ACD 509–03: Grievance Policies and Procedures for Academic Professionals

To provide for hearing procedures for academic professionals

Arizona Revised Statutes § 41–1062

Arizona Board of Regents Policy Manual - 6–301

Academic professionals (except in cases of dismissal or suspension without pay [see ACD 503])

1. The Board of Regents, the university president, the faculty, academic professionals, and the administrators of ASU recognize the importance of providing a prompt and efficient procedure for fair and equitable resolution of grievances without fear of prejudice or retaliation for initiating a grievance or participating in its settlement on the part of the person involved.


2. Each individual’s attempt to rectify a perceived wrong is considered consistent with ASU’s role as an upholder of individual rights.


3. The existence of a grievance process in no way diminishes the responsibility of academic professionals for the exercise of sound professional judgment.


4. All grievants shall have a clearly defined avenue of redress and appeal which may include a hearing before a hearing committee. The committee shall submit its recommendation to the executive vice president and provost of the university (or president or president’s designee, as appropriate) following a hearing. The executive vice president and provost of the university or designee shall decide the matter. The decision shall be final, except decisions to terminate academic professionals on continuing appointment or dismiss academic professionals holding probationary or year-to-year appointments during the contract term may be appealed to the Board of Regents.


5. The recommended option is to resolve grievances internally and at the level closest to the grievant. By using the internal mediation and grievance procedures first, a grievant should be able to obtain acceptable results without escalation to a formal charge with an outside agency.


6. At each level of decision making, the grievant shall be informed of the informal and formal options available for redress and appeal if the grievance is unresolved.


7. Academic professionals shall be involved in the preparation and/or periodic review of equitable and mutually agreed upon written policies and procedures for academic professional governance and grievance resolution.


8. Academic professional grievance policies and procedures shall be clearly and fully explained in writing and placed in the Academic Affairs Policies and Procedures Manual. Amendments to the procedure, suggested by either the academic professionals or the administrator, shall be brought to the university Committee on Academic Professional Status.


9. The process of resolving academic professional grievances at ASU shall be approved by the university president.


10. A grievant may choose either a mediation route that may then be followed by a grievance route or may choose a grievance route alone.


11. If a grievant chooses not to follow the mediation route, the grievant may choose to have counsel at his or her expense.


12. The right of an academic professional to be heard by the appropriate board or committee of peers shall not be restricted.


13. Each grievant has the right to a fair, full and reasonably speedy investigation and judgment by members of the appropriate board or committee.


14. Two or more academic professionals experiencing the same grievance have the right to seek redress jointly or individually.


15. Adequate written records of grievance-related matters at each level are to be kept.


16. All parties to a grievance are entitled to frequent notification on the status of their case, especially at the conclusion of each stage of the process.


17. The chair of the Academic Professional Grievance Committee shall act in an administrative capacity only. The chair will decide primarily on prehearing procedural matters.


18. All actions at any stage of the grievance process shall be characterized by fairness, frankness, courtesy and respect for the dignity of each individual.


19. Grievances involving academic professionals who are employed off the ASU at Tempe campus shall be handled by established Tempe-campus grievance procedures.


20. “Retaliation” in grievance matters shall be defined for each specific case. Respondent, grievant, witnesses, and members of the grievance body handling the case shall have a clear understanding of what is meant by retaliation and be instructed that retaliation is forbidden. Grievants and witnesses must be assured freedom from restraint, coercion, discrimination or reprisal in presenting their testimony. Examples of retaliation include, but are not limited to:
    
    1. refusal to communicate with grievant about any matter not related to grievance without justification
    
    
    2. overt or covert hostility or rudeness directed toward any participant in the grievance process
    
    
    3. refusal to provide support or funding to grievant for reasons relating to grievance
    
    
    4. criticism or reprimand of grievant when not appropriate or justified
    
    
    5. finding fault with grievant for conduct that would not be addressed if another colleague engaged in similar conduct
    
    
    6. adverse performance reviews without justification
    
    
    7. denial of salary increments or merit pay without justification.
    
    

21. If a person changes from staff status or faculty status to academic professional status while a grievance is pending, and wishes to present a grievance, the grievant shall have the option of choosing, with the aid of an ombudsperson, which single process (staff or faculty or academic professional) is the more appropriate for the particular grievance in question.

1. Source and Supporting Documents
   
   1. BOR 6-301, “Conditions of Professional Service.”
   
   
   2. ACD 403, “Procedures for Resolving Complaints of Unlawful Discrimination.”
   
   
   3. The policies in ACD 507, “Academic Professional Personnel Actions.”
   
   

2. Definitions
   
   1. “Academic freedom”—see “Professional and intellectual freedom.”
   
   
   2. “Academic professional”—non-classified employees involved with research or teaching programs who require professional and intellectual freedom and who report to a person below the level of vice president including librarians, cooperative extentionists, and researchers. (Conditions of Professional Service, I.B.5.a.).
   
   
   3. “Academic Professional Grievance Committee” (hereafter may be referred to as “Committee”)—defined herein as the grievance committee for processing and hearing grievances brought by academic professionals.
   
   
   4. “Grievant”—the academic professional(s) filing a complaint.
   
   
   5. “Ombudsperson”—functions as a mediator between the grievant and respondent as described herein; a member or appointee of the Ombudspersons Committee.
   
   
   6. “Professional and Intellectual Freedom”—the right and responsibility to exercise judgment within the standards of the employee’s profession. Professional and intellectual freedom is defined as “academic freedom” for those employees involved in teaching and/or research. (Conditions of Professional Service, I.B.4.).

      Freedom in pursuing professional responsibilities and adhering to standard professional policies and practice, without interference or fear of reprisals; for those employed in teaching, freedom to discuss a field of competence without restriction of content or method. In the exercise of this freedom, the academic professional is also obligated to encourage and support the free pursuit of learning and research. The academic professional should be careful not to introduce controversial matters which have no relation to the subject matter of the course and to adhere to a proper role as intellectual guide and counselor.

   
   
   7. “Respondent”—the department(s) or official(s) named by the grievant as responsible for the allegations contained in the complaint.
   
   
   8. Definitions of other terms are provided in source documents.
   
   

1. A complaint may be filed if the grievant believes:
   
   1. There has been a violation, a misinterpretation, an arbitrary or discriminatory application of university policy, regulation or procedure relating to the privileges, responsibilities, or terms and conditions of employment of the academic professional.
   
   
   2. The academic professional has been discriminated against on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, citizenship, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, disability, other protected veteran status, newly separated veteran status, Vietnam-era veteran status, and/or special disabled veteran status.
   
   
   3. There has been an infringement on the academic or professional freedom of the academic professional.
   
   

2. The structure differentiates between mediation and grievance. Mediation is a less formal process involving the academic professional and others (e.g., department chairperson, dean, other academic professionals) who are assembled by the ombudsperson. In a grievance, an academic professional requests a formal hearing by the Academic Professional Grievance Committee.


3. An academic professional may choose either the mediation process followed (if necessary) by the grievance process or the grievance process alone.


4. The recommended starting point for resolving grievances is at the chair or dean level. If, however, the grievant either does not wish to follow this route, or this route has not provided acceptable resolution, the academic professional may use the mediation/grievance procedures.


5. The ombudsperson and the Academic Professional Grievance Committee shall keep a record of all grievance related cases. The ombudsperson’s report shall be forwarded to the chair of the Ombudspersons Committee. The Academic Professional Grievance Committee shall keep records of the number of cases referred to it where the grievant explored resolution at a lower level in a sequential manner, and number of cases referred where the grievant did not explore the complaint at a lower level. The grievant may choose whether or not to give reasons to the committee for not following the recommended option. The committee shall report annually to the Academic Senate and the president. Their report shall include the information above, the number of cases handled, number resolved, number pending and number referred to an outside agency.

Introduction

Mediation may be requested by an academic professional who requires informal assistance in the resolution of a complaint. The ombudsperson will mediate, conciliate, and coordinate communication activities among the grievant, respondent, and those related to the complaint. The purpose of this process is to air differences between the parties and to resolve the complaint to the satisfaction of both parties without resorting to formal hearings. Mediation is a strongly recommended procedure.

Mediation Process

1. The academic professional seeking mediation shall file a complaint with the ombudsperson within 30 days of the occurrence of the actions which form the basis of the complaint.


2. Mediation shall proceed according to procedures outlined in ACD 509–01, “University Ombudsperson Committee Guidelines.”


3. If mediation does not result in a successful resolution of the complaint, the academic professional may request a formal hearing by the Academic Professional Grievance Committee within 30 days of receipt of the ombudsperson’s report.

Introduction

The grievant may choose not to seek a resolution of the grievance through mediation, or mediation may not result in a satisfactory resolution of the complaint for both grievant and respondent. A grievant may then choose to petition for a formal grievance hearing by the Academic Professional Grievance Committee.

Academic Professional Grievance Committee

1. Membership and Election
   
   1. The Academic Professional Grievance Committee (hereafter may be called “committee”) shall be composed of five elected regular members and two elected alternate members representing the widest possible range of academic professionals.
   
   
   2. Members of the committee shall be elected from academic professionals with continuing appointment at the university. Academic professionals at the level of dean, associate or assistant dean shall be excluded from serving on the committee.
   
   
   3. Members shall be elected for a period of three years with staggered terms.
   
   
   4. Alternates shall be determined based on the highest vote tallies of the remaining nominees, taking into account the need for equitable unit representation.
   
   
   5. Alternates shall serve for a period of one year unless selected to replace a regular member, in which case, the term of service of the member being replaced will be completed.
   
   
   6. The committee shall elect its own chair at the end of the academic year to serve during the following year.
   
   
   7. Committee vacancies will normally be filled by returning to the ballot and certifying as elected the individual with the next largest number of votes. In the event there are no names available from the ballot pool of the previous election, the Committee on Academic Professional Status (CAPS) shall appoint an eligible academic professional to fill the vacancy. CAPS may seek the advice of the Provost's Advisory Committee on Academic Professionals (PACAP) to fill such vacancies.
   
   
   8. Members of the Academic Professional Grievance Committee shall not participate in the hearing if they have a personal prejudice concerning a party or personal knowledge of disputed facts concerning the proceeding. Any party may challenge a hearing committee member or alternate for a bias or prejudice. The chair of the committee shall make the final decision on continued participation of the member who was challenged. Replacements for members in a particular grievance or for members on leave will be selected from the two elected alternate members.
   
   


2. Jurisdiction
   
   1. Discrimination. If discrimination in employment, program, or activity based on race, color, religion, national origin, citizenship, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, disability, or Vietnam-era veteran status or other protected veteran status is the essence of the grievance:
      
      1. The grievant may file a complaint with the Office of Diversity, Human Resources,

         or

      
      
      2. The grievant may forward a complaint to the chair of the Academic Professional Grievance Committee who shall refer the petition to the director, Office of Diversity, Human Resources. The director may be called on when necessary to assist the chair, and/or the grievant in determining whether the complaint should remain with the committee or be handled by the Office of Diversity, Human Resources. The grievant shall make the determination within five days. The grievant shall follow the procedures in “Procedures for Resolving Complaints of Unlawful Discrimination,” ACD 403, if the grievance is handled in the Office of Diversity, Human Resources.
      
      
      3. The Office of Diversity, Human Resources will not normally assume jurisdiction in discrimination cases which involve the denial of promotion or continuing appointment (see item [2.d.ii] below).
      
      
   
   
   2. The Academic Professional Grievance Committee shall hear all other academic professional grievances. These may include:
      
      1. Alleged infringements on academic or professional freedom as defined in this document.
      
      
      2. Alleged Code of Conduct violations.
      
      
      3. Disputes on the amount of salary due to an academic professional on probationary or year-to-year status, who has been suspended or dismissed before the expiration of the employment period.
      
      
      4. Alleged abuse of governance policies and procedures. Unless specifically excepted below, the committee shall hear all complaints alleging unfair treatment because no policies or procedures exist, or existing policies or procedures have been misinterpreted, misapplied or violated by a university administrator.
         
         1. The committee shall not have jurisdiction to hear complaints concerning the basis or reasons for administrative decisions on promotion, or sabbatical leave.
         
         
         2. The committee shall not usually hear complaints when the matter concerns non-retention, including denial of continuing appointment. However, the committee may hear the matter if the academic professional alleges that the decision for non-renewal was not determined in accordance with regular university procedures or that the action was based on discriminatory or other unconstitutional grounds.
         
         
      
      
   
   

Hearing Committee

1. Eighteen days prior to the hearing date, the members of the committee shall elect a hearing officer from their own membership to preside at the hearing. The chair of the committee will not vote in this election and is not eligible to serve on the hearing panel. The grievant and respondent shall be notified within 72 hours of the results of the election.


2. A panel of at least three members of the Academic Professional Grievance Committee including a hearing officer shall hear the grievance. The elected hearing officer of the panel shall preside at the hearing. The hearing officer will not vote in the final decision unless is it to break a tie.


3. It is the chair’s responsibility to ensure that the grievance will be heard by a quorum of the committee (a minimum of three members including the hearing officer). Only hearing panel members who hear all evidence in a hearing shall participate in the final deliberations and decisions.


4. Either grievant or respondent may challenge a member of the Academic Professional Grievance Committee for bias or prejudice by filing a written justification with the chair of the committee. All challenges of committee members must be made no later than 20 days prior to hearing date.


5. The chair may excuse any member of the hearing panel for cause at his discretion at any time.

Grievance Procedures

1. Within 30 days of receipt of the ombudsperson’s report or within 30 days of the occurrence of the actions which formed the basis of the complaint, the grievant shall file a written request for a formal hearing and complaint to the Academic Professional Grievance Committee (APGC).

   The request must be filed by the grievant either hand delivering the request to the chair of the committee or mailing the request by certified mail (return receipt requested) to the chair at his/her university office address.

   The complaint shall state:

   1. Grievant’s name, address, telephone number.
   
   
   2. Date dispute arose.
   
   
   3. Department, college or unit involved and alleged respondent(s).
   
   
   4. A brief statement of the grievant’s position and remedies sought.
   
   
   5. The name and address of grievant’s counsel, if any, or a statement that grievant is proceeding without counsel.
   
   


2. The chair of the committee shall forward the complaint to the respondent within seven days with instructions to respond within 15 days of the respondent’s receipt of the complaint. The response shall contain:
   
   1. Name, address, telephone number of respondent.
   
   
   2. A brief statement of respondent’s position.
   
   
   3. Name and address of respondent’s counsel if grievant is utilizing counsel and the respondent chooses to be advised by counsel.
   
   


3. The chair shall notify both the grievant and respondent of the names of the members of the APGC at the time the complaint is forwarded to the respondent.


4. The chair of the committee shall establish a hearing date in conjunction with all parties involved in the case. The hearing should begin within 60 days of the date of the original request.


5. The parties shall receive notice of the hearing date at least 21 days before hearing date. The chair shall advise the grievant on the existence of relevant statutes of limitation that would affect his/her ability to file for a hearing outside the university. Specifically, in the case of discrimination, that the grievant has 180 days from the occurrence of the action complained of to file a complaint with the Arizona Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights, or the U.S. Department of Labor. He/she has 300 days from the date of occurrence to file with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.


6. No later than 15 days before the hearing date the grievant and respondent will submit four copies of the complete written documentation of the complaint and a list of witnesses to the chair of the committee. Grievant and respondent will index and number exhibits, G-1,2 . . ., and R-1,2 . . ., respectively.

   Immediately after the chair receives the hearing documentation and witness lists from the grievant and respondent, the documents will be transferred to the hearing officer of the committee.



7. The hearing officer shall send copies of the written documentation and witness lists submitted by the grievant and the respondent to the hearing panel members within three days after receipt. The grievant’s witness list and documentation will be forwarded to respondent, and respondent’s witness list and documentation will be forwarded to grievant by the hearing officer within three days after receipt.


8. The chair may require witnesses upon request of either party or on the chair’s own initiative. The chair may also require the production of books, records, and other evidence. Request shall be made either by personal delivery or by mailing certified mail, return receipt requested. In the interest of fair treatment, it is expected that any member of the university community called to testify shall testify and any university community member or university office that has access to relevant documents will produce them to a requesting party or the APGC. In the event such cooperation is not forthcoming, the hearing committee chair has subpoena power to do one or more of the following:
   
   1. compel the attendance and testimony of witnesses called by the parties or the hearing committee who refuse to appear without a subpoena
   
   
   2. compel either party to produce relevant documents if a party refuses to do so without a subpoena

      and

   
   
   3. compel a university office/representative who is in possession of relevant documents desired by a party or the hearing committee to produce such documents to the hearing committee, if the office/representative refuses to do so without a subpoena.
   
   

   If a party needs a subpoena, the party will request a subpoena form from the hearing committee chair, complete the form, and submit it to the chair for signature. The party will then give the signed subpoena to the appropriate witness or university representative. The chair may also serve subpoenas on the chair’s initiative.

The Hearing

The hearing is not a trial. All parties and witnesses shall be under oath. Court rules do not apply and the hearing officer may exclude information which is deemed irrelevant or unnecessarily repetitive. The hearing shall be conducted in a fair, impartial, thorough, and timely manner.

1. Hearing Officer. The hearing officer may grant a continuance to either grievant or respondent. If grievant fails to gain a continuance and fails to appear at the hearing after due notice, the grievance may be dismissed. If the respondent fails to gain a continuance and fails to appear at the hearing after due notice, the hearing may proceed at the discretion of the hearing officer. A grievant may withdraw his/her grievance at any stage in the grievance procedure by giving a written notice of withdrawal to the chair of the committee.


2. Counsel. The grievant and the respondent may retain counsel (not necessarily legal counsel) at their own expense. Either party may have the advice of counsel prior to the hearing. On counsel participation, the grievant must elect one of the following three options in making a presentation to the hearing committee:
   
   1. The grievant may proceed without counsel at the hearing. In this event, the respondent will proceed without counsel.
   
   
   2. The grievant may be accompanied by counsel who will act as an advisor during the hearing. The grievant will be responsible for presenting the case (witnesses, exhibits, and statements) and counsel may advise the grievant. In this event, the respondent may proceed with counsel as an advisor.
   
   
   3. The grievant may be represented by counsel at the hearing; counsel may present statements, question witnesses called by both parties and present documents. In this event, the respondent may be represented by counsel in the same manner.
   
   

   Regardless of which option the grievant elects, the committee has the right to speak to the parties and witnesses during the hearing, including the right to question and to receive responses from the parties and witnesses directly.

   If neither party is advised or represented by counsel and the university general counsel has not been involved in the case on behalf of either party, the university general counsel may provide advice to the grievance committee and/or grievance committee chair; however, legal advice is limited to procedural, not substantive, issues related to the case.

   If the grievant has counsel, generally, an attorney in the university Office of General Counsel will advise the respondent. In order to avoid a potential conflict of interest, the university general counsel will not advise the grievance committee or chair; rather, the university Office of General Counsel will secure an outside counsel to advise the committee or chair at the chair’s request, if the committee desires such assistance.

3. Schedule. The parties shall arrive at the hearing with all materials necessary to complete their presentations. Parties do not have the right to delay without good cause, or obstruct the proceedings. However, in light of new information, either party may request a recess from the hearing officer.

   If in the judgment of the hearing officer, a hearing produces information or charges requiring additional time for response by either party, the hearing officer may halt the hearing, and continue it at a later date.

   Any panel member may call for executive session at any time if discussion is believed necessary.



4. Closed Session. The hearing is to be held in closed session. Attendance at the hearing will be restricted to the grievant, respondent, their counsels, and the committee members. Witnesses will be excluded from the hearing except for the time that each presents testimony, unless their presence is mutually agreed to by the parties.


5. Rules. The hearing officer will maintain order, rule on matters of order and procedure, and ask for clarification or relevance from the parties.

   The burden of proof that the respondent failed to follow written policy or procedures is on the grievant. In case of termination of employment due to financial emergency or reorganization the burden of proof is on the respondent.

   The panel is not bound by rules of evidence applicable to courts of law, but may permit evidence determined by the committee to be prudent for the conduct of the hearing and for arrival at an informed decision.

   Unless overriding reasons are given to grievant, respondent or their counsel, all parties shall have access to all information that is presented to the hearing body at no expense to them. An audio tape of the hearing will be recorded by the committee. A copy of the tape will be made available to the parties on request at their own cost. The deliberations of the committee will not be recorded.



6. Order of Hearing
   
   1. Swearing In. The grievant, respondent and all witnesses shall be sworn in by the hearing officer or an appointed delegate on the committee with the words, “Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth before this committee?” Witnesses may be sworn in as a group or individually.
   
   
   2. Opening Statements. Each party shall make an opening statement. The grievant will proceed first in all hearings except for cases involving discipline; in a discipline case, the respondent will proceed first.
   
   
   3. Presentation of Case by Exhibits and Witnesses. Facts should be presented through testimony and exhibits as much as possible, rather than by argumentation by the parties.
      
      1. Witnesses. While one party is questioning a witness, only hearing panel members may interrupt for clarification. After a witness has concluded the testimony, each party will be given an opportunity to examine the witness further. The opposing party may question the witness after the other party completes the presentation.
      
      
      2. Parties may question their own witnesses after the witnesses have been questioned by the opposing party. During the presentation by one party, the other party will not speak without recognition by the hearing officer.
      
      
      3. Questions to witnesses, statements made by witnesses or parties, and exhibits may be challenged by the opposing party. The hearing officer will rule on all objections. The ruling may be made at the time of the objection or at a later time, but the parties will be notified of the ruling.
      
      
   
   
   4. Committee Participation. The hearing panel members may, at any time, ask questions of the parties for purposes of clarification and can request further information or documentation. In general, other questions of relevance from the panel will be asked at the end of each presentation.
   
   
   5. Closing Statement. The respondent will make a closing statement followed by a closing statement by the grievant. No new issue or evidence shall be introduced in the closing statement.
   
   
   6. Hearing Closure. When the panel is assured by both parties that all evidence has been presented, the hearing officer will rule the hearing closed.
   
   

7. Recommendation and Decision. At the conclusion of the hearing, the parties and their counsel and witnesses will be excused.

   The hearing panel will discuss the evidence in executive session.

   The panel has the right to seek information to further clarify issues presented by the parties. If new evidence is discovered and/or further clarification is needed, the hearing officer may reconvene the parties and the committee, if deemed appropriate. After discussions have been completed, a secret ballot (or ballots) will be held with a majority vote being the committee decision. The vote will not be published.

   The panel may determine that it is prepared to render a decision immediately following the hearing. The normal procedure will be that the panel will be provided a maximum of 30 days to deliberate and to provide a written recommendation.

   A written report of facts, findings, and recommendations will be prepared by the panel and provided to the executive vice president and provost of the university (as representative of the president), the grievant, and the respondent.

   If the grievant feels that the Academic Professional Grievance Committee has violated university policy or procedures, the grievant may file objections with the Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost of the University (or designee) within 14 days of receipt of the committee’s report.

   Where the executive vice president and provost of the university is the respondent, the president or designee will receive the committee’s recommendation and will rule on the recommendation.



8. Response. The executive vice president and provost of the university (or president or president’s designee, if appropriate) will provide a written decision to the grievant, respondent, and the hearing panel members within 30 days after receipt of the committee recommendation. If the executive vice president and provost of the university cannot issue the decision within the 30-day period, the executive vice president and provost of the university will notify the parties in writing within the 30-day period of the delay, the reasons for the delay, and the date on which the decision can be expected.

   The decision of the executive vice president and provost of the university (or president or president’s designee, as appropriate) is the final decision of the Board of Regents (board) and ASU. Any further recourse must be sought with forums outside the university and the board.



9. Records. All recordings of proceedings, written documentation, and decisions relating to the grievance will be filed with the university Office of General Counsel.


10. The grievant who is dissatisfied with the decision of the president may request reconsideration by filing a written request with the president no later than 15 working days following the receipt of the president’s written decision. The request shall be based on the following grounds:
    
    1. irregularities in the proceedings, including but not limited to any abuse of discretion or misconduct by the committee which has deprived the employee of a fair and impartial process
    
    
    2. newly discovered material evidence, which could not have been available for the presentation
    
    
    3. the decision is not justified by the evidence or is contrary to law

       and

    
    
    4. the severity of the sanction.
    
    

    Following receipt of the request for reconsideration, the president shall conduct whatever reconsideration is deemed necessary to resolve the issues that have been raised. The president will provide a written response to the request to all parties within 20 days of receipt of the grievant’s request. The decision following reconsideration is final.

11. To pursue the case outside the university, the employee must file a legal action in Maricopa County Superior Court in accordance with Arizona Revised Statutes § 12–901, et seq. The action must be filed in court within 35 days after receipt of the president’s decision, if the grievant does not request reconsideration, or within 35 days after receipt of the president’s response following reconsideration, if requested by the grievant.

Recommendations for changes in the Arizona State University Academic Professional Grievance Policies and Procedures shall be submitted to the University Committee on Academic Professional Status (CAPS). The committee shall consider recommended changes and discuss those it supports with the vice president for academic affairs, who will inform the committee of any changes recommended by the university administration. Changes recommended by the committee shall then be submitted to the academic professionals for approval. The changes will then be submitted to the Personnel Committee of the Academic Senate for comment. The approved documents will be transmitted to the president of the university for appropriate action.

These Academic Professional Grievance Policies and Procedures become effective when approved by the president.