Many individuals have left comments on this site since we broke the story of Robert Felner and the federal investigation focusing on him at the University of Louisville. Most of those comments suggest that Felner was the focus of more grievances filed at the school than anyone else. And some merely suggest that the College of Education and Human Development (Felner was the Dean) was the center of more complaints than all other schools combined.

So we filed an open records request with UofL to obtain the Faculty Grievance Officer’s annual reports for the past five years. So far we’ve received reports for the past three years and expect to receive additional reports later in the week. A report for 2008 will not be available until September.

In 2005 (PDF link) the College of Education and Human Development was responsible for 42% (13) of faculty grievance consultations. That’s six more than the School of Medicine at 23%.

Fine and dandy, right? Maybe. Until one examines the 2006 (PDF link) report from the Faculty Grievance Officer. That year 15 (56%) of the 27 grievance consultations that took place were within the CEHD. Quite a number. So many, in fact, that that grievance officer Suzanne Meeks had this to add:

Read Meeks’ comments along with the rest after the jump…

Due to the number of consultations from CEHD, and the level of negative affect associated with those consultations, I have worked with the Provost’s office to recommend that they use administrative mechanisms to restore morale, faculty governance, and collegial interaction there. Although I believe interventions have been attempted, it is not be sense that they have yet been effective.

See that? Negativity resulted from grievance consultations to the point that recommendations were made to the Provost to work at improving morale and leadership. Meaning problems were coming from the top– (then) Dean Robert Felner.

(Interesting note: the report mentioned that a disproportionate number of grievances came from minorities, particularly those with Asian and Middle Eastern backgrounds.)

In 2007 (PDF link) there was still a disproportionate number of grievance consultations from CEHD. More than 33% of the 16 consultations that took place that year. But what’s most interesting about 2007 is the grievance officer’s comment about the CEHD. Here’s what Meeks had to say:

As with previous years, a disproportionate number of consultations have related to the College of Education and Human Development (one-third). Over the three years of my tenure as FGO, I have consulted with at least one-third of the CEHD faculty. Throughout this time, I have heard talk of retaliation against faculty members who file grievances or requests for mediation. The majority of those I have spoken with are not willing to file grievances because of this fear of retaliation, which extends to those who testify at grievance hearings as well. This situation demonstrates a significant weakness in the grievance system, in that there is no way to prevent such retaliation when one files a complaint against someone who has the power to determine work load agreements and salary increases, approve expenditures, and allocate resources.

I have continued to encourage faculty members to try mediation before going to grievance. In the two cases that I know about, the administrators in question refused to go to mediation, so the case went to grievance. I believe that it might be helpful for deans and other administrators to be educated about the use of mediation as a way to handle disputes with faculty, especially those around allocation of duties through annual work load agreements. Many grievances might have been avoided had administrators been willing to have a neutral third party present in earlier phases of dispute resolution. Streamlining this process so that administrators may request mediation rather than requiring a faculty member to go through the formal process of requesting it, only to have the administrator refuse, would greatly enhance dispute resolution processes in this university.

How bout them apples? Retaliation against faculty who filed grievances (and witnesses who testified) in the CEHD coming from “someone who has the power to determine work load agreements and salary increases, approve expenditures, and allocate resources.”

Whomever could Suzanne Meeks be referencing in the College of Education and Human Development? Robert Felner? Seems to jibe with information that was revealed during the March 2006 Faculty Senate meeting where a vote of no-confidence took place against the Dean.