[media-credit name=’DEREK MONTGOMERY/Herald photo’ align=’alignnone’ width=’648′][/media-credit]A new University of Wisconsin committee took its first step toward correcting the systemwide employee disciplinary process at Van Hise Hall Thursday.

Board of Regents President David Walsh announced the formation of the committee two weeks ago when testifying before the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, which authorized a legislative audit on UW System employment policies and practices.

"We need to assure the public that we're good stewards not only of the funds but that we're good stewards of the safety of the [people of the] university," Walsh said in his statement of committee purpose. "There is a very delicate balance that we attempt to maintain [in which] we safeguard due-process rights and property rights [and] balance [that] against the need for safety."

Thursday's commencement meeting primarily consisted of clarification and discussion of the current policies concerning the employment disciplinary process as it regards to both UW policies and state law. The committee is prepared to recommend changes to both codes.

Regent Brent Smith, one of three regents on the six-member committee, said the members "absolutely" have a better understanding of current laws after input from UW System General Counsel and committee member Patricia Brady.

"It's a complex combination of Fourteenth Amendment, state statutes and our own internal rules, and you try to harmonize those and it's not always easy to understand," Smith said. "Pat Brady did a good job, and I think the discussion that followed really helped us get a handle, and that's what we had to have first."

When Walsh appointed the committee, he requested recommendations for the full board to consider at its Dec. 8 meeting, an admittedly tight timeframe. The committee tentatively plans to convene again Nov. 11 and Smith said it will probably meet once or twice more after that.

"I think we're on a timetable which we can meet in December," he said.

UW-Madison law professor and committee member Walter Dickey said the procedures need to be changed in part because the times have changed.

"[The rules] weren't drafted to confront the kind of situations we're facing now," he said.

Dickey noted one of the difficulties of setting a successful employee-discipline process is determining what offenses are considered grounds for discipline or dismissal.

For example, Dickey suggested conviction of a felony may not be a good benchmark for dismissal because, in that case, the felon's attorneys may push harder to settle for two misdemeanor convictions instead.

"What is the behavior that gives rise to a possible dismissal?" Dickey asked. "It's the question of the underlying behavior that's really of concern."

The committee's action comes in the wake of intense criticism from state legislators and national media alike after the system took what some felt was far too long to dismiss three convicted felons — all UW-Madison professors — from its payroll.

All three convictions were of serious felonies, all sexual in nature, and the professors' continued employment caused UW much embarrassment and, some have argued, damaged the school's credibility and legitimacy.