McAdams suspension not 'suspension', says Marquette

Marquette expands on John McAdams controversy in a new statement, Karen Herzog reported in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

"'He is under review. He has been relieved of his teaching duties and other faculty duties,' the statement said, referring to how the university's actions have been interpreted by others. 'His salary and benefits will continue during the course of the review.'"

That does not address any misinterpretation. It's what Marquette said in its December 17th statement.

"Asked to clarify what would constitute a suspension, spokesman Brian Dorrington said: 'Our definition of suspension is without pay.'"

That doesn't clarify. Rather it appears to contradict Marquette's own Statutes on Faculty Appointment, Promotion and Tenure. Section 307.02 says,

"In all cases of ...suspension ... a faculty member's entitlement to salary and fringe benefits shall continue, irrespective of any suspension from duties ..."

McAdams referred to this Chapter of the Statutes in his blog post Marquette’s Suspension of Marquette Warrior Violated Marquette’s Own Rules.

It also conflicts with what Dean Richard Holz emailed to McAdams, as quoted on McAdams' blog.

"The university is continuing to review your conduct and during this period--and until further notice--you are relieved of all teaching duties and all other faculty activities, including, but not limited to, advising, committee work, faculty meetings and any activity that would involve your interaction with Marquette students, faculty and staff. ..."
[...]
"You are to remain off campus during this time..."

Marquette might plausibly say it has put McAdams under interdict. But to say what it has done is a lesser level of sanction than suspension is incredible. There's the further problem that Marquette seems to think that calling this 'review' rather than 'suspension' takes this matter outside the procedural requirements and protections in its own Statutes.