Rejoinders, reconsideration requests, and grievances

There are three different processes available to faculty depending on the circumstance, including rejoinder, reconsideration, and  grievance.

Rejoinder

A rejoinder is a statement written and submitted by an employee to their supervisor and the Human Resources Department wherein the employee offers context and/or additional information on a decision (evaluation rating, merit score, or content) relative to their annual evaluation. Rejoinders may include contextual information or a rationale for the disagreement with the decision, but they do not constitute a request for action to change the decision on the part of the institution. (Reconsideration and grievance processes are available to faculty members to request an action to change an evaluation rating or merit score.) A rejoinder is retained in the personnel file of the employee and, as such will be part of the tenure review process along with the employee’s annual evaluations. There are no time limitations on the submission of a rejoinder. The only context within which employees have the right to submit a rejoinder is disagreement with an annual evaluation of the employee submitted by the employee’s supervisor or a personnel committee that affects evaluation rating or merit pay.

Reconsideration

Reconsideration is a formal written request for administrative review of certain decisions as specified in University Bylaws 3.2.4 and provided in the following sections. If an administrative decision is subject to a grievance, a request for reconsideration may be the first step of desired action, prior to initiating the grievance process, although it is not required.

Reconsideration may be the only process one invokes and does not have to lead to a formal grievance process. Not all issues that can be reconsidered can be grieved. It is advisable to contact the Faculty Senate office prior to initiating the reconsideration process.

Issues that are subject to a request for reconsideration include the following:

• Adverse annual evaluation rating and denial of a salary increase
• Denial of Promotion or Tenure
• Notice of Non-Reappointment (NNR)
• Notice of Termination, or Lay-off

Reconsideration for furlough, pay reduction, layoff due to financial exigency or curricular reasons shall be limited in its scope to the issue of whether there is sufficient evidence to support the specific decision to furlough, reduce pay or lay off the faculty member requesting the reconsideration or whether there has been a deviation from the procedure by which such a decision may be based.

Other decisions are NOT eligible for reconsideration, such as the following:

• Policy decisions made to declare financial exigency, discontinue or reduce in size an administrative unit, project or program because of financial exigency or curricular reasons
• Unpaid leave and temporary workload increases
• Removal of a tenured faculty member from an administrative position and reassignment of administrators

The reconsideration process and deadlines are found in University Bylaws 3.2.4 and a condensed guide is provided in these flowcharts:

Reconsideration Process Flowchart (evaluation or denial of salary increase)
Reconsideration Process Flowchart (tenure, promotion or reappointment)

Grievance

As defined by NSHE Code 5.7.2 a grievance is an act or omission to act by the respective administrations of the System institutions, allegedly resulting in an adverse impact on the employment conditions of a faculty member relating to promotion, appointment with tenure or other aspects of contractual status, or relating to alleged violations of the NSHE Code or University of Nevada, Reno Bylaws.

Filing a grievance initiates a formal hearing process to review a decision. The grievance is reviewed by a committee of faculty members in a formal hearing. The committee then makes a recommendation to the President, who makes the final decision.

It is important to understand that grievance can be a difficult and sometimes adversarial process. Prior to filing for grievance, a faculty member should consider seeking informal resolution or reconsideration. The Faculty Senate office is responsible for facilitating the grievance process and is available to answer questions regarding the process.

Decisions that are subject to a request for grievance include the following:

• Adverse annual evaluation rating and denial of a salary increase
• Reprimands or Warnings
• Denied Promotion or Tenure
• Other aspects of contractual status
• Alleged violations of the University of Nevada, Reno Bylaws or the NSHE Code

Many decisions are NOT eligible for grievance, such as the following:

• Notice of Non-Reappointment (NNR) or Termination of Employment
• Reprimands or Warnings if mediation is used for the same reprimand or warning
• The President's decision if mediation is requested as a response to a warning or reprimand
• The furlough or lay-off of faculty for financial exigency or curricular reasons
• The decision of an appointing authority not to accept a request to rescind a resignation more than three working days after its written acceptance is not subject to grievance or appeal
• Decisions of the Board of Regents
• Duration of employee contracts
• Bridge funding
• Minimum notice of non-reappointment for non-tenured academic and administrative faculty
• Shortened notice of non-reappointment for non-tenured academic and administrative faculty for financial exigency
• Notice of termination for non-tenured academic and administrative faculty (including at the rank of dean or above) hired on or after March 1, 2005
• Interim measures to address sexual harassment charges against faculty

The grievance process and deadlines are found in University of Nevada, Reno Bylaws 3.2.4 and a condensed guide is provided in this flowchart.

Grievance Process Flowchart
University Grievance Process and Procedures