Wisconsin Administrative Code › Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System › Chapter UWS 11 - Dismissal Of Academic Staff For Cause › Subchapter III - Procedures for Academic Staff Dismissal and Discipline in Title IX Cases › Section UWS 11.21 - Adequate due process

Current through June 24, 2024
(1) A fair hearing for an academic staff
				member against whom dismissal or other discipline is sought shall include all
				of the following:
(a) Service of written
				notice of a live hearing on the allegations in the formal complaint at least 10
				days prior to the hearing.
(b) A
				right to the names of witnesses and of access to documentary and other evidence
				which serve as the basis for seeking dismissal or other discipline.
(c) A right for the complainant and academic
				staff member to be heard on their own behalf.
(d) A right to an advisor, counsel, or other
				representatives, and to offer witnesses. The academic staff member's or
				complainant's advisor or counsel may ask all witnesses relevant questions and
				follow-up questions, including those challenging credibility. Credibility
				determinations, however, may not be made based on a person's status as a
				complainant, respondent, or witness. If the academic staff member does not have
				an advisor, the university shall provide the academic staff member, without
				charge, an advisor of the university's choice to conduct cross-examination on
				behalf of the academic staff member. The advisor may be an attorney.
(e) A right to confront and cross-examine
				adverse witnesses. The academic staff member's or complainant's advisor shall
				conduct cross examination directly, orally, and in real time. The academic
				staff member and the complainant may not personally conduct cross examination.
				If the academic staff member, the complainant, or a witness does not submit to
				cross-examination at the hearing, the hearing committee or the hearing examiner
				may not rely on any statement of the academic staff member, complainant, or
				witness in reaching its findings and recommendations. However, the hearing
				committee or hearing examiner may not draw a negative inference in reaching its
				findings and recommendations based solely on the absence of an academic staff
				member, complainant, or witness from the hearing or refusal to answer
				cross-examination or other questions.
(f) A verbatim record of all hearings, which
				might be a sound recording, made available at no cost for inspection and
				review.
(g) Written findings of
				fact supporting the decision based on the hearing record. The written findings
				of fact and decision shall include all of the following:
1. Identification of the allegations
				potentially constituting Title IX misconduct.
2. A description of the procedural steps
				taken from the receipt of the formal complaint through the hearing committee's
				or hearing examiner's decision, including any notifications to the academic
				staff member and the complainant, interviews with the academic staff member,
				the complainant, and witnesses, site visits, methods used to gather evidence,
				and hearings held.
3. Conclusions
				regarding the application of the university's conduct rules and policies to the
				facts including the following: a determination regarding responsibility for
				each allegation and the rationale behind each decision, any disciplinary
				sanction recommended to be imposed, any remedies recommended to restore or
				preserve equal access to the university's educational program or activity, and
				the university's procedures and permissible bases for complainant and academic
				staff member to appeal.
(h) Admissibility of evidence is governed by
				s.
				227.45(1) to
				(4), Stats. Only relevant questions may be
				asked of the academic staff member, the complainant, and any witnesses. The
				hearing committee or hearing examiner shall determine whether a question is
				relevant and explain the decision to exclude a question as not relevant.
				Questions and evidence about the complainant's sexual predisposition or prior
				sexual behavior are not relevant, unless such questions or evidence are offered
				to prove that someone other than the academic staff member committed the
				conduct alleged by the complainant, or unless the questions or evidence concern
				specific incidents of the complainant's prior sexual behavior with the academic
				staff member and are offered to prove consent.
(i) Upon the academic staff member's request,
				the university shall provide for the hearing to occur with academic staff
				member and complainant located in separate rooms with technology enabling the
				hearing committee or hearing examiner, the academic staff member, and the
				complainant to simultaneously see and hear witnesses answering
				questions.