Merit Review. The department chair shall conduct an annual evaluation of every bargaining unit faculty member in accordance with the department's bargaining unit faculty member evaluation criteria established pursuant to Subsection (A).
1. In preparation for the chair's evaluation, all members of the bargaining unit will submit to the chair a report of their teaching, scholarship, and service during the preceding academic year. For the purposes of merit review only, the academic year is defined as beginning on the first (1st) day of the first summer session and concluding with the day prior to the first day of the following year’s first summer session. Bargaining unit faculty hired to begin either summer or fall semester of the preceding academic year shall be eligible for raise pools as outlined in Sections 1, 2, and 3 of this article. Bargaining unit faculty hired to begin in the spring semester shall be eligible for only the across-the-board raise pool if he/she is reappointed for the coming year. A three (3) year rolling average may be the basis for the evaluation, if appropriate. In addition to any materials required by this Agreement, by department merit criteria, or by the department chair, bargaining unit faculty may include whatever material will provide evidence of successful teaching, scholarship or service.
2. For each area -- teaching, scholarship, and service -- the Chair will provide a written evaluation and assign a ranking of "unsatisfactory," "satisfactory," "meritorious," "outstanding," or "extraordinary."
3. After conducting the evaluations, the department chair/director shall send to each member of the bargaining unit a copy of his or her evaluation before or simultaneously with submission to the xxxx.
4. Any member who disagrees with the chair's evaluation may send a written response to the chair. This rebuttal shall be attached to the original evaluation and forwarded to the college xxxx for resolution. The xxxx shall provide a copy of his or her decision to the member and department chair.
5. Merit evaluation shall not be grievable unless the bargaining unit faculty member has been rated less than meritorious and then only as to procedural error and/or inadequate consideration in the review process. A bargaining unit faculty member may appeal a merit evaluation with which they disagree to the Xxxxxxx.
Merit Review. A. Annual Merit Review for NTT Faculty. In addition to review for renewal, NTT faculty, like all instructional staff including tenure-track faculty, must be evaluated annually according to Article VIII: Merit Evaluation. These evaluations of performance will take the form of standard faculty review procedures. The chair of the department is responsible for annual evaluation of the NTT faculty member for teaching, service and scholarship according to department criteria. Departmental/unit criteria for merit must be developed by departmental/unit faculty and be approved by them, and the departmental/unit chair, xxxx, and xxxxxxx. The official department criteria must include the date of faculty approval. Since NTT faculty have responsibility primarily for teaching, peer review by senior faculty should be utilized by the department chair. Evaluations will be kept on file as one basis for decisions regarding reappointment. The general criteria for annual review for merit (salary) raises of NTT faculty are shown below, but the specific criteria will be developed by departmental/unit faculty and be approved by them, and the departmental/unit chair, respective xxxx, and xxxxxxx and may vary depending on department and college needs. Teaching and teaching-related activities and professional development 70% Service to the faculty member’s profession, FHSU and the community 20% Scholarship 10%
B. Appeal. Any NTT who is not satisfied with his or her annual merit review, or who has not been reappointed and believes the decision did not follow the procedures required by this policy may file an appeal using the grievance procedure (Article XXIII) of the MOA. The grievance procedure may not be used to simply challenge the decision to not reappoint NTT faculty.
Merit Review. Your salary will be reviewed along with the general review date for all other Rockwell Automation employees on a pro-rata basis or at such time as the Company may decide from time to time. Your increment is discretionary and will be subject to and on the basis of effective performance and results delivered during the period.
Merit Review. In any review of merit selection procedures, Station Managers will be involved in the process of selecting station staff to act in higher grade.
Merit Review. The department chair/director shall conduct an annual evaluation of every bargaining unit faculty member in accordance with the department's bargaining unit faculty member evaluation criteria established pursuant to Subsection (A).
1. In preparation for the chair/director's evaluation, all members of the bargaining unit shall submit to the chair/director a report of their teaching, scholarship, and service during the preceding calendar year by the end of week three (3) of the Spring semester.
2. For each area -- teaching, scholarship, and service -- the chair/director shall provide a written evaluation to the faculty member by the end of week eight (8) of the Spring semester and assign a rating of "unsatisfactory," "satisfactory," "meritorious," "outstanding," or "extraordinary."
3. Any member who disagrees with the chair/director's evaluation may send a written rebuttal to the chair/director by the end of week ten
Merit Review. (a) It is the policy of DOE that discretionary financial assistance be awarded through a merit-based selection process. A merit review means a thorough, consistent, and objective examination of applications based on pre-established criteria by persons who are independent of those submitting the applications and who are knowledgeable in the field of endeavor for which support is requested.
(b) Each program office must establish a merit review system covering the financial assistance programs it administers. Merit review of financial assistance applications is intended to be advisory and is not intended to replace the authority of the project/program official with responsibility for deciding whether an award will be made.
Merit Review. At least 15 days prior to employee's merit increase anniversary date, the appointing authority shall notify the Human Resources Director and the employee in writing of his decisions regarding approval, denial or deferment of a merit increase. In all cases, the recommendation of the appointing authority shall be based on the employee's performance. Sec. 517 Sec. 518 Sec. 519 discovery that an employee who would otherwise have been recommended for an anniversary merit increase failed to receive such increase as the result of an oversight of his anniversary date, the Auditor-Controller shall compensate the employee for the additional salary he should have received dating from his anniversary date by adding said additional salary to the employee's next biweekly paycheck. In such cases, there shall be no adjustment of an employee's anniversary date.
Merit Review. If a unit member disagrees with their performance evaluation and fails to get a merit increase, s/he may submit a grievance as per Article XXXI up to Stage 2, the Superintendent level.
Merit Review. Merit payments will continue while the employee continues to demonstrate meeting the criteria. The employee will be required to demonstrate their continuing eligibility for merit payment at annual appraisal. If following the appraisal, it appears the employee no longer meets the criteria, the employer will notify the employee with the intent to consult before making a final decision. As always, the employee is entitled to seek advice from NZNO and to be represented if the employee so wishes. If the employee is not meeting the criteria, the merit payment shall cease to be paid. The merit level shall be achieved for those medical receptionist/clerical/administration staff that meet the required criteria.
Merit Review. See Section E, Part 2. All items listed in initial review will be given a merit review.
