Skip to content Skip to main navigation Report an accessibility issue

3.12 Procedures for Terminating Tenured Faculty

3.12.1 Termination Procedures for Adequate Cause

Termination Procedures for Adequate Cause are governed by Board Policies Governing Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure. 3.12.2 below applies in cases of unsatisfactory performance in teaching, research, or service. 3.12.3 below applies in cases of misconduct. The procedures in 3.12.2 below shall apply if the Adequate Cause grounds for termination include both (i) unsatisfactory performance in teaching, research, or service and (ii) misconduct.

3.12.2 Termination Procedures for Unsatisfactory Performance in Teaching, Research, or Service

The following procedures shall apply to termination of a tenured faculty appointment, or termination of a tenure-track appointment before expiration of the annual term, for unsatisfactory performance in teaching, research, or service within the definition of Adequate Cause, 3.11.8.1c.(1), above.

3.12.2.1 Suspension with Pay or Reassignment Pending Completion of Termination Proceedings

After consultation with the president of the Faculty Senate or the Faculty Senate Executive Council, the chancellor may suspend the faculty member with pay, or change his or her assignment of duties, pending completion of the university’s termination proceedings.

3.12.2.2 Tenured Faculty’s Recommendation

The department head shall direct the tenured departmental faculty to consider the faculty member’s performance in teaching, research, and service and, by an anonymously cast vote taken in accordance with applicable department or college bylaws, to make a recommendation on the question of whether the faculty member’s performance constitutes Adequate Cause for termination. The faculty vote shall be advisory to the department head. If an Enhanced Post-Tenure Performance Review (EPPR) has been completed in the preceding four years, the report of the EPPR peer committee shall be provided to the tenured faculty, along with any other evaluative information provided for their review. The faculty member under review shall be provided with a copy of the material provided to the tenured faculty and shall be given a reasonable opportunity to submit responsive written materials before the vote of the tenured faculty.

3.12.2.3 Department Head’s Recommendation

The department head shall consider the faculty member’s performance in teaching, research, and service, and the recommendation of the tenured departmental faculty, and make a recommendation on the question of whether the performance constitutes Adequate Cause for termination. The department head shall forward his or her recommendation and the reasoning supporting the recommendation to the dean, together with the history of efforts to encourage the faculty member to improve his or her performance and a report of the recommendation of the tenured faculty (including the anonymously cast vote tally) on the question of whether the faculty member’s performance constitutes Adequate Cause for termination.

3.12.2.4 Dean’s Recommendation

The dean shall consider the faculty member’s performance in teaching, research, and service, and the recommendation of the tenured departmental faculty and department head, and make a recommendation on the question of whether the performance constitutes Adequate Cause for termination. The dean shall forward his or her recommendation and the reasoning supporting the recommendation to the chief academic officer, together with the recommendations of the tenured faculty and the department head.

3.12.2.5 Decision by the Chief Academic Officer

  1. Review by the Chief Academic Officer
    1. If the chief academic officer concludes that Adequate Cause for termination may exist, he or she shall call the faculty member to a meeting to discuss a mutually satisfactory resolution of the matter.
    2. If a mutually satisfactory resolution is not achieved within 30 calendar days, the chief academic officer shall ask the Faculty Senate Appeals Committee to make a recommendation as to whether Adequate Cause for termination exists. The recommendation of the Faculty Senate Appeals Committee, along with supportive reasoning, shall be provided to the chief academic officer within 30 calendar days of the request and shall be advisory to the chief academic officer.
    3. If the chief academic officer concludes that Adequate Cause does not exist, then the chief academic officer shall provide the faculty member with written notice of the conclusion (with a copy to the dean and the department head), and shall include in the notice any further instructions regarding the matter as may be necessary.
  2. Sanctions Less than Termination for Adequate Cause
    1. If the chief academic officer concludes Adequate Cause exists but that a sanction other than termination or suspension without pay should be imposed, then the chief academic officer may impose the lesser sanction. The faculty member may appeal the lesser sanction to the chancellor, whose decision shall be final and not appealable to the president.
    2. If the chief academic officer concludes Adequate Cause exists but that the sanction should be suspension without pay rather than termination, the chief academic officer shall employ the procedures set forth in paragraph c of this section (3.12.2.5), all as appropriately tailored to reflect that the proposed sanction is suspension without pay rather than termination. If the faculty member wishes to contest the suspension without pay, the procedures shall be those set forth in section 3.12.2.7 of this handbook, all as appropriately tailored to reflect that the proposed sanction is suspension without pay rather than termination.
  3. Termination for Adequate Cause
    1. Notice of Adequate Cause and Opportunity to Respond: Before deciding that the faculty member’s appointment should be terminated for Adequate Cause, the chief academic officer shall give the faculty member written notice, including a statement of the grounds for termination, framed with reasonable particularity, and the opportunity to respond to the stated grounds and the proposed termination in a meeting with the chief academic officer. The faculty member may choose to respond in writing instead of, or in addition to, a meeting with the chief academic officer. Any written response must be submitted to the chief academic officer within 10 calendar days of delivery of the written statement of the grounds for termination.
    2. Notice of Termination: If, after considering any information provided by the faculty member and after consulting with the chancellor and the president, the chief academic officer concludes that the faculty member’s appointment should be terminated for Adequate Cause, the chief academic officer shall provide written notice of termination to the faculty member (a) providing a statement of the grounds for termination, framed with reasonable particularity, and the date on which the termination will become effective unless the faculty member elects to contest the termination in a pre-termination hearing before a hearing tribunal (section 3.12.2.7a of this handbook); (b) providing notice of the faculty member’s right to contest the proposed termination in a pre-termination hearing before a tribunal, as described below, or in a post-termination hearing conducted under the provisions of the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act; and (c) providing notice that the faculty member has 15 calendar days after receipt of the written notice to elect in writing to contest the termination and to elect in writing the form of hearing. Selection of one type of hearing waives the opportunity to contest the termination through the other type of hearing. The chief academic officer shall send a copy of the written notice to the Faculty Senate at the same time.

3.12.2.6 Failure to Contest Termination

If the faculty member does not contest the charge(s) in writing and make the required hearing election within 15 calendar days after receipt of the written notice described in paragraph 3.12.2.5c(2) above, the faculty member shall be terminated, and no appeal of the matter will be heard within the university.

3.12.2.7 Options to Contest Termination

The rights provided in this paragraph 3.12.2.7 are in lieu of any other rights of grievance or appeal in this handbook or any appeal to the president.

  1. Pre-Termination Hearing before a Tribunal and Final Decision by the Chancellor: If the faculty member makes a timely election to contest the charge(s) through a hearing by a university tribunal, the faculty member must confirm in writing the decision to waive the right to a hearing under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, and the chancellor shall ask the Faculty Senate, or a designated committee of the Faculty Senate, to appoint a tribunal within 15 calendar days and shall notify the faculty member in writing of this action. The matter shall then proceed in accordance with the tribunal procedures described below with the faculty member’s termination stayed pending the conclusion of those procedures.
    1. Composition of the tribunal: The university tribunal shall consist of five members of the tenured faculty and the administration. Members of the administration who are members of the tribunal must also hold tenure, and the majority of the tribunal must be full‑time faculty members. The tribunal shall select its own chair. Either the chancellor or the faculty member may challenge the appointment of a tribunal member on the ground of bias or conflict of interest. A challenge shall be judged by the Faculty Senate, or a designated committee of the Faculty Senate, whose decision on the challenge shall be final and not subject to appeal.
    2. Notice of hearing: The chancellor shall give the faculty member written notice of the hearing date at least 30 calendar days in advance. The chancellor shall issue a scheduling order to ensure that the tribunal’s written findings, reasoning, and conclusions are submitted to the chancellor within 120 calendar days from the date the faculty member has been provided with written notice of termination under paragraph 3.12.2.5c(2) of this handbook. A scheduling order shall not be modified except by leave of the chancellor upon a showing of good cause.
    3. Representation: If the university intends to be represented by legal counsel, the written notice of the hearing date shall so advise the faculty member. The written notice shall also state the faculty member’s right to be represented by legal counsel or other representative of his or her choice. If the faculty member intends to be represented by legal counsel, he or she must notify the tribunal chairperson within 10 days of receipt of the written notice of the hearing date. If the faculty member fails to give timely notice of legal representation, the hearing date shall be postponed at the university’s request.
    4. Waiver of hearing: If, at any time prior to the hearing date, the faculty member decides to waive his or her right to a hearing and respond to the charge(s) only in writing, the tribunal shall proceed to evaluate all available evidence and rest its recommendation upon the evidence in the record.
    5. Pre‑hearing preparation: The faculty member and the university shall have a reasonable opportunity prior to the hearing to obtain witnesses, specific documents, or other specific evidence reasonably related to the charge(s).
    6. Evidence: The tribunal is not bound by legal rules of evidence and may admit any evidence of probative value in determining the issues. The tribunal shall make every reasonable effort, however, to base its recommendation on the most reliable evidence. If the charge is “failure to demonstrate professional competence in assigned roles in teaching, research, or service,” the evidence shall include the testimony of qualified faculty members from this and/or other comparable institutions of higher education.
    7. Confrontation and cross‑examination of witnesses: The faculty member and the university shall have the right to confront and cross‑examine all witnesses. If a witness cannot or will not appear, but the tribunal determines that his or her testimony is necessary to a fair adjudication of the charge(s), the tribunal may admit as evidence the sworn affidavit of the witness. In that event, the tribunal shall disclose the affidavit to both parties and allow both parties to submit written interrogatories to the witness.
    8. Adjournments: The tribunal shall grant adjournments to allow either party to investigate evidence to which a valid claim of surprise is made. The tribunal may grant one such adjournment for a period of no more than five calendar days. If the tribunal wishes to grant an adjournment for more than five calendar days, or wishes to grant more than one adjournment, the tribunal shall notify the chancellor of the proposed adjournment, provide an explanation of the need for the adjournment, and provide a recommendation regarding the length of the adjournment. If the chancellor concurs in the tribunal’s recommendation that an adjournment be granted, the chancellor shall give the faculty member written notice of the date on which the hearing will resume.
    9. Burden of proof: The burden of proof that adequate cause exists rests with the university and shall be satisfied only by clear and convincing evidence in the record considered as a whole.
    10. Findings and conclusions. The tribunal shall make written findings and conclusions and shall provide a copy to the faculty member at the time of submission to the chancellor.
      1. If the tribunal concludes Adequate Cause for termination has not been established, it shall so report to the chancellor, with supporting reasons. In the case of a split decision, a minority report should be included.
      2. If the tribunal concludes Adequate Cause for termination has been established but that a sanction other than termination should be imposed, it shall so recommend to the chancellor, with supporting reasons. In the case of a split decision, a minority report should be included.
      3. If the tribunal concludes Adequate Cause for termination has been established and that termination is the appropriate sanction, it shall so report to the chancellor, with supporting reasons. In the case of a split decision, a minority report should be included.
    11. Transcript of the hearing: A verbatim record of the hearing shall be made, and a transcript shall be provided to the faculty member and the chancellor at the time of the tribunal’s submission of the findings, reasoning, and conclusions.
    12. Final Decision by the Chancellor: Upon receipt of the tribunal’s findings, reasoning, and conclusions, the chancellor shall provide an opportunity for written argument by the parties and may provide the parties an opportunity to present oral argument. After considering the tribunal’s findings, reasoning, and conclusions and any arguments of the parties, the chancellor will determine whether Adequate Cause has been established and whether termination is the appropriate sanction.If the chancellor concludes that Adequate Cause has not been established, the chancellor shall provide the faculty member with written notice of the conclusion (with a copy to the tribunal, chief academic officer, dean, and department head), and shall include in the notice any further instructions regarding the matter as may be necessary.If the chancellor concludes that Adequate Cause has been established but that a sanction other than termination should be imposed, including without limitation suspension without pay, the chancellor may impose the lesser sanction by written notice to the faculty member (with a copy to the tribunal, chief academic officer, dean, and department head). The notice shall include the date on which the sanction will become effective. The decision of the chancellor shall be final and not appealable to the president.If the chancellor concludes that Adequate Cause has been established and that termination is the appropriate sanction, the chancellor shall provide the faculty member with a written notice of termination stating the grounds for termination (with a copy to the tribunal, chief academic officer, dean, and department head). The notice of termination may include or adopt the written findings and conclusions of the tribunal if applicable to the chancellor’s decision. The notice shall include the date on which termination will become effective. The decision of the chancellor shall be final and not appealable to the president.
  2. Post-Termination Hearing and Final Decision under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act
    1. Contested Case Procedures: If the faculty member makes a timely election to contest the charge(s) under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act (UAPA), the chancellor shall appoint an administrative judge, the faculty member’s employment will be terminated on the date specified in the notice provided under paragraph 3.12.2.5c(2) of this handbook, and the matter shall proceed post-termination in accordance with the contested case procedures promulgated by the university under the UAPA. The UAPA contested case procedures are published in the Compiled Rules and Regulations of the State of Tennessee, Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. § 1720-1-5.
    2. Initial Order: In accordance with the UAPA contested case procedures, upon completion of the hearing, the administrative judge shall render an initial order, which either party may appeal to the chancellor within 15 calendar days. In addition, the chancellor, on his or her own motion, may elect within 15 calendar days to review the administrative judge’s initial order.
    3. Final Order: The administrative judge’s initial order shall become the final order unless review is sought by either party or the chancellor within the fifteen-day period. If review is sought, the chancellor shall review the initial order and issue a final order in accordance with applicable provisions of the UAPA contested case procedures. The final order, whether rendered by the chancellor or by virtue of neither party appealing the initial order, shall be the final decision on the charge(s) within the university. If the university’s final order is favorable to the faculty member and concludes that the faculty member’s employment should not have been terminated for Adequate Cause, then full restitution of salary, academic position and tenure lost during the termination will be made.
    4. Judicial Review: If the final order is unfavorable to the faculty member, he or she is entitled to judicial review of the final order in accordance with applicable provisions of the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act.

3.12.3 Termination Procedures for Misconduct

The following procedures shall apply to termination of a tenured faculty appointment, or termination of a tenure-track appointment before expiration of the annual term, for misconduct within the definition of Adequate Cause.

3.12.3.1 Suspension or Reassignment Pending Completion of Termination Proceedings

The chief academic officer may combine action under this paragraph with any other procedures in section 3.12 of this handbook.

  1. Suspension with Pay or Reassignment of Duties: After consultation with the president of the Faculty Senate or the Faculty Senate Executive Council the chief academic officer may suspend a faculty member with pay, or change his or her assignment of duties, pending completion of the university’s termination proceedings described in section 3.12 of this handbook and in campus procedures incorporating this section.
  2. Suspension without Pay: After consultation with the chancellor, the president, and the president of the Faculty Senate or the Faculty Senate Executive Council, the chief academic officer may suspend a faculty member without pay, pending completion of termination proceedings only for the following types of alleged misconduct and only in accordance with the procedures outlined in the section 3.12.3.8 of this policy entitled “Expedited Procedure for Termination or Suspension Without Pay in Certain Cases of Misconduct”:
    1. alleged misconduct involving: (i) acts or credible threats of harm to a person or university property; or (ii) theft or misappropriation of university funds, property, services, or other resources, or
    2. indictment by a state or federal grand jury, or arrest and charge pursuant to state or federal criminal procedure, for: (i) a felony; or (ii) a non-felony directly related to the fitness of a faculty member to engage in teaching, research, service, or administration.

If the university’s final determination after either a UAPA proceeding or an ad hoc hearing committee proceeding is favorable to the faculty member and concludes both that the faculty member’s employment should not be terminated for Adequate Cause and that the faculty member should not have been suspended without pay pending completion of termination proceedings, then full restitution of salary, academic position and tenure lost during the suspension without pay will be made.

3.12.3.2 Consultation with the tenured faculty.

The department head shall consult with the departmental tenured faculty before making a recommendation regarding whether a faculty member’s alleged misconduct constitutes Adequate Cause for termination.

3.12.3.3 Department head’s recommendation.

If the department head concludes that a faculty member’s alleged misconduct constitutes Adequate Cause for termination, he or she shall forward a written recommendation and the reasoning supporting the recommendation to the dean. At the same time, the department head shall send a copy of his or her recommendation to the faculty member. The recommendation shall include a report of the head’s consultation with the tenured faculty.

3.12.3.4 Dean’s recommendation.

If the dean concludes that a faculty member’s alleged misconduct constitutes Adequate Cause for termination, he or she shall forward a written recommendation and the reasoning supporting the recommendation to the chief academic officer.

3.12.3.4 Decision by the Chief Academic Officer

  1. Review by the Chief Academic Officer
    1. If the chief academic officer concludes that Adequate Cause for termination may exist, he or she shall call the faculty member to a meeting to discuss a mutually satisfactory resolution of the matter.
    2. If the chief academic officer concludes that Adequate Cause does not exist, the chief academic officer shall provide the faculty member with written notice of the conclusion (with a copy to the dean and the department head), and shall include in the notice any further instructions regarding the matter as may be necessary.
  2. Sanctions Less than Termination for Adequate Cause
    1. If the chief academic officer concludes Adequate Cause exists but that a sanction other than termination or suspension without pay should be imposed, the chief academic officer may impose the lesser sanction. The faculty member may appeal the lesser sanction to the chancellor, whose decision shall be final and not appealable to the president.
    2. If the chief academic officer concludes Adequate Cause exists but that the sanction should be suspension without pay rather than termination, the chief academic officer shall employ the procedures set forth in paragraph 3.12.3.5c, below, all as appropriately tailored to reflect that the proposed sanction is suspension without pay rather than termination. If the faculty member wishes to contest the suspension without pay, the procedures shall be those set forth in section 3.12.3.7 of this handbook, all as appropriately tailored to reflect that the proposed sanction is suspension without pay rather than termination.
  3. Termination for Adequate Cause
    1. Notice of Adequate Cause and Opportunity to Respond: Before deciding that the faculty member’s appointment shall be terminated for Adequate Cause, the chief academic officer shall give the faculty member written notice, including a statement of the grounds for termination, framed with reasonable particularity, and the opportunity to respond to the stated grounds and the proposed termination in a meeting with the chief academic officer. The faculty member may choose to respond in writing instead of, or in addition to, a meeting with the chief academic officer. Any written response must be submitted to the chief academic officer within 10 calendar days of delivery of the written statement of the grounds for termination.
    2. Notice of Termination: If, after considering any information provided by the faculty member, and after consulting with the chancellor and the president, the chief academic officer concludes that the faculty member’s appointment should be terminated for Adequate Cause, the chief academic officer shall provide written notice to the faculty member (a) providing a statement of the grounds for termination, framed with reasonable particularity, and the date on which the termination will become effective unless the faculty member elects to contest the termination in a pre-termination hearing before an ad hoc hearing committee (section 3.12.3.7a of this handbook); (b) notice of the faculty member’s right to contest the proposed termination in a pre-termination hearing before an ad hoc hearing committee (section 3.12.3.7a of this handbook) or in a post-termination hearing under the provisions of the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act; and (c) notice that the faculty member has 15 calendar days after receipt of the written notice to elect in writing to contest the termination. Selection of one type of hearing waives the opportunity to contest the termination through the other type of hearing. The chief academic officer shall send a copy of the written notice to the Faculty Senate at the same time.

3.12.3.6 Failure to Contest

If the faculty member does not contest the charge(s) of misconduct in writing within 15 calendar days after receipt of the written notice described in paragraph 3.12.3.5c(2) of this handbook, the faculty member shall be terminated, and no appeal of the matter will be heard within the university.

3.12.3.7 Options to Contest Termination

The rights provided in this paragraph 3.12.3.7 are in lieu of any other rights of grievance or appeal in the handbook or any appeal to the president.

  1. Pre-Termination Hearing before an Ad Hoc Hearing Committee and Final Decision by the Chancellor: If the faculty member contests the charge(s) of misconduct but elects to waive his or her right to formal hearing under the contested case procedures of the UAPA, the faculty member must confirm in writing the decision to waive the right to a hearing under the UAPA, and the chancellor shall appoint an ad hoc hearing committee to conduct an informal hearing on the charges, with the faculty member’s termination stayed pending the conclusion of the procedures set forth in this section, 3.12.3.7a.

The chancellor shall give the faculty member written notice of the hearing date at least 30 calendar days in advance. The chancellor shall issue a scheduling order to ensure that the hearing committee’s written findings, reasoning, and conclusions are submitted to the chancellor within 120 calendar days from the date the faculty member has been provided with written notice of termination under paragraph 3.12.3.5c(2) of this handbook. A scheduling order shall not be modified except by leave of the chancellor upon a showing of good cause.

The faculty member may be represented before the hearing committee by legal counsel or other representative of his or her choice. If the faculty member intends to be represented by legal counsel, he or she must notify the committee chairperson within 10 calendar days of receipt of the written notice of the hearing date. If the faculty member fails to give timely notice of legal representation, the hearing date shall be postponed at the university’s request.

The hearing committee shall grant adjournments to allow either party to investigate evidence to which a valid claim of surprise is made. The hearing committee may grant one such adjournment for a period of no more than five calendar days. If the hearing committee wishes to grant an adjournment for more than five calendar days, or wishes to grant more than one adjournment, the hearing committee shall notify the chancellor of the proposed adjournment, provide an explanation of the need for the adjournment, and provide a recommendation regarding the length of the adjournment. If the chancellor concurs in the hearing committee’s recommendation that an adjournment be granted, the chancellor shall give the faculty member written notice of the date on which the hearing will resume.

The hearing committee shall make a written report of its findings, reasoning, and conclusions to the chancellor. In the case of a split decision, a minority report should be included.

Upon receipt of the hearing committee’s findings, reasoning, and conclusions, the chancellor shall provide the opportunity for written argument by the parties and may provide the parties an opportunity to present oral argument. After considering the hearing committee’s findings, reasoning, and conclusions and any arguments of the parties, the chancellor will determine whether Adequate Cause has been established and whether termination is the appropriate sanction.

If the chancellor concludes that Adequate Cause has not been established, the chancellor shall provide the faculty member with written notice of the conclusion (with a copy to the hearing committee, chief academic officer, dean, and department head), and shall include in the notice any further instructions regarding the matter as may be necessary.

If the chancellor concludes that Adequate Cause has been established but that a sanction other than termination should be imposed, including without limitation suspension without pay, the chancellor may impose the lesser sanction by written notice to the faculty member (with a copy to the hearing committee, chief academic officer, dean, and department head). The notice shall include the date on which the sanction will become effective. The decision of the chancellor shall be final and not appealable to the president.

If the chancellor concludes that Adequate Cause has been established and that termination is the appropriate sanction, the chancellor shall provide the faculty member with a written notice of termination stating the grounds for termination (with a copy to the hearing committee, chief academic officer, dean, and department head). The notice of termination may include or adopt the written findings, reasoning, and conclusions of the hearing committee if applicable to the chancellor’s decision. The notice shall include the date on which termination will become effective. The decision of the chancellor shall be final and not appealable to the president.

  1. Post-Termination Hearing and Final Decision under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act
    1. Contested Case Procedures: If the faculty member makes a timely election to contest the charge(s) under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act (UAPA), the chancellor shall appoint an administrative judge, the faculty member’s employment will be terminated on the date specified in the notice provided under paragraph 3.12.3.5c(2), and the matter shall proceed post-termination in accordance with the contested case procedures promulgated by the university under the UAPA. The UAPA contested case procedures are published in the Compiled Rules and Regulations of the State of Tennessee, Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. § 1720-1-5.
    2. Initial Order: In accordance with the UAPA contested case procedures, upon completion of the hearing, the administrative judge shall render an initial order, which either party may appeal to the chancellor within 15 calendar days. In addition, the chancellor, on his or her own motion, may elect within fifteen calendar days to review the hearing officer’s initial order.
    3. Final Order: The administrative judge’s initial order shall become the final order unless review is sought by either party or the chancellor within the fifteen-day period. If review is sought, the chancellor shall review the initial order and issue a final order in accordance with applicable provisions of the UAPA contested case procedures. The final order, whether rendered by the chancellor or by virtue of neither party appealing the initial order, shall be the final decision on the charge(s) within the university. If the university’s final order is favorable to the faculty member and concludes that the faculty member’s employment should not have been terminated for Adequate Cause, then full restitution of salary, academic position and tenure lost during the termination will be made.
    4. Judicial Review: If the final order is unfavorable to the faculty member, he or she is entitled to judicial review of the final order in accordance with applicable provisions of the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act.

3.12.3.8 Expedited Procedure for Termination or Suspension without Pay in Certain Cases of Misconduct

In the following cases of alleged misconduct by a faculty member, the chancellor, after consulting with the president of the university and the president of the Faculty Senate or the Faculty Senate Executive Council, may invoke an expedited procedure to accomplish termination or suspension without pay, with comprehensive due process procedures to be offered after termination or suspension without pay:

  1. alleged misconduct involving (i) acts or credible threats of harm to a person or university property, including, without limitation, sexual harassment or other sexual misconduct; or (ii) theft or misappropriate of university funds, property, services, or other resources, or
  2. indictment by a state or federal grand jury, or arrest and charge pursuant to state or federal criminal procedure, for (i) a felony; or (ii) a non‑felony directly related to the fitness of a faculty member to engage in teaching, research, service, or administration

Under the expedited procedure, the faculty member shall be offered the following process before termination or suspension without pay:

  1. a written notice of the charges;
  2. an explanation of the evidence; and
  3. an informal opportunity to refute the charges in a meeting with the campus chief academic officer.

After termination or suspension without pay, the faculty member shall be offered the full range of due process options available to faculty members in other Adequate Cause proceedings as set forth in section 3.12.3.7 of this handbook, except that the termination or suspension without pay shall not be stayed pending the outcome of an ad hoc hearing committee if the faculty member elects that method of contesting the action. If the university’s final determination after either a UAPA proceeding or an ad hoc hearing committee proceeding is favorable to the faculty member and concludes that the faculty member should not have been suspended without pay or that the faculty member’s employment should not have been/should not be terminated for Adequate Cause, then full restitution of salary, academic position and tenure lost during the suspension without pay or termination will be made.

The flagship campus of the University of Tennessee System and partner in the Tennessee Transfer Pathway.