The Story Thus Far, Part I
Jeffries was not allowed to appeal the decision.
Because the probationary contract would nullify his existing tenure contract, Jeffries refused to sign the new contract. After his refusal to accept the probationary contract, Jeffries was told that his services were no longer required, and he was asked to vacate his office at the University.
From what we have been able to piece together, the events leading up to the decision to revoke Jeffries's tenure began when the administration had requested that Jeffries, in his role as a tenured faculty member and as the Wendt Professor of Ethics (a.k.a., the "campus ethicist"), present evidence against a fellow faculty member who had been accused of wrongdoing. According to reports we have received, Jeffries refused on a number of grounds, first and foremost because he was, indeed, the so-called campus ethicist; he did not want to alienate himself from his colleagues for fear they would no longer trust him in that capacity. Furthermore, as far as he could tell, he was not obligated by the terms set forth in the faculty handbook to engage in any such activity.
From what we can gather, Jeffries was charged with having an uncollegial attitude.
Rumor has it that the University is claiming that a memo Jeffries sent to some administrators asking to discuss a few things in his contract constituted a counter-offer to his tenure contract, and thus the University was justified in taking the tenure contract off the table. Because Jeffries refused to sign the probationary contract on the grounds that it would nullify his existing contract, it seems that he did not intend his memo to be interpreted as a counter-offer.
NOTE: We will be updating this story as more information is made available.