CVILLE RIGHT NOW REPORTS: UVA’S AAUP CHAPTER VOICES AGREEMENT WITH 128 MEDICAL SCHOOL FACULTY MEMBERS' NO-CONFIDENCE LETTER
The University of Virginia chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) stands in support of the September 5 no-confidence letter.
By Dori Zook September 13, 2024 3:08 pm
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA (CVILLE RIGHT NOW) – The University of Virginia chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) stands in support of the September 5 no-confidence letter in which 128 School of Medicine faculty ask for the resignation of UVA Health’s CEO and Dean of the School of Medicine.
In a letter submitted by AAUP’s Executive Committee on September 12, the chapter said the letter’s allegations are consistent with the chapter’s own long-standing concerns regarding “the systematic flaunting of disregard for the values of our academic mission under the disguise of mutual trust,” including a “fear and retribution among faculty that affects shared governance and academic freedom.”
Citing “the climate of fear and, or retaliation,” the chapter encourages faculty members in the School of Medicine “who have been denied due process or suffered retaliation for speaking out in relation to shared governance, academic freedom or promotion and tenure to access formal institutional grievance channels.” The chapter goes on to say that it anticipates receiving complaints and that if, and when, it occurs, they intend to investigate the complaints more fully per Committee A-compliant procedures.
American Association of University Professors-UVA
1521 Amherst St.
Charlottesville, VA 22903
(434) 825-1896
Robert Hardie, Rector, Board of Visitors
Members of the UVA Board of Visitors (via Secretary Harris)
James Ryan, President
Ian Baucom, VP & Provost
James Lambert, Chair, Faculty Senate
University of Virginia
Sent by Email
September 12, 2024
Statement By American Association of University Professors-UVA Concerning Shared Governance and Academic Freedom at University of Virginia, School Of Medicine
This statement from the UVA local chapter of AAUP comes in support of, and concerns about, the allegations made by 128 UVA Physicians Group-employed faculty report to the Rector and the Board of Visitors on September 5th, 2024, and subsequently published in the Cavalier Daily on the same day.1
The reported allegations were delivered as cause for “no confidence” in the leadership of the Chief Executive Officer of UVA Health and the Dean of the School of Medicine. In agreement with the longstanding concerns our local chapter has had with university-wide failure in strenuously upholding the principles of Shared Governance and Free Speech, we find much in the said report that is consistent with the systematic flaunting of disregard for the values of our academic mission under the disguise of mutual trust.
According to allegations, documents sent to us, and initial comments relayed to us by some SOM faculty, the leaders of the SOM have created a culture of fear and retribution among faculty that affects shared governance and academic freedom.
Any evidence of intimidation of school-level faculty senate members or any faculty members engaged in shared governance would constitute violations of AAUP standards on the matter. Having a structure of shared governance without a strong culture of shared governance that includes freedom from retaliation, the ability to dissent, or independence of faculty decision making from administration interference in such a structure of shared governance, is tantamount to having no structure of shared governance.
Without shared governance there is no solid foundation for academic freedom.
The reported dismissal, punishment, and silencing, by the leadership in UVA Health, of those who followed policy protocols but whose demands were ignored or punished would indeed be egregious violations and noncompliance with AAUP principles pertaining to shared governance and academic freedom. The reports of explicit and implicit threats and retaliation, public ridicule and humiliation, delays and denials of promotion and tenure for those identified as noncompliant to leadership interests, the elevation of rankings over sound practice, all run counter to good practice of shared governance, academic freedom and free speech recommended by the AAUP.
Some specific allegations in the SOM faculty statement that pertain to AAUP principles and standards include:
Lack of Faculty role in hiring decisions;
“Using Delays and denials of promotion and tenure as retaliation against respected faculty for speaking out about patient safety concerns, a culture of fear and retaliation, and unethical behavior by UVA Health leaders;”
“Implementing non-transparent and inconsistent standards regarding academic rank and compensation for new hires relative to existing faculty;”
Lack of involvement of faculty in budgetary matters;
Violations of professional conduct and ethics standards;
Inappropriate disciplinary actions related to the “use of ASPIRE Values to punish and intimidate faculty often in the form of letters placed in Human Resources and Departmental files that have been referenced as cause to withhold recommendations for promotions and tenure.”
AAUP guidelines on Shared Governance2 clarify the expectations of the faculty role in university governance, and the areas in which faculty have primacy and secondary roles. AAUP standards on academic freedom3 and the relationship of shared governance to academic freedom4 set the expectations to be met at the university and school levels.
There appears to be grounds that indicate possible violations of AAUP standards in this case.
We would also call to your attention the following statement in the UVA Faculty Handbook:
“Faculty academic freedom is the freedom to teach; to explore all avenues of scholarship, research, and creative expression and to disseminate the results; and to speak or write on any matter of public concern and on any matter related to professional duties and the functioning of governance of the University.”
In our preliminary inquiries (including a document “UVA HEALTH CONCERNS COMMUNICATED BY FACULTY TO LEADERSHIP timeline sent to the Board of Visitors on September 12, 2024) we have found there were indications of these problems as far back as September of 2021, but more importantly that Provost Baucom and President Ryan were informed about these specific alleged violations in January of 2024.
On January 9, 2024, some SOM faculty members met with Provost Baucom and Associate Provost Brandt-Pierce and presented a SOM Faculty Senate resolution concerning the issues raised in the no confidence letter.
We understand that the then Chair of the UVA Faculty Senate was present at that meeting. We understand that Provost Baucom met with President Ryan about the issues on the following day, January 10. Subsequently some SOM Faculty Senate Members met with Provost Baucom, UVA’s Faculty Senate Chair Kennedy, Dean Kibbe, CEO Craig Kent and Wendy Horton on January 29, 2024 to present the SOM Faculty Senate resolution concerning the myriad problems at the SOM. The SOM Faculty Senate held a general faculty meeting (in person and virtual) on March 5, 2024 that included SOM leadership, Vice Provost Brandt-Pierce and UVA Faculty Senate Chair Kennedy and was attended by approximately 230 participants with documented comments made at the meeting. There appear to be many other meetings held with administrators concerning these issues between September, 2021 and August, 2024.
Given these events, it is apparent that UVA administrators were made aware of the problems addressed in the no confidence letter in January of this year and reminded of the problems again in March. They were provided with documents illustrating the problems alleged. Yet there has been no intervention known to aggrieved SOM faculty leaders since that time thus prompting the drastic measure of issuing a no confidence letter.
We find this troubling as these allegations of violations of shared governance and academic freedom appear to be severe and could lead to investigation and possible censure.
We are dismayed that with the participation of the UVA Faculty Senate Chair at meetings where the problems relayed in the no confidence letter were raised and discussed dating back to January, the Faculty Senate has not acted to address and correct these issues. We are concerned that the disposition of the UVA Faculty Senate leadership to view themselves as extensions of the administration, conflicted with their obligation to represent and secure the interests of faculty members at the SOM. This culture may have contributed to the boiling point of this controversy.
We were disappointed with the written response to the letter of no confidence sent to the SOM community by President Ryan on September 7. That response seemed dismissive and inappropriately hostile, further exacerbating fears of retaliation and mistrust.
It appears to us there are details presented in documents proffered to administrators by faculty since January and through March that are troubling. Our preliminary queries have not turned up evidence that the complainants feel that administration has addressed the concerns raised in any substantive manner since January.
Moreover, President Ryan’s criticisms of difficulty in investigating “generalized and anonymous claims of wrongdoing, without specific details or names to follow up with…” indicated that he does not understand or take seriously the allegations of a culture of retaliation in the SOM. Given the circumstances it is simply not in the realm of trust to say he is disappointed with the letter of no confidence when he was made aware of these issues in January and perhaps before. Attempting to turn faculty against faculty in the SOM as his response does, is not in tune with calls for community processes. Simply asserting that no one connected to the letter will face reprisal when faculty have reportedly faced reprisal for even raising the issues, is further evidence that internal investigation of the allegations would be impossible.
Apparently, faculty already have tried between January and now to “come together as a community to have a conversation—a real, honest, and ongoing conversation—about how to manage change” and have reportedly been met with hostile work conditions, and reprisals according to the letter of no confidence, documents sent to us of meetings held, and comments relayed to us by faculty members.
We disagree with President Ryan’s conclusions that this letter of no confidence and the allegations therein represents the concerns of a small minority of faculty at the SOM. This discourse is meant to diminish the harm alleged as if these problems are commonplace problems in every SOM.
We have been informed that the CSEC at UVA Health conducted an informal survey this week. The results indicate that a majority of faculty and nurses are either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with leadership, calling into question President Ryan’s assertion that the faculty letter of no confidence reflected the sentiments of only a small portion of the community. Based on our experience with the culture of fear among many faculty at UVA, it is likely that there are more concerned or harmed faculty members who would not put their names to the petition for fear of reprisal.
Where there is smoke there is fire.
We therefore wholeheartedly stand in support of the grounds of the allegations and conditions in the SOM presented in the “no confidence” report made by signed petitioners. We fear that this culture exists in other schools and departments at UVA. These allegations of violations of shared governance and academic freedom must be investigated and corrected immediately. We do agree that the CEO and Dean deserve due process. AAUP recommendations on this issue state:
“With respect to other academic administrators, sound practice dictates that the president should neither retain an administrator found wanting by faculty standards nor arbitrarily dismiss an administrator who meets the accountability standards of the academic community (Faculty Participation in the Selection, Evaluation, and Retention of Administrators).
Retention of SOM administrators found wanting by faculty standards is at issue here. Given the culture, it appears it is impossible to do an internal investigation of these allegations with the current leadership in place; perhaps a temporary leave is in order while the external investigation is conducted.
There are issues raised by the letter of no confidence beyond potential violations of shared governance and academic freedom and we cannot speak to those. We urge you to bring in independent external evaluators who have the expertise, and most importantly, the trust and confidence of the faculty to conduct a review of fiscal and ethical issues alleged. We encourage you to invite the AAUP National Office or State Conference to conduct an investigation of the allegations pertaining to shared governance and academic freedom at the SOM. Again, it seems abundantly clear to us that the level of trust required for any internal investigation without retaliation and reprisal is now impossible.
If there are faculty members who have been denied due process or report that they have suffered retaliation for speaking out in relation to shared governance, academic freedom or promotion and tenure, we encourage such faculty members in the School of Medicine to access formal institutional grievance channels. If this proves impossible due to the climate of fear and, or retaliation, and in any event, we also encourage them to file a complaint with our chapter or to the AAUP Department of Academic Freedom at the same time they engage institutional grievance avenues. We anticipate receiving complaints from one or more SOM faculty members based on alleged violations of AAUP standards on shared governance and/or academic freedom. If, and when, that occurs, we intend to investigate more fully those complaints per our Committee A-complaint procedures.
Yours truly,
The Executive Committee
American Association of University Professors -UVA
Cc: Susan Harris, Secretary, UVA Board of Visitors sgh4c@virginia.edu
Mark Criley, AAUP Department of Academic Freedom
What is going on at UVA Health?
We are Concerned Citizens of Charlottesville and Patients of UVA Health who are troubled by what we have heard from many UVA Health professionals over the past year.
These professionals are not only our doctors and nurses but also our friends, family and neighbors. We believe our community should value and protect its health care workers who have dedicated their lives to helping UVA patients.
A Parrhesiastes is someone who speaks the truth in a clear and honest way…
It's about the courage to speak one’s mind even when it's difficult or unpopular…to prioritize truth over social niceties or personal gain...
But speaking the truth can be dangerous. A Parrhesiastes understands this risk and is willing to face the consequences, from social disapproval to vindictive employers or even violence...
Because ultimately Parrhesiastes act out of a sense of duty.
They believe speaking the truth is necessary for the greater good and to protect the people and institution they love.