SAMPLE FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES 

FACULTY OMBUDS INFORMATION

PURPOSE

 

The WSU Faculty Ombuds is a neutral, independent, impartial and confidential resource whose primary purpose is to provide informal assistance to WSU faculty in addressing University-related complaints, conflicts or problems involving or affecting them. The goal of the WSU Faculty Ombuds is to help faculty solve problems early, informally, and at the lowest levels to minimize the need to pursue formal grievance procedures. The Ombuds uses conflict resolution methods such as mediation, facilitation, conciliation and shuttle diplomacy to help resolve issues. The Ombuds will preserve confidentiality except for threats of imminent harm. Any faculty member or administrator of the WSU community can bring a concern to the faculty ombuds so long as the concern relates to the role and experience of WSU faculty. (What do you think about including administration? Some institutions specified administrator use of the Ombuds specifically, while others left administrative involvement unclear. No institutions that I reviewed indicated that administrators could NOT use the services of the Ombuds.)  The Ombuds may recommend policy changes to alleviate chronic problem areas. The Ombuds operates under the code of Ethics and Standards of Practice of the International Ombudsman Association.  (The purpose/role description is a synthesis of information from multiple institutions. If I have forgotten something, or if you have deletions or insertions, please let me know.)

ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
Independence
The Ombuds is independent in structure, function, and appearance to the highest degree possible within the organization.

Neutrality and Impartiality
The Ombuds, as a designated neutral, remains unaligned and impartial. The Ombudsman does not engage in any situation which could create a conflict of interest.

Confidentiality
The Ombuds holds all communications with those seeking assistance in strict confidence, and does not disclose confidential communications unless given permission to do so. The only exception to this privilege of confidentiality is where there appears to be imminent risk of serious harm.

Informality
The Ombuds, as an informal resource, does not participate in any formal adjudicative or administrative procedure related to concerns brought to his/her attention.
(see http://www.ombudsassociation.org/about-us/code-ethics)

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES  (This list is a synthesis of roles & responsibilities from several institutions.  This information could be included on a web page describing the role of the Ombuds.)
The Ombuds:
…is an independent, neutral person designated to assist in resolving conflicts and addressing concerns.
…listens to questions and concerns, without being judgmental or criticizing, and answers questions.
…helps identify and evaluate options.
…helps develop options for resolving problems or conflicts at the university.
…provides a mechanism for early problem resolution.
…prevents negative conflict through early intervention.
…offers an impartial perspective and acts impartially and confidentially.
…provides a safe place to share confidences and maintains strict confidentiality.
…considers all sides of an issue in an informed, unbiased fashion.
…analyzes complex and difficult situations.
…promote better communication.
…advocates for fairness and equality while providing a neutral perspective.
…facilitates difficult conversations as an impartial third party.
…facilitates a just resolution of problems & disputes.
…uses informal means to facilitate the resolution of concerns & disputes.
… refers individuals to appropriate WSU resources.
…provides training for conflict management skills.
…helps construct nonadversarial approaches.
… helps access WSU policies & procedures.
…recommends constructive change in University policies and procedures affecting faculty
…makes appropriate inquiries, involves appropriate other parties, and works to create an environment in which those involved come to a clearer understanding of the situation and reach reasonable and mutually satisfying agreements
…has institutional authority for access to records or other materials necessary to be effective.
…mediates between disputing parties.
…offers a safe and confidential place to discuss concerns.

SITUATIONS /CONCERNS IN WHICH THE OMBUDS MAY BE INVOLVED:  

(This list is a synthesis of various situations in which an Ombuds would be involved from several institutions.  This information could also  be included on a web page describing situations and concerns in which the Ombuds could assist faculty.)

Bureaucratic runarounds and red tape
Ethical dilemmas
Performance feedback
Tenure and job security
Grade disputes
Disciplinary matters
Interpersonal difficulty
Unfair treatment
Bullying
Academic honesty
Workplace conflict with colleagues
WSU policies, processes and procedures & how they apply to faculty
When faculty are uncertain where to take a work problem
When faculty feel they have been unfairly treated or a WSU policy has been applied unfairly or erroneously or is itself unfair.
When faculty have a question regarding some aspect of WSU.

SITUATIONS /CONCERNS IN WHICH THE OMBDUS WILL NOT BE INVOLVED:

(This list is a synthesis of various situations in which an Ombuds would NOT be involved . This information could also  be included on a web page describing situations and concerns in which the Ombuds would NOT assist faculty.)

Providing legal advice, accepting or providing notice of an alleged violation
Accepting notice on behalf of the University
Assisting if faculty are engaged in a formal grievance process or are represented by legal council
Testifying at formal legal proceedings as a witness
Requiring anyone to follow Ombuds recommendations
Offering psychological counseling
Keeping records that identify specific faculty members (must maintain confidentiality)
Advocating for individuals or the university
Making decisions or rendering judgments on issues
Making or changing policy or administrative decisions
Making binding decisions or determining rights
Conducting formal investigations and/or issuing investigative reports of any kind
Participating or testifying in formal processes, including lawsuits or grievances
Serving as part of any formal grievance or complaint process
Taking sides or advocating for individuals or for the University in a dispute
Advocating for any individual
Sharing information with others without an individual’s knowledge or permission
Communicating via email as it is not a secure, confidential medium
 

QUALIFICATIONS
Applicants must hold the rank of full professor with at least ten years of service at the University.  (The ten year time frame includes total time at WSU, which means the person has been a full professor for at least a few years prior to being eligible for consideration.)     

SELECTION
The Ombuds shall be selected from a pool of applicants by the Executive Committee and approved by the Faculty Senate.

(Is this how we want to select the Ombuds? Or, should the EC just appoint someone (like the members of the Faculty Board of Review).  Can faculty just put in their names for consideration, then have the EC decide?  Would it make more sense to have a committee other than EC make the decision? Think about the pros and cons of each method. If you’ve got a super good method in mind, please suggest it!)

(]The selection process could be much different, but ultimately, the selection needs to be made by faculty. It makes sense to me for the Executive Committee to make the selection since the Ombuds will be serving all faculty. For me, the question is:  Do we want to have the person APPROVED by faculty senate, OR do we just want to INFORM the faculty senate (much the same way we do with the selection of the TLF Coordinator.)

TERM OF APPOINTMENT
The term of appointment will be three years with the possibility for re-appointment.  (The term of appointment is modeled after the TLF position. As I talked to Mike about the position earlier this afternoon, he indicated that he would like longer terms for this position. He mentioned a 5 year term. The pros for a 5 year term include knowing the job, having a sense of faculty needs, and developing trust over a period of time. The cons might include having someone in a position for 5 years that may not be doing his/her job or giving the position the attention that it needs. With a 5 year time frame, would there be a possibility for re-appointment? Think about it.)

Reporting
The Ombuds reports directly to the President and issues an annual report of Ombuds activities. (This reporting structure is from another institution. To whom should our Ombuds report? Who makes the most sense? Faculty Senate, Provost, Associate Provost, President? What are your thoughts?) This report is designed to identify trends and patterns and is strictly demographic, with no information available that would identify individuals who have utilized Ombuds’ services. An annual report is provided to the President, Provost, and Faculty Senate. The report provides a summary on the types of matters handled and a narrative reflecting the year’s activities.

COMPENSATION
For the first year, compensation will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Following the first year, the position will be reviewed to determine what compensation (released time, money, etc.) is warranted by the position.

SAMPLE POSITION ANNOUNCEMENT

FACULTY OMBUDS

The Faculty Senate Executive Committee is in the process of identifying an experienced full professor interested in serving as the Faculty Ombuds. This is a new position created for the purpose of providing informal assistance to WSU faculty in addressing University-related complaints, conflicts or problems involving or affecting them. The goal of the WSU Faculty Ombuds is to help faculty solve problems early, informally, and at the lowest levels to minimize the need to pursue formal grievance procedures. The Ombuds uses conflict resolution methods such as mediation, facilitation, conciliation and shuttle diplomacy to help resolve issues.

For the first year, the position is a one year term. The Ombuds will keep confidential records of his/her activities and be compensated accordingly on a case-by-case basis. At the end of the year, the Ombuds will provide a summary report to the Faculty Senate Executive Committee describing the work s/he has done throughout the year.

The appointment is for the academic year 2012-2013. Following the first year, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee will review the position and make recommendations for terms of office, compensation and/or reassigned time.

The successful candidate should be a full professor with at least 10 years of service at Weber State with knowledge of university departments, administration, policies and procedures. (I wasn’t sure whether to include these, so I went ahead and added them. We can delete if you think they’re unnecessary.) The candidate should also possess strong communication skills including listening and conflict resolution methods such as mediation, facilitation, conciliation and shuttle diplomacy. The candidate should also demonstrate the ability to be impartial to help resolve issues and be able to keep all information confidential.

Applicants should send a brief vita (3 pages focusing on Ombuds related experiences) and letter outlining your interest and experiences to Kay Brown, 210J Miller Administration Building, MC 1033 or KBrown4@weber.edu by Month, Day, Date.  (Any ideas when you would want to do this? Sooner is better! I would like to take this to faculty senate in March for approval – then we could begin the appointment process.)   Review of applicants will begin immediately.