staffing advisory committee: can it have a human face? d gareth jones quality forum march 2008
Post on 01-Jan-2016
212 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Staffing Advisory Committee: Can it have a human face?
D Gareth Jones
Quality ForumQuality Forum
March 2008March 2008
Not outlining policies
Talking around how things function
Personal perspective
Trying to provide insights into SAC’s processes
Introduction
Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic & International) – Chair
Vice-Chancellor
Divisional representatives from each Division – two from Health Sciences (one from a Northern campus)
In attendance
Manager Professional Development & Equity
Manager Promotions & Remuneration
Human Resources promotions advisor
For promotion, also two AUS representatives
Composition
Policy review and development
Decisions on individual staff in:
• Confirmation
• Promotion
• Appointment of Associate Professors
• Appointment of Honorary and Adjunct staff
• Leave without pay
What does SAC do?
Takes guidelines seriously
Flexibility
Attempts to achieve consistency across University
Tries to balance teaching and research interests
How does SAC function?
Reports at 12, 24, 36, 48 60 (final) months
Based on generic objectives provided by Divisions (with modifications in some cases, e.g. performance staff)
Undertaken by DVC (A&I) prior to final confirmation
Response informed by comments of HoD, (Dean), PVC
Detailed analysis by HR
Confirmation in practice
Goes to SAC for early (3 reports minimum) or final confirmation
Reports from HoD and PVC (Dean) (generally very helpful)
Central role of HoD report
SAC has available all previous reports and can trace progress of staff member
SAC will take account of unusual circumstances (illness; excessive teaching loads; other responsibilities)
When necessary SAC works in conjunction with HR, PVC and HoD
Confirmation in practice
Takes objectives seriously
12 publications in international refereed journals means precisely that
Teaching responses: 20% 1 and 2 responses by students is not a good outcome
Address issues raised by poor student evaluations
Don’t pretend they don’t exist; don’t ignore them
Service is also taken seriously
Confirmation issues
SAC wishes to assist staff and not simply judge them
Teaching issues – make use of HEDC and peer review
Take seriously comments querying standards of journals
Outline service responsibilities in sufficient depth for outsiders to understand them
Confirmation issues
Are some staff not confirmed after 5 (or 5+1) years?
Problem posed by staff whose confirmation deferred repeatedly
SAC is reticent to defer staff for more than 1 year (after 5 years)
Repeated deferrals are unhelpful to all parties
Aim of confirmation process is to provide framework to assist staff to become successful academic staff members (by looking forwards as well as backwards)
Confirmation issues
SAC deals with promotions to AP and P; also special cases where Divisional committees unable to decide; also HEDC staff
Been through Divisional committees (DC) before coming to SAC
Recommendations of DC taken very seriously by SAC
If SAC’s recommendation is different, almost always in positive direction
SAC is in position of looking over all recommendations – attempts to ensure consistency
Promotion
SAC makes final decision on AP promotions in light of referee reports
Aware of rogue or unhelpful reports
Final decision on P promotion made by special committee chaired by VC
Special committee includes DVC (A&I), PVC, plus senior professors
Promotion
SAC aware that this is contentious area
Crucial importance of HoD’s comments and assessment
Rely on HoDs to provide insight into quality of journals, perspective on teaching contribution, and what staff member is actually doing in service area
Inadequate HoD’s comments do not assist staff member, although SAC tries to ensure that staff are not disadvantaged by less than helpful reports
On occasion SAC has asked PVC to talk to HoD after completion of exercise
Promotion issues
Criteria are scrutinized each year after completion of exercise
Scrutiny takes account of reports from PVCs and Divisional committees, members of committees, EEO and AUS observers, as well as HR and SAC
Modifications made for the following year
Promotion issues
Failure to be promoted
SAC provides staff with reasons why case unsuccessful
Discussion encouraged with PVC and DVC (A&I)
Some staff fail to do themselves justice by providing inadequately formulated cases
Promotion issues
Appeal against non-promotion – only on procedural grounds
DVC (A&I) decides on appeals assisted by HR analysis
All appeals are taken seriously
Promotion issues
Impossible for insider to judge
Always willing to improve procedures and practice
DCs function very well in promotion
Many HoDs (but not all) provide very good reports for confirmation and promotion
SAC only functions as well as the paperwork it receives from staff
How well does SAC function?
top related