Piatt Claims De Facto Tenure

Last month I blogged about how three individuals will not be back to teach at St. Mary's law school after this semester. I just received an email from one of the three, Instructor Rosanne Piatt. She said that because she has been a full-time faculty member at St. Mary's for ten years, she has tenure.

Here's her email, in its entirety (links added by yours truly):

St. Mary's Law School is a member of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS). One of the conditions of membership is that member schools agree to adhere to the standards regarding academic freedom and tenure of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP). The AAUP standards describe two categories of full-time teachers: probationary (up to 7 years) and tenured. If a school continues a full-time teacher beyond seven years, that professor is tenured, per the AAUP (and AALS). Twice now the American Association of University Professors has written to St. Mary's, informing St. Mary's that I hold tenure and requesting my reinstatement, or the initiation of formal tenure revocation proceedings, with the burden on the university to show cause. St. Mary's has refused to comply. I will be able to share additional information within a week. Thank you for your interest.

According to the AAUP, de facto tenure exists if, after the probation ends, a faculty member continues teaching or working at the school:

Upon continuance of full-time service beyond the maximum probationary period, faculty members who so serve should be recognized as having an entitlement to the procedural safeguards that accrue with tenure, even in the absence of institutional regulations to that effect or of specific action by a particular college or university.

However, the case law on de facto tenure runs both ways. The AAUP lists a number of federal and state court cases on this subject, including a couple of federal cases from Texas:

• Owens v. Board of Regents of Texas Southern University, 953 F. Supp. 781 (S.D. Tex. 1986): Faculty manual adopted subsequent to plaintiff's appointment explicitly provided that tenure would be granted only upon affirmative action by governing board and would not be granted automatically. Factual question existed as to whether plaintiff had rights under earlier manual that administrator testified provided for tenure by default through length of service. Court denied university's motion for summary judgment.
  
• LaVerne v. University of Texas System, 611 F. Supp. 66 (C.D. Tex. 1985): Under the applicable university regents' rules, there was no tenure by default, de facto, or "common law" tenure. When university published written tenure procedures, "the legitimacy of a claim to tenure acquired outside the procedures is vitiated because there is no basis for mutuality." Because no entitlement to continued employment existed, no property or liberty interest existed.

I will post more on this subject as soon as I hear anything.