It was noted that a new calendar for tenure is coming and faculty who are eligible to apply will be notified soon.

A discussion was held about the faculty who applied for T&P in 2014 right before a moratorium was put in place. Their dossiers have been already evaluated by Unit and College, and University T&P Committees and a recommendation was submitted to the VPAA. Their dossiers are in the VPAA’s Office and VPAA and the president need to review and make their decisions. It was discussed that the minutes of F/S’s last meeting and VPAA Jackson’s suggestion to pick up or update their dossiers during the recent F/S meeting, were confusing and may need to request her to clarify. It was discussed that updating dossiers may not be appropriate since all dossiers were evaluated using the T&P criteria in 2014. It was discussed that their dossiers need to move forward for further decision, these faculty do not need to reapply. VPAA Jackson needs to evaluate their dossiers and submit to the president.

PCC’s view on post tenure provisions were considered. It was suggested that a post tenure evaluation is important and we need it if there is a problem with the faculty member’s performance that needs to be monitored. A member raised an issue about post-tenure evaluation procedure, relating that a prior chair in one division told faculty they were NEVER to evaluate themselves as “Exceeds Expectations”. That Chair (in the past) told them it was inappropriate, but then when that Chair left and a new one came in, the new Chair then asked the PUA Faculty why no one was “exceeding expectations”. Therefore our current evaluation method is subjective and is not applied evenly across all units.

It was suggested Distribution of Effort Agreement (DEA) is the one that needs to be referenced for faculty’s annual evaluation. It was discussed that if somebody reaches a certain level and not evaluated it may not be a good practice. A member opined that post-tenure policy was put in place to acknowledge faculty achievements. Meritorious performance needs to be acknowledged and rewarded in a timely manner.

PCC was informed that there is a sabbatical policy in place but we don't know how decisions are made at administration level and mostly the decisions are made at random without following any criteria.

The Chair asked if we have other agenda for discussion.

It was suggested to have a discussion on current hiring policy. It was discussed that there is no standard procedure for screening of applications. There is no consistency in where the applications come, who keeps them, who acknowledges to the applications, it's not clear.

A member explained a recent case of mishandling of applications. One applicant was screened out because that applicant did not meet one of the demographic attributes. A member said we cannot practice illegal discriminatory screening of applications. We need to follow procedures properly for screening and hiring of candidates.