Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

Version 1 Next »

Any faculty member, department chair, or dean involved in the promotion review (Section A.2) with an actual or potential conflict of interest related to a candidate (e.g., spouse, partner, Ph.D. advisor, postdoctoral mentor, etc.) must recuse themselves from the review, discussion, and vote on that candidate.

For purposes of this provision, a conflict of interest exists in the following situations:

  • A member of the promotion review committees (BC/EC, ad hoc promotion review committee or CAC), the department chair, or the dean was either a respondent or complainant in a University misconduct matter, and the promotion candidate was an opposing party in the same matter (i.e., one was a complainant and the other a respondent)
  • The complainant alleged that the respondent’s misconduct was directed against or harmed the complainant
  • The matter resulted in a finding that the respondent committed a policy violation or engaged in behavior subject to discipline

For purposes of this provision, a potential conflict of interest exists when the Faculty Affairs team, in consultation with the Office of the Vice President of Legal Affairs, determines that the underlying facts in a given scenario cause the appearance of a conflict that undermines University confidence in the fairness of the process.

  • This determination is final.

The dean should contact the provost’s Faculty Affairs team regarding voting eligibility in the event of similar situations that did not result in a finding or that are under investigation at the time of the dossier review.


  • No labels