I. Introduction
This section of the faculty manual sets forth procedures for the investigation and resolution of certain complaints involving alleged inappropriate conduct by members of the Syracuse University faculty as defined in Section 4.1 of the Faculty Manual.
Any concerns regarding alleged misconduct by faculty for which there are separate and special procedures shall be resolved in accordance with those procedures. For example, complaints involving alleged violations of the University’s Sexual Harassment, Abuse, and Assault Prevention Policy are investigated via procedures available on the Syracuse University Policies website. Complaints involving alleged misconduct in research, scholarship, or creative activity are investigated via procedures detailed in sec. 4.4. Faculty complaints involving alleged violations of academic freedom or rights afforded by tenure are investigated via procedures detailed on the website of the Committee on Academic Freedom, Tenure, and Professional Ethics (AFTPE).
Any and all complaints involving alleged inappropriate conduct by faculty that are not covered by procedures detailed elsewhere will be addressed via the procedures detailed in this section. These procedures apply to complaints that are received by the University on or after May 13, 2024, regardless of when the conduct reportedly occurred. The term “Complainant” refers to an individual who is reported to have experienced Prohibited Conduct, regardless of whether the individual makes a report or seeks disciplinary action. Although the University reserves the right to initiate a Formal Complaint under this process, the term “Complainant” refers to the individual who is reported to have experienced the Prohibited Conduct. The term “Respondent” refers to an individual who has been accused of Prohibited Conduct. An individual may make a report to the University, to law enforcement, to neither, or to both. In particular, a Complainant has the right to report, or decline to report, potential criminal conduct to law enforcement.
The University is committed to providing a prompt, thorough, equitable, and impartial resolution of all reports and complaints. These procedures designate estimated time frames for major stages of the process and provide a framework for review of concerns that afford the Complainant and Respondent notice, along with equal opportunities to present witnesses and information, to be assisted by a non-attorney advisor, to review the information that will be used in determining whether a policy violation has occurred, and to appeal the finding and outcome. Where appropriate, these procedures include participation by AFTPE and the Office of Equal Opportunity, Inclusion, and Resolution Services (EOIRS).
A. Interim Measures
While a complaint against a faculty member is being addressed, the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs may implement interim measures in instances where any of the following conditions exist:
- There is immediate physical danger to persons or property;
- There is reasonable indication of serious criminal violation;
- There is an immediate threat to health and safety of members of the University community;
- There is immediate need to protect the safety or interests of the person(s) making the allegations, of witnesses, or of the subject(s) of the allegations or their collaborators and associates;
- There is a need to preserve evidence or to prevent improper influence of witness testimony;
- There is immediate need to protect essential equipment or funds, including federal funds or federal financial assistance; or
- There is a need to prevent ongoing and substantial unprofessional conduct that negatively impacts other members of the university community.
Interim action may include, for example:
- Restrictions on contact or communication with person(s) involved in the complaint
- Limitation on access to certain areas of the campus
- Reassignment of duties
- Partial or total administrative leave with pay
- Directives to preserve or grant access to evidence or records related to the allegations
- Restrictions on university-related travel
The Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs shall adopt such interim measures only after due consideration of potential implications for academic freedom, shall where possible consult with the AFTPE Chair in advance of taking such actions, and shall notify the AFTPE Chair of any such interim measures in a timely manner.
B. Confidential Consultation
The University provides all faculty and staff with access to the following options for confidential consultation before choosing whether to report inappropriate conduct. Individuals acting as confidential resources cannot disclose the information (including information about whether an individual has received services) without the consent of the disclosing individual, except in instances where the confidential resource is required by ethical or legal obligations to reveal such information. This ethical obligation may exist, for example, if the reported behavior poses ongoing danger to the community. Individuals acting as confidential resources cannot initiate a complaint process or formally resolve a complaint; they serve as a supportive resource only.
Faculty and Staff Assistance Program
Faculty and staff can contact Carebridge at 800-437-0911. Carebridge counselors may be reached 24/7 for confidential consultation, assessment, referrals, and counseling. (315) 443-1087
Office of the University Ombuds
Provides University employees with an informal, confidential, imartial, and independent resource to address concerns or questions openly without fear of retaliation or judgment.
111 Waverly Ave, Suite 215
(315) 443.1087
ombuds@syr.edu
II. Alleged Violations of Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Policies by University Faculty
The procedures in this section shall be applied to complaints involving alleged violations by faculty of the University’s Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Policies, other than the Sexual Harassment, Abuse, and Assault Prevention Policy.
Prior to or in lieu of reporting discrimination or harassment to the Chief Equal Opportunity officer, the Complainant may communicate the allegation of inappropriate faculty conduct directly to the Faculty Member in question. The most useful communication will have three parts:
- a factual description of the inappropriate conduct, including date, time, place and specific action;
- a description of the Complainant’s reaction, including any consequences of the incident(s); and
- a request that the objectionable conduct cease.
Alternatively, the Complainant may communicate the allegation to someone in a relevant supervisory position (e.g., the Respondent’s Chair, Director, or Dean). The purpose of such a report is to communicate the specific conduct in question, request that the person in a supervisory position let the Faculty Member know that the conduct has been claimed to be inappropriate, and request that any such conduct cease. The Respondent’s Chair, Director, or Dean should document the conversation and share a record of it with the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs and the Chief Equal Opportunity and Title IX Officer for Faculty and Staff.
Such a communication may cause the alleged inappropriate conduct to stop, particularly where the Respondent may not be aware that the conduct is perceived as inappropriate. If the conduct in question continues, the Complainant may proceed by reporting the discrimination or harassment to the Chief Equal Opportunity officer as described below.
A. Reporting Discrimination
Complaints may be submitted by current university faculty, staff, or students. In the case of former faculty, staff, and students alleging misconduct that occurred while they were members of the university community, complaints may be submitted on their behalf by current faculty, staff, or administrators. Likewise, in the case of complaints arising from persons unaffiliated with the university alleging misconduct by university faculty in the course of university-related activities or programs, the University reserves the right to act on behalf of others.
The University encourages all individuals to report discrimination and harassment to the Chief Equal Opportunity and Title IX Officer for Faculty and Staff in person, by telephone, or by email:
Chief Equal Opportunity and Title IX Officer for Faculty and Staff
Office of Equal Opportunity, Inclusion and Resolution Services
005 Steele Hall, Syracuse University
Syracuse, NY 13244-1120
equalopp@syr.edu | (315) 443-0211
If the initial complaint is made to individuals outside of the Office of Equal Opportunity, Inclusion, or Resolution Services, the individual receiving the complaint will notify the Chief Equal Opportunity and Title IX Officer for Faculty and Staff.
Conduct that is potentially criminal in nature may also be reported to the Department of Public Safety:
Department of Public Safety, 005 Sims Hall, (315) 443-2224
Complainants and witnesses who make a good faith report of harassment or discrimination will be provided with written information about available support and resources, including interim support measures, and the University will take steps to prevent and respond to any retaliation or attempted retaliation.
The Office of Equal Opportunity, Inclusion, and Resolution Services will make available mechanisms for submitting complaints both anonymously and non-anonymously. While the University endeavors to address all complaints, the nature of anonymous complaints makes investigation, determination, and remediation more difficult, and at times, impossible.
When investigating non-anonymous complaints, the University will attempt to protect the identity of Complainants who do not wish to be identified, but this may not always be possible.
B. Preliminary Inquiry
Upon receipt of a complaint of discrimination or harassment based on a protected category, the Chief Equal Opportunity and Title IX Officer for Faculty and Staff (or designee) will conduct a preliminary inquiry of the allegations. This preliminary inquiry may require speaking with the reporting party (or parties) or witnesses to more fully understand the allegations.
The Chief Equal Opportunity and Title IX Officer for Faculty and Staff (or designee) will then determine whether the allegations, if true, state a violation of any University policy. If an allegation involves a clear violation of University policy, the case may proceed to an investigation through a formal resolution process or be referred for informal resolution. If the allegation does not involve a violation of University policy, the case will be closed. However, even if a case is closed, the Chief Equal Opportunity and Title IX Officer for Faculty and Staff may elect to provide feedback, coaching, or advice to the faculty member, directly or with the assistance of others, in an effort to foster inclusion and/or equity in future behavior.
C. Informal Resolution
Upon review of a complaint that more likely than not constitutes a violation of University policy, the Chief Equal Opportunity and Title IX Officer for Faculty and Staff (or designee) may seek to broker an informal resolution to which all parties can agree. A satisfactory informal resolution must adequately address the needs of the Complainant, Respondent, and the University and may include, for example, a recommendation of professional development or training among other activities. Any such informal resolution shall be communicated to both parties in writing, with copies to the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs and the AFTPE Chair.
D. Formal Resolution
1. Summative Complaint
If the parties are unable to agree on informal resolution or if the Chief Equal Opportunity and Title IX Officer for Faculty and Staff concludes that informal resolution is inappropriate, the Chief Equal Opportunity and Title IX Officer for Faculty and Staff will assign an investigator from the Office of Equal Opportunity, Inclusion, and Resolution Services and, in consultation with the AFTPE Chair, a faculty liaison. Faculty liaisons may be AFTPE members or other faculty designated by the AFTPE Chair to serve in an ad hoc capacity. The liaison’s role is to ensure that an independent faculty voice is present throughout the process of investigations involving alleged faculty misconduct and to keep the AFTPE Chair apprised of any concerns regarding academic freedom that emerge in the course of investigation. Faculty liaisons should familiarize themselves with the principles of academic freedom referenced in Section 3.51.
The EOIRS investigator(s), in consultation with the faculty liaison, will produce a summative version of the formal complaint, specifying the allegations of violations per Section 4.1. The Summative Complaint will be provided to the Complainant and Respondent. The Respondent will have the opportunity to respond to the Summative Complaint in a meeting with the Investigator and faculty liaison and may respond in writing. The Respondent also may identify witnesses who can provide relevant information regarding the complaint.
2. Investigation
Following the response to the summative complaint by both parties, the investigator will take steps to investigate the allegations including, without limitation, by conducting witness interviews, gathering documentary evidence, conducting site visits, and utilizing any other appropriate methods to obtain pertinent information. The investigator will summarize the facts in an investigative report. Where the facts warrant, the investigative report shall state conclusions as to any violations of university policy that have been established as more likely than not. The faculty liaison will participate in this process and offer feedback on the investigative report prior to its distribution to the parties.
For parties or witnesses wishing to submit evidence to the investigator, they must submit all known evidence in existence and in their possession prior to completion of the investigative report. If a party or witness fails to provide known evidence in their possession during the investigation, they may be precluded from offering it at a later date. In addition, if a witness chooses not to participate in an investigation interview, they may be precluded from testifying at a later date. No party or witness is required to speak with the investigator, but the investigator has the right to move forward with an investigation and may complete an investigative report without the party or witness’s statement or evidence. Although the University encourages all individuals involved in these processes to keep the matter private, the University cannot and will not restrict the Complainant’s and Respondent’s rights to speak about their experiences.
Both Complainant and Respondent will have an opportunity to review a draft investigative report and provide a written response to the report within ten business days. The investigator, in consultation with the faculty liaison, will review the written responses and determine whether any additional investigation is necessary or if the investigative report should be modified. If no additional investigation or modifications are necessary, or if no written responses are received, the investigator will conclude the investigation.
EOIRS will then provide the investigative report to the Chair of AFTPE. After reviewing the report, AFTPE may request additional information. Upon such request, EOIRS will revise the investigative report. This process may be repeated as necessary until AFTPE requires no additional information. Upon review of the final investigative report, AFTPE will submit its Advisory Report and Recommendations to the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs, indicating whether or not there is a finding of conduct in violation of University policy, and if so, recommended sanctions for review and determination by the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs. If the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs is the Respondent or otherwise has a conflict of interest, the AFTPE report shall be submitted to the Vice Chancellor, Provost and Chief Academic Officer instead. Likewise, if the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer has a conflict of interest or is the Respondent, the report will be provided to the Office of the Chancellor. The AFTPE’s Advisory Report and Recommendations will be delivered or an update provided within four months of AFTPE’s receipt of the final investigative report.
3. Decisions and Sanctions
Within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of the Advisory Report and Recommendations from the AFTPE Chair, the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs will issue an outcome to the Complainant and Respondent, and if the Respondent is found responsible for a policy violation, may also issue appropriate sanctions. In addition to the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer, the Chief Equal Opportunity and Title IX Officer for Faculty and Staff, the Chair of AFTPE, and the Respondent’s Dean also will receive a copy of the outcome. If the recommended sanction impacts the Respondent’s status as an employee (for example, administrative leave without pay or termination), University Counsel will be notified.
Any recommended sanction and/or penalty should reflect the severity, duration, and/or frequency of the conduct. The recommended penalties may include, but are not limited to, any one or a combination of the following: written warning placed in the Respondent’s file, probation, suspension with or without pay, removal from administrative duties within a department, dismissal, or other action appropriate to the circumstances, such as restitution, professional development, or mental health assessment or counseling. If the outcome involves a recommendation for dismissal from the University, the Respondent will be afforded the procedures set forth at Section 4.51 of the Faculty Manual.
4. Appeals
Either party may, within ten (10) business days of the communication of the Decision and/or Sanction, file either an Appeal or a Notice of Intent to Appeal to the Office of the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer, which will notify the other parties of the action. Appeals must be based on one or both of the following:
- new evidence not reasonably available during consideration of the complaint, the absence of which can be shown to have had a material effect on the outcome; or
- errors in the interpretation of University policy that had a material effect on the outcome.If the party files a Notice of Intent to Appeal, the party has an additional five (5) business days to submit the Appeal. The Vice Chancellor, Provost and Chief Academic Officer may accept, reject, or modify the investigatory findings and conclusions. If necessary, they may take steps to further investigate or clarify any aspect of the report or allegations. Absent extenuating circumstances, the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer will render a decision within twenty (20) business days of receipt of the Appeal. This answer to the Appeal is final.If the respondent leaves the University while a complaint is pending, the University may close the case.
III. Other Alleged Misconduct by University Faculty
Alleged violations of the University Code of Ethical Conduct or any other university policy, including but not limited to harassment, bullying, or retaliation, that are not addressed under Section II shall be investigated as follows. If the same set of facts (alleged misconduct) implicates both the Code of Ethical Conduct and any of the University’s nondiscrimination policies, the procedures in Section II will be followed.
A. Complaints from students or staff
This section governs complaints submitted by university students or staff alleging unethical or otherwise prohibited conduct by university faculty that does not fall under Section II. Such complaints shall be resolved wherever possible at the lowest appropriate administrative level. Students or staff should direct such complaints to the relevant unit-level administrator, who may hold the title of department chair, director of the school, or in schools and colleges that are not structured by departments, associate dean. If the responsible administrators identified in these procedures are the targets of the complaint or otherwise have a conflict of interest, alternates will be identified to act in their place, as follows:
- If the unit-level administrator has a conflict of interest or is Respondent, complaint may be made to the Dean, who will identify an alternate unit-level administrator to review the complaint.
- If the Dean has a conflict of interest or is Respondent, complaint may be made to the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs, who will identify an alternate to fulfill the responsibilities of both the unit-level administrator and the Dean. This may be one or two persons.
- If the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs has a conflict of interest or is Respondent, the Provost will identify an alternate to review complaints forwarded by the Dean.
- If the Vice Chancellor, Provost and Chief Academic Officer has a conflict of interest or is the Respondent, the Chancellor will substitute for the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer and will determine the appropriate procedures. Such procedures will be communicated to all parties in writing.
The unit-level administrator who receives the complaint shall make reasonable effort to determine whether the alleged conduct implicates University policy or directives. Unit-level administrators should familiarize themselves with the University Code of Ethical Conduct, the principles of academic freedom referenced in Section 3.51, and other relevant policies and directives regarding faculty rights and responsibilities. In addition, they are encouraged to consult with other relevant administrative personnel before proceeding. If they believe interim measures are warranted, they should promptly refer the matter to the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs.
If the alleged conduct does not implicate University policy or directives, the allegation will be dismissed. The unit-level administrator shall notify the Complainant, the relevant Dean, and the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs of such dismissal. The unit-level administrator may notify the Respondent as well, if in their judgment the feedback would be beneficial to the Respondent.
If the unit-level administrator who receives the complaint determines that University policy or directives are implicated, they should, where possible, seek to broker an informal resolution to which all parties can agree. A satisfactory informal resolution must adequately address the needs of the Complainant, Respondent, and the University. Any such informal resolution shall be communicated to both parties in writing, with copies to the relevant dean, the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs, and the AFTPE Chair.
If the parties are unable to agree to an informal resolution, or if informal resolution is inappropriate, the unit-level administrator who receives the complaint shall make reasonable effort to establish the relevant facts. For example, the unit-level administrator may meet with and interview relevant parties and witnesses and review any evidence provided by those persons. The unit-level administrator may also review other records or documents relevant to the case, but should consult with the Dean before requesting access to records or documents not normally available to them or to the public.
If, after a review of the relevant facts, the unit-administrator determines that no violation occurred, they shall dismiss the complaint and communicate this decision to the parties, the Dean, and the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs. The Complainant may, within five (5) business days of the receipt of the decision, request reconsideration of the complaint one step up the administrative hierarchy.
If the unit-level administrator determines that it is more likely than not that the alleged conduct represents a violation of University policy, they shall report their findings in writing to the Dean. This report shall detail the investigative steps undertaken, document any relevant factual findings, and indicate which university policies or directives have been violated. Any named party may submit a written response to the report within five (5) business days to the relevant Dean.
After reviewing the report and any written responses, the Dean may consult with the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs together with the Chair of AFTPE, as needed. The Dean shall then either concur with or reject the unit-level administrator’s determination that a violation of University policy or directives has occurred. The Dean’s decision should be issued within ten (10) business days following the receipt of the report from the unit-level administrator or statements received by any named parties, whichever is later.
- If the Dean concurs with the finding of a violation, they may implement ameliorative steps to end the misconduct and prevent its recurrence. Such steps may include requiring professional development training or mandating any other actions otherwise within the Dean’s authority to require of all faculty.
- If the Dean concurs with the finding of violation and determines that the violation warrants sanctions that would materially impact the respondent’s employment, such as suspension, the Dean shall forward the case to the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs with a recommendation as to what sanctions should be imposed.
- If the Dean rejects the unit-level administrator’s determination that a violation of University policy or directives has occurred, the Complainant may request reconsideration of the facts by the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs within ten (10) business days of receiving the outcome from the Dean. The Associate Provost’s decision will be final.
- In all cases, the Dean’s recommendation shall be provided in writing to the parties, the relevant unit-level administrator, the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs and the Chair of AFTPE.
Any recommended sanction and/or ameliorative steps issued by the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs should reflect the severity, duration, and/or frequency of the conduct. The recommended penalties may include any one or a combination of the following: written warning placed in the Respondent’s file, probation, suspension with or without pay, removal from administrative duties within a department, dismissal, or other action appropriate to the circumstances, such as restitution, professional development, or mental health assessment or counseling. If the recommended sanction involves dismissal from the University, the Respondent will be afforded the procedures set forth at Section 4.51 of the Faculty Manual. The Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs will issue a decision within fifteen (15) business days of receiving a report and recommendation from a Dean or a request for reconsideration from a complainant.
Either party may, within ten (10) business days of the communication of the decision and/or sanction by the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs, file an appeal to the Office of the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer, which will notify the other parties of the action. Appeals must be based on one or both of the following:
- new evidence not reasonably available during consideration of the complaint, the absence of which had a material effect on the outcome; or
- errors in the interpretation of University policy or directives that had a material effect on the outcome.
In addition, if the faculty Respondent believes that the Dean or Associate Provost’s decision and/or sanction impinges upon their academic freedom or tenure rights or represents a violation of professional ethics, they may file a written complaint with the Chair of AFTPE within ten (10) business days of receiving the Dean’s or Associate Provost’s decision. AFTPE shall immediately notify the Vice Chancellor, Provost and Chief Academic Officer that the claim has been received and will review the complaint in accord with procedures posted on its website. Any such review shall result in an Advisory Report and Recommendation to the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer.
Upon receipt of an appeal and/or an AFTPE Advisory Report and Recommendation, the Vice Chancellor, Provost and Chief Academic Officer may accept, reject, or modify the investigatory findings and conclusions. If necessary, they may take steps to further investigate or clarify any aspect of the report or allegations. Absent extenuating circumstances, the Vice Chancellor, Provost and Chief Academic Officer will render a decision within twenty (20) business days of receipt of the appeal or report from AFTPE, whichever is later. The Vice Chancellor, Provost and Chief Academic Officer’s decision is final.
If the respondent leaves the University while a complaint is pending, the University may close the case.
B. Complaints from faculty
Complaints by university faculty alleging violations of academic freedom or rights afforded by tenure may be submitted in writing to the Chair of AFTPE. AFTPE shall review the complaint(s) via procedures available on AFTPE’s website.
Complaints by university faculty alleging unethical or otherwise prohibited conduct by fellow faculty that does not fall under Section II and that does not implicate academic freedom or tenure rights shall be submitted to the relevant unit-level administrator, where they shall be resolved via the procedures detailed in Section III.A. If an allegation based on the same set of facts implicates both the Code of Ethical Conduct and any of the University’s non-discrimination policies, procedures in Section II will be followed. University faculty may consult with the Chair of AFTPE regarding the scope of academic freedom and tenure rights. If either faculty Complainant or Respondent believes that any resulting decision and/or sanction represents a violation of professional ethics, they may file a written complaint with the Chair of AFTPE.
C. Anonymous complaints
Complaints may be submitted through portals, reporting forms, or other mechanisms specifically designated by the University to enable anonymous reporting of alleged violations of University policy by University Faculty. While the University endeavors to address all complaints, the nature of anonymous complaints makes investigation, determination, and remediation more difficult, and at times, impossible.
Recipients of anonymous complaints will refer all information received to the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs who will determine if University policies are implicated. If so, the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs will refer the report to the appropriate unit-level administrator for review as indicated in Section III.A., or may refer complaints to other appropriate administrators, for example, to the Vice President for Research as required by Section 4.4. If the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs determines that University policy is not implicated in the reported behavior, the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs will provide the recipient of the anonymous complaint with the necessary response. Upon dismissal, the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs may share information about the anonymous complaint with the Respondent if in their judgment the feedback would be beneficial to Respondent.
IV. Annual Reporting
Each academic year, AFTPE shall report to the University Senate regarding the frequency of complaints resolved formally or informally under the Section II or III procedures above. To the extent practical while maintaining privacy of relevant parties and witnesses in individual cases, AFTPE’s report shall provide summary indication of the procedures followed and outcomes reached in the aggregate set of cases reviewed over the preceding year.
Approved by the University Senate April 17, 2024