Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4

To— 

?

From SENATE LIBRARY COMMITTEE 

Subject 

?

Date DECEMBER 22, 1971 

MOTION: ? 

"That Senate approve the establishment of the following 

Committee, as set forth in Paper S.72-12, effective 

immediately: 

NAME ? 

Library Penalties Appeal Committee. 

TYPE ? 

Standing Committee reporting to Senate 

Library Committee. 

PURPOSE ? 

To consider cases wherein an individual 

• ? 

feels that he is unjustly penalized for 

an infraction of the Library Loan Policy 

and to make the final decision. 

MEMBERSHIP Chairman, Senate Library Committee (voting) 

Ombudsman, Student Society (voting) 

Head, Loan Division, University Library (voting) 

PROCEDURE Any individual who is aggrieved by the decision 

of the Loan Division of the Library concerning 

penalties may petition, in writing, to the Head 

of the division that his case be considered by 

the Library Penalties Appeal Committee. The 

individual will be notified by letter/telephone 

of the date of the meeting and may speak to the 

.

?

committee on his grievance. The Loan Division 

will provide documentation for the Library and 

the individual may contest the evidence or 

/

-2-

enter any circumstances that may be germane. 

The decision of the Committee is final 

Penalties imposed will not be suspended while an appeal 

is waiting to be heard by the Committee, but fines which 

have been paid and which are subsequently deemed unfair 

by the Committee will be refunded." 

.

SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

72,

MEMORANDUM

00 ....... I.

......

From

.......A. H....Lach.an

Chairman

...................................................................SenateLibraryCommittee

Subject .............. ..LIBRARYPENALTIES

Date ................... De.ce.mb.e.r..2.1,1.9.7.1

COMMITTEE

This paper is in response to the following motion passed by Senate at its

meeting of August 2, 1971

"that Senate instruct the Senate Library Committee to

implement an appropriate appeals mechanism on fines with

student parity and report back to Senate"

The Senate Library Committee recommends that appeals be heard by

the committee described below:

NAME ?

Library Penalties Appeal Committee

TYPE

Standing

Committee reporting to Senate Library Committee 

PURPOSE

To consider cases wherein an individual feels that

he is unjustly penalized for an infraction of the Library

Loan Policy and to make the final decision

MEMBERSHIP Chairman, Senate Library Committee (voting)

Ombudsman, Student Society

(voting) ?

Head, Loan Division, University Library (voting)

PROCEDURE Any individual who is aggrieved by the decision of

the Loan Division of the Library concerning penalties

may petition, in writing, to the Head of the division

that his case be considered by the Library Penalties

Appeal Committee. The individual will be notified by

letter /telephone of the date of the meeting and may

speak to the committee on his grievance.

The Loan Division will provide documentation for

the Library ?

and the individual may contest

the evidence or enter any circumstances that may be

germane. The decision of the Committee is final.

Penalties imposed will not be suspended while an appeal is waiting to

be heard by the Committee, but fines which have been paid and which

are subsequently deemed unfair by the Committee will be refunded.

Comment

The Senate Library Committee in its debate did not address itself to

the question of student parity. The membership recommended for the

Appeal Committee respects Senate's wish for student parity in that it

provides for one student member and one faculty member.

(I am

assuming that the Head of the Loan Division is not a faculty member and

that, as is usually the case, the Chairman of the Senate Library Committee

is a faculty member.) Senate might wish to interpret parity in a different

sense. The appeals mechanism suggested here has not yet been implement-

ed and it seems wise to refrain from implementation until the will of

Senate has been clarified.

The advantage of having a small appeal committee with an odd number of

voting members seems self-evident. With an even number of voting

members, decisions might not be reached in many cases.

AHL: dcp