Attorney Elledge's reply to Professor Clark seems to say that UW Administrators are exempt from the faculty code.
The idea that NIKE's activities are not relevant to her functions as a faculty member in the Medical school is hard to comprehend. If as a Professor of Physiology, Dr. Wise is able to exempt herself from SOM policy then I suggest that policy has no bearing on any UW faculty member.
As a faculty member of the SOM, this action by Attorney Elledge reinforces my belief that the policies of the SOM comprise illegal modifications to the faculty code. Those policies, while well intended, seem to me to amend the faculty code. However, as proven by the court case over UW pay policy, the UW Faculty Code is state kaw and can onloy be amended by the legislative process described in the Code, that is by actions fo the faculty Senate.
If the SOM's polcies do take precedence over the Code, then Dr. Wise, as a faculty member of the SOm must be subject to those policies since the published School of Medicine policy does not distinguish between the capacities under which a faculty member is hired. A UW doctor who also works for Swedish would not be =allowed to accept gifts that vio9klatre the UW policy. Under Attorney Elledge's reasoning, I could accept consulting fees as an officer of a professional society and ignore the UW altogether. Similarly, this implies that the administrators of the Medical School are exempt from their own policy.
Attorney Elledge's reply, raises new concerns about the process pursued by Dr. Wise:
1. Did she get approval for this exemption from her Chair and from Dean Ramsey?
2. Did Attorney Elledge rule on this exemption before the inquiry by Professor Clark?
3. Has the Secretary of the Faculty already made a ruling that supports the exemption claimed by Provost Wise.
4. Does this exemption mean that administrators, at the discretion of the President, are exempt from the rules of the Faculty Code?
2. Did Attorney Elledge rule on this exemption before the inquiry by Professor Clark?
3. Has the Secretary of the Faculty already made a ruling that supports the exemption claimed by Provost Wise.
4. Does this exemption mean that administrators, at the discretion of the President, are exempt from the rules of the Faculty Code?
It seems to me that Dr. Wise should suspend her appointment to the Nike board until the Senate can take action on this matter.
Finally, I want to point out that under Washington State Law, Attorney Elledge is not allowed to interpret the faculty code other than to express her opinions. Washington State law only allows the Attorney General or this delegates to function as attorne3ys on as attorneys on campus. The only people authorized to interpret the Faculty Code are the Secretary of the Faculty and the Senate Executive Committee. This is very disturbing, especially coming at the time of a crisis in governance brought about by the President's need to over ride the Faculty Code because of the budget problems.
- Hide quoted text -
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Karen Elledge <kelledge@u.washington.edu>
Date: Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 8:59 AM
Subject: RE: Steve Schwartz and 1460 questions
To: Edward Clark <Eclark@wanprc.org>
Cc: "stephenm.schwartz@gmail.com" <stephenm.schwartz@gmail.com>
Professor Clark,
Yes, Provost Wise completed a 1460 form. That form was signed by her immediate supervisor, President Emmert. My understanding is that the form is a public record and would be available upon request.
Provost Wise was not required to fill out the additional SoM Supplement. Since Provost Wise serves as a member of the Nike board in her capacity as Provost rather than in her capacity as an SoM faculty member, the separate SoM process does not apply and the required approval process is through the President only.
Regards,
Karen Elledge
Director of Regulatory Guidance
School of Medicine
-----Original Message-----
From: Edward Clark [mailto:Eclark@wanprc.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 4:35 PM
To: Karen Elledge
Cc: stephenm.schwartz@gmail.com
Subject: Steve Schwartz and 1460 questions
Dear Dr. Elledge,
Michael Corn referred Steve Schwartz and me to you. Per Steve's points in the e mail copied to you by Michael, I would like to know if Provost Wise as a SOM faculty did fill out a 1460 form, and if so, if it is in fact available in the public domain? I am not personally interested in reviewing her 1460 form, but I would like to know if the same procedures apply for all SOM faculty.
Thanks for your assistance with this.
Best regards,
Ed Clark
Professor, Microbiology and Immunology
1. Has Dr. Wise filed this form? Is it available in the public
> domain (NOTE: quoted from text below: "Faculty should also be aware
> that this information is considered in the public domain and could
> be requested by individuals or organizations outside of the
> University of Washington. "?
> As required by the UW Medicine Policy for Faculty on Potential
> Financial Conflicts of Interest with Commercial or Nonprofit
> Entities, if the outside work requiring prior approval includes
> compensation that has monetary value, that value should be disclosed
> on a supplement to the request for approval.
No comments:
Post a Comment