Name That Section - Frequently Used Education Code and Title 5 Sections for Community College Districts

catch-all category) could agree to collegially consult on Advisory Committee selection and process, but not content.

We realize that many districts have already charted their course as to how they will work with their senates on EEO Plan and Advisory Committee development. However, we have included this discussion both for districts that have not started down this road, and those that are struggling with the course chosen. Districts that want to revisit how they are working with various constituencies to develop their Advisory Committees and EEO Plans should consult with legal counsel. 2. EEO Plans and Faculty Agreement on Hiring Procedures Separate and apart from the participatory governance obligations discussed above, the Education Code also provides academic senates with certain rights and responsibilities concerning procedures for faculty hiring. The Education Code states: “No later than July 1, 1990, hiring criteria, policies, and procedures for new faculty members shall be developed and agreed upon jointly by representatives of the governing board, and the academic senate, and approved by the governing board.” 203 This provision has been construed by the California Court of Appeal to require agreement with the academic senate before any policies concerning faculty hiring can be modified. 204 In Irvine Valley College Academic Senate v. South Orange Community College District , 205 the Academic Senate brought a writ of mandate against the South Orange County Community College District in an attempt to stop the district’s implementation of new faculty hiring procedures that had not been “agreed upon jointly” with the senate as required by Education Code section 87360. The district argued that Section 87360 only applied to the initial adoption of a faculty hiring policy and did not provide the academic senate with an ongoing right to consultation on any subsequent modifications of the policies. The Court disagreed and found that “the Legislature intended the faculty, through the academic senates, to have an ongoing role in developing and consenting to faculty hiring policies and procedures.” 206 Additionally, the Court found that the existing policies must remain in effect until any proposed changes can be agreed upon by both the district and the academic senates. 207 The Court discounted the district’s argument that this provided the senates with a “veto” and allowed them to obstruct change. 208 “The bottom line is that the Legislature granted the Senates a role equal to the district’s in developing and adopting faculty hiring policies. They undoubtedly contemplated a balance between the interests of each party and that compromise would be required. Respondents may feel this decision was unwise and are free to seek a change in the law, but the law on the books is what this Court must follow.” 209

The question here is: what does this mean for EEO Plan adoption procedures? We identify three important points for consideration:

Name that Section: Frequently Used Education Code and Title 5 Sections for Community College Districts ©2019 (c) Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 69