Any faculty member at SMC has the right to be represented by the Faculty Association when called in for closed door meetings with any administrators.  The presence of a Faculty Association representative prevents administrators from coercing faculty into accepting undue actions.  This right to have a union rep present during such meetings comes from a 1975 U. S. Supreme Court decision, NRLB v. Weingarten.  That case set out certain rules for employees subject to investigatory interviews on the job.

      Under Weingarten, an employee has the right to union representation when he or she is the subject of an investigatory interview.  This kind of interview happens an administrator obtains information which could be used as a basis for discipline or asks an employee to defend his or her conduct.  The employee also has the right to union representation when he or she has a reasonable belief that discipline or other adverse consequences may result from what he or she says in an interview.

      The faculty member must, either before or during the interview, ask for FA representation.  When the request is made, one of three things must happen: (1) the administrator must either grant the request and delay questioning until an FA rep arrives and has a chance to consult privately with the faculty member; or (2) deny the request and end the interview immediately; or (3) give the faculty member the choice of having the interview without FA representation or ending the interview.  If an administrator refuses to honor the faculty member's request and insists on the interview, then that administrator has committed an unfair labor practice and the results of the interview may be set aside by PERB.

      Hand in hand with the Weingarten rule are Skelly rights.  All public employees in California have Constitutional due process rights on the job.  This comes from a 1975 California Supreme Court decision, Skelly v. State Personnel Board.  Before any public employer can impose severe discipline (such as suspensions of more than five days) or terminate one of its permanent employees,  the employer  must do three  things.

First, the employer must give a written notice of the proposed disciplinary action that includes the following: state the nature of the proposed discipline; state an effective date of the proposed discipline; state the reasons for the discipline in ordinary language; state the specific policy or rule violated; and advise the employee that he or she has the right to respond to the employer's charges either orally or in writing.  Second, the employer must allow the employee to respond to the charges at a hearing, (called a "Skelly hearing") which must be held before the effective date of the proposed discipline.  Finally, the employer must provide any documents or other evidence upon which the proposed discipline is based.  Any public employee who is disciplined without this process is entitled to full back pay for the period of time up until a proper hearing is held, regardless of whether the discipline is upheld.

      The California Education Code provides that a regular academic employee (read: "tenured faculty") may be terminated for cause.  Those causes are: immoral or unprofessional conduct; dishonesty; unsatisfactory performance; evident unfitness for service; physical or mental condition that makes him or her unfit to instruct or associate with students; persistent violation of, or refusal to obey, the reasonable regulations of the state or local district; conviction of a felony or of any crime involving moral turpitude; conduct specified in Section 1028 of the Government Code (advocating the overthrow of the government).

      After filing written charges and serving notice on the faculty member, the local district may suspend him or her  for thirty days.  If the faculty member does not request a hearing, then the district may terminate the faculty member.  If the faculty member requests a hearing, then a hearing before an arbitrator will take place.  The arbitrator will then rule on whether the faculty member may be terminated.  Arbitrator rulings are rarely overturned in Superior Court unless the arbitrator's ruling was clearly unreasonable.