Opinion ID: 2456
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Renewal Process

Text: Cornell and ILR School policy stated that senior extension associates were appointed to five-year terms, renewable on the basis of department recommendations. Moreover, each of plaintiffs appointment letters in 1984, 1987, 1992, and 1998 explicitly indicated that the appointment was for a finite term and was contingent upon funding. Plaintiff acknowledges that the position of Senior Extension Associate II was not a tenured one. In fact, plaintiff sent an e-mail in 2000 to a friend in which she stated, I'm just a lowly, untenured Extension person. However, plaintiff asserts that she held a position equivalent to that of a tenured professor and cites several pieces of evidence to support that assertion. First, it is undisputed that, prior to the non-renewal of plaintiffs contract, defendants had never terminated, laid off, or failed to renew the contract of one holding the position of Senior Extension Associate II without cause. Second, plaintiff points to the ILR Faculty Personnel Policies, which describe the process for Reappointment and Promotion of Non-tenured Faculty Members, and plaintiff sets forth evidence that the enumerated process was not followed with respect to senior extension associates. Defendants note that the policy refers only to assistant professors (i.e., tenure-track professors) and does not reference senior extension associates and has no application to them. Finally, plaintiff points to the belief by two senior extension associates that they had a position that was essentially equivalent to tenure, as well as statements by three other Cornell employees in which they stated they had heard or believed that senior extension associates had something similar to (but not) tenure, or that the review process was pro forma. As noted above, plaintiff was reappointed as a senior extension associate for the term from February 1, 1998 to October 31, 2002.