29
36f
invulnerable status of members of the staff ensured by
Statute 17 of the Ordinance might easily be dangerous. The machinery for removing an incompetent lecturer, for
example, whatever may be the terms of his original
agreement, seems to us to be unnecessarily cumbrous under that Statute; and we consider that the publicity entailed by the existing necessity of taking such a
case before a body such as the full Court is undesirable.
The individual concerned must be fully entitled to appeal
against any such decision; but the decision, we are
satisfied, should originally lie with the Council, or
even with the Vice-Chancellor subject to the Council's
confirmation.
We
83. A further point under the same Statute presents itself. Apart from lunacy or something like criminal
misconduct, the only "Good Cause" which can be shown
seems to be the rather vague "actual incapacity". do not fully understand the meaning of this term but it seems at least arguable that incompetence, indolence, indiscipline, and a number of other undesirable characteristics could never be quoted as a grounds for
removal.
We consider that this should be remedied and
that no member of the staff should feel that he is
invulnerable until retiring age.
84.
The periodical election of Deans of the Faculties under Statute 3(5) appears to us to be undesirable from the point of view of discipline, and it is not easy for us to see the objections to the senior
professor being ex officio Dean of his Faculty, his
place while on leave being naturally filled by the next
senior. We observe that the annual election which