The Western Nevada College Academic Faculty was summoned to a meeting on March 4, 2011 and informed of the pending Curricular Review process.This meeting was presented as an informational meeting and faculty were informed that the determinations for the cuts would be made by April 4. Faculty were asked if there were questions, but not invited to participate in developing the curricular review process outside the setting of this one-hour informational meeting.
On April 4, the entire college was informed that seven faculty were being cut, but no specific reasons for the cuts were given. General justifications were that some had low enrollment, some had low program completions, and some taught developmental classes. The WNC Academic Faculty Senate was informed that they must respond to the cuts proposed by the administration by May 4. The president was to make final cut decisions (pre-Reconsideration process) by May 13 to allow notices of termination to be issued by June 30, 2011.
The WNC Academic Faculty Senate formed a Curricular Review Response Group (CRRG) to address the proposed cuts. The CRRG determined the seven affected faculty could be saved with the cuts being placed elsewhere in the institution. This finding was fully shared with the administration.
The WNC Academic Faculty Senate voted in April 2011 for the WNC Administration to abandon the current Curricular Review Process and restart the process to include meaningful and substantial Academic Faculty input. The WNC Administration rejected this response and requested a meeting with the Curricular Review Response Group.
May 2, 2011 The WNC Administration met with the Curricular Review Response Group. The president asked if she could delay her decisions until Fall 2011, after the budget is decided by the legislature. The Curricular Review Response Group agreed.
June 2011, the WNC administration offered five of the seven affected faculty a “super buyout” in the form of 150% of their salary. Two faculty accepted this. Two administrative vacancies are filled: A new director of the foundation via a search committee and a coordinator of work force development is appointed without a search committee.
August 22, 2011, the administration meets with the Curricular Review Response Group. The funding shortfall for WNC was 18% rather than 31%. Several of the administrative and classified employees who were slated to be cut are retained. Two of the remaining five faculty members have a potential reassignment. As stated by VP of Human Resources, one of the reassigned faculty members would not retain her tenure in her new assignment.
August 26, 2011, the WNC Academic Faculty Senate passes another resolution again rejecting the Curricular Review process and requesting the process be restarted with faculty involvement. Another resolution is passed encouraging faculty to not serve on search committees until the five faculty affected by Curricular Review are retained.
August 30, 2011, the president and VP Human Resources/Legal Counsel meet the the Academic Faculty Senate chair and former chair/NFA Chapter President to discuss the resolution. The president and VP take the position that the March 4 meeting was the time the Academic Faculty were supposed to give input to the VP of Academic and Student Affairs prior to her making the decisions for the cuts. The meeting ends with the two sides disagreeing as to the content of the March 4 meeting.
September 5, 2011, the five remaining tenured faculty members stand to undergo the Reconsideration Process at WNC with two having potential reassignments, pending funds.
September 6, 2011, no letters of termination have been sent to the affected faculty. The affected faculty have no written declaration citing cause for their termination.
The Academic Faculty Senate approved two facutly members for the Reconsideration Committee. The president appointed the VP of Academic and Student affairs and another faculty member to the reconsideration committee. The president appointed a former administrator for the college as the chair for this committee. This person is paid as a consultant to the college. The chair has a vote only in the case of a tie.