Á½ÐÔÉ«ÎçÒ¹

The current NTT Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) provides that bargaining unit members who have received appointments for three consecutive academic years shall be subject to a Full Performance Review during the third year of appointment before a fourth annual appointment can be anticipated or authorized. The current CBA further provides that, upon completion of a second three-year term of annually renewable appointments, a bargaining unit member is eligible for consideration of another three-year term of annually renewable appointments upon successful completion of a second Full Performance Review. These guidelines set forth specific Full Performance Review and Reappointment criteria and procedures for NTT faculty in University Libraries (UL) and as such, work in conjunction with current provisions in the NTT Collective Bargaining Agreement.

 

Members of the bargaining unit in year one, two or three of employment may expect to be notified by the Dean as early as possible, but no later than May 1, if they will be reappointed for the coming year. Members of the bargaining unit in years four, five and six of employment may expect to be notified by the Dean as early as possible, but no later than March 1, if they will be reappointed for the coming year. Absent timely written notification as specified in this section that the appointment is not to be renewed for the next academic year, the appointment for the next academic year shall be regarded as renewed.

An NTT faculty member shall be subject to a Full Performance Review in her/his third and sixth year of consecutive employment. For bargaining unit members who are hired between January 1 and June 30, the following academic year first full academic year will be considered the bargaining unit member's first year for the purposes of the Full Performance Review.

 

The Full Performance Review has as its primary purpose the reaffirmation of the appointment of the NTT faculty member through a review of her/his job performance during the preceding three years. The Full Performance Review is expected to be part of a three-year term of annually renewable appointments, providing that continuing programmatic need and budgeted resources supporting the position can be anticipated for the term in question.

NTT faculty members successful in standing for Full Performance Review in UL shall have demonstrated effective job performance that meets or exceeds the performance standards established for the position, as primarily documented in annual performance evaluations.

 

6.1. By May 31st, the Dean of University Libraries shall notify NTT faculty members who will be subject to a Full Performance Review during the following academic year and shall provide review guidelines and timetable.

6.2. The NTT faculty member is responsible for submitting a file containing the following to the Dean by the specified date:

    a. A self-evaluation providing an assessment of the NTT faculty member's job performance during the period under review;
    b. An up-to-date curriculum vitae;
    c. A current job description;
    d. Performance standards for the position(s) held; and
    e. The performance evaluations for the period under review.

At her/his discretion, the NTT faculty member may include other materials that further demonstrate effective job performance.

6.3. Guidelines for the submission of materials for review will be issued annually by the Office of Faculty Affairs.

6.4. The Dean shall review the file with the NTT faculty member in order to insure that the file is complete. Both the dean and the candidate shall sign a certificate of file completeness, which shall be added to the file.

6.5. The Dean shall convene an ad hoc Review Committee to review and make recommendations regarding the Full Performance Review. The ad hoc Review Committee shall be made up of three UL tenure track Faculty members and two UL NTT faculty members not standing for review. The committee shall be appointed by the Dean in consultation with the College Advisory Committee (CAC).

6.6. Deliberations and voting. The Dean shall initiate a candid and confidential discussion by sharing her/his estimate of the performance strengths and weaknesses of each NTT faculty member undergoing Full Performance Review with the ad hoc Review Committee. At the conclusion of the deliberations, there shall be a vote of all members, who shall vote yea or nay on each NTT faculty member under consideration.  Each voting member of the ad hoc Review Committee shall indicate on a signed ballot either to recommend or not recommend the candidate, along with written comments. In order to be recommended for renewal of appointment, the NTT faculty member must receive a simple majority positive vote.  A tabulation of the final count shall be included in the Dean's written summary provided for in Section 6.7 below.

6.7. After carefully reviewing the recommendation of the committee, the Dean shall weigh and assess the NTT faculty member's record and arrive at a final conclusion regarding the review. The Dean shall prepare a written summary of performance which incorporates the Dean's assessment and conclusions. The Dean shall review the written summary of performance with the CAC. The Dean shall transmit a copy of the summary to the NTT faculty member with the renewal of appointment decision. A negative decision will include an explanation of whether lack of adequate satisfaction with performance or the absence of programmatic need or budgeted resources to support the position is the reason. A negative decision based on performance will be supported by a discussion of the shortcomings of the NTT faculty member's performance based on the performance standards for that position and as evidenced by the NTT faculty member's annual performance reviews.

6.8. The Dean shall place a copy of this memo in the NTT faculty member's personnel file and shall transmit a copy to the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs.
 

In addition to providing written comments in response to the review for the personnel file, the NTT faculty member may request a reconsideration of the review by the CAC within 30 days of receipt of the Dean's written summary of performance.