A week after details of the recent dismissal of Politics Prof. James R. Sofka from his post as director of the Echols program became public, there remains some question about whether Sofka was denied established procedures according to University policy.
A Jan. 14, 2005 letter from College Dean Edward L. Ayers to Sofka, a copy of which was provided to The Cavalier Daily on the condition of anonymity, states that Sofka was being reassigned to full-time teaching due to "inappropriate behavior with female Echols scholars." The letter also states that Sofka will not be reappointed as a general faculty member when his current contract expires in May of 2007, stating that the University has "no obligation to renew your contract beyond that date."
Sofka publicly has protested that he was not afforded due process in defending himself against the allegations. University administrators routinely have declined to comment on the matter, citing the protection of personnel matters.
According to University policy, however, general faculty members such as Sofka who have served for six years or more automatically are entitled to the "expectation of continued employment" unless they have specifically signed away that right. This does not affect administrative assignments but may apply to the intended termination of Sofka's contract.
Because Sofka joined the general faculty in 1998 and received his third three-year appointment in 2004, he would qualify for this expectation with regard to future employment.
While this expectation does not afford the same degree of job security as tenure, it does require the University to take certain steps before declining to renew employment, according to Environmental Sciences Prof. Bill Keene, chair of the policy committee of the General Faculty Council.
"The employee who has earned the [expectation of continued employment] serves with the expectation that the University will renew his or her contract," Keene said.
According to the policy, the University must provide one of three reasons for not renewing a contract of a general faculty member with this expectation: action for just cause, abolition of position or financial stringency.
The policy's criteria for just cause include "unethical conduct" and "misconduct that interferes with the capacity of the employee to perform effectively the requirements of his employment."
The policy goes on to state that "removal for cause is to be preceded by a predetermination hearing that is required before a decision can be made to terminate. In cases where there is some likelihood of threat to health or safety, the predetermination hearing can be waived." [Click here for excerpts from the policy.]
Based on these criteria, "it would appear that Sofka is entitled to a hearing where evidence would be presented to justify termination for cause," Keene said.
Sofka sent an official letter of complaint to Ayers in a statement dated Jan. 26, a copy of which also was provided to The Cavalier Daily, but said yesterday that he had yet to receive a response from Ayers or University Provost Gene Block, who was carbon copied on the letter.
"My great preference is to resolve this administratively," Sofka said. He added, however, that he has consulted legal counsel and has not ruled out the possibility of outside action.
Established procedures include investigations and recommendations through the University Office of Equal Opportunity Programs.
According to Brad Holland, University ombudsman and interim director of the EOP, many students who feel that a professor is acting inappropriately toward them are reluctant to file a formal complaint, which poses certain limitations of the EOP's ability to act in a given situation.
"The number of people who want to file a formal complaint are few and far between," Holland said. "It does limit to some extent what you can do."
In the end, though, Holland said administrators must carefully weigh the evidence against someone in making a decision so as to protect everyone's interests.
"It's the University's responsibility to address discriminatory behavior," he said. "We've got a responsibility too to treat our employees fairly."
In a situation where an administrator has received multiple complaints against a faculty member, one has to consider the volume of complaints, how credible they are and what the professor's explanation is, among other things, Holland said.
"I would be very surprised if someone took unilateral action without investigating at least some of the facts," he added.
Read More
Severe flooding cancels classes, trips for U.Va. in Valencia study abroad program
By Bertie Azqueta | 49 minutes agoAdministrators canceled classes for students studying abroad in Valencia beginning Oct. 29 due to transportation concerns. Classes resumed Monday.
Remembering a tragedy: A look at the aftermath of Nov. 13 over the past year
By Grace Thrush | 23 hours agoOver the past year, several developments in the aftermath of the shooting, from an independent review of the University’s response to a settlement for the victims’ families, have transpired.
Out-of-state students endured a series of obstacles in obtaining absentee ballots
By Bennett Galper and Jackie Bond | YesterdayFour states — Missouri, Mississippi, Oklahoma and South Dakota — require notarization to either receive an absentee ballot or have it be officially counted.
