3.12| Employee Grievance Procedures

A. Purpose and Scope
This policy provides a grievance procedure for all Sampoerna University employees, excluding faculty (or faculty holding administrative appointments). This includes professional staff, hourly employees, and student employees.

 

B. Definitions

1. Complainant: Person who is subject to alleged inequity as it applies to any University policy or procedure. For purposes of this policy, a complainant is an employee, with the exception of individuals classified as faculty.
2. Respondent: Person whose alleged conduct is the subject of a complaint. For purposes of this policy, a respondent can be an employee or authorized representative of the University.
3. Appointing Authority: The individual designated by the President to make ultimate personnel decisions concerning a particular employee.
4. Disciplinary Authority: The individual designated by the President with the authority to make ultimate personnel decisions to impose disciplinary actions upon a particular employee.
5. Investigator: The individual(s) designated by the Vice Rector for Administration, Resources and Operations to investigate an employee grievance.
6. Appeals Committee: The individuals designated by the President to review the appeal of a grievance decision by the Investigator.

 

C. Grievable Offenses

1. Except as noted herein, an employee may grieve any action which violates or inequitably applies any University policy or procedure and which adversely affects the employee’s working conditions.
2. Claims of discrimination and/or harassment are taken very seriously and should be reported to an employee’s supervisor or a human resources officer.

 

D. Non-grievable matters

1. Matters over which the employer is without authority to act.
2. Evaluations of job performance.
3. Dismissals, non-renewals, suspensions, and disciplinary actions.
4. Reassignments except those that result in a reduction in pay.

 

E. Filing a Complaint
All complaints will be made as promptly as possible after the occurrence. A delay in reporting may be reasonable under some circumstances; however, an unreasonable delay in reporting is an appropriate consideration in evaluating the merits of a complaint or report.

 

F. Filing a Complaint

1. Employees must submit all grievances in writing to Human Resources. All grievances will be assessed by the preponderance of evidence standard. The Vice Rector for Administration, Resources and Operations will designate an individual(s) to be the investigator(s) over the complaint.
2. The investigator(s) will initially determine whether the complaint is grievable or non-grievable.
   • If grievable, the investigator(s) will inform the complainant and respondent of the grievance.
   • If the investigator(s) determines the complaint is not grievable, s/he will inform the complainant of this decision in writing. This decision is final.

 

G. Informal Resolution
Before pursuing a formal complaint, every reasonable effort should be made to constructively resolve the issues with the affected parties at an informal level. The investigator(s) will facilitate the informal resolution process. If informal resolution is not successful, the investigator(s) will open a formal grievance case.

 

H. Formal Process

1. The investigator(s) will contact or request a meeting with both the complainant and respondent. Both parties will be given the opportunity to discuss the allegations of the grievance and may offer any documentation, witnesses, or other materials in support of their case. During this meeting, neither party may have an outside representative. This process is entirely administrative in nature and is not considered a legal proceeding.
2. No audio or video recording of any kind may be made without the consent of the parties.
3. The investigator(s) may also contact or request a meeting with relevant University staff, students or others as part of the investigation.
4. At the investigator’s discretion, the investigator(s) may discontinue meetings with anyone that is hostile or disruptive, and will proceed to make a determination based on the information known at that time.
5. Based on the preponderance of evidence, the investigator(s) will issue a decision, in writing, to both the complainant and the respondent. The decision will reject or grant the grievance and make recommendations to resolve the issue(s). The complainant and respondent will be advised of his/her right to appeal the decision, subject to the grounds below, by filing a written appeal with the investigator within seven (7) days of receipt of the decision.
6. In the event of an appeal, the investigator will give written notice to the other party to allow him/her the opportunity to submit a response in writing. The investigator will also draft a response memorandum (also shared with all parties). All appeals and responses are then forwarded to the President’s office for initial review to determine if the appeal meets the limited grounds for appeal and is timely. The original finding will stand if the appeal is not timely or substantively eligible and the decision is final. If the appeal has standing, the President will convene an Appeals Committee composed of at least three individuals. The Appeals Committee must include at least two professional staff and one HR representative. Documentation is forwarded to the Committee for consideration. The party requesting an appeal must show error as the original finding is presumed to have been decided reasonably and appropriately. The ONLY grounds for appeal are as follows:
   • A procedural or substantive error occurred that significantly impacted the outcome of the decision (e.g. substantiated bias, material deviation from established procedures); or
   • To consider new evidence, unavailable during the original complaint or investigation, that could substantially impact the original finding. A summary of this new evidence and its potential impact must be included in the written appeal.
7. If the Appeals Committee determines that new evidence should be considered, it will return the complaint to the investigator(s) to reconsider in light of the new evidence only.
8. If the Appeals Committee determines that a material procedural or substantive error occurred, it may return the complaint to the investigator(s) with instructions to reconvene the hearings to cure the error. In rare cases, where the procedural or substantive error cannot be cured due to clear bias, the Appeals Committee may order a new grievance hearing be held with a different individual acting in the place of the compromised investigator. The results of a reconvened hearing cannot be appealed. The results of a new hearing can be appealed based on the two applicable grounds for appeals.
9. Retaliatory Acts
   • If any person who files a grievance, or any person who testifies, assists or participates in a proceeding, investigation or hearing related to a grievance, feels they are being subjected to retaliatory acts, they should report such incidences to Human Resources as soon as possible.
   • It is a violation of this policy to engage in retaliatory acts against any person who files a grievance or any person who testifies, assists or participates in a grievance proceeding, investigation or hearing relating to a grievance. Acts of retaliation will be subject to discipline, up to and including expulsion for student employees, termination for SU professional staff and dismissal for other categories of employees, volunteers, guests or visitors.