UC Santa Cruz Tenured Ladder-rank Faculty
RE: Update to the Career Equity Review Process
Over the last few years, there has been an increasing number of questions regarding the use and intention of the Career Equity Review (CER). This has resulted in our reviewing the original spirit and principles of the CER and determining that current Academic Personnel Manual (APM) and Campus Academic Personnel Manual (CAPM) policies involving the advancement process for ladder-rank faculty now incorporate these values. The result is that a standalone career equity review process appears redundant. Therefore, we are updating the current CER process for the reasons described below and incorporating it into the advancement process for major actions post-tenure. The May 15 deadline to request a CER will no longer apply.
Subsequent to the issuance of the CER policy in 2005, the APM and CAPM have been revised to include language specifically stating:
- Advancement reviews to Professor, Step 6, and to Above Scale status involve an overall career review with emphasis on time since appointment at UCSC; and
- Contributions in all areas of faculty achievement that promote equal opportunity and diversity are given due recognition and are evaluated and credited in the same way as other faculty achievements.
Our campus practice that faculty under review may identify in their personal statement the rank and step that they feel is appropriate (which then drives the type of review that will be conducted), combined with the revised policy language above, provides the opportunity for faculty to request an overall career review when they believe that such advancement is warranted with these major advancement actions.
Another important advancement is promotion to full Professor. It is appropriate that faculty under review for advancement to full Professor also have the same opportunity for an overall career review when requested by the faculty member.
Therefore, starting with the 2016-17 review year, the CER process will be incorporated into the advancement process when the review is for promotion to full Professor, merit to Professor, Step 6, and initial merit to Above Scale status. As such, the May 15 deadline to request a CER is no longer applicable. Requests will follow the deadline established by the campus or department, if earlier, for the submission of review materials. This allows the candidate a greater opportunity to consider and write their request and to meet with their chair, if desired.
The overarching goals and purpose of the CER remain unchanged. Per current campus policy, “The purpose of the Career Equity Review is not to reopen or appeal the decision of any previous case. Rather, the purpose is to see if the candidate’s accomplishments, when considered over multiple review periods, may warrant additional action. It is not intended to address salary scale compression or other salary issues unrelated to academic accomplishments. A CER functions as a process to correct a substantial inequality with respect to rank and step, which is typically a product of multiple past actions; it is not a means of appeal for, or expression of disagreement with, a single personnel decision.”
- The current CER process in CAPM 412.000 will be updated to incorporate the request into the advancement process for major actions post-tenure.
- Faculty candidates either on the CALL or requesting review for advancement to full Professor, Professor, Step 6, or Above Scale status may include with their review materials a request for a CER. No special form is required.
- The request is a document that is separate from the candidate’s self-statement and includes a summary statement of not more than two pages that identifies why the candidate believes that their current rank and step are inappropriate and what the candidate believes is appropriate. Possible justifications are that the cumulative career record warrants a recalibration and/or that certain work and contributions were overlooked, undervalued, or had a delayed impact.
- The reviewing bodies (department, dean, CAP, CP/EVC, Chancellor-for Above Scale actions) will consider and evaluate the candidate’s requested rank and step as part of the evaluation of the file. The review period is the candidate’s whole career, with focus on the time since coming to UCSC.
- These major advancements remain CP/EVC or Chancellor-authority actions. The dossier flow and associated deadlines follow the established process for these actions.
- External letters are required for these major actions and will be solicited as is normally done.
- To assist in the determination of the appropriate step, it is recommended, although not required, to solicit and receive input from at least one UC colleague who is familiar with the UC ladder-rank system and who is asked to recommend a rank and step based on the information in the file.
- An ad hoc personnel review committee may be appointed after the file has left the division. The Committee on Academic Personnel will review the dossier and may recommend an ad hoc personnel committee be convened by the CP/EVC. The ad hoc personnel committee may include members of the candidate’s division and/or department and representatives from other UC campuses and will be staffed by the Academic Personnel Office.
- Academic advancement continues to be based on the record of accomplishments in teaching, research/creative activity, and service as presented in the review file. The criteria for merit advancement and promotion at all ranks and steps is not changed. The file must meet the criteria for the specific advancement under review.
The CAPM will be updated shortly. In the meantime, questions may be directed to your divisional academic personnel coordinator or the Academic Personnel Office.
Campus Provost and
Executive Vice Chancellor
cc: Chancellor Blumenthal
Senate Chair Brenneis
CAP Chair Dean
Vice Provost Lee
Associate Vice Chancellor Peterson
Academic Personnel Office Analysts
Divisional Academic Personnel Coordinators