Complaint Resolution at UC Davis

Complaint Resolution at UC Davis

Personnel Policies for Staff Members
Policy and UCD Procedure 70

The following is an outline of hearing procedures under PPSM 70 and options available for resolution of complaints and grievances. For more detailed information about employee and management rights, review the applicable University policies and collective bargaining agreements on the Web.

RIGHT TO REPRESENTATION

At any stage of the grievance process the grievant may be either self represented or represented by a union representative or any other (1) person of the grievant's choosing.

COMPLAINT RESOLUTION OFFICERS

1. PPSM 70 provides for an administrative meeting as the second step in the process of resolving employee grievances. The complainant is entitled to present and establish their opposing contentions before an objective Complaint Resolution Officer (CRO).
   
2. The Complaint Resolution Officer is appointed by the Associate Vice Chancellor of Human Resources. Normally the CRO is the next level of management (or chain of command) that is not involved in the complaint.
   
1. The CRO's charge is to render a fair and objective Step II decision based on their findings in a written response to the complaint.
   
2. At the Complaint Resolution meeting, the complainant is entitled to present and establish their opposing contentions before the Complaint Resolution Officer.
   
3. Unless both parties agree otherwise, the Step II meeting is limited to the CRO, the complainant, the complainant's representative, a representative from the department, a representative from the Employee and Labor Relations, and a person to record the meeting, if necessary. Unless otherwise agreed, witnesses shall be present only when testifying.
   
3. After reviewing and weighing the evidence presented, the CRO will determine whether or not the action giving cause to the complaint violated University policy.
   
4. If the issues do not qualify for further review as expressed in PPSM 70 Section F. Step III, the Step II decision is final and binding on the parties.
   
   FACT FINDING
5. Either the employee or a Vice Chancellor may request a Fact Finding investigation when the subject matter of a grievance is ineligible for hearing consideration.
   

6.  The Associate Vice Chancellor Human Resources appoints specially trained University employees to serve as a    Fact Finder. A list of trained employees is maintained by Human Resources. The first available Fact Finder is selected to serve, unless there is a clear bias or conflict of interest.

1. A Fact Finder's job is to identify the applicable policies and rules and to determine the facts surrounding the grievance. The Fact Finder is expected to fully, fairly and objectively investigate the case, interview both parties to the grievance and any applicable witnesses, solicit and review documents, and submit a written report to the Chancellor or designated Vice Chancellor.
   
   
2. The Fact Finder is not authorized to issue a decision or order a remedy; thus, the report will only include findings of fact. After reviewing the report, the Chancellor or designated Vice Chancellor will issue a final and binding decision, and, if applicable, order a remedy. The report must be sufficiently thorough to allow the decision maker to issue a fair and equitable decision.
   
   

MEDIATION

The campus offers a Mediation Services Program. Mediation is a dispute resolution process; it is voluntary, informal and confidential. Unlike a hearing, the end result of mediation is a mutually acceptable agreement signed by both parties, rather than a final and binding decision issued by an outside party. Mediation may be utilized at any point in the process, if both parties agree to it. Electing to use mediation can "stop the clock" on hearing time limits, when certain requirements have been met. Information on the mediation process is available at http://mediation.ucdavis.edu/.

EXPEDITED ARBITRATION

The University offers expedited arbitration hearings, which differ from the "Hearing Process" in the following ways:

1. The hearing will last no longer than one day (the hearing procedures are designed to ensure that the hearing is completed in one day).
   
   
2. A non-University hearing officer will be appointed by State Mediation and Conciliation Services.
   
   
3. The complainant's share of the hearing officer's fee and associated hearing costs is fixed at $300.00 (most hearing officers charge more that $600.00 per day).
   

Please see the Expedited Arbitration Agreement for more details.

HEARING PROCESS

1. Selection of University Hearing Officer. The complainant has the option of having their hearing conducted by a University Hearing Officer who has received training in the hearing process. University Hearing Officers serve at no cost to the grievant.
   
   
   1. The Advocacy and Research Unit maintains a list of University Hearing Officers.
      
      
   2. The first University Hearing Officer on the list that is available (i.e., able to conduct the hearing within a reasonable time) is selected to serve as the hearing officer.
      
      
   3. Both the grievant and the University have the option of one strike of a name from the list for any reason. If either side objects to the first name on the list, that side uses their challenge and the potential hearing officer's name is by passed on the list.
      
      
   4. Once a University Hearing Officer is agreed upon, the University Hearing Officer is contacted. If for any reason, the University Hearing Officer declines to serve, the next willing University Hearing Officer on the list is chosen to serve, unless there is a clear bias or conflict of interest.
      
      
   5. The Advocacy and Research Unit will establish a hearing date with the University Hearing Officer and the grievant and will confirm the date, time, and location.
      
      
2. Selection of a non-University Hearing Officer. If a non-University Hearing Officer is elected, the hearing officer's fees are borne equally by the grievant and the University. Non-University Hearing Officers are selected as follows:
   
   
   1. The Advocacy and Research Unit will request a list of five potential hearing officers from the State Mediation and Conciliation Services. There is no charge to either party for requesting the list. However, most hearing officers charge between $700-900 per day of hearing plus writing time.
      
      

      Example: If a hearing runs two days, the hearing officer will likely bill four days (two days of hearing and two days of research/writing). The bill is divided equally between the grievant and the University. Many hearing officers also charge travel expenses. Some require a court reporter. If a hearing officer who requires a court reporter is chosen, then the parties may:

      1. agree to select another Hearing Officer or
         
         
      2. agree to use the chosen Hearing Officer and split the cost of the court reporter.
         
         
   2. The hearing officer is selected via a strike-off procedure. Each party alternately "strikes" a name off the list until one-name remains. That name is the name of the hearing officer selected to hear the case.
      
      
   3. Once the hearing officer has been selected and agreed upon by the parties, the hearing officer will offer a choice of hearing dates. When the parties have agreed to the hearing dates, the University will schedule a hearing location. The parties then prepare for hearing.
      
      
3. At the hearing, each party uses witnesses and documents to present their case. Each party has the opportunity to question all witnesses. The hearing officer may also ask questions. At the conclusion of the hearing, the parties may make closing statements. Sometimes, a written statement (post-hearing brief) is used instead of a closing statement.
   
   
4. The hearing officer will write a detailed final and binding decision which sets forth the issue decided, the essence of the parties case, the decision itself, and the reasoning behind the decision. A copy of the decision is mailed to each party and the case is closed.