New Jersey Tenure Decisions at Private, as Well as Public Colleges and Universities, Examined by Appeals Court Decision
Under New Jersey employment law, tenure provides college, university and school faculty great protection. However, this protection is not unlimited. A New Jersey appeals court explained how courts should review decisions to terminate a tenured college professor in the case of Chee Ng v. Fairleigh Dickinson University.
Background
Dr. Chee Ng was a professor of finance at the Silberman College of Business at Fairleigh Dickinson University. He was granted tenure in 2003, and promoted to full professor in 2007. In 2009, ten of his students complained to the school regarding Dr. Ng’s conduct in class. They alleged that he made discriminatory comments in class, mistreated students, and was generally rude. Similar complaints were made again in 2010. The department chair counseled him, but similar complaints were made by more students in 2012. More counseling was held. Complaints were again received in Fall 2013 and Spring 2015; again, he was counseled. Dr. Ng then took a sabbatical during the Fall 2015 and Spring 2016 semesters. However, more student complaints were received upon Dr. Ng’s return. The complaints were investigated, and the Dean met with Ng and advised him that if there were more upheld student complaints, there would be more severe consequences.
New Jersey Lawyers Blog


recently examined this doctrine in the context of the revocation of a teacher’s teaching certificate after an arbitration on tenure charges in the case of
full-time position in the case of
protections are extremely valuable.
he choice will depend on the relief sought. If the employee does not want to continue working for the employer or does not care about correcting the discipline, but rather only cares about collecting money damages, then she would sue in court (New Jersey state courts and New Jersey law provide greater procedural and substantive advantages for employees, so they usually file in the Superior Court rather than federal court). If the employee is more concerned about getting her job back or correcting the discipline, often the administrative route (which can also provide back pay) is the best choice. When there are no issues of constitutional rights, or discrimination or retaliation, then the administrative route is the only option.