The Academic Senate at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona unanimously approved a resolution calling for the immediate reestablishment of the Office of Conflict Resolution Services and Ombuds and an expedited search to fill the Ombudsperson position. The action follows the termination of Ombuds Mark Patterson and the abrupt closure of the office in February. The resolution reaffirms support for an independent Ombuds office operating in accordance with IOA standards and calls on university administrators to provide clearer communication about the closure and future plans for the office. (Poly Post.)
On the one hand, it is nice to see such strong support for the Ombuds role at this university. It appears the resolution articulates the value the role brings to the university. On the other hand, it is ironic that the Faculty Senate both supports the role’s independence but also wants a hand in the program’s administration. You can’t support an Ombuds independence and simultaneously want to control it. An Ombuds is accountable to the entire system, but is not beholden to the whims and desires of faculty, staff, students, or administrators. You’re there to help inspire resolution, but not personally responsible for it. You’re there as a coach to help, not to drive it. You’re there to help empower, but must accept when individual decisions don’t align with what was discussed, agreed upon, or align with ideal resolution behaviors. Moreover, all of this work is done confidentially. What is clear in this case is that no one (at the university or external, to include readers of this blog), knows what is really going on. And you’ll never know, But you’re quick to judge and make assumptions, asserting what you think you know is the truth. The problem is that the Ombuds can’t share because of IOA confidentiality, and the system can’t share because of personnel confidentiality. This makes it unfair to both the Ombuds and the administrators frankly. Because there’s likely a lot going on that no one is allowed to know. So let’s perhaps stop being so judgmental, assume the best, and give everyone some grace.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the problem isn't the institution itself, but how individuals are actually handling their roles. It makes you wonder—is this just bad management on their part, or the consequence of our profession lacking real oversight?
ReplyDeleteReinstate Mark Patterson.
ReplyDeleteWho in their right mind would take an ombuds job there under this president?
ReplyDeleteThe Academic Senate’s resolution reflects the collaborative spirit I worked to build at CPP. From the start, I pushed for transparency and shared governance, advocating for charter provisions to require advance notice and consultation with faculty and staff leadership before making structural changes. While the administration and Chancellor's office resisted those clauses, I was able to secure a commitment in the final August 2025 Charter: a promise that if the office were reduced or closed, CPP would "take reasonable steps to ensure that confidentiality commitments are honored and that comparable conflict resolution resources will remain available."
ReplyDeleteWhile the charter and this language was in effect, the administration closed the office without warning, continuity plans or even an explanation. These actions point to a top-down structural distrust of ombuds value rather than an operational shortcoming, validating why the faculty is calling to get this resource back.
This reflects a profession-wide failure to articulate the REAL value of the function, which is not ADR.
Delete