The Board of Regents committee in charge of investigating the University of Wisconsin System's disciplinary process met for the third time Tuesday, as they continue the process of reforming dismissal procedures.

Although scheduled to make a recommendation to the full board Dec. 8, committee members said the process has moved slower than expected and they may continue meetings into 2006.

"We don't want to rush," Regent Michael J. Spector said. "I think we are making progress."

One topic of debate discussed repeatedly during past meetings has been what just cause for suspension without pay should be.

"Charge and conviction aside, I think the real concern is the underlying behavior," UW law professor and committee member Walter Dickey said. "Dismissal is for the behavior, not for the conviction. The conviction is evidence of the behavior."

Committee members agreed the decision to suspend a faculty member without pay could be made without a conviction.

They also agreed the disciplinary process would start with a faculty member being charged with an egregious crime. Such a proposal was not accepted by everyone in attendance at the meeting, however.

"People are presumed innocent in our society until proven guilty. We are operating on a different principle here," David Nack, vice president of the Faculty and Academic Staff Union, said. "Anybody can charge anybody with anything, and that generates a police report."

The committee defended the proposed policy by emphasizing the investigation must find a "substantial likelihood" the faculty member committed the crime he or she was accused of before suspending his or her pay.

"There are limitations on the information that you can get pre-conviction. I mean, it's a fact of life," Dickey said. "If you are going to proceed pre-conviction, you need to accept those limitations, and you need to do the things that we are doing here to try and make it as fair as it can possibly be."

Members of the audience raised other questions regarding the concept of suspension without pay.

"There is no civil right to being paid," he said. "There is civil right to being paid for working, and doing good work, and not having endangered others in a way that affects your institution."

In addition to these issues, the committee also discussed the possibility of having two categories of crimes that would merit suspension without pay. One would be a specific list of egregious crimes that would be clearly defined, while the other would be a more general category of behavior seen as detrimental to the university.

Regent President David Walsh announced the formation of the ad hoc committee in testimony before the Joint Legislative Audit Committee hearing last month.

The possibility of a delayed deadline is not completely unexpected. Though Walsh requested the committee prepare a recommendation for the December board meeting, he acknowledged the strict timetable.