EC discussion on revision of policies for acting and interim appointments
ovember 27, 2006
otes
A. Three documents in question, brief comments on them:
1. Acting Appointments to Cover Temporary Vacancies (June 7, 2006)
•
•
•
•
Bears no relation structurally or substantively to doc #2, but it should.
Needs either to be merged with doc #2 or made structurally and substantively
parallel.
Content of Section 2 concerns interim appointments. It needs to be moved to doc
#2.
I suggest revision of title to “Policy for Making Acting Academic Appointments
within the University Library.”
2. Principles for making Interim Appointments to Temporarily Cover
Permanent Vacancies (August 10, 1998)
•
•
Title is interesting, but it needs to be made parallel to doc #1. I suggest “Policy for
Making Interim Academic Appointments within the University Library.”
Has 9 points, serves as a better model than doc #1 but needs revision.
3. Policy for Making Acting & Interim Academic Appointments Within the
University Library (August 10, 1998)
•
•
•
Purpose and scope of this document are incomprehensible to me, in the context of
doc #1 and #2. Title contradicts content, and use of words “administrative” and
“academic” are unclear.
Says little of substance except that process should be timely, consultative,
consistent, and fair, with no further definition.
It merely refers to other documents, and adds that any listed document can
supersede it.
B. Ideas expressed in each document.
1. Acting Appointments to Cover Temporary Vacancies (June 7, 2006)
Idea
1. For planned absences (acting appts):
who initiates arrangements
with whom they discuss
UL notifies EC, i.e. UL makes decision on whether to make
appt, on final arrangements, and on any acting appts to be
Comment
Includes AUL for
Services. Delete this?
Conflicts with point 5.
Also, UL does not have to
made
notify AC of final
arrangements, or on any
acting appts to be made,
such as UL needs to do for
interim appts
title will be ‘acting”
no stipend except in extraordinary situations
UL does not have to
communicate decision on
whether to make acting
appt to Library faculty
2. For unplanned absences (interim appts):
who initiates arrangements
“Proposed arrangements will be reviewed as described
above.”
UL notifies EC and AC of final arrangements, and on any
acting appts to be made
stipend provided
3. Untenured librarians allowed to be acting
Scope of acting appts may be reduced, tasks may be
delegated to others
4. Duration and terms of acting appt will be explicitly
defined
5. UL acts with advice of EC but retains final authority over
decision
This section should not be
in this document
Presumably refers only to
the point about with whom
they discuss
With acting appts, no need
to notify AC
Not specified concerning
interim (Cherie Weible??)
Merge this with point
about final arrangements?
Conflicts with point 1, that
UL notifies EC
6. Add another point:
“Vacancies at the level of
Associate University
Librarian require that a
call of interest be posted
to tenured and tenuretrack faculty.”
2. Principles for making Interim Appointments to Temporarily Cover
Permanent Vacancies (August 10, 1998)
1. who initiates arrangements
2. with whom UL discusses
who makes decision
Change DUL to UL
EC, DC, UH
Decision made by UL
decision to be made expeditiously
communication on decision to Library faculty, along with
rationale
3. Requires soliciting nominations from Library faculty at
large
Current position description will be posted
4. EC serves as search committee, screens and recommends
to UL
5. consultation required with “those most affected” both
inside and outside Library
6. Evaluation of candidates
7. Scope may be reduced
8. Duration and terms of interim appt will be explicitly
defined
9. Documentation retained for not less than 2 years
3.
with advice of EC,DC,
UH
Not in doc #1
Not in doc #1
Consider language here, as
opposed to “tenured and
tenure-track faculty.”
Presumably means that
visiting faculty can apply.
Do such things exist?
Procedure is different with
acting appts, which is
already contradictory
within itself
Not required of acting
appts
Do we need this, is it not
obvious?
Resembles point 3 of doc
#1
Resembles point 4 of doc
#1
Not required of acting
appts, should we add?
There is no point
concerning salary stipend,
need to bring this in from
doc #1
Policy for Making Acting & Interim Academic Appointments Within the
University Library (August 10, 1998)
Rationale: acting and interim administrative appts are
made because they are needed
Applicability: “All temporary administrative appointments
made to cover academic vacancies in the University
Library…”
“… except …those covered by Section IIB of Provost
Communication #3.”
This is just a rationale for
why acting and interim
administrative
appointments might be
necessary
Is this a typo?
Communication #3
concerns appts of faculty
and academic
professionals
Most of the links are dead
C. Immediate questions:
•
•
•
Should we keep docs #1 and #2 separate or merge them?
If kept separate, should they be structurally and substantively similar?
Do we need doc #3 at all?
JTP 11/27/06