Rule 31008: Termination of a Faculty Member

1.  Title

Termination of a Faculty Member

2.  Rule and Regulation

Sec. 1 Applicability of Rules and Policies.  This Rule addresses the procedures for the involuntary termination for good cause of:

(1)  a tenured faculty member;

(2)  a term-tenure faculty member during the term of appointment as stated in the faculty member’s Memorandum of Appointment; or

(3)  a non-tenured faculty member during the term of appointment as stated in the faculty member’s Memorandum of Appointment.

Depending on the nature of the allegations, an institution may either terminate or summarily dismiss a faculty member. The University of Texas Systemwide Policy 198, Termination of a Faculty Member (UTS 198), defines “good cause,” provides grounds for Summary Dismissal, and includes detailed procedures implementing this Rule. Substantive changes to UTS 198 must comply with state law, including Texas Education Code Section 51.942(c-1), and require approval by the Chancellor, Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Executive Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs, and Vice Chancellor and General Counsel.

Sec. 2  Termination for Good Cause.   Termination by an institution of the employment of a faculty member who has been granted tenure and of all other faculty members before the expiration of the stated period of appointment, except as is otherwise provided in Rule 31007, Section 5, and Texas Education Code Section 51.943, or by resignation or retirement, specified in UTS 198.

Such termination may be made at any time after providing the faculty member with appropriate due process in conformance with federal and state law, this Rule, UTS 198, and applicable institution policy, if any.

Sec. 3  Review of Allegation.   The president of the institution (the president) shall assure that all allegations against a faculty member that involve the potential for termination are reviewed under the direction of the chief academic officer unless another officer is designated by the president. The faculty member who is the subject of the allegations shall be given an opportunity to be interviewed and shall have the right to present a grievance, in person or through a representative, to the chief academic officer on an issue or subject related to the allegations under review. The chief academic officer or another individual designated by the president if the allegations pertain to the chief academic officer shall take the grievance, if any, into consideration prior to making a determination whether the allegations are supported by evidence that justifies the initiation of termination procedures. Upon making that determination, the chief academic officer or other appropriate designee will recommend to the president whether to proceed with charges for termination. Failure to present a grievance to the chief academic officer or other appropriate designee prior to his or her recommendation shall not preclude a faculty member from presenting an issue or subject to the special hearing tribunal in defense of charges for termination that may result from the review. 

Sec. 4  Response to Allegation.   If the president determines that the allegations are supported by evidence that justifies the initiation of termination procedures, the president will meet with the faculty member, explain the allegations and supporting evidence, and give the faculty member a reasonable amount of time, as determined by the president, to respond either orally or in writing.

Sec. 5  Authorization for Summary Dismissal.   The institutional policies and procedures adopted pursuant to this Rule will include a process for the summary dismissal of a tenured faculty member upon a finding that the faculty member committed serious misconduct, as defined by institutional policies, at any time after providing the faculty member with appropriate due process required by state law, including providing the faculty member with written notice of the allegations against the faculty member together with an explanation of the evidence supporting dismissal and an opportunity for the faculty member to respond to the allegations in a hearing with a designated administrator.

The designated administrator must consider the faculty member’s response, must make a written determination of whether the institution will proceed with the summary dismissal, and must promptly provide the faculty member a copy of the written determination. If the decision is in favor of summary dismissal, the written determination must state that clearly and include the effective date of the dismissal and information regarding the faculty member’s opportunity for a post-dismissal appeal. If the decision is against summary dismissal, the written determination must state that clearly.

Following a designated administrator’s written determination to summarily dismiss a faculty member, the former faculty member must be provided with the opportunity for a post-dismissal appeal in accordance with the institution’s policies and procedures.

Institutional policies adopted pursuant to this Rule must be approved by the Chancellor, Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs or Health Affairs, and the Vice Chancellor and General Counsel.

Sec. 6  Hearing Tribunal.   In cases where other offenses are charged, and in all cases where the facts are in dispute, the accused faculty member will be informed in writing of the charges. If the president determines that the nature of the charges and the evidence are such that it is in the best interest of the institution, the accused faculty member may be suspended with pay pending the completion of the hearing and a final decision. A special hearing tribunal of at least three faculty members will hear the charges. The academic rank of each member of the tribunal must be at least equal to that of the accused faculty member. The accused faculty member will be notified of the names of the faculty members selected for the tribunal and of the date, time, and place for the hearing. Such notification shall be made at least eight workdays prior to the hearing. The hearing tribunal members are appointed by the president from a standing panel (pool) of members of the faculty. At least 50% of the panel members from which the hearing tribunal members are appointed shall be selected by a procedure established by the faculty governance organization, or an existing faculty committee with oversight for university-wide faculty committee selection. The president shall appoint the remaining members of the panel. A minimum of one member of a hearing tribunal appointed by a president is to be from among panel members selected by the faculty input, existent faculty committee, or faculty governance procedure. The president may request counsel from the System Administration’s Office of General Counsel to advise the hearing tribunal.

6.1  Right to Cross-examine.   In every such hearing the accused faculty member will have the right to appear in person and by counsel of the accused's selection and to confront and cross-examine witnesses who may appear. If counsel represents the accused faculty member, the institution is entitled to be represented by counsel from System Administration’s Office of General Counsel.

6.2  Right to Testify.   The accused faculty member shall have the right to testify, but may not be required to do so. He or she may introduce in his or her behalf all evidence, written or oral, which may be relevant and material to the charges.

6.3  Record of Proceeding.   A stenographic or electronic record of the proceedings will be taken and filed with the Board of Regents, and such record shall be made accessible to the accused.

6.4  Burden to Prove Good Cause.   A representative of the institution may appear before the hearing tribunal to present witnesses and evidence in support of the charge against such faculty member, and such institutional representatives shall have the right to cross-examine the accused faculty member (if the faculty member testifies) and the witnesses offered in behalf of the faculty member. The institution has the burden to prove good cause for termination by the greater weight of the credible evidence.

6.5  Make-up of Hearing Tribunal.   The hearing tribunal shall not include any accuser of the faculty member. If the accused faculty member is not satisfied with the fairness or objectivity of any member or members of the hearing tribunal, the faculty member may challenge the alleged lack of fairness or objectivity, but any such challenge must be made in writing to the hearing tribunal at least three workdays prior to the date for the hearing. The accused faculty member shall have no right to disqualify any member or members from serving on the tribunal. It shall be up to each challenged member to determine whether he or she can serve with fairness and objectivity in the matter, and if any challenged member should voluntarily disqualify himself or herself, the president shall appoint a substitute member of the tribunal from the panel described in Section 4 of this Rule.

6.6  Findings and Recommendations.   The hearing tribunal, by a majority of the total membership, will make written findings on the material facts and will make a recommendation of the continuance or termination of the accused faculty member. The hearing tribunal, by a majority of its total membership, may make any supplementary suggestions it deems proper concerning the disposal of the case. The original of such findings and the recommendation, with any supplementary suggestions, shall be delivered to the president and a copy to the accused. If minority findings, recommendations, or suggestions are made, they shall be similarly treated. The original transcript of the testimony and the exhibits shall also be forwarded to the president.

6.7  President’s Report and Board of Regents Review.  Within fourteen (14) workdays after receipt of the findings and recommendations of the hearing tribunal, the president shall make one of the following decisions based solely on the evidence of record in the proceedings and report that decision in writing to the accused faculty member:

(a) may recommend termination to the Board of Regents if the president determines that the greater weight of the credible evidence presented to the hearing tribunal establishes good cause for termination. If so, the president shall deliver to the Board of Regents for its review:  the hearing tribunal’s findings and recommendations; the original stenographic transcript of the testimony; the hearing exhibits; and the president’s recommendation. The president shall also deliver a copy of the president’s recommendation to the tenured or term-tenure faculty member. The faculty member may submit a written response, based solely on the record evidence, to the Board of Regents. The faculty member’s written response must be submitted within ten days after receiving the president’s recommendation.

The Board of Regents, by a majority of the total membership, shall approve, reject, or amend the president’s recommendation, or shall recommit the president’s and hearing tribunal’s submissions to the same hearing tribunal for hearing additional evidence and reconsideration. The Board of Regents’ reasons for approval, rejection, or amendment of the president’s recommendation shall be stated in writing and communicated to the tenured or term-tenure faculty member.

(b)  President Review Final for Non-tenured Faculty During Term of Appointment: The president shall adopt, reject, or amend the hearing tribunal’s findings and recommendation, and the president may terminate the non-tenured faculty member or impose a lesser sanction. The president shall provide the decision and reasons in writing to the faculty member. The president’s decision is final and not subject to review by the Board of Regents or grievable under the institution’s grievance policy.

Sec. 7  Reasons for Termination Not Required.   Full-time faculty members who are notified in accordance with Rule 31002, Section 1 of the Regents’ Rules and Regulations, concerning notice of nonrenewal, that they will not be reappointed or who are notified in accordance with Rule 31007, Section 5 and Rule 31002, Sections 1 and 2 that the subsequent academic year will be the terminal year of appointment shall not be entitled to a statement of the reasons upon which the decision for such action is based. Such a decision shall only be subject to review pursuant to the following procedures:

7.1  Grievance.   The affected faculty member may present a grievance, in person or through a representative, to the chief academic officer or another individual designated by the president if the allegations pertain to a chief academic officer on an issue or subject related to the nonrenewal decision. The chief academic officer shall meet with the faculty member. Unless a review by a hearing tribunal is requested and granted, pursuant to Section 7.2 below, the nonrenewal decision shall not be subject to further review.

7.2  Hearing Tribunal to Hear Grievance.   A review by a hearing tribunal shall be granted only in those cases where the affected faculty member submits a written request for review by a hearing tribunal to the president and describes in detail the facts relied upon to prove that the decision was made for reasons that are unlawful under the Constitution or laws of Texas or the United States. If the president determines that the alleged facts, if proven by credible evidence, support a conclusion that the decision was made for unlawful reasons, such allegations shall be heard by a hearing tribunal under the procedures in Section 4 of this Rule as in the case of dismissal for cause, with the following exceptions:

(a) The burden of proof is upon the affected faculty member to establish by the greater weight of the credible evidence that the decision in question was made for reasons that are unlawful under the Constitution or laws of Texas or the United States.

(b) The administration of the institution need not state the reasons for the questioned decision or offer evidence in support thereof unless the affected faculty member presents credible evidence that, if unchallenged, proves the decision was made for unlawful reasons.

(c) The hearing tribunal shall make written findings and recommendations based on the evidence presented at the hearing and shall forward such findings and recommendations with the transcript and exhibits from the hearing to the president.

(d) The president may approve, reject, or amend the recommendations of the hearing tribunal or may reach different conclusions based upon the record of the hearing. The decision of the president shall be final.

Sec. 8  Special Circumstances.   The Board authorizes the Chancellor, in consultation with the appropriate Executive Vice Chancellor and the Vice Chancellor and General Counsel, to appoint officers, staff, and/or others, other than those specifically designated in this Rule, to fulfill the administrative roles specified in this Rule when the Chancellor deems such appointments necessary.

3.  Definitions

Faculty Member – a faculty member is any individual holding an academic title listed in Regents’ Rules and Regulations, Rule 31001, Section 2, with the exception of Assistant Instructors, Teaching Associates, and Teaching Assistants.

4.  Relevant Federal and State Statutes 

Texas Education Code Section 51.942 – Performance Evaluation of Tenured Faculty

Texas Education Code Section 51.943– Renewal of Faculty Employment Contracts 

Texas Education Code Section 65.32 – Removal of Officers, Etc. 

5.  Relevant System Policies, Procedures, and Forms 

Regents’ Rules and Regulations, Rule 31001 – Faculty Appointments and Titles 

The University of Texas Systemwide Policy UTS 198, Termination of a Faculty Member

6.  Who Should Know 

Administrators 
Faculty 

7.  System Administration Office(s) Responsible for Rule 

Office of Academic Affairs 
Office of Health Affairs 

8.  Dates Approved or Amended 

Regents’ Rules Revision History 

9.  Contact Information 

Questions or comments regarding this Rule should be directed to: 
•  bor@utsystem.edu