CHALLENGES
There has never been a governance crisis at
an American university with anything close to these features.
The university was plunged into a crisis when the active faculty learned from three emeritus colleagues that one of
their tenured members had been terminated without their knowledge or input four weeks earlier.
The emeritus faculty were led by a former Provost who had retired seven years earlier and lived 700 miles away.
Within five weeks of learning about my termination, a faculty investigation on campus completely exonerated
the faculty member and concluded that one or more senior administrators would have to resign.
The dispute was over the terms of a medical leave. It did not concern the health of the faculty member.
The dispute was solely over the question of the legality of changes the university made twice
to the terms of a medical leave as it was coming to an end.
The arrests were retaliation for activities opposing changes in the medical leave policy.
The faculty member was arrested four times in the course of the dispute over the medical leave, with the arrests
tracking the argument precisely and having as their only explanation retaliation by the university
against the faculty member for protesting the changes in policy.
The debate over who to blame on campus: a three-way split.
(4) The terminated faculty member blamed the Provost of the College, along with a few others, for a long period; then waffled indecisively about the Provost's role; and then, almost nine months into the university's crisis, abruptly reported to faculty that he could confirm the Provost was not guilty and that only two key administrators were responsible.
(5) Faculty views of the wrongful termination were and are today divided between one group which blames the Provost and another that blames the terminated faculty member and holds that the theory implicating the Provost is a fiction invented by the faculty member to deflect blame. The faculty member disavowed this account 18 months ago, however.
FEISS, SLEVIN, MEYERS
I invite those who are active faculty at other institutions of higher education to imagine yourself nearing the end of the first full week of classes in a fall semester, on a Thursday, perhaps. Just after lunch you receive an email with an attached letter with the following header, first three paragraphs, and final sentence.
There are details I could add which would amplify the effect. For example, the former Provost, Geoff Feiss, had retired seven years earlier. And he lives in Maine.
What would you think, if you got this letter?
===========================================================================
Date: September 8, 2016
To:
Members of the Faculty Affairs Committee, A&S; Faculty Affairs Committee, FA; Executive Committee, FA
From:
P. Geoffrey Feiss, Professor of Geology and Provost Emeritus;
Terry L. Meyers, Chancellor Professor of English Emeritus;
Kathleen F. Slevin, Chancellor Professor of Sociology and Vice Provost Emerita
Subject:
A Disturbing Violation of the Faculty Handbook
Dear Colleagues:
The three of us have been profoundly disturbed by recent actions of the William and Mary administration that have effectively fired a senior member of the Faculty in violation of the letter and spirit of the Faculty Handbook.
We write to bring this matter to your attention with the expectation that the large and clear threat to academic freedom at William and Mary will compel the strongest and most urgent response from the Faculty.
In all our years of service at the College, these actions constitute the most egregious evisceration of the Faculty Handbook that we have seen and indeed could imagine.
…
If Professor Dessler is deprived of his rights in this matter, if the procedures of the Faculty Handbook are simply thrown out the window, faculty rights at the College are indeed under an existential threat and in jeopardy for each and every member of the College faculty. Each would be subject to arbitrary and extrajudicial treatment, with all the implications that would entail.
...
We cannot overstate the seriousness of this matter and the danger currently existing to the rights of faculty members at the College of William and Mary.
=====================================================================
an American university with anything close to these features.
The university was plunged into a crisis when the active faculty learned from three emeritus colleagues that one of
their tenured members had been terminated without their knowledge or input four weeks earlier.
The emeritus faculty were led by a former Provost who had retired seven years earlier and lived 700 miles away.
Within five weeks of learning about my termination, a faculty investigation on campus completely exonerated
the faculty member and concluded that one or more senior administrators would have to resign.
The dispute was over the terms of a medical leave. It did not concern the health of the faculty member.
The dispute was solely over the question of the legality of changes the university made twice
to the terms of a medical leave as it was coming to an end.
The arrests were retaliation for activities opposing changes in the medical leave policy.
The faculty member was arrested four times in the course of the dispute over the medical leave, with the arrests
tracking the argument precisely and having as their only explanation retaliation by the university
against the faculty member for protesting the changes in policy.
The debate over who to blame on campus: a three-way split.
(4) The terminated faculty member blamed the Provost of the College, along with a few others, for a long period; then waffled indecisively about the Provost's role; and then, almost nine months into the university's crisis, abruptly reported to faculty that he could confirm the Provost was not guilty and that only two key administrators were responsible.
(5) Faculty views of the wrongful termination were and are today divided between one group which blames the Provost and another that blames the terminated faculty member and holds that the theory implicating the Provost is a fiction invented by the faculty member to deflect blame. The faculty member disavowed this account 18 months ago, however.
FEISS, SLEVIN, MEYERS
I invite those who are active faculty at other institutions of higher education to imagine yourself nearing the end of the first full week of classes in a fall semester, on a Thursday, perhaps. Just after lunch you receive an email with an attached letter with the following header, first three paragraphs, and final sentence.
There are details I could add which would amplify the effect. For example, the former Provost, Geoff Feiss, had retired seven years earlier. And he lives in Maine.
What would you think, if you got this letter?
===========================================================================
Date: September 8, 2016
To:
Members of the Faculty Affairs Committee, A&S; Faculty Affairs Committee, FA; Executive Committee, FA
From:
P. Geoffrey Feiss, Professor of Geology and Provost Emeritus;
Terry L. Meyers, Chancellor Professor of English Emeritus;
Kathleen F. Slevin, Chancellor Professor of Sociology and Vice Provost Emerita
Subject:
A Disturbing Violation of the Faculty Handbook
Dear Colleagues:
The three of us have been profoundly disturbed by recent actions of the William and Mary administration that have effectively fired a senior member of the Faculty in violation of the letter and spirit of the Faculty Handbook.
We write to bring this matter to your attention with the expectation that the large and clear threat to academic freedom at William and Mary will compel the strongest and most urgent response from the Faculty.
In all our years of service at the College, these actions constitute the most egregious evisceration of the Faculty Handbook that we have seen and indeed could imagine.
…
If Professor Dessler is deprived of his rights in this matter, if the procedures of the Faculty Handbook are simply thrown out the window, faculty rights at the College are indeed under an existential threat and in jeopardy for each and every member of the College faculty. Each would be subject to arbitrary and extrajudicial treatment, with all the implications that would entail.
...
We cannot overstate the seriousness of this matter and the danger currently existing to the rights of faculty members at the College of William and Mary.
=====================================================================