Faculty Reviews Governance Process; Aims to Create Grievance Committee After Failed Spring Motion

Iqra Athar ’26

Executive News Editor

At the Oct. 7 faculty meeting held in the Washington Room, faculty continued their review of Trinity’s governance structures, including revisions to the Faculty Manual and updates to committees responsible for addressing faculty concerns. A new governance committee was elected and motions were passed to formally establish the Faculty Grievance Committee and to add a jointly authored statement on academic freedom by faculty, administration and the Board of Trustees to the Faculty Manual. The committee is expected by faculty leadership to be operational before the next faculty meeting on Dec. 9.

The restructuring follows last spring’s failed attempt to reorganize the Faculty Manual and establish a formal amendment process due to time constraints and limited faculty review. The Faculty Conference plans to reintroduce revised motions in December. Concerns raised in October focused on legal terminology in the manual, unclear control of appendices and how shared governance with the Board of Trustees will function as revisions continue.

Co-chair of the Academic Freedom Committee and Professor of English Christopher Hager told the Tripod that the committee brought forward the motion to create the Faculty Grievance Committee for several reasons. First, procedures in the Faculty Manual allowed faculty to bring non-academic complaints to the Academic Freedom Committee if the ombudsperson could not resolve them, a structure he described as confusing and out of step with the committee’s purpose. Second, he said the committee sought to remain focused on academic freedom alone rather than adjudicating unrelated disputes. A third consideration involved clarifying the relationship between the committee and the ombudsperson as the College considers revisions to that role. Hager added that this work is part of a broader effort by the college to review governance documents and said the Board of Trustees had already examined the charter, bylaws and statutes before asking faculty to review the Faculty Manual. He also said the Board of Trustees asked faculty to review governance procedures because “when you have fiduciary responsibility… you are always looking for exposure to risk,” especially in areas such as grievances that can escalate to legal disputes if procedures are unclear.

Professor of Applied Science Susan Masino, who currently serves as interim ombudsperson, wrote in an email to the Tripod that the purpose of the role is to provide “confidential advice and informal pathways for resolving conflicts and grievances” and that this can prevent problems from “escalating, for example to litigation.” She noted that some matters require referral to Human Resources or other campus offices, and said she supports hiring a professional external ombuds for faculty, staff and students.

In contrast to the ombudsperson’s informal advisory function, the committee serves as a formal body designed to hear and adjudicate disputes. Hager said that the committee is now formed following a special election in September, but its procedures for grievances involving staff or administrators are still being developed. He said this work involves the Faculty Conference and requires coordination with other campus policies, including student procedures. Faculty at the October meeting also questioned how shared governance will operate under the revised system, including who will control appendices to the manual and whether any authority has been ceded to the Board of Trustees.

The next faculty meeting will take place on Dec. 9, when updated motions addressing the grievance process, ombudsperson role and procedures for amending the manual are expected to be introduced.