1 / 18

Staffing Advisory Committee: Can it have a human face?

Staffing Advisory Committee: Can it have a human face?. D Gareth Jones. Quality Forum March 2008. Introduction. Not outlining policies Talking around how things function Personal perspective Trying to provide insights into SAC’s processes. Composition.

meara
Download Presentation

Staffing Advisory Committee: Can it have a human face?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Staffing Advisory Committee: Can it have a human face? D Gareth Jones Quality Forum March 2008

  2. Introduction Not outlining policies Talking around how things function Personal perspective Trying to provide insights into SAC’s processes

  3. Composition 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

  4. What does SAC do? • Policy review and development • Decisions on individual staff in: • Confirmation • Promotion • Appointment of Associate Professors • Appointment of Honorary and Adjunct staff • Leave without pay

  5. How does SAC function? Takes guidelines seriously Flexibility Attempts to achieve consistency across University Tries to balance teaching and research interests

  6. Confirmation in practice 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

  7. 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

  8. Confirmation issues 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

  9. 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

  10. 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)

  11. Promotion 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

  12. 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

  13. Promotion issues 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. How well does SAC function? 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

More Related