Using an academic assessment or other academic action as a means to retaliate against a student for engaging in conduct protected by the HGSU-UAW bargaining agreement is unacceptable and prohibited. Prohibited academic retaliation includes basing a grade, academic credit, authorship, denial of an academic opportunity, or other academic judgment on a student’s participation in a grievance process as described in the HGSU-UAW bargaining agreement.

A student who believes that they have been the subject of a retaliatory academic action for engaging in conduct protected by the HGSU-UAW bargaining agreement should initially discuss their concern with the Director of Student & Academic Services or the Director of Support Services, Student & Academic Services. That individual or a designee will ask the student to describe the connection between the protected conduct they engaged in and the retaliatory action. The individual or designee will consult with the MBA Program Chair, Executive Director of the MBA Program, and a representative from The Office of Labor and Employee Relations to determine if the student engaged in conduct protected from retaliation. If so, the individual or a designee will engage with the student and relevant faculty member to resolve the matter informally. A matter will be deemed satisfactorily resolved when both parties expressly agree, in writing, to an outcome that is also acceptable to the individual or designee. Students who raise a concern under this policy may have a HGSU-UAW student representative or UAW representative join them at any and all steps of the handling of this matter.

If the parties do not come to an informal resolution, the MBA Program Chair will confer with the Dean’s Office and appoint a Reviewer to conduct an assessment which will include, but is not limited by, the following steps as relevant to the alleged retaliatory action:

1. Ask the faculty member who took the academic action to explain the basis for the academic assessment and if the academic assessment was made on the basis of the student’s protected conduct.
2. Identify a faculty member with subject matter expertise and no involvement in the matter at issue. They will review the student’s work product and/or the academic action and advise whether the academic assessment or other academic action was reasonable. The Reviewer will make every effort possible to keep the identity of the faculty member with subject matter expertise confidential and will redact the name of the student and the name of the faculty member from the student’s work product.
3. If the faculty member with subject expertise does not find that the academic assessment or other academic action was reasonable, they will review other recent academic assessments or other academic actions of comparable student work by the same faculty member. The Reviewer will redact the names of the students and the name of the faculty member from the students’ work product.
4. Considering the information gathered by the faculty member with subject expertise, the faculty member’s basis for the academic assessment or other academic action, and the student’s description of the connection between their protected conduct and the retaliatory action, the Reviewer will issue a determination as to whether the challenged action was retaliatory. Retaliation is established when there is a clear connection between the academic assessment or other academic action and the student's protected activity. [2]

In the event of a finding of academic retaliation, the Reviewer will forward their finding to the Dean or their designee, who will determine what action to take. The outcome of this process is final.