516.000 - Unit 18 Titles and Lecturers without Salary

UCSC:APO:CAPM rev:07/10

I Definitions of Titles
II Initial Appointment Procedures: 0 quarters of service in a Unit 18 title
III Reappointment Procedures: 1-17 quarters of service in the same UCSC department
IV Initial Continuing Appointment Procedures - The Excellence Review: completed 18
quarters of service in the same UCSC department
V Continuing Appointment Merit Review Procedures
VI Terms of Service
VII Pay Periods
VIII Compensation and Merit Increases
IX Layoff, Reduction in Time, and Re-Employment
X Lecturers without Salary

Appendix A: Evaluation, Criteria, and Evidence for non-Lecturer Unit 18 titles

Appendix B: Instructional Workload Policy

Appendix C: Common IWCs Converted to Percent Time Chart [PDF]

Appendix D: Unit 18 Titles and Title Codes [PDF]

These policies and procedures are intended as a supplement to the Memorandum of Understanding between the University of California and University Council-American Federation of Teachers.


NOTES:
  • Registered University of California students may not be appointed to these titles.

  • Unit 18 members are not eligible for Security of Employment or Academic Senate Membership.

  • The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and this policy refer to all instructional faculty and non-faculty appointees in the bargaining unit as non-Senate faculty or "NSF" (e.g., Lecturer, Teacher-Special Programs, Coordinator of Field Work, etc.).

* Throughout this document, "department" is used broadly to refer to a college, unit or program in addition to department.

**Throughout this document, "department chair" is used broadly to refer to the faculty member appointed by the Dean (or Vice Provost for college provosts) who serves as the academic leader and administrative head of a department, college, unit, or program.

I. DEFINITIONS OF TITLES

A. Lecturer - Pre-Six Year

This title is used to designate individuals who are appointed to teach courses on a contractually limited basis during the first 18 quarters of employment in the UCSC department.

B. Lecturer - Continuing Appointment

This title is used to designate individuals who are appointed to teach courses for an indefinite period of time following completion of 18 quarters of employment in any Unit 18 title in the same UCSC department. Appointment to this title can be made only when there has been a positive instructional need determination and the NSF is found to meet the required excellence standard following completion of the Excellence Review.

C. Senior Lecturer (may be Pre-Six Year or Continuing)

This title is used to designate individuals who have an appropriately senior level of professional achievement and experience (normally at least 15 years professional experience). Designation as a Senior Lecturer shall depend upon having earned distinction in the subject field comparable to that attained by leading members of the professorial faculty in similar fields.

D. Coordinator of Field Work (may be Pre-Six Year or Continuing)

The Coordinator of Field Work title is used for academic appointees who are charged with the primary responsibility for the maintenance of the education standards and effective functioning of the field work course/practicum. Other academic duties may include serving on academic and administrative committees.

E. Supervisor of Teacher Education (may be Pre-Six Year or Continuing)

Supervisors of Teacher Education are responsible for teacher education and teaching methods/programs. Supervisors of Teacher Education supervise the work of University students doing student teaching in elementary and secondary school classrooms. Supervisors of Teacher Education may also conduct teaching seminars, methods courses and other regular University courses. They shall be required to comply with state law(s) regarding active classroom participation.

F. Teacher - Special Programs (may be Pre-Six Year or Continuing)

Teacher - Special Programs are teachers who normally teach non-regular classes to University and non-University students, usually on a part-time by-agreement basis.

G. Lecturer in Summer Session

This title is used to designate individuals appointed on a temporary basis to teach in the Summer Session.

H. Lecturer without Salary

Lecturers without salary are not members of Unit 18 (i.e., this title is not included in the collective bargaining unit). See Section X of this policy for additional information.

II. INITIAL APPOINTMENT PROCEDURES (0 quarters of service in a Unit 18 title in a UCSC department* )

A. Department Review

1. Candidate submits the following during the initial appointment process:

  • a. Curriculum Vitae or Bio-bibliography

  • b. Optional materials (anything the candidate wishes to include) may include statement of teaching philosophy.

2. Letters of recommendation, not more than three years old, must be included in the appointment dossier. Letters of recommendation (usually three) obtained in recruitment may be used. The department chair ** may solicit additional letters of recommendation from internal or external sources, as appropriate. If extramural letters are solicited, include the following:

  • a. Sample copy of solicitation letter. The letter must include the following paragraphs on UC's confidentiality policies:

    "Under University of California policy, the identity of authors of letters of evaluation which are included in the personnel review files will be held in confidence. A candidate may request access to your letter in redacted form after he/she accepts an offer of appointment at UCSC. Redaction is defined as the removal of identifying information (including name, title, institutional affiliation, and relationship to the candidate) contained either at the top of the letterhead or within and below the signature block of the letter of evaluation.

    "The full text of the body of your letter will therefore be provided to the candidate if so requested. Thus, if you provide any information that tends to identify you in the body of the letter, that information will become available to the candidate. If you wish, you may provide a brief factual statement regarding your relationship to the candidate at the end of your letter but below the signature block. This brief statement will not be made available to the candidate.

    "Although we cannot guarantee that at some future time a court or government agency will not require the disclosure of the source of confidential evaluations in University of California personnel files, we can assure you that the University will endeavor to protect the identity of authors of letters of evaluation to the fullest extent allowable under the law."

  • b. List of all persons from whom letters were sought, with brief comments on academic standing of each letter writer. Identity each letter writer with an alpha code; and

  • c. List of any persons declining to write; include declining letters or memo to file recording declination.

3. If letters are not solicited by the department chair, an explanation of how the letters of recommendation were obtained (e.g., candidate solicited, unsolicited, placement package) shall be included in the department letter.

The quality of the letter of recommendation and standing of the author is more persuasive than the number of letters of recommendation submitted. The department chair may use his or her judgment in determining how many letters should be submitted. Subsequent reviewers may request additional letters be solicited by the department chair.

4. Following applicable departmental procedures for NSF assessment, the department chair submits the department's recommendation to the dean. All references to confidential letter writers must be by alpha code. It is suggested that the recommendation include the following:

  • a. Recommended title;

  • b. Annual salary rate and actual salary (See Section VIII regarding compensation);

  • c. Percent time based on divisional workload policy and actual work assigned to individual (see Appendix B for Instructional Workload Policy);

  • d. Effective dates of initial appointment (shall not exceed two years);

  • e. Responsibilities assigned (courses, equivalency assignments, etc.);

  • f. Nature of appointment, i.e., whether the course or equivalency is usually assigned to NSF, or if not, what are the circumstances which require this appointment (e.g., course is normally taught by Senate faculty but that individual is on sabbatical leave);

  • g. Name and title of person to whom the NSF reports.

  • h. Evaluation of qualifications in relation to criteria for initial appointment. The criteria are:

    • 1. Demonstrated competence in the field and teaching ability, as evidenced by:

      • - requisite degree, and/or
      • - previous teaching experience and performance.
    • 2. Senior Lecturer requires, in addition, an appropriately senior level of professional achievement and experience (normally at least 15 years professional experience). (See also Definitions, page 1.)

    • 3. Appendix A contains additional criteria and evidence appropriate to titles other than Lecturer (e.g., Coordinator of Field Work, Supervisor of Teacher Education, Teacher-Special Programs).

5. Because candidates drawn from professional areas may often have very limited experience in formal lecturing, the recommending department has a special obligation to assure that the candidate possesses teaching abilities in the classroom and in other aspects of the organization and presentation of the subject. In support of its recommendation to the dean, the recommending department should furnish an evaluation of the specific evidence available to it regarding these factors.

6. Experience and/or professional degree must be appropriate to the course(s) which the candidate is to teach. Evidence of the qualifications of the candidate must be included in the documentation submitted by the recommending department.

7. A description of the course(s) to be taught, if known, may be included in the documentation submitted by the recommending department.

B. Dean's Review
  • 1. The dean has final authority for initial appointments.

  • 2. If the appointment is approved, an appointment letter shall be issued (see Section II.C below for requirements of appointment letter; see Appendix B for Instructional Workload Policy).

C. Appointment Letters

Appointment letters should be issued June 15th or as soon as practicable for courses being offered the next academic year and must contain the following information:

  • 1. Title of position;
  • 2. Annual salary rate and actual salary;
  • 3. Department Name;
  • 4. The name of the person to whom the NSF reports;
  • 5. Percent time based on divisional workload policy and actual work assigned to individual (see Appendix B for Instructional Workload Policy);
  • 6. Effective dates of appointment (initial appointments shall not exceed two years);
  • 7. Responsibilities assigned (courses, equivalency assignments, etc.);
  • 8. Nature of appointment;
  • 9. Name and title of person to whom the NSF reports; and
  • 10. The UC and AFT web sites where the MOU can be found: http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/employees/policies_employee_labor_relations/collective_bargaining_agreements.html
D. Changes in Percent Time
  • 1. If the department chair recommends a change in workload resulting in an increase in percent time after an initial appointment is approved by the dean, the department shall submit a Unit 18 Workload Increase Recommendation form to the dean. The dean shall review the request, and if approved, a revised letter or copy of the form shall be issued to the NSF by the dean.

  • 2. If the department chair approves a change in work assignment(s) that does not result in a change in the percent time or effective dates of the appointment, this information shall be communicated to the dean who will issue a revised appointment letter to the NSF.

    • a. For an involuntary reduction in percent time, also known as layoff, refer to Article 17 of the MOU and Section IX of this policy.

    • b. Documentation for voluntary decreases in percent time must include a letter from the candidate requesting the decrease and a letter from the chair supporting or declining the requested decrease. This documentation shall be sent to the dean who shall decide whether to approve the request. If approved, the dean shall issue a revised appointment letter.

III. REAPPOINTMENT PROCEDURES - Pre-Six Years (1-17 quarters of service in a Unit 18 title in the same UCSC department)

Reappointment files must contain sufficient materials to document the demonstrated competence of the candidate. Any reappoint shall be preceded by an assessment of the performance of the NSF, which shall be undertaken in accordance with the department's applicable procedures.

For assessment and reappointment of a Pre-Six Lecturer, use the Pre-Six Lecturer Assessment/Reappointment Form. For assessment of and reappointment to all other pre-six Unit 18 titles, use the Document Inventory for Pre-Six Reappointment.

A. Department Assessment

1. NSF under consideration for reappointment shall be notified of the review criteria, the form of assessment, and when the assessment will occur. The Checklist to Assure Fairness is initiated.

2. Reappointment Criteria - Assessment of NSF for reappointment purposes shall be based on the following:

  • a. Demonstrated competence in the field, as evidenced by:

    • (1) Requisite degree; and/or
    • (2) Previous teaching experience.
  • b. Demonstrated ability in teaching. Performance is measured by evaluation of qualities such as:

    • (1) Command of the subject matter;
    • (2) Ability to organize and present course materials;
    • (3) Ability to stimulate imaginative thinking and encourage critical and analytical skills;
    • (4) Ability to arouse curiosity in beginning students and to stimulate advanced students;
    • (5) Appropriately current syllabi, reading lists, and other instructional material; and
    • (6) Student evaluations.
  • c. Academic responsibility as a duty associated with a course assignment.

  • d. Demonstrated ability in other assigned duties, which may include university co-curricular and community service.

  • e. Senior Lecturer requires, in addition, service of exceptional value to the University. (See also Definitions of Titles, Section I.C.)

    Appendix A contains additional criteria and evidence appropriate to Coordinators of Field Work, Supervisors of Teacher Education, and Teacher - Special Programs.

3. NSF submits:

  • a. Updated bio-bibliography including teaching information and current address.

  • b. Optional materials which may include unsolicited letters of assessment, a statement of pedagogical philosophy and goals, representative sample of syllabi, tests, reading lists, and other instructional materials.

4. Department gathers student evaluations for the review period.

5. The NSF shall be provided with the opportunity to inspect the assessment materials (consistent with University policy on confidential material), before the department recommendation is determined, and to make a written response within five working days. Any written response must be included in the assessment file. (See APM 160 and CAPM 200.160 for guidance on what is confidential material.)

6. According to applicable departmental procedures, the department chair or standing personnel committee considers evidence of the reappointment criteria listed in section A.2 above, and any documents and materials submitted by the NSF. Consideration will be given to all relevant materials in the file.

7. In exceptional circumstances (e.g., where market forces dictate), it may be possible to renegotiate a salary adjustment upon reappointment. If a department chair considers this necessary, a letter of justification, including the number of steps recommended, must be included with the file.

8. If the result of the assessment is not to recommend reappointment, the review is terminated at this point and the department chair shall notify the candidate in writing.

9. If the result of the assessment is to recommend reappointment of a pre-six lecturer, the department chair completes the "Assessment of Candidate" section of the Pre-Six Lecturer Assessment/Reappointment Form, and signs the form where indicated to verify the assessment. If the result of the assessment is to recommend reappointment to any Unit 18 title other than lecturer, the department chair writes a letter of recommendation to the dean (see section II.4 for what the recommendation letter should include, and include an evaluation of the qualifications in relation to criteria for reappointment - see section III.A.2).

10. The department chair or designee provides the NSF with a copy of the Pre-Six Lecturer Assessment/Reappointment Form (which shall have been completed up to the "Division" section); or with a copy of the written department recommendation, if the reappointment is to a Unit 18 title other than lecturer.

11. In either case, the NSF shall be given an opportunity to respond to the department recommendation in writing within five working days. Any written response must be included in the assessment file.

B. Dean's Review
  • 1. The dean shall review the department recommendation, and may request additional information from the department (e.g., the student evaluations and any optional material in the assessment file).
  • 2. The dean has final authority to approve reappointments and salary increases. NSF with proposed appointments in more than one department and/or division must be coordinated by the dean or his/her designee to ensure appropriate workload assignments.
  • 3. If reappointment is approved, the dean issues an appointment letter (See section II.C above for requirements of appointment letter; see also Appendix B for Workload Policy).
C. Changes in Percent Time
  • 1. If the department chair recommends a change in workload resulting in an increase in percent time after reappointment is approved by the dean, the department shall submit a Unit 18 Workload Increase Recommendation form to the dean. The dean shall review the request, and if approved, a revised letter or copy of the form shall be issued to the NSF by the dean. (See Appendix 8 for form.)
  • 2. If the department chair approves a change in work assignment(s) that does not result in a change in the percent time or effective dates of the reappointment, this information shall be communicated to the dean who will issue a revised appointment letter to the NSF.
  • 3. For an involuntary reduction in percent time, also known as layoff, refer to Article 17 of the MOU and Section IX of this policy.
  • 4. Documentation for voluntary decreases in percent time must include a letter from the candidate requesting the decrease and a letter from the chair supporting or declining the requested decrease. This documentation shall be sent to the dean who shall decide whether to approve the request. If approved, the dean shall issue a revised appointment letter.

IV. INITIAL CONTINUING APPOINTMENT - (following completion of 18 quarters of service in a Unit 18 title in the same UCSC department)

Reappointments which commence after 18 quarters of service in a Unit 18 title in the same department at UCSC can be made only when the following two criteria have been met:

A. Instructional Need Determination

1. Instructional need to establish a Continuing Appointment shall exist when the department determines, and the dean approves, the following with respect to the initial year of the Continuing Appointment:

  • a. There is a departmental need for courses to be taught by NSF in the area in which the NSF under consideration has taught, and
  • b. The NSF under consideration is qualified to teach the course(s), and
  • c. A Continuing Appointee is not already expected to teach the course(s).

2. Instructional need must be identified BEFORE proceeding with the Excellence Review. The needs assessment will be completed no later than one calendar year prior to the NSF's 18th quarter of service in the same UCSC department. The NSF must be notified in writing whether instructional need was or was not approved.

B. Excellence Review

1. When there has been a positive instructional need determination, an NSF who has completed 18 quarters of service in a Unit 18 title in the same department must undergo the Excellence Review to determine whether the NSF meets the excellence standard required for a Continuing Appointment.

2. The Excellence Review will be completed in the academic year in which the NSF's 18th quarter of service falls.

3. Prior to the initiation of the Excellence Review (i.e., before the Checklist to Assure fairness is initiated), the NSF under consideration for a Continuing Appointment shall be notified in writing of the review, and the timing, criteria, and procedures that will be followed.

4. Once the Excellence Review is initiated (i.e., the Checklist to Assure Fairness is initiated), the file shall continue through the entire review process (i.e., the file shall be forwarded to all reviewing entities), including files in which the department recommends against a Continuing Appointment. However, the candidate may request in writing at any time that the review stop. If such a request is made, the file does not continue through the review process, and reappointment will not be considered further.

C. Continuing Appointment Criteria

1. Consideration for a Continuing Appointment shall be made on the basis of demonstrated EXCELLENCE in the field and in all three of the following categories:

  • a. Teaching/instructional performance;
  • b. Academic responsibility;
  • c. Other assigned duties which may include University co-curricular and community service.

2. Instructional Performance

Instructional performance is measured by evaluation of evidence demonstrating such qualities as:

  • a. Command of the subject matter and continued growth in mastering new topics;
  • b. Ability to organize and present course materials;
  • c. Ability to awaken in students an awareness of the importance of the subject matter;
  • d. Ability to arouse curiosity in beginning students and to stimulate advanced students to do creative work; and
  • e. Achievements of former students in their fields.

Due attention should be paid to the variety of demands placed on NSF by the types of teaching called for at various levels and the total performance of the NSF should be judged with proper reference to assigned responsibilities.

Senior Lecturer requires, in addition, an appropriately senior level of professional achievement and experience, and service of exceptional value to the University.

Appendix A contains additional criteria appropriate to Coordinator of Field Work, Supervisor of Teacher Education, and Teacher - Special Programs.

3. Excellence in Teaching

The following exemplify excellence in teaching. All relevant materials shall be given due consideration:

  • a. Student evaluations (although the quantitative measure may not be used as the sole criterion for determining teaching excellence)
  • b. Assessments by former students who have achieved notable professional success;
  • c. Assessments by other members of the department, and other appropriate faculty members;
  • d. Development of new and effective techniques of instruction and instructional materials; and
  • e. Assessments resulting from classroom visitations by faculty and evaluators.
D. Establishing the Continuing Appointment Percentage

Normally, the NSF's initial Continuing Appointment Percentage will be at least equal to the appointment percentage in the previous academic year (i.e., the sixth year). However, it may be lower if the dean determines, based on the department chair's recommendation, that the courses taught by the NSF in the previous academic year will not be offered, or will not be taught by the NSF because Instructional Need has changed based on one of the following reasons:

  • 1. A specified Senate faculty member is designated to teach the course(s) previously assigned to the NSF during the next academic year;
  • 2. A graduate student whose training is in the same department, related discipline, or where the assignment is made pursuant to an academic plan for pedagogical training, is designated to teach the course(s) previously assigned to the NSF during the initial appointment year;
  • 3. An unanticipated distinguished Visiting Professor or Adjunct Professor is designated to teach the course(s) previously assigned to the NSF during the initial appointment year;
  • 4. The assignment of the NSF to teach the course(s) conflicts with the established departmental academic program requirements for intellectual diversity;
  • 5. Other courses in the area in which the NSF has taught and for which the NSF is currently qualified, are neither available nor taught during the initial appointment year; or
  • 6. The course(s) has been assigned to another Continuing Appointee with more service, and there are no other courses taught by less senior NSF in the area where the candidate has been teaching and is qualified to teach.
E. Department Review

1. The department chair or his/her designee initiates the Checklist to Assure Fairness.

2. NSF submits:

  • a. Updated bio-bibliography including teaching information and current address.
  • b. Syllabi, tests, reading lists, and instructional materials.
  • c. Optional materials which may include unsolicited letters of assessment, a statement of pedagogical philosophy and goals, and other relevant materials such as self-statement or self-evaluation.

3. Department gathers evidence for evaluation:

See section IV.C. above for examples of the types of evidence. Regarding solicited letters, there is no specific number of letters required. The department chair may use her/his judgment in determining exactly how many letters are submitted. The quality of analysis of the letters and standing of the author is more persuasive than the number of letters. Solicited letters shall be accompanied by:

  • a. Sample copy of the letter soliciting the evaluation. This letter must include the following paragraphs:

    "Under University of California policy, the identity of authors of letters of evaluation which are included in the personnel review files will be held in confidence. A candidate will, at certain prescribed stages of the academic personnel review process, be provided access to such letters in redacted form. Redaction is defined as the removal of identifying information (including name, title, institutional affiliation, and relationship to the candidate) contained either at the top of the letterhead or within and below the signature block of the letter of evaluation.

    "The full text of the body of your letter will therefore be provided to the candidate if so requested. Thus, if you provide any information that tends to identify you in the body of the letter, that information will become available to the candidate. If you wish, you may provide a brief factual statement regarding your relationship to the candidate at the end of your letter but below the signature block. This brief statement will not be made available to the candidate.

    "Although we cannot guarantee that at some future time a court or government agency will not require the disclosure of the source of confidential evaluations in University of California personnel files, we can assure you that the University will endeavor to protect the identity of authors of letters of evaluation to the fullest extent allowable under the law."

  • b. List of all persons from whom letters were sought;

  • c. List of any persons declining to write; include declining letters or memo to file recording declination; and

  • d. Brief comments on academic standing or category the author represents. Identify each letter writer with an alpha code. Subsequent levels of review may request additional letters be solicited by the department.

Appendix A describes additional evidence appropriate to Coordinator of Field Work, Supervisor of Teacher Education, and Teacher - Special Programs.

4. Department chair provides the NSF with a redacted copy of confidential material in the review file. (See APM 160 and CAPM 200.160 for guidance on what is confidential. A copy all redacted material must be included in the file.)

5. The NSF is given an opportunity to respond in writing. Any written response must be received by the department within five working days and must be included in the review file before the department recommendation is determined.

6. A departmental committee shall evaluate the file and make a written recommendation about the NSF's performance pertaining to the Excellence Review. The department chair shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that a qualified NSF will participate on the departmental committee. If the "qualified NSF" is not a regular member of such a departmental committee (i.e., is not a member of a standing personnel committee), the NSF under review shall be consulted about the "qualified NSF's" participation to ensure that the committee is composed of faculty who can offer a neutral assessment of the candidate's performance.

7. Department chair submits the department's letter of recommendation to the dean. This letter should include the following:

  • a. Recommendation for or against Continuing Appointment;
  • b. Merit recommendation; if candidate is found to have met the excellence standard in all areas required for a Continuing Appointment, a two-step merit increase is required (or the recommended annual salary rate must be brought up to the minimum rate for a Continuing Appointment, whichever is greater. See applicable Unit 18 salary scales - "Non-Senate Instructional (NSI) Unit 18 Continuing Lecturer";
  • c. Proposed annual salary rate and actual salary;
  • d. Percent time based on instructional need determination, divisional workload policy, and actual work assigned to individual (see Appendix B for Workload Policy). In recommending the percent time, the department chair shall distinguish between the base percentage of the Continuing Appointment and any additional percentage that qualifies as a temporary augmentation, if appropriate;
  • e. Commencement date of the Continuing Appointment, and the effective dates of any temporary augmentation, if appropriate;
  • f. Responsibilities assigned (courses, committee assignment, etc.);
  • g. Name and title of person to whom the NSF reports;
  • h. Evaluation of qualifications in relation to criteria for a Continuing Appointment; and
  • i. Evaluation of performance in all assigned duties during previous appointment period.

8. Department chair or designee provides NSF with copy of the department letter. All references to confidential letter writers must be by alpha code.

9. The NSF is given an opportunity to respond in writing. Any written response must be received by the department within five working days. Any written response must be included in the review file.

F. Divisional Review

1. Divisional Committee on Academic Personnel - Initial Continuing Appointment files shall be reviewed by the appropriate Divisional Committee on Academic Personnel, which shall provide a written recommendation to the dean. The Divisional Committee on Academic Personnel is composed of at least three tenured Academic Senate members selected by the dean in accordance with applicable divisional procedures, and approved by the Committee on Academic Personnel.

2. If during the Excellence Review, the review file is found to be incomplete or inadequate, additional information may be solicited through the dean's office. The Checklist to Assure Fairness for Submission of Additional Information shall be completed if any additional information is to be submitted. Specifically, the department chair shall:

  • a. provide the NSF with redacted copies of any confidential material,
  • b. allow the NSF to inspect all non-confidential material, and
  • c. provide the NSF an opportunity to make a written statement for inclusion in the file within five working days.

3. Additional material shall be reviewed by the Divisional Committee on Academic Personnel.

4. The dean has final authority to approve Continuing Appointments.

5. If a Continuing Appointment is approved, a letter shall be issued containing the following information:

  • a. Title of position;
  • b. Annual salary rate and actual salary;
  • c. Department name;
  • d. Percentage of time (distinguish between Continuing Appointment base percentage and temporary augmentation percentage, if any);
  • e. Date the Continuing Appointment commences, and effective dates of appointment (service dates and pay dates) if appropriate (i.e., if partial year appointment);
  • f. Responsibilities assigned (courses, equivalency assignments, etc.);
  • g. The name and title of person to whom the NSF reports; and
  • hi. University and AFT web addresses where the complete MOU can be found http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/employees/policies_employee_labor_relations/collective_bargaining_agreements.html

6. If the final decision is not to approve a Continuing Appointment, a written notice so stating will also originate from the dean.

7. Alleged procedural violations of this process shall be subject to the applicable grievance and arbitration provisions. An arbitrator reviewing such alleged violations shall have the authority to order the University to redo the Excellence Review.

V. CONTINUING APPOINTMENT MERIT REVIEW PROCEDURES

A. Excellence - Consideration for a merit increase shall be made on the basis of maintaining excellence in the field in all three of the following categories:
  • 1. Teaching/instructional performance;
  • 2. Academic responsibility;
  • 3. Other assigned duties which may include University co-curricular and community service.
B. Instructional Performance

Instructional performance is measured by evaluation of evidence demonstrating such qualities as:

  • 1. Command of the subject matter and continued growth in mastering new topics;
  • 2. Ability to organize and present course materials;
  • 3. Ability to awaken in students an awareness of the importance of the subject matter;
  • 4. Ability to arouse curiosity in beginning students and to stimulate advanced students to do creative work; and
  • 5. Achievements of former students in their fields.

    Due attention should be paid to the variety of demands placed on NSF by the types of teaching called for at various levels and the total performance of the NSF should be judged with proper reference to assigned responsibilities.

    Senior Lecturer requires, in addition, an appropriately senior level of professional achievement and experience, and service of exceptional value to the University.

    Appendix A contains additional criteria appropriate to Coordinator of Field Work, Supervisor of Teacher Education, and Teacher - Special Programs.

C. Excellence in Teaching

The following exemplify excellence in teaching. All relevant materials shall be given due consideration:

  • 1. Student evaluations (although the quantitative measure may not be used as the sole criterion for determining teaching excellence)
  • 2. Assessments by former students who have achieved notable professional success;
  • 3. Assessments by other members of the department, and other appropriate faculty members;
  • 4. Development of new and effective techniques of instruction and instructional materials; and
  • 5. Assessments resulting from classroom visitations by faculty and evaluators.
D. Department Review

1. The department chair or his/her designee initiates the Checklist to Assure Fairness.

2. Candidate submits:

  • a. Updated bio-bibliography including teaching information and current address.
  • b. Syllabi, tests, reading lists, and instructional materials.
  • c. Optional materials which may include unsolicited letters of assessment, a statement of pedagogical philosophy and goals, and other relevant materials such as self-statement or self-evaluation.

3. Department gathers evidence for evaluation:

See section V.C. above for examples of the types of evidence. Solicited letters are required only if recommending more than a two-step increase. If solicited letters are required, the department chair may use her/his judgment in determining exactly how many letters are submitted. The quality of analysis of the letters and standing of the author is more persuasive than the number of letters. Solicited letters shall be accompanied by:

  • a. Sample copy of the letter soliciting the evaluation. This letter must include the following paragraphs:

    "Under University of California policy, the identity of authors of letters of evaluation which are included in the personnel review files will be held in confidence. A candidate will, at certain prescribed stages of the academic personnel review process, be provided access to such letters in redacted form. Redaction is defined as the removal of identifying information (including name, title, institutional affiliation, and relationship to the candidate) contained either at the top of the letterhead or within and below the signature block of the letter of evaluation.

    "The full text of the body of your letter will therefore be provided to the candidate if so requested. Thus, if you provide any information that tends to identify you in the body of the letter, that information will become available to the candidate. If you wish, you may provide a brief factual statement regarding your relationship to the candidate at the end of your letter but below the signature block. This brief statement will not be made available to the candidate.

    "Although we cannot guarantee that at some future time a court or government agency will not require the disclosure of the source of confidential evaluations in University of California personnel files, we can assure you that the University will endeavor to protect the identity of authors of letters of evaluation to the fullest extent allowable under the law.";

  • b. List of all persons from whom letters were sought;
  • c. List of any persons declining to write; include declining letters or memo to file recording declination; and
  • d. Brief comments on academic standing or category the author represents. Identify each letter writer with an alpha code. Subsequent levels of review may request additional letters be solicited by the department.

    Appendix A describes additional evidence appropriate to Coordinator of Field Work, Supervisor of Teacher Education, and Teacher - Special Programs.

4. Department chair provides the NSF with a redacted copy of confidential material in the review file. (See APM 160 and CAPM 200.160 for guidance on what is confidential. A copy all redacted material must be included in the file.)

5. The NSF is given an opportunity to respond in writing. Any written response must be received by the department within five working days and must be included in the review file before the department recommendation is determined.

6. Department chair submits the department's letter of recommendation to the dean. This letter should include the following:

  • a. Merit recommendation. If deemed excellent, the recommendation must be a two-step increase. If recommending more than a two-step increase, solicited letters are required. If deemed not excellent (i.e., there has been a significant decline in the quality of the candidate's performance), the file and letter must specifically identify how the candidate has failed to maintain the excellence standard;
  • b. Recommended annual salary rate and actual salary;
  • c. Commencement date of the recommended merit increase;
  • d. Evaluation of qualifications in relation to criteria for a merit; and
  • e. Evaluation of performance in all assigned duties during previous appointment period.

7. Department chair or designee provides candidate with copy of the department letter. If solicited letters are included, all references to confidential letter writers must be by alpha code.

8. The NSF is given an opportunity to respond in writing. Any written response must be received by the department within five working days. Any written response must be included in the review file.

E. Divisional Review

1. Divisional Committee on Academic Personnel - Continuing Appointment merit review files shall be reviewed by the appropriate Divisional Committee on Academic Personnel, which shall provide a written recommendation to the dean. The Divisional Committee on Academic Personnel is composed of at least three tenured Academic Senate members selected by the dean in accordance with applicable divisional procedures, and approved by the Committee on Academic Personnel.

2. If during the merit review the file is found to be incomplete or inadequate, additional information may be solicited through the dean's office. The Checklist to Assure Fairness for Submission of Additional Information shall be completed if any additional information is to be submitted. Specifically, the department chair shall, where appropriate:

  • a. Provide the NSF with redacted copies of any confidential material;
  • b. Allow the NSF to inspect all non-confidential material, and
  • c. Provide the NSF an opportunity to make a written statement for inclusion in the file within five working days.

3. Any additional material shall be reviewed by the Divisional Committee on Academic Personnel.

4. The dean has final authority to approve merits.

5. If a merit increase is approved, a letter shall be issued by the dean informing the Continuing Appointee of the merit increase and its effective date. If a merit increase is denied, a written remediation shall be provided in accordance with procedures outlined in Article 30 - Discipline and Dismissal of the MOU. The Dean's office shall consult with Labor Relations and Academic Personnel for assistance in this case.

Alleged procedural violations of this process shall be subject to the applicable grievance and arbitration provisions. An arbitrator reviewing such alleged violations shall have the authority to order the University to repeat the merit review from the point at which the violation occurred.

VI. TERMS OF SERVICE

1. Pre-Six Year - appointment and reappointments shall have definite ending dates and shall terminate on the last day of the appointment as set forth in the appointment letter.

  • a. Initial Appointment - not to exceed two years.
  • b. Reappointment - not to exceed three years.

2. Continuing Appointment - appointments are for an indefinite period of time, and shall terminate only by a full layoff (see Section IX of this policy and Article 17 of the MOU), or by dismissal in accordance with relevant disciplinary procedures (refer to Article 30 of the MOU).

VII. PAY PERIODS

A. Full-Year Appointments: 9/12 paid over basis

1. For NSF appointed to teach all three quarters of an academic year, the pay period dates are July 1 through the following June 30. Paychecks normally commence August 1 and end the following July 1. The payroll dates for each quarter are:

  • a. FALL QUARTER: July 1 through October 31;
  • b. WINTER QUARTER: November 1 through February 28; and
  • c. SPRING QUARTER: March 1 through June 30.

2. This pay period is to be used regardless of the percent of time of the appointment, and shall be used when the appointment is approved as late as the end of fall quarter of the given year (which would require payments retroactive to July 1).

B. Partial-Year Appointments: 9/9 paid over basis

1. NSF appointed to teach one or two quarters of an academic year are paid in three installments per quarter. Such installments are called one-ninth payments and each month's installment is based on a rate equal to one-ninth of the full nine-month (academic year) salary rate. Pay periods are as follows regardless of the percent of time of the appointment for the one or two quarters:

  • a. FALL QUARTER: October 1 through December 31;
  • b. WINTER QUARTER: January 1 through March 31; and
  • c. SPRING QUARTER: April 1 through June 30.
C. Service Dates

1. Service dates reflect the actual service period. For example, for fall quarter service, a NSF is expected to work from the first day of the quarter through the last day of the quarter. Note that the quarter begins before formal instruction begins. The dates are published annually in the Academic and Administrative Calendar distributed by the Registrar's office.

2. Because service and pay periods differ, NSF should be aware that unexpected leaves without salary or mid-term resignation might result in overpayment that must be reimbursed to the University. Calculations for reimbursement will usually be made on a "daily rate" basis (see APM 600 Appendix 2).

VIII. COMPENSATION AND MERIT INCREASES

  • A. Compensation - Individuals appointed to these titles are compensated at any rate set forth in the applicable published Academic Standard Table of Pay Rates. Senior Lecturers may not receive less than the rate for Professor, Step I. Determination of salary rate at initial appointment and subsequent reappointments is based on criteria such as professional qualifications, responsibilities of the position, and resources available.

  • B. Pre-Six Year NSF Salary Increases - Upon reappointment to a 10th quarter of service in the same department, a Pre-Six Year NSF shall receive a two-step salary increase provided s/he has not previously received a within range salary increase of at least two steps from that department.

  • C. Continuing Appointment Merit Increases - Continuing Appointees shall be considered for a merit review at the time of the initial Continuing Appointment, and once every three years thereafter. If the Continuing Appointee is found to have maintained the excellence standard, s/he shall receive a two-step merit increase (See applicable Unit 18 salary scales - "Non-Senate Instructional (NSI) Unit 18 Continuing Lecturer"). If a greater than two-step merit increase is being recommended, additional information (e.g., solicited letters of evaluation) is required in the merit review file to justify the exceptional merit recommendation. At the sole discretion of the University, a merit increase may be considered and awarded before the completion of three years, after appropriate review. A Continuing Appointee may request that his or her merit review be deferred for up to one year.

IX. LAYOFF, REDUCTION IN TIME, AND RE-EMPLOYMENT OF UNIT 18 ACADEMIC APPOINTEES

A. Responsibility

The University has the sole discretion to determine when a layoff or reduction in time is necessary, and to determine the function(s) and the title code(s) to be reduced.

B. Definition
  • 1. A layoff is an involuntary separation from employment prior to the expiration of the appointment that occurs because of lack of work, budgetary considerations, or programmatic change that results in a lack of work. A decision not to reappoint is not a layoff.
  • 2. A reduction in time is an involuntary reduction in the percentage of time of appointment during the term of the appointment that occurs because of lack of work, budgetary considerations, or programmatic change that results in a lack of work.
  • 3. Seniority is based on the number of quarters of service on pay status in the bargaining unit, in the same department, program, or unit. If two or more NSF have the same number of quarters of service, the number of quarters at 50% or greater shall be used to determine which NSF has greater seniority. If two or more NSF have the same number of quarters of service and the same number of quarters at 50% or greater, the tie-breaker shall be the earliest hire date in the department, program, or unit. (Eff. 10/17/11)
C. Selection and Order of Layoff or Reduction In Time
  • 1. When there is no substantial difference in the degree of special skills, knowledge or ability essential to the department as determined by the department chair, the order of layoff or reduction in time shall be in inverse order of seniority.
  • 2. When a pre-six year NSF and a Continuing Appointee are teaching the same course in the same department, the pre-six year NSF shall be laid off before the Continuing Appointee.
  • 3. When a layoff or reduction in time is necessary, the department chair shall report to the dean the reasons for the order of layoff and shall recommend its implementation.
  • 4. The dean shall review the recommendation and shall make the final decision.
D. Layoff Unit

The layoff unit shall be the department, college, program, or equivalent unit. The provisions of this section do not nullify or modify the applicable University and campus policies or procedures that exist or may be developed pertaining to disestablishment of an academic unit.

E. Alternatives to Layoff

When the dean determines that layoffs or reductions in time of NSF are necessary, s/he will consider various alternatives to layoff, such as: attrition, retirement, the non-reappointment or layoff of Pre-Six Year NSF, and voluntary reductions in NSF staffing within the department, in order to avoid a layoff.

F. Notice of Layoff or Reduction in Time

Affected NSF in the department shall be given written notice of the effective date of any layoff or reduction in time. Generally, the notice period is counted from the effective pay date of the appointment. The written notice shall include the basis for the layoff or reduction in time. Affected NSF shall also be notified of their right to re-employment and will be advised to maintain an up-to-date CV with the division during the period of layoff or reduction in time. The AFT shall be notified of the layoff or reduction in time by copy of the NSF's notification letter.

1. Notice of layoff for Pre-Six Year NSF will be given as follows:

  • a. NSF on quarter or initial one-year appointments will be given at least thirty (30) calendar days advance written notice, or pay in lieu of notice.
  • b. NSF with an appointment of at least one year, and with four (4) through nine (9) quarters of service in the bargaining unit in the department will be given at least sixty (60) calendar days advance written notice, or pay in lieu of notice.
  • c. NSF with an appointment of at least one year, and with ten (10) or more quarters of service in the bargaining unit in the department will be given at least ninety (90) calendar days advance written notice, or pay in lieu of notice.
  • d. When a single course is cancelled due to lack of enrollment, advance notice of layoff or reduction in time shall be provided as soon as practicable, but no later than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the date of the first scheduled class meeting.
  • e. Where advance written notice of reduction in time is not given as specified above, in 2.a-d, only 30 days of pay in lieu of notice shall be given.
  • f. The period of notice will not extend past the expiration date of an appointment. Pay in lieu of notice will not be greater than the amount of pay the NSF would have received through the last day of appointment.

2. Notice of layoff for Continuing Appointees will be given as follows:

Continuing Appointees will be given written notice of the effective date of any layoff or reduction in time as soon as practicable after the decision has been made. When advance written notice is not provided in accordance with this section, pay in lieu of notice will be provided. Pay in lieu of notice will not extend past the following notice periods:

  • a. Continuing Appointees will be given at least twelve (12) months advance written notice of full separation from employment resulting from layoff.
  • b. For a reduction in time of one course, Continuing Appointees will be given at least thirty (30) calendar days advance written notice.
  • c. When a reduction in time exceeds one course, Continuing Appointees will be given at least sixty (60) calendar days advance written notice.
  • d. When a single course is cancelled due to lack of enrollment, or when a Continuing Appointee's initial Continuing Appointment percentage is reduced by a single course for any reason—advance written notice of reduction in time will be given as soon as practicable, but no later than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the date of the first scheduled class meeting.
G. Re-employment

1. Whenever the division decides to fill a vacancy, the division will review its list of NSF who have been laid off or reduced in time to determine if there is anyone with re-employment rights to the vacancy as follows:

  • a. the NSF was laid off from or reduced in time from the same title code as the vacancy and from the same layoff unit where the vacancy exists;
  • b. the Pre-6 Year NSF has not been laid off or reduced in time for more than a period equivalent to the duration of her/his appointment prior to the layoff or reduction in time; or
  • c. the Continuing Appointee has not been laid off or reduced in time for more than two years; and
  • d. the division, with the recommendation of the layoff unit, determines that the NSF on layoff or reduction in time is qualified for the position and is available to begin work within a reasonable amount of time.

2. When the division determines that there is a qualified NSF with re-employment rights as described above, the division shall appoint that NSF to the vacancy.

3. If more than one qualified person is on layoff status or reduced in time from the same layoff unit, the order of reemployment shall be on the basis of special skills, knowledge or ability essential to the department as determined by the department chair. When there is no substantial difference in the degree of special skills, knowledge or ability, the order of re-employment shall be in inverse order of layoff.

4. In the event the University decides to offer temporary re-employment opportunities of no more than one quarter in the same department and title code from which an NSF has been laid off or reduced in time, the temporary re-employment does not constitute a recall for re-employment purposes. Further an NSF's acceptance of temporary re-employment of no more than one quarter will not nullify the NSF's layoff status. Should instructional need exist beyond this temporary period, the NSF's re-employment status prior to the layoff or reduction in time will be reinstated.

5. The right to re-employment terminates if:

  • a. The NSF does not respond affirmatively within fourteen (14) calendar days to the layoff unit's inquiries concerning the desire of the NSF to return to work provided that such response is feasible. The fourteen (14) calendar day response period shall begin immediately upon personal notice or seven (7) calendar days from the date written notice is postmarked. If the division is attempting to fill a vacancy on an urgent basis and if a laid-off or reduced in time NSF cannot be reached and/or does not respond within seven (7) calendar days, the division may fill the position. The NSF in this instance does not waive future re-employment rights;
  • b. The NSF refuses two offers of re-employment at the same or higher percentage of time; or,
  • c. The NSF accepts any other Unit 18 appointment at the same or higher percentage of time.
H. Placement Assistance

To the extent available, the University will, upon request, provide placement assistance to any NSF who has been laid off.

I. Benefit Coverage while on Layoff

A NSF on layoff may continue, if previously enrolled, in certain group insurance programs for the length of time provided by the University's Group Insurance Regulations, subject to the payment of full premiums by the NSF. The NSF should be referred to the Benefits Office for information.

J. Grievances

Alleged violations of Article 17 of the MOU (Layoff, Reduction in Time, and Re-employment) may be grieved and arbitrated. In any arbitration involving layoff, the arbitrator shall not have the authority to substitute her/his judgment for that of the dean regarding the necessity for the layoff, or the functions/programs or titles affected by the layoff. The arbitrator shall defer to the dean's judgment regarding a NSF's academic qualifications unless the AFT demonstrates that there was no reasonable basis for the decision.

K. Other

For purposes of the Appointment and Layoff Articles, layoff periods of less than one quarter count towards University service and seniority. Time on layoff of more than one-half of the working days of a month does not count towards University service for benefit purposes.

X. LECTURERS WITHOUT SALARY

  • A. Lecturers without salary are not members of Unit 18; however, the same procedures outlined for initial appointment and reappointment of Pre-6 Year NSF should be followed. Lecturers without Salary are not eligible for Continuing Appointment; appointments to this title shall have specified end dates.

  • B. Departments should contact their dean's office before assigning the Lecturer Without Salary title. Dean's offices are encouraged to consult with Academic Human Resources for assistance in the use of the title.