This won’t be up long, but I have to say it.
One link connected all the three different institutions that have apparently violated their governing legislation to ignore their obligations to public sector oversight — no appeal was “allowed.” My institution refused to hear multiple academic freedom complaints and then refused to allow their decision not to listen to them be appealed.
I was told the institution could teach what it liked even if it violated academic freedom at the methodology level. I just hadn’t liked the way the class was taught while it did so.
No part of my complaint was not liking how the class was taught. My problem was that the person who confirmed that my program’s pedagogy was based on academic freedom violation got to decide my issue with him for the institution.
There are multiple documents outlining the appeals process the institution has. The section of the Grad School Student handbook talks specifically about the duties of a New Decision Maker:
I know I followed the appeals process mentioned in the 2019 Investigations Policy before it was falsified. It specifically laid out the appeal process for a UBC Person unsatisfied with the Provost’s decision. It listed the Director of Equity (of outcomes) and Inclusion, the University Counsel, and the Senate in that order.
The University Counsel failed to mention the implications or impacts of his “amendments” to the Investigations Policy will cause. The amendment documents fail to mention the legal risk of violating the University Act if it removed mention of the Senate’s legal obligation in the appeals process.
The Training Department had failed to scour UBC’s policies to remove any reference to non-employees having access to academic freedom protections. They have also failed to scrub institutional documents of any mention of a student’s right to appeal investigation decisions.
Considering the new policy is supposed to be in effect in a week, they’d better have an expedited method of updating their handbook.
The institution set this as the expectation at every level of the appeals process:
But at every level across multiple institutions, I was told the Provost had decided what my problem with him was.
And that was that.
The Law Society expected me to find a lawyer specializing in UBC policies or an Ombuds officer willing to follow the Ombudsperson Act and the Public Interest Disclosure Act to appeal their decision.
The Ombuds Office is almost a month outside its 90-day appeals process timeline.
An abusive institution will mistreat a person. A narcissistic institution will do so while forcing the person to accept its version of reality as fact.