUC Employees Handbook and/or the ii. Each panel member must vote to sustain or dismiss the grievance–no abstentions. iii. When a grievance is upheld, the JRB shall make a recommendation regarding relief. The purpose of any relief shall be to remediate the procedural violation(s) and the negative effect(s) of the violation(s) on the grievant. The JRB recommendation(s) related to remedy may include a range of options including, but not limited to, a recommendation that no remedy be awarded because the procedural violation(s) were too trivial to warrant a remedy to a recommendation that promotion and/or tenure be awarded to the grievant. The JRB shall include the reasoning for its recommendation related to the remedy in its report. iv. The Chancellor shall recuse himself or herself from participating in the decision of any grievance involving promotion and/or tenure cases in which s/he has had prior consultation with the Xxxxxxx over the substance or proper disposition of the case, unless the Faculty member and the JRB consent to his/her participation. In such cases where the Chancellor has not recused himself/herself, the Chancellor and the Xxxxxxx shall provide the Judicial Review Board and the Grievant with specific information regarding the nature, content, and scope of their prior consultations in a promotion and/or tenure matter that was grieved before the JRB. v. The Chancellor shall make a decision on a promotion and/or tenure grievance case that is heard by the JRB based upon the JRB’s report, supporting documents, and, in cases where the Chancellor chooses to review the testimony, the tape recording of the hearing. Unless both parties are present, the Chancellor shall not entertain any new information. The Chancellor shall refrain from consulting with either party to the grievance prior to making a decision on the JRB’s recommendation. A decision by a JRB panel shall replace the decision of the Xxxxxxx and Vice Chancellor that is being appealed. The Chancellor shall treat the JRB panel decision in the same manner as she/he treats similar decisions of the Xxxxxxx and Vice Chancellor. Following the submission of the JRB panel’s decision, the Chancellor and the JRB panel may meet in a timely manner in order for the JRB panel to answer questions in clarification of its report. vi. If the Chancellor does not accept a recommendation of the JRB that is favorable to the Faculty member in a grievance concerning a negative promotion and/or tenure decision, the Chancellor shall state the reason(s) for non-acceptance in sufficient detail, based on the JRB’s report, supporting documents, and, in cases where the Chancellor chooses to review the testimony, the tape recording of the hearing, in order to apprise the Faculty member of the basic rationale for such non-acceptance. vii. If a non-contractual grievance is filed under this section, the Grievant/Faculty member shall have no right to appeal the Chancellor’s decision to the Board of Trustees.

Non-Contractual (JRB) Grievance. i. If the Faculty member files a non-contractual grievance, the JRB shall rule on procedural matters identified in the 2016 SIUC Employees Handbook and/or thethe Faculty Association Contract, whichever is pertinent to the grievance. ii. Each panel member must vote to sustain or dismiss the grievance–no abstentions. iii. When a grievance is upheld, the JRB shall make a recommendation regarding relief. The purpose of any relief shall be to remediate the procedural violation(s) and the negative effect(s) of the violation(s) on the grievant. The JRB recommendation(s) related to remedy may include a range of options including, but not limited to, a recommendation that no remedy be awarded because the procedural violation(s) were too trivial to warrant a remedy to a recommendation that promotion and/or tenure be awarded to the grievant. The JRB shall include the reasoning for its recommendation related to the remedy in its report. iv. The Chancellor shall recuse himself or herself from participating in the decision of any grievance involving promotion and/or tenure cases in which s/he has had prior consultation with the Xxxxxxx over the substance or proper disposition of the case, unless the Faculty member and the JRB consent to his/her participation. In such cases where the Chancellor has not recused himself/herself, the Chancellor and the Xxxxxxx shall provide the Judicial Review Board and the Grievant with specific information regarding the nature, content, and scope of their prior consultations in a promotion and/or tenure matter that was grieved before the JRB. v. The Chancellor shall make a decision on a promotion and/or tenure grievance case that is heard by the JRB based upon the JRB’s report, supporting documents, and, in cases where the Chancellor chooses to review the testimony, the tape recording of the hearing. Unless both parties are present, the Chancellor shall not entertain any new information. The Chancellor shall refrain from consulting with either party to the grievance prior to making a decision on the JRB’s recommendation. A decision by a JRB panel shall replace the decision of the Xxxxxxx and Vice Chancellor that is being appealed. The Chancellor shall treat the JRB panel decision in the same manner as she/he treats similar decisions of the Xxxxxxx and Vice Chancellor. Following the submission of the JRB panel’s decision, the Chancellor and the JRB panel may meet in a timely manner in order for the JRB panel to answer questions in clarification of its report. vi. If the Chancellor does not accept a recommendation of the JRB that is favorable to the Faculty member in a grievance concerning a negative promotion and/or tenure decision, the Chancellor shall state the reason(s) for non-acceptance in sufficient detail, based on the JRB’s report, supporting documents, and, in cases where the Chancellor chooses to review the testimony, the tape recording of the hearing, in order to apprise the Faculty member of the basic rationale for such non-acceptance. vii. If a non-contractual grievance is filed under this section, the Grievant/Faculty member shall have no right to appeal the Chancellor’s decision to the Board of Trustees.

Non-Contractual (JRB) Grievance. i. If the Faculty member files a non-contractual grievance, the JRB shall rule on procedural matters identified in the 2016 SIUC Employees Handbook and/or thethe Faculty Association Contract, whichever is pertinent to the grievance. ii. Each panel member must vote to sustain or dismiss the grievance–no abstentions. iii. When a grievance is upheld, the JRB shall make a recommendation regarding relief. The purpose of any relief shall be to remediate the procedural violation(s) and the negative effect(s) of the violation(s) on the grievant. The JRB recommendation(s) related to remedy may include a range of options including, but not limited to, a recommendation that no remedy be awarded because the procedural violation(s) were too trivial to warrant a remedy to a recommendation that promotion and/or tenure be awarded to the grievant. The JRB shall include the reasoning for its recommendation related to the remedy in its report. iv. The Chancellor shall recuse himself or herself themself from participating in the decision of any grievance involving promotion and/or tenure cases in which s/he has they have had prior consultation with the Xxxxxxx over the substance or proper disposition of the case, case unless the Faculty member and the JRB consent to his/her their participation. In such cases where the Chancellor has not recused himself/herselfthemself, the Chancellor and the Xxxxxxx shall provide the Judicial Review Board and the Grievant with specific information regarding the nature, content, and scope of their prior consultations in a promotion and/or tenure matter that was grieved before the JRB. v. The Chancellor shall make a decision on a promotion and/or tenure grievance case that is heard by the JRB based upon the JRB’s report, supporting documents, and, in cases where the Chancellor chooses to review the testimony, the tape recording of the hearing. Unless both parties are present, the Chancellor shall not entertain any new information. The Chancellor shall refrain from consulting with either party to the grievance prior to making a decision on the JRB’s recommendation. A decision by a JRB panel shall replace the decision of the Xxxxxxx and Vice Chancellor that is being appealed. The Chancellor shall treat the JRB panel decision in the same manner as she/he treats they treat similar decisions of the Xxxxxxx and Vice Chancellor. Following the submission of the JRB panel’s decision, the Chancellor and the JRB panel may meet in a timely manner in order for the JRB panel to answer questions in clarification of its report. vi. If the Chancellor does not accept a recommendation of the JRB that is favorable to the Faculty member in a grievance concerning a negative promotion and/or tenure decision, the Chancellor shall state the reason(s) for non-acceptance in sufficient detail, based on the JRB’s report, supporting documents, and, in cases where the Chancellor chooses to review the testimony, the tape recording of the hearing, in order to apprise the Faculty member of the basic rationale for such non-acceptance. vii. If a non-contractual grievance is filed under this section, the Grievant/Faculty member shall have no right to appeal the Chancellor’s decision to the Board of Trustees.