Search

ARCHIVES
CONTACT US
WORLD NEWS

UA faculty chairman,Ariz. regents question lawsuits' implications

The UA faculty chairman and some regents expressed concern Friday about recent litigation that could alter the peer review system, possibly replacing faculty member representation with legal counsel.

An Arizona Supreme Court decision stated that Arizona State University employee Camille Kimball had the right to legal representation at her administrative hearing.

A Pima County Superior Court judge's recent ruling stated that the University of Arizona violated the rights of former professor Marguerite Kay by not allowing her legal representation.

UA Faculty Chairman Jerrold Hogle spoke at the Arizona Board of Regents meeting Friday about the future of peer review and his concerns about the changes that are coming.

"In all disciplinary hearings, the faculty now can be actively represented by counsel," Hogle said at the ABOR meeting.

In the past, faculty were allowed to have legal representation at their side but were not to speak out loud. Attorneys were allowed to whisper to their clients and were to act as "potted plants," Regent Designee Gary Stuart said at the meeting at the Arizona Cancer Center.

"Peer review is going to be like a court of law rather than faculty reviewing faculty," Hogle said, referring to the possible effects of having lawyers replace the faculty members in the process.

Kay, a former microbiology and immunology professor, was fired after being accused of falsifying research data. Kay filed a lawsuit against the UA stating that she was not allowed legal representation.

Judge Stephen Villarreal ruled earlier this month that Kay did have the right to a lawyer at her peer review hearing.

"This is definitely a change and we're not quite sure how to proceed," Regent Rudy Campbell said at the ABOR meeting.

Hogle said he is also worried about whether the effects of these rulings could spread into areas outside of faculty issues.

"We still need to figure out where the limits are and whether it involves student cases," Hogle said.

ABOR has yet to alter their policy and several regents opted not to comment. The two cases are still under litigation, making the full implication still unclear.

"It's going to be attorney to attorney rather than faculty to faculty, I'm a little saddened," Hogle said.