From: Boxill, Jan
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 1:35 PM
To: khugon@physics.unc.edu
Subject: Response to Faculty Concerns Regarding Professor Frampton
Dear Professor Karwowski,
I am writing to let you know what I
have learned about Paul Frampton’s complicated situation, as you were one of
our colleagues who joined in the letter recently circulated to the faculty.
As you probably know the Faculty
Executive Committee acts as a council of advice to me and also acts for the
Faculty Council during the summer recess. As the faculty’s elected
representatives, we feel a deep sense of obligation to take faculty requests seriously.
For that reason, in response to concerns raised in the letter, I, as Faculty
Chair, asked the Committee to discuss Paul’s situation. At our meeting on
Monday, August 6th, the FEC heard from Leslie Strohm,
the University’s General Counsel, as well as Chris Clemens and Art Champagne,
current and previous chairs of Physics & Astronomy. The chancellor and
provost were not present during the discussion, but the chancellor exercised
his discretion under state personnel laws to allow confidential personnel
information to be shared with the FEC. Leslie, Art, and Chris recounted
in considerable detail the efforts that both the University and the department
have made to assist Paul. Some of these have been reported in the press; many
have not.
We came away from this discussion
with the clear impression that the University has made and continues to make
good faith efforts to assist Paul, but that he has made decisions and taken
actions that have hindered those efforts. Some of these actions, especially those
that have led to widespread public knowledge of some of the facts in his case,
have had dire consequences for him that will not be easily addressed.
The Committee takes note that
nine-month employees do not accrue either annual leave or sick leave. Therefore,
a nine-month faculty member who is unable to perform his or her duties for an
extended period of time, for whatever reason, cannot fall back on unused leave
as a means of salary continuation. In certain cases, salary can be continued
for up to 60 days, but Paul's absence has extended long past that period of
time.
We do not think it reasonable under
the circumstances described to us to expect Physics & Astronomy to find
resources to continue to pay Paul’s salary while making other arrangements for
carrying out his teaching and other faculty responsibilities for an indefinite
and extended period of time, nor do we think it reasonable to expect the dean
to draw on resources that would otherwise be allocated to other departments.
The committee takes note, however,
that Paul has filed a formal grievance with the Faculty Grievance Committee,
which will afford his representative an opportunity to lay before the faculty a
full accounting of the facts as he sees them. We acknowledge the jurisdiction of
the Grievance Committee in this matter and have confidence that the committee
will give a full and fair hearing to the case and will make such
recommendations to the chancellor as it sees fit.
Thank you for your empathy for an
esteemed colleague and your concern for the continued integrity of our system
of academic tenure. I am writing to assure you that I and my colleagues on the
Faculty Executive Committee are persuaded that the University’s commitment to
tenure is in no danger as a result of Paul Frampton’s difficulties. We
share your concern for the plight in which Paul finds himself, and we hope it
is not too late for the efforts that the University has put in motion on his
behalf to have a positive effect.
Respectfully,
Jan Boxill
Chair
of the Faculty
From: Hugon [khugon@email.unc.edu]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 4:24 PM
To: Boxill, Jan
Subject: Re: Response to Faculty Concerns Regarding Professor Frampton
Dear Professor Boxill,
thank
you for your e-mail and for convening the meeting of
the Faculty Executive Committee. It is however regrettable that the Committee
did not care to invite to this meeting anyone
other than university administrators.
Wouldn't it be useful to the Committee to hear the opinions of those who may be
actively involved in trying to help Professor
Frampton?
The response of the Committee expressed in your letter is quite disappointing.
It does not address the main points raised in the letter to the faculty and
repeats
what we heard before as justification for university's
inaction, or rather for
actions detrimental to his welfare.
The university has had recently plenty of
negative publicity.
It seems to me that it is in UNC's interest to try to limit the fall-out
coming from Professor Frampton's arrest by
acting in a humanitarian
rather than callous way. I am especially concerned
that UNC seems to be blaming Professor
Frampton for trying
to make his case public. After all it was the UNC's decision to
stop paying his salary which caused Professor Frampton to voice his
grievances to the press.
I am also puzzled by the statement in your
letter
about "dire consequences for him that will not be easily
addressed".
Professor Frampton is 68 years old, in poor health, locked in one
of the worst prisons in the Southern hemisphere. He
has no income
so he can not afford to pay his legal bills. His
employer of 30+ years
has effectively abandoned him
despite benefiting for all those years
from overhead on his research grants and from UNC's name being placed
on his 400+ fine publications. If I were Professor Frampton I really
would not
worry about 'dire consequences' whatever they might be, and even if
I were threatened by Ms. Strohm. The present
situation is really bad enough.
Regards
Hugon Karwowski