Tenure Review Could Be Tied to Florida Race Instruction Law
The proposed tenure-review regulation would make "any violation" of the Stop WOKE law one of seven criteria that would be considered. If faculty members' performance is deemed unsatisfactory, they could face termination.
November 04, 2022 at 11:02 AM
4 minute read
Employment Law
A controversial law designed to restrict the way certain race-related topics can be taught in Florida classrooms could factor into a new tenure-review process for university professors, under a proposal that higher-education officials will consider next week.
The proposed regulation links two laws that the Legislature and Gov. Ron DeSantis approved this year.
One of the laws allowed the state university system's Board of Governors to adopt a regulation that would require tenured professors to undergo a "comprehensive post-tenure" review every five years.
The board on Nov. 10 is slated to consider a draft of the regulation. The proposal lays out criteria that would be included in professors' reviews and makes clear that compliance with the race-related instruction law would be considered.
The race-related instruction law (HB 7), which DeSantis dubbed the "Stop Wrongs to Our Kids and Employees Act," or "Stop WOKE Act" — was one of the most-contentious issues of the 2022 legislative session and has drawn federal-court challenges. The law enumerates several concepts that would constitute discrimination if they were included in instruction.
For example, the law targets instruction that "compels" students to believe that they bear "personal responsibility for and must feel guilt, anguish, or other forms of psychological distress because of actions, in which the person played no part, committed in the past" by members of the same race or sex.
The proposed tenure-review regulation would make "any violation" of the Stop WOKE law one of seven criteria that would be considered. If faculty members' performance is deemed unsatisfactory, they could face termination.
Faculty members would receive a "performance rating" under the process. Deans would recommend ratings, which could be accepted, rejected or modified by university chief academic officers.
"For each faculty member who receives a final performance rating of 'does not meet expectations,' the appropriate college dean, in consultation with the faculty member's department chair, shall propose a performance improvement plan to the chief academic officer," the proposal said.
Professors who are directed to follow improvement plans would be given up to a year to meet requirements laid out in the plans.
"Each faculty member who receives a final performance rating of 'unsatisfactory' shall receive a notice of termination from the chief academic officer," the proposal also said.
The United Faculty of Florida has strongly opposed the race-related instruction law. The union in July published an article on its website titled, "HB 7: What UFF Members Need To Know About The "Stop WOKE Act," calling the law "horrendous" and advising faculty members about its potential impacts.
"Please know that if you, as a UFF member, experience any discipline, harm, or other adverse action from your supervisor or institution in response to your attempts to navigate the prohibitions in HB 7, you should immediately contact your local union leaders for support," an introductory part of the post said.
Democrats who opposed the measure during the legislative session argued, in part, that it was being pushed by DeSantis for political reasons, as the governor has made his fight against critical race theory and "indoctrination" in schools a linchpin of his education agenda.
The tenure-review law (SB 7044) was sponsored by former Sen. Manny Diaz, R-Hialeah, and Sen. Ray Rodrigues, R-Estero. Diaz later left the Legislature to become state education commissioner, while Rodrigues next week will become chancellor of the university system.
Part of the proposed regulation suggests that tenured university employees' political views would not be a factor in the performance reviews.
"The review shall not consider or otherwise discriminate based on the faculty members' political or ideological viewpoints," the proposal said.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Get Rid of the Men': Employer Accused of Discrimination
Employee's Alleged Action Lands Marriott in Court for Defamation, Negligence
11th Circuit Rejects Former CSX Employee's Safety-Related Whistleblowing Claims
Judge Says University of Miami Should Face Discrimination Case by Ex-Department Chair
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1UPS Agrees to $45M Settlement With SEC Over Valuation Claim
- 2For Midsize Law Firms, Curbing Boys-Club Culture Starts with Diversity at the Top
- 3Southern California Law Firms Boast Industry-Leading Revenue, Demand Through Q3
- 4AI: An Enhancement, Not a Replacement for Attorneys
- 5Fowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250