Common use of Outcomes Clause in Contracts

Outcomes. The Committee’s recommendation must be approved by the academic administrator responsible for the advancing Writing Centre, and reported for information to the Division Head. The Committee Co-chairs shall advise the candidate in writing of the outcome of the advancement process by December 31st, or before if possible for fall term, by April 30 for spring term, and by August 31 for any advancement process undertaken in a Summer academic session. A candidate who is advanced to the status of Writing Instructor2I shall assume that status for purposes of consideration for vacancies in the following academic session which are circularized to the pool after the date of the Committee Co-chairs’ letter. Where a Writing Centre does not adhere to the timelines for the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process, and where the candidate has fulfilled all of the obligations and requirements in accordance with the advancement process, then the candidate shall be entitled to be remunerated at the advanced rate for position(s) held in the subsequent academic term. If the Writing Centre’s delay described above continues beyond that subsequent academic term then the candidate shall continue to be remunerated at the advanced rate until the end of the academic term in which the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process has been provided to the candidate. A candidate who is not advanced to the status of Writing Instructor 2 may be eligible for re-evaluation after a further two (2) years of employment and a minimum of three hundred (300) further hours of employment. It is understood and agreed that a candidate who is not advanced to the rank of Writing Instructor 2 remains eligible for appointment at the rank of Writing Instructor 1. It is understood and agreed that the decision not to advance the candidate, in and of itself, will not be considered in future hiring decisions. The letter to a candidate advising of an unsuccessful advancement shall contain a summary of the reasoning and evidence that formed the basis of the decision.

Outcomes. The Committee’s recommendation must be approved by the academic administrator responsible for the advancing Writing Centre, Chair and reported for information to by the Division Head. The Committee Co-chairs Chair shall advise the candidate in writing of the outcome of the advancement process by December 31st, or before if possible for fall termF and Y courses, by April 30 for spring termS courses, and by August 31 for any advancement process undertaken in a Summer academic session. A candidate who is advanced to the status rank of Writing Instructor2I Sessional Lecturer II shall assume that status rank for purposes of consideration for vacancies in the following academic session which are circularized to the pool after the date of the Committee Co-chairs’ Chair’s letter. Where a Writing Centre Department does not adhere to the timelines for the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process, and where the candidate has fulfilled all of the obligations and requirements in accordance with the advancement process, then the candidate shall be entitled to be remunerated at the advanced rate for position(s) held in the subsequent academic term. If the Writing Centre’s Departmental delay described above continues beyond that subsequent academic term then the candidate shall continue to be remunerated at the advanced rate until the end of the academic term in which the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process has been provided to the candidate. A candidate who is not advanced to the status rank of Writing Instructor 2 Sessional Lecturer II may be eligible for re-evaluation after a further two (2) years of employment and a minimum of three hundred four (3004) further hours of employmenthalf courses or the equivalent. It is understood and agreed that a candidate who is not advanced to the rank of Writing Instructor 2 Sessional Lecturer II remains eligible for appointment at the rank of Writing Instructor 1. Sessional Lecturer I. It is understood and agreed that the decision not to advance the candidate, in and of itself, will not be considered in future hiring decisions. The letter to a candidate advising of an unsuccessful advancement shall contain a summary of the reasoning and evidence that formed the basis of for the decision.

Outcomes. The Committee’s recommendation must be approved by the academic administrator responsible for the advancing Writing Centre, Chair and reported for information to by the Division Head. The Committee Co-chairs Chair shall advise the candidate in writing of the outcome of the advancement process by December 31st, or before if possible for fall termF and Y courses, by April 30 for spring termS courses, and by August 31 for any advancement process undertaken in a Summer academic session. A candidate who is advanced to the status rank of Writing Instructor2I Sessional Lecturer III shall assume that status rank for purposes of consideration for vacancies in the following academic session which are circularized to the pool after the date of the Committee Co-chairs’ Chair’s letter. Where a Writing Centre Department does not adhere to the timelines for the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process, and where the candidate has fulfilled all of the obligations and requirements in accordance with the advancement process, then the candidate shall be entitled to be remunerated at the advanced rate for position(s) held in the subsequent academic term. If the Writing Centre’s Departmental delay described above continues beyond that subsequent academic term then the candidate shall continue to be remunerated at the advanced rate until the end of the academic term in which the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process has been provided to the candidate. A candidate who is not advanced to the status rank of Writing Instructor 2 Sessional Lecturer III may be eligible for re-evaluation after a further two one (21) years more year of employment and a minimum of three hundred two (3002) further hours of employment. It is understood and agreed that a candidate who is not advanced to half courses or the rank of Writing Instructor 2 remains eligible for appointment at the rank of Writing Instructor 1. It is understood and agreed that the decision not to advance the candidate, in and of itself, will not be considered in future hiring decisionsequivalent. The letter to a candidate advising of an unsuccessful advancement shall contain a summary of the reasoning and evidence that formed the basis of for the decision.