Tukukkk

I'm on a short-term contract with a local state university. I have been teaching there as an adjunct for a while, but a full-time faculty needed to take emergency leave so I was asked to cover their courses.

As part of my full-time responsibilities, I was asked to a meeting for some administrative work that I know something about. There were four faculty members: the head of department, a recently tenured faculty, and a tenure-track faculty. During the meeting we divided up the work and said we'd meet in two weeks or so to review it.

There was some discussion about who did what, but the recently tenured faculty said very little.

The next day, that recently-tenured faculty sent an email saying that they had "felt uncomfortable" with how the work was assigned and had a "clear vision" about the part of the work that I had volunteered for. As I said, the recently-tenured faculty said very little during the meeting and seemed to agree with the outcome.

In addition to the four people who were at the meeting, this email was CCed to the Dean and the rest of the department.

Coming from a commercial, rather than academic, background I found this behavior disturbing and unprofessional.

My full-time contract ends at the end of the calendar year, but I am wondering if you have any advice regarding how I should deal with this recently-tenured faculty apart from doing the work that I was asked to do during the meeting? I'd rather have nothing to do with them and, were they in a commercial environment, they would probably be on a PIP (performance improvement plan).

The head of department has been supportive. The Dean has not weighed in.

Actually, I would ignore it. It is fairly typical behavior among some faculty. It might not even be abuse, but just the other person having time to reflect after the meeting. If the comments made were on-topic and not a personal attack, then you have nothing to gain in your current position by doing anything beyond arguing for your position. It could even be that the other person is uncomfortable in meeting generally.

I once found that offering suggestions for improvement of policy, as a new faculty member, is sometimes definitely not appreciated. I suffered setbacks because I suggested that "the way we do things here" was counterproductive. People don't like to hear that from a new person or an underling.

But yielding graciously, even if you don't feel it, could put you in a better position for future employment there.

On the other hand, you are justified in responding to a personal attack, but do so through "channels".

I suggest checking with the department chair to find out what he wants you to do --- continue with your part of the work as agreed during the meeting? trade assignments with the recently tenured person so that he can develop that "clear vision"? do nothing and let the newly tenured person do your part of the work in addition to his own?

An earlier comment was removed which said that such a head-over-heels turn would deserve a PIP in industry is far over the top. I do not know why this comment was removed, I thought it was perfectly apt. Yea, it is not nice when somebody tries to underhandedly and one-sidedly modify an agreement decided publicly, but it is far from an actionable offence.

As response, it is perfectly sufficient to say that if they disagree with the outcome of the meeting and want to change it, and OP is unhappy about this proposed change, it would need renegotiation.

So, an answer could be: "In our meeting, we agreed to which seemed to be all right with all participants; this included me - and, given that you did not express anything to the contrary, also you. If you wish to modify this outcome now, this would need to be coordinated between all parties; in this case, I suggest you call in another meeting of all the parties to realign the duties."

I very much doubt that that person would dare to do that, given that the others will ask themselves why they have to waste their time again on a question which already had been decided and closed.