Common use of Procedural Due Process Clause in Contracts

Procedural Due Process. A. All faculty members have a right to due-process regarding terms and conditions of employment, especially in those situations that could lead to the termination of employment. Below is a general description of what is meant by procedural due process in promotion, tenure and merit procedures. B. In the tenure, promotion and merit procedures, the starting point for a faculty member is the criteria established at the department level and approved by the Xxxx. The expectations and the criteria are not likely to be the same for all departments. However, the criteria of all departments will reflect the general expectations of the university as well as the specifics of the department and college. The candidate is expected to work toward meeting or surpassing such criteria in preparation for tenure and/or promotion (and for merit raises) and the evidence for such must be placed in the candidate’s tenure/promotion file. C. Procedural due process also requires strict adherence to the procedures specified in the MOA regarding tenure and promotion (and merit, although the procedure is quite different). The timelines and sequence of events, including the notification schedule, must be followed. The candidate should be able to add items to his or her file at the department level, and nothing should be altered or removed from a candidate’s file without the candidate’s knowledge and consent, unless such action is authorized by the MOA. Neither the candidate nor a reviewing party may remove items from a candidate’s file after review at the departmental level. No individual reviewing the candidate’s file should alter the file in any way, including pencil marks, circling words, highlighting sentences etc. D. Due process also includes the following general expectations and considerations, but should any of these items conflict with other specific provisions of the MOA, the more specific provisions would prevail: 1) The various levels of review must use the approved criteria to decide if the candidate has met the standards for tenure, promotion or merit raise; 2) No faculty member or administrator should act as a reviewer at more than one level of review; 3) There should be no hidden or secret criteria used to evaluate the candidate; 4) Normally, no factors beyond the candidate’s control should be utilized during the review process; 5) The decision of the reviewer or committee must be communicated to the candidate in writing, making it clear how the candidate fared regarding the tenure/promotion/merit criteria; 6) The candidate must be allowed to respond, in writing (and in person, if so requested by the candidate) to the evaluation, and the written response by the candidate must be placed in his/her promotion/tenure file in a timely manner; 7) FHSU-AAUP may assist the applicant, by request, regarding procedural due-process, to the extent allowed by the MOA, including provisions contained below. E. When an FHSU-AAUP representative assists a faculty member in an appeal by speaking regarding procedural due process, such representative is limited to the matters contained in this section. It is inappropriate for FHSU-AAUP to speak on the faculty member’s behalf regarding the fitness of the candidate for tenure or promotion or to otherwise speak on matters outside of procedural due process as defined in this section. F. Whenever the term “criteria” is used herein, such term refers to the criteria for faculty evaluation either for promotion, tenure, merit, or other purposes. Any such criteria will normally provide standards for evaluation of the faculty member’s performance of the various obligations assigned to that faculty member, which in the normal case, will be 60% teaching, 20% service and 20% research and scholarly activity.

Appears in 4 contracts

Samples: Memorandum of Agreement, Memorandum of Agreement, Memorandum of Agreement

AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Procedural Due Process. A. All faculty members have a right to due-process regarding terms and conditions of employment, especially in those situations that could lead to the termination of employment. Below is a general description of what is meant by procedural due process due- process” in promotion, tenure and merit procedures. B. In the tenure, promotion and merit procedures, the starting point for a faculty member is the criteria established at the department level and approved by the Xxxx. The expectations and the criteria are not likely to be the same for all departments. However, the criteria of all departments will reflect the general expectations of the university as well as the specifics of the department and college. The candidate is expected to work toward meeting or surpassing such criteria in preparation for tenure and/or promotion (and for merit raises) and the evidence for such must be placed in the candidate’s tenure/promotion file. C. Procedural due due-process also requires strict adherence to the procedures specified in the MOA regarding tenure and promotion (and merit, although the procedure is quite different). The timelines and sequence of events, including the notification schedule, must be followed. The candidate should be able to add items to his or her file at the department level, and nothing should be altered or removed from a candidate’s file without the candidate’s knowledge and consent, unless such action is authorized by the MOA. Neither the candidate nor a reviewing party may remove items from a candidate’s file after review at the departmental level. No individual reviewing the candidate’s file should alter the file in any way, including pencil marks, circling words, highlighting sentences etc. D. Due Due-process also includes the following general expectations and considerations, but should any of these items conflict with other specific provisions of the MOA, the more specific provisions would prevail: 1) The various levels of review must use the approved criteria to decide if the candidate has met the standards for tenure, promotion or merit raise; 2) No faculty member or administrator should act as a reviewer at more than one level of review; 3) There should be no hidden or secret criteria used to evaluate the candidate; 4) Normally, no factors beyond the candidate’s control should be utilized during the review process; 5) The decision of the reviewer or committee must be communicated to the candidate in writing, making it clear how the candidate fared regarding the tenure/promotion/merit criteria; 6) The candidate must be allowed to respond, in writing (and in person, if so requested by the candidate) to the evaluation, and the written response by the candidate must be placed in his/her promotion/tenure file in a timely manner; 7) FHSU-AAUP may assist the applicant, by request, regarding procedural due-process, to the extent allowed by the MOA, including provisions contained below. E. When an FHSU-AAUP representative assists a faculty member in an appeal by speaking regarding procedural due process, such representative is limited to the matters contained in this section. It is inappropriate for FHSU-AAUP to speak on the faculty member’s behalf regarding the fitness of the candidate for tenure or promotion or to otherwise speak on matters outside of procedural due process as defined in this section. F. Whenever the term “criteria” is used herein, such term refers to the criteria for faculty evaluation either for promotion, tenure, merit, or other purposes. Any such criteria will normally provide standards for evaluation of the faculty member’s performance of the various obligations assigned to that faculty member, which in the normal case, will be 60% teaching, 20% service and 20% research and scholarly activity.

Appears in 1 contract

Samples: Memorandum of Agreement

AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Procedural Due Process. A. All faculty members have a right to due-process regarding terms and conditions of employment, especially in those situations that could lead to the termination of employment. Below is a general description of what is meant by procedural due process due-process” in promotion, tenure and merit procedures. B. In the tenure, promotion and merit procedures, the starting point for a faculty member is the criteria established at the department level and approved by the Xxxx. The expectations and the criteria are not likely to be the same for all departments. However, the criteria of all departments will reflect the general expectations of the university as well as the specifics of the department and college. The candidate is expected to work toward meeting or surpassing such criteria in preparation for tenure and/or promotion (and for merit raises) and the evidence for such must be placed in the candidate’s tenure/promotion file. C. Procedural due due-process also requires strict adherence to the procedures specified in the MOA regarding tenure and promotion (and merit, although the procedure is quite different). The timelines and sequence of events, including the notification schedule, must be followed. The candidate should be able to add items to his or her file at the department level, and nothing should be altered or removed from a candidate’s file without the candidate’s knowledge and consent, unless such action is authorized by the MOA. Neither the candidate nor a reviewing party may remove items from a candidate’s file after review at the departmental level. No individual reviewing the candidate’s file should alter the file in any way, including pencil marks, circling words, highlighting sentences etc. D. Due Due-process also includes the following general expectations and considerations, but should any of these items conflict with other specific provisions of the MOA, the more specific provisions would prevail: 1) The various levels of review must use the approved criteria to decide if the candidate has met the standards for tenure, promotion or merit raise; 2) No faculty member or administrator should act as a reviewer at more than one level of review; 3) There should be no hidden or secret criteria used to evaluate the candidate; 4) Normally, no factors beyond the candidate’s control should be utilized during the review process; 5) The decision of the reviewer or committee must be communicated to the candidate in writing, making it clear how the candidate fared regarding the tenure/promotion/merit criteria; 6) The candidate must be allowed to respond, in writing (and in person, if so requested by the candidate) to the evaluation, and the written response by the candidate must be placed in his/her promotion/tenure file in a timely manner; 7) FHSU-AAUP may assist the applicant, by request, regarding procedural due-process, to the extent allowed by the MOA, including provisions contained below. E. When an FHSU-AAUP representative assists a faculty member in an appeal by speaking regarding procedural due process, such representative is limited to the matters contained in this section. It is inappropriate for FHSU-AAUP to speak on the faculty member’s behalf regarding the fitness of the candidate for tenure or promotion or to otherwise speak on matters outside of procedural due process as defined in this section. F. Whenever the term “criteria” is used herein, such term refers to the criteria for faculty evaluation either for promotion, tenure, merit, or other purposes. Any such criteria will normally provide standards for evaluation of the faculty member’s performance of the various obligations assigned to that faculty member, which in the normal case, will be 60% teaching, 20% service and 20% research and scholarly activity.

Appears in 1 contract

Samples: Memorandum of Agreement

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!