UT throws out TAs’ grievance filings
University president changes procedures
University of Texas President Jay Hartzell recently dismissed two teaching assistants’ grievances against their work reassignments after they sent in November a pro-Palestinian message on the class’s messaging page.
Callie Kennedy and Parham Daghighi spent dozens of hours writing statements, collecting evidence and gathering materials to argue their grievances alleging that their work reassignments constituted discipline and violated their academic freedom. But in a disposition sent last week, Hartzell officially dismissed the complaints, a decision that can’t be appealed.
“Academic freedom protects the ability of instructors to provide points of view and a fulsome discussion around classroom material. That is not what happened here,” Hartzell said in a statement Wednesday to the American-Statesman. “The statement distributed was overtly political, went beyond the classroom material, and is not protected under academic freedom. This boundary applies no matter the subject matter of the message.”
As an example, Hartzell said that if teaching assistants in a calculus class received permission to send “a political opinion statement” about the war in Ukraine, “that permission alone cannot bring the statement into relation with the calculus course for purposes of academic freedom.”
The former teaching assistants, however, have said that, with the class being focused on mental health and social justice being a principle of social work, it was relevant to offer support and resources to Palestinian students.
In interviews with the Statesman, the graduate students described the university’s grievance process as time
consuming and laborious. The students also said the process was changed halfway through its course in a way, they alleged, that limited their due process, but the university said it made the process more efficient.
The students filed three grievances, two of which — being dismissed from their positions and that the nonrenewal violated contractual rights or laws — were dismissed in December. A third alleging that their reassignments violated their academic freedom, was found on Jan. 8 by a majority of a Faculty Grievance Committee subcommittee to possibly have merit.
In “construing all allegations in the light most favorable” to the teaching assistants, “there is a factual basis to believe that the complainant’s allegations might be sustained,” the subcommittee found, according to a document obtained by the Statesman.
On that grievance, the students were allowed to proceed to the next step: request a hearing.
Nine days later, Hartzell emailed the chair of the committee, and copied the former teaching assistants in the communication, saying that the university’s current grievance policy, which had not been updated since 2014, was concerning, confusing, untimely and “likely to be disruptive.” Hartzell said the policy would be suspended immediately, and instead of a hearing on the students’ third grievance in front of the faculty panel, the former teaching assistants would be asked to submit their written case to the panel and answer its questions via email.
Hartzell’s email, obtained by the Statesman, also said that after the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by Hamas, a militant Palestinian government and military group, issues related to the Middle East have prompted “heightened concern” and that the grievance policy would be suspended to ensure safety for all.
He also said it was “imperative” that the teaching assistants receive due process efficiently.
In a statement to the Statesman in February, the university said the old policy had not been updated in nearly 10 years, and that the process would help the teaching assistants resolve their case in a more timely manner.
“Because many of the steps had no required timeframe, the TAs could not count on a timely resolution of the issues they raised. President Hartzell suspended the policy and implemented an interim process to ensure the TA’s matters could be handled expeditiously and meet the constitutional requirements for due process,” the statement continued.
Kennedy said sending the evidence and materials over email felt “burdensome” and “unwieldly.” She said they agree with the president that the process needed review, but that taking the in-person hearing in front of a faculty panel away was a significant loss.
“The president isn’t wrong that the process is very time intensive,” Kennedy said. “However, the fact that he suspended the process, only when he got to the point at which finally it was in our favor, feels like it just lacks integrity.”
What are UT’s grievance policies?
The university has different grievance procedures for students, teaching assistants and faculty members.
The faculty grievance policy, which was significantly revised last year to address timeliness, also does not offer a hearing in front of the Faculty Grievance Panel. Students contesting an academic sanction, suspension or expulsion are eligible for a hearing with the dean of students in front of a hearing officer or the Student Conduct Panel, but they are otherwise ineligible, according to university rules.
Kennedy and Daghighi lamented Hartzell’s decision and their inability to have an in-person hearing before a faculty grievance panel in favor of an emailed presentation, which they’ were concerned would be less rigorous.
“It just feels pretty unfair and disrespectful of our time and our due process, given the fact that it’s been over two months that we’ve been trudging through this process, with absolutely no support from the university,” Kennedy said in a February interview. “When we finally made it to the point of a hearing, again, the door was closed on us.”
An interim policy is currently posted on the university’s website and a permanent one is in development. The TAs went through a new process Hartzell set out for them individually while an interim policy was in development.
Kennedy and Daghighi were instructed to send their written statement and materials to Hartzell about their grievances, which also included arguing that the reassignment constituted discipline. The university provost was instructed to send a written analysis as well.
As per the new process, the Faculty Grievance Panel reviewed the students’ written submissions and were allowed to ask the former teaching assistants questions via email. The panel then submitted its recommendation to Hartzell, which Kennedy and Parham said they did not see in its entirety. Daghighi said the faculty’s role here seemed “more passive” compared with what they expected under the old policy.
Each student and the administration then each had 20 minutes over Zoom to argue their case to Hartzell. Students said this meeting happened early this month. Both sides were allowed to have representation, but Kennedy said the administration was the only one with representatives in the room and the teaching assistants spoke for themselves.
“It was this pretty intense feeling of disproportionate power,” Daghighi said.
Kennedy and Parham were offered graduate research positions for the spring semester, but both declined for personal reasons. Before this point, they had written statements, secured letters of support from nonprofits and student organizations, and collected evidence to argue their case. Kennedy said she isn’t convinced this new process significantly reduced their time to come to a resolution.
As this is their last semester, the students said it was likely too late for them to be reinstated as teaching assistants anyway. What they wanted, Daghighi said, is an acknowledgement that what happened was wrong.
“At this point, that’s not primarily what our concern is, to be reinstated as teaching assistants,” Daghighi said in February. “Part of what would look like relief would be some kind of validation that in fact, what happened to us wasn’t OK. And that it adds to the total environment of precarity and danger for our Palestinian, Muslim and Arab students across college campuses.”
Kennedy said that, as the university moves forward with creating a new grievance policy, she hopes UT consults teaching assistants, reduces the burden on anyone filing a grievance to prove their side and reinstates the in-person hearings.
In a statement after the students work reassignment, the university said Dec. 1 that the School of Social Work “appropriately managed” the situation, and that the teaching assistants were removed from their positions for sharing “a personal political message” while in their professional roles.
Hartzell added that he stands by School of Social Work Dean Allan Cole, who made the initial decision to reassign the teaching assistants.
“Dean Cole did the right thing in protecting our classrooms as spaces for the learning we are here to do together. In doing so, he promotes academic freedom,” Hartzell said. “Academic freedom provides faculty great power in the classroom. That power goes handin-hand with the responsibility to honor its bounds.”
In regard to their case, Kennedy said they reject the premise that employee free speech should be limited, especially amid the war in Gaza, where more than 30,000 people have died, according to media reports.
“We want to highlight and shame the university for assuming this fear, seeking to limit our free speech,” she said. “We knew how it would end up all along. And that’s how they’re choosing to respond to this particular moment in history.”