CAUT Ad Hoc Investigatory Committee Report

Bradshaw indicated: a) That the university intended to conduct an investigation under Article 20.3 of the Collective Agreement; b) That Professor Mason should agree not to teach while the investigation was being conducted; and c) That the parties would issue a joint communication indicating that Professor Mason had “voluntarily agreed to remain out of the classroom until the conclusion of the inve. [...] The Collective Agreement also specifies in Section 20.3.4, however, that: As soon as practicable after commencing an investigation, the Principal or Dean shall: (a) promptly and fully advise the Member in writing of the nature and substance of the allegation and the scope of the investigation, including advising the Member of her or his right to seek advice from the Association, and inviting the M. [...] Specifically: i) He was not advised in writing of “the nature and substance of the allegation;” ii) He was not advised of “the scope of the investigation;” iii) He was not invited two days ahead of time in writing to discuss the allegation; iv) He was not advised of his right to seek advice from the Association; and v) He was not accorded the opportunity to respond to the allegation. [...] The only intervention should have been an explanation to the class that the utterances were quotations from primary sources, and were meant to illustrate past and existing racist attitudes, the understanding of which were germane to the content of the course. [...] Article 19 of the collective agreement provides a detailed and specific process for the parties to utilize if there is a dispute or difference arising out of the "application, interpretation, administration, or alleged violation of the provisions of this Agreement." Article 14 of the collective agreement specifies the parties' understanding about the nature and content of academic freedom, and a f.