I have to say, i think that the case longley hase is really weak. It is, in fact, pretty standard practice. For whatever reason, the department had decided that they weren't going to offer this guy tenure. When this happens, what they do is discourage you from applying, as a sort of courtesy. Also, it is indeed standard practice to not renew contracts of faculty who apply for tenure track but don't make it. It's basically like "hey, you're not going to ever get tenure here, so you might as well leave." They usually, as again a professional courtesy, don't come up to people and say "you're not going to get tenure." But, after a few years if you're not in a tenure-track position, you are passively encouraged to find another position
( ... )
Yeah, I think I'm with you on the merits of the case. I think he has a fair complaint with the standard the department uses to grant tenure, since he really was a fantastic teacher, but nothing that should really be the subject of a lawsuit. In fact, I remember in class that he complained about the publication requirement for tenure so I think that may have had more to do with it than this "discrimination" issue. Then again, I don't really know too much about the facts here.
The problem I see is this. You really really are NOT supposed to choose applicants solely based on Race/Gender/Diversity. That really is illegal.
It was pretty much explicit here, I think. They wanted a woman/minority so they told the newest guy there to leave. I even remember the people who's had him as a prof talking about it at the time. Didn't have anything to do with his publication/teaching/funding record. That's really not standard practice is it?
"I think he has a fair complaint with the standard the department uses to grant tenure but nothing that should really be the subject of a lawsuit."
What should his complaint be a subject of if not a lawsuit? He complained to the department directly as well as the Provost and was shut out. Where's he supposed to go from there if he has a legitimate reason to think that he was discriminated against?
Well certainly the school cannot consider race and gender in isolation, but if they're presented with similar candidates they can consider the long term goal of having a diverse department. He would only have a case if his replacement was less qualified than he was. You can argue about the wisdom of considering diversity in hiring, but it isn't illegal if you stay away from quotas. I haven't heard anything to suggest that his replacement wasn't qualified.
Also, I really may be wrong, but I remember there being some question about the adequacy his publication record. That's all the school would need to deny tenure.
I remember there was a similar case a few years ago with Sarah Griessing, a visiting prof in the Spanish dept. She applied for a tenure spot, didn't get it, and then was asked to leave. She made a huge deal about it, and somehow I believe she was allowed to stay in her current position. Makes me wonder if Mac is really that consistent in the implementation of that policy.
Comments 9
Reply
Reply
It was pretty much explicit here, I think. They wanted a woman/minority so they told the newest guy there to leave. I even remember the people who's had him as a prof talking about it at the time. Didn't have anything to do with his publication/teaching/funding record. That's really not standard practice is it?
"I think he has a fair complaint with the standard the department uses to grant tenure but nothing that should really be the subject of a lawsuit."
What should his complaint be a subject of if not a lawsuit? He complained to the department directly as well as the Provost and was shut out. Where's he supposed to go from there if he has a legitimate reason to think that he was discriminated against?
Reply
Also, I really may be wrong, but I remember there being some question about the adequacy his publication record. That's all the school would need to deny tenure.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment