FACULTY HANDBOOK Employment and Appointment Regulations

Employment and Appointment Regulations

 

 

C05: Rights and Responsibilities at the Mesarya Technical University

Policy

(Adopted by the Board of Trustees,02.10.2019)

Section 6 as follows is added to the Statement as an interim measure pending further study and the adoption of a permanent policy:

  1. One of the important aspects of academic due process is a clear statement of the kinds of conduct that will lead to University disciplinary action. It is deemed important, therefore, to clarify the type of conduct which shall be considered to affect adversely the University’s educational function, to disrupt community living on campus, or to interfere with the right of others to the pursuit of their education or to conduct their University duties and responsibilities. In an effort to accomplish this, but without intending the statement to be all-inclusive, the following is hereby set forth:

(a) Any member of the University community—student or member of the faculty or staff—who commits or attempts to commit any of the following acts of misconduct shall be subject to appropriate disciplinary procedures and sanctions:

(i) Obstruction or disruption, by any means, of teaching, research, administration, disciplinary procedures, or other University or University-authorized functions, events, or activities.
(ii) Unauthorized or prohibited entry into or onto, or unauthorized or prohibited occupation or use of, any University facility, building, vehicle, or other University property.
(iii) Physical abuse, the threat of physical abuse, or intimidation of any person on campus or at any University-authorized function or event, or other conduct which threatens or endangers the health, freedom of action, or safety or any such person.
(iv) Theft of, damage to, or defacement of property of the University or the property of any person on campus. (Any student or member of the faculty or staff who steals, damages, or defaces University property shall reimburse the University to the full extent of the University’s loss.)
(v) Denial of, or interference with, any person’s lawful right of, access to, use of, or exit from any University facility or with any other lawful right of any person on the campus.
(vi) The destruction of, or damage to, property of the University or of others on campus by setting a fire without proper authority.
(vii) Use or possession on the campus of firearms, ammunition, or other dangerous weapons, substances, or materials, or of bombs, explosives, or incendiary devices, except as authorized.
(viii) Aid to others in committing or inciting others to commit any act of misconduct set forth in 6(a)(i) through 6(a)(vii).
(ix) Any act that demonstrates the probability that the person constitutes a physical danger to himself or others on campus.
(x) Willfully refusing or failing to leave the property of, or any building or other facility owned, operated, or controlled by the Board of Trustees upon being requested to do so by the Rector, if the person is committing, threatening to commit, or inciting others to commit, any act which would disrupt, impair, interfere with or obstruct the lawful mission, processes, procedures or functions of the University. As used herein, “Rector” means the Rector (or acting Rector) of the University or any person or persons designated by him to act on his behalf.
(xi) Any other acts or omissions which affect adversely the University’s educational function, disrupt community living on campus, interfere with the rights of others to the pursuit of their education, or affect adversely the processes of he University.

 

(b) Sanctions:

(i) Any student who violates any of the rules set forth in 6(a)(i) through 6(a)(xi) shall be subject to censure, warning, disciplinary probation, suspension, or expulsion.
(ii) Any member of the faculty or staff who violates any of the rules set forth in 6(a)(i) through 6(a)(xi) shall be subject to censure, warning, disciplinary probation, or dismissal.
(iii) As used in 6(b)(i) and (ii),

  1. a) “Censure” means a written reprimand or expression of disapproval.
    b) “Warning” means an oral censure.
    c) “Disciplinary probation” means the establishment of a time period during which further acts of misconduct may or will result in more severe disciplinary sanctions depending on the conditions of the probation.
    d) “Suspension” means losing student status for a period of time specified in the terms of the suspension. A suspension may commence immediately upon a finding of a violation or it may be deferred to a later time.
    e) “Expulsion” means losing student status for an indefinite period of time. Readmission may not be sought before the expiration of two years from the date of expulsion.
    f) “Dismissal” means a termination of employment, either for a stated time period or indefinitely.

(c) If any of the acts of misconduct set forth in 6(a)(i) through 6(a)(xi) are committed by a person who is not a student or member of the faculty or staff, such person may be denied admission, readmission, or employment by the University.

 

As noted above, the Board of Trustees and the vast majority of students, faculty, staff, alumni, and citizens share the same goal for the University—that it be a stable and peaceful center of teaching, research, discussion, learning, and service, free from coercion and unlawful use of force.

 

In situations where the stability and peace of the institution are threatened, extraordinary measures are required. The Board of Trustees are determined to use all lawful means to assure the continuity and the integrity of the educational process at the University.

 

As part of this effort, we adopt the following as an interim measure pending further study and adoption of permanent policy:

 

 

State of Emergency

  1. As used in this Policy:
  2. a) “Rector” means the Rector (or acting Rector) of the University or any person or persons designated to act in his behalf for purposes of these rules.
    b) “Official” means any person authorized by the Rector to act on behalf of the University.
    c) “Student” means a person who is a student at the University in an undergraduate, graduate, or professional program on campus, whether for credit or no credit, full- or part-time.
    d) “Visitor” means any person on campus who is not a student or member of the faculty or staff.
    e) “Person” means any student, member of the faculty or staff, or visitor.

 

  1. The Rector is authorized to declare a State of Emergency at the University upon finding by him that the orderly processes of the University are seriously threatened. In making such a finding the Rector shall consider whether disruptive activities are such as to require immediate, extraordinary measures to safeguard persons or property or to maintain the University’s educational function. As soon as reasonably possible after the Declaration of Emergency, the Rector shall inform available Board of Trustees of his action. When the Rector determines that the serious threat has passed, he shall, after consultation with available Board of Trustees, declare the State of Emergency to be at an end.

 

  1. a) During a State of Emergency, the Rector, in the exercise of reasonable judgment in the circumstances, is authorized to take whatever actions he finds necessary in order to safeguard persons or property or to maintain the University’s educational function. Such actions shall remain in effect during the State of Emergency unless sooner canceled by the Rector. During a State of Emergency, the Rector may, if in his judgment the circumstances warrant it, suspend University activities for a day or a portion thereof.

 

  1. b) During a State of Emergency, the violation by any person of a Rectorial order or ruling under 3(a) of this Policy, or the commission during such State of Emergency of any act or acts of misconduct of the kind set forth in Section 6(a)(i) through 6(a)(xi) of the Board of Trustees’ Statement on Rights and Responsibilities will be considered an offense of the graves nature, and sanctions (as listed in Section 6 of the Statement on Rights and Responsibilities) appropriate to the gravity of such offense or offenses shall be imposed.

 

  1. c) A visitor who, after appropriate hearing, is found to have violated a Rectorial order authorized by Section 3 of this Policy may be denied admission to and employment by the University.

 

  1. During a State of Emergency, any person who, after being requested to do so by a properly identified official and after being advised by such official of the sanction for failure to identify oneself, fails to identify himself by name and status as a student, member of the faculty or staff, or visitor to such official shall have imposed upon him, after appropriate hearing, the sanctions set forth in Section 6 of the Statement on Rights and Responsibilities.

The second Monday in March for the Board of Trustees’ annual organization meeting, at which time officers are elected for the ensuing year. Quarterly meetings are required by law, but in actual practice the Board of Trustees convene on an average of ten times annually.

The University, one of the largest private institutions of higher learning, is supported chiefly by appropriations made by the Northern Cyprus (TRNC) State Legislature, by income from the rental of lands granted to it by the Northern Cyprus (TRNC) Government, by the income from income drived from the establishments and entities on these lands, and by student fees.

 

C07: Faculty Disciplinary Policy

Policy

(Approved by the Rector  01.10.2019;

Approved by Board of Trustees 02.10.2019)

  1. The University encourages a supportive problem-solving approach to workplace problems, but the University recognizes that misconduct may require disciplinary action. The University normally uses progressive discipline to address possible misconduct. Progressive discipline is intended to be corrective, not punitive in nature. It is designed to provide faculty with notice of deficiencies and an opportunity to improve. However, some violations of policies and procedures, or continued negative behavior, may be of such serious nature that suspension without pay or discharge pursuant to Faculty Handbook policies may be appropriate.
  2. Any member of the faculty, including any serving as an academic administrator, who violates a published University policy may be subject to warning, censure, suspension without pay, or dismissal. Teaching or research assistants in their faculty capacity are considered faculty members for purposes of this Policy.
  3. a) “Warning” means an oral reprimand or expression of disapproval.
  4. b) “Censure” means a written reprimand or expression of disapproval, which should include an explanation of the nature of the misconduct, and the specific action to be taken by the faculty member and/or chair to correct the problem, including mentoring, if appropriate, and a statement that further disciplinary action could occur should the problem persists.
  5. c) “Suspension without pay” means disciplinary suspension without regular salary for a stated period of time.
  6. d) “Dismissal” means termination of employment (see Faculty Handbook sections B.5.3, B.6.4.3, and B.5.4).

 

  1. The procedures specified in this Policy provide for the consideration and determination of proposed disciplinary actions against faculty members short of dismissal. Consideration and determination of disciplinary actions that may result in a proposed dismissal of a tenured faculty member, or dismissal of an untenured faculty member prior to expiration of his or her contract term, are governed by sections B.5.3, B.6.4.3, or B.5.4, respectively, of the Faculty Handbook and are not covered by these procedures. However, cases in which faculty dismissal has been considered pursuant to sections B.5.3, B.6.4.3, or B.5.4, and a lesser sanction is ultimately proposed instead by the administration, shall be handled under this policy, without duplicating steps that have already taken place. In particular, if the chair and dean conclude that suspension without pay is appropriate in a case in which dismissal was considered but rejected, the faculty member is entitled to request a peer hearing as provided below in sections 10 and 11.
  2. In the case of allegations against a faculty member that appear to be within the scope of another specific University policy that has its own procedures for investigation and resolution (including but not limited to allegations of research misconduct, discrimination, or sexual harassment), the chair or dean shall forward such allegations to the appropriate person or department for handling pursuant to the applicable policy. If such a process requires the chair to make a disciplinary determination after an investigation and recommendation from another University body, this policy will be followed in determining the appropriate discipline. If the other procedure involved a hearing before a faculty committee, any factual determinations will not be subject to reconsideration by faculty peer review under this policy.
  3. References to the department chair in this policy also include the program director or associate or vice dean in a non-departmentalized school or Faculty. If allegations are made against a department chair or other administrator, the next higher academic authority shall perform the functions assigned in this Policy to the chair, and the provisions shall be modified as appropriate. Any individual(s) bringing an allegation of faculty misconduct to the chair’s attention is protected by, and subject to, the University’s policy on reporting misconduct (UBPPM section 2200, Whistleblower Protection and Reporting Suspected Misconduct and Retaliation).
  4. In all cases other than those set forth in paragraphs 3 and 4 above, if a member of the faculty is alleged to have violated a policy of the University, the department chair shall provide the faculty member a written notice explaining the nature and specific content of the alleged violation, together with a copy of this policy, and shall discuss the alleged violation with the faculty member. The written notice shall be given to the faculty member within ninety (90) days of the chair learning of the apparent violation of policy. The faculty member may be accompanied by one person in meeting with the chair. The faculty member and the chair shall notify each other at least two working days prior to the scheduled meeting who, if anyone, will be accompanying them at the meeting. The chair should issue a written report within five (5) working days after the meeting summarizing the discussion with the faculty member, keep a copy in the faculty member’s file, and send a signed copy to the faculty member. Before, during or after the meeting, the chair may ask the faculty member to respond in writing to the notice and present any relevant written material within a reasonable time specified by the chair. Likewise the faculty member shall be free to submit any materials reasonably desired on his/her own volition, no later than five (5) working days after meeting with the chair unless the chair grants additional time in writing. The matter may be concluded at this point by the mutual consent of all parties.
  5. The department chair or the faculty member may initiate conciliation proceedings at any time prior to the chair’s decision by contacting the Ombudsman Dispute Resolution Services for Faculty program as provided in Section C345 with notice to the other parties. Conciliation may be undertaken if both parties agree.
  6. If a mutually agreeable resolution (with or without conciliation) is not achieved, the department chair shall make a decision in the matter and communicate it to the faculty member in writing within ten (10) working days after meeting with the faculty member or the termination of conciliation efforts if they are unsuccessful, whichever is later. The faculty member shall have ten (10) working days from receipt of the written decision to submit a written request for review by the appropriate dean, who will issue a written decision concerning whether the chair’s decision is upheld, modified or reversed. Prior to making a decision, the dean shall meet with the department chair and the faculty member, and their representatives if desired, together or separately, and shall receive and consider any documents the parties wish to submit. Documents shall be submitted within five (5) working days of the faculty member’s request for review. If formal conciliation has not been attempted previously, the dean may refer the matter to Ombudsman Dispute Resolution Services for Faculty. The dean will communicate his/her decision to the parties in writing within ten (10) working days after meeting with the faculty member or the termination of conciliation efforts if they are unsuccessful, whichever is later.
  7. If the faculty member does not agree with the dean’s action, he/she may submit a written request for review by the Provost or Chancellor within five (5) working days of receipt of the dean’s decision. The Provost/Chancellor will decide the matter on the record unless he/she determines that it would be helpful to meet with the parties, together or separately. Within ten (10) working days after receipt of the complete record or after meeting with the parties, whichever is later, the Provost/Chancellor shall uphold, modify or reverse the dean’s decision by written notice to the parties. The Provost/Chancellor may seek an advisory investigation and opinion from the Faculty Ethics Committee. The decision of the Provost/Chancellor is subject to discretionary review by the Rector or Board of Trustees if requested by the faculty member.
  8. If the chair, after meeting with the faculty member and considering all materials submitted pursuant to section 6, proposes to suspend the faculty member without pay, the chair shall meet with the dean to review the matter. If the proposal is supported by the dean after meeting with the chair and the faculty member, the faculty member is entitled to a faculty peer hearing. The faculty member shall send such a request to the Provost/Chancellor within five (5) working days of receipt of the dean’s determination.
  9. If a faculty peer hearing is requested as provided in this Policy, the chair of the Faculty Ethics Committee will arrange for a hearing before two members of that Committee from outside the faculty member’s department, chosen by the Ethics Committee, and one uninvolved department chair from a different school or Faculty chosen by the Provost/Chancellor. The hearing will be held as soon as reasonably possible and shall be conducted according to the University’s Dispute Resolution Hearing Procedures. The University Secretary’s office shall make arrangements for the hearing. Hearings shall be recorded and shall be private unless both parties agree that the hearing be open. The hearing panel may uphold or reverse the proposal to suspend the faculty member without pay. If the panel’s decision is to reverse the proposal, the panel may direct the chair and dean to impose a lesser disciplinary measure. The panel’s decision may be reviewed on the record by the Provost/Chancellor, but the panel’s decision shall not be reversed or modified except in the case of clear error, which shall be detailed in writing by the Provost/Chancellor. The decision of the Provost/Chancellor is subject to discretionary review by the Rector or Board of Trustees if requested by the faculty member.
  10. The faculty member may bring a complaint before the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure (AF&T) if he/she believes the matter or its handling is within the jurisdiction of the Committee. The Committee will determine whether the matter is within its jurisdiction and, if so, shall handle the matter under the Policy on Academic Freedom and Tenure. Normally, review by the AF&T Committee should be sought after the determination by the Provost/Chancellor. If the faculty member pursues the matter before the AF&T Committee, AF&T shall accept the facts as determined by the faculty peer hearing, if one was held.
  11. If the final determination is that no misconduct occurred, efforts shall be undertaken to the extent possible and appropriate to fully protect, restore, or maintain the reputation of the faculty member.
  12. These procedures do not supersede Appendix VIII to Part B of the Faculty Handbook, concerning the Faculty Ethics Committee, and a faculty member who believes that he/she has been improperly accused of unethical behavior may bring the matter to the attention of the Ethics Committee under Appendix VIII after determination by the Provost/Chancellor.

C09: Respectful Campus

Approved by: Rector             Effective: 01.10.2019
Responsible FS Committee: Policy Committee
Office Responsible for Administration: Office of the Provost and Office of the HSC Chancellor

Revisions to the Policy Rationale, Policy Statement, and Applicability sections of this document must be approved by the full Faculty Senate.

Policy Rationale

The Mesarya Technical University (MTU) is committed to freedom of academic inquiry and encourages an environment of spirited and open debate. MTU does not attempt to shield people from ideas they may find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even offensive. At the same time, MTU is committed to providing a respectful campus that includes a working, learning, and social environment where all members of the MTU community including, but not limited to, Board of Trustees, administrators, faculty, staff, students, and volunteers work together in a mutually respectful, psychologically-healthy manner. MTU strives to foster such an environment because a respectful campus is a necessary condition for success in teaching and learning, in research and scholarship, in patient care and public service, and in all other aspects of MTU’s mission and values.

Policy Statement

Everyone at MTU has a right to be treated with respect and a responsibility to treat others with respect.  When these rights and responsibilities are honored and practiced, the MTU campus is a respectful one.  This Policy describes the actions and cornerstones, that characterize a respectful campus and to which all members of the MTU community should aspire.  Actions that are destructive to a respectful campus will not be tolerated.  All members of the MTU community who have witnessed or been a target of destructive actions are encouraged to raise concerns in accordance with this Policy.

  1. Constructive Actions

 

A respectful campus exhibits and promotes the following constructive actions:

1.1. Displaying personal integrity and professional ethics (Faculty Handbook, Section B, Appendix V).

1.2. Practicing fairness.

1.3. Exhibiting respect for individual rights and differences.

1.4. Demonstrating respect for diversity and difference.

1.5. Being responsible and accountable for one’s actions.

1.6. Emphasizing communication and collaborative resolution of problems and conflicts.

1.7. Developing and maintaining confidentiality and trust.

 

  1. Cornerstones of a Respectful Campus

 

The commitment to a respectful campus calls for promotion of an environment where the following are upheld:

 

2.1. MTU strives for an atmosphere where individuals at all levels and in all units value each other’s contributions and treat each other with respect.

 

2.2. Individuals in positions of authority serve as role models in the promotion of a respectful campus.  Promoting courtesy, civility, and respectful communication is consistent with the responsibility of leadership.

 

2.3. Individuals at all levels are allowed to discuss issues of concern in an open and honest manner, without fear of reprisal or retaliation.

 

2.4. The right to address issues of concern does not grant individuals license to make untrue allegations, unduly inflammatory statements or unduly personal attacks, or to harass others, to violate confidentiality requirements, or engage in other conduct that violates the law or MTU policy.

 

  1. Destructive Actions

Actions that are destructive to a respectful campus will not be tolerated.

3.1. Destructive Actions Covered by This Policy

 

This Policy covers the destructive actions described in sections 3.1.1 through 3.1.1.4.  Credible reports of such actions will be addressed in accordance with the Procedures Section of this Policy.

 

3.1.1. Bullying

 

Bullying is defined by MTU as repeated mistreatment of one or more individuals or a pattern of mistreatment of more than one individual.  This mistreatment can include, but is not limited to the following actions:

 

3.1.1.1. Verbal Bullying

 

Verbal bullying, which can be oral, written, or electronic, includes repeated slandering, ridiculing, or maligning of a person or persons; addressing abusive and offensive remarks to a person or persons in a sustained or repeated manner; shouting at others in public and/or in private where such conduct is so severe or pervasive as to cause or create a hostile educational or working environment or unreasonably interferes with a person’s work or school performance or participation.

 

 

3.1.1.2. Nonverbal Bullying

 

Nonverbal bullying includes, but is not limited to, directing threatening gestures toward a person or persons or invading personal space after being asked to move or step away.

 

3.1.1.3. Threatening Action toward a Person’s Job or Well-Being

 

Making threats, either explicit or implicit, to the security of a person’s job, position, or personal well-being can be bullying. It is not bullying for a supervisor to address an employee’s poor job performance and discuss potential consequences within the framework of MTU policies and procedures, or for a professor or academic program director to advise a student of unsatisfactory academic work and the potential for course failure or dismissal from the program if uncorrected.

 

3.1.1.4. Anonymous Bullying

 

Anonymous bullying includes withholding or disguising one’s identity while treating a person in a malicious manner, sending insulting or threatening anonymous messages, placing objectionable objects among a person’s belongings, or leaving degrading written or pictorial material about a person where others can see.

Differences of opinion, conflicts, or problems in workplace relationships may occasionally occur as a normalpart of working life and should not be considered bullying.

3.1.2. Single Incident of Destructive Action

 

Bullying is defined in sections 3.1.1through 3.1.1.4 herein as repeated mistreatment.  A single incident should be handled by a supervisor using informal processes.

 

3.2. Destructive Actions Covered by Other MTU Policies

 

Credible reports of the destructive actions described below will be addressed in accordance with the applicable policy listed.

 

3.2.1. Violent Action—refer to UAP 2210“Campus Violence.”

 

3.2.2. Sexual harassment–refer to UAP 2730″Sexual Harassment.”

 

3.2.3. Other forms of harassment—refer to UAP 2720“Equal Opportunity, Non-Discrimination, and Affirmative Action.”

 

3.2.4. Retaliation— refer to UAP 2200″Whistleblower Protection and Reporting Suspected

Misconduct and Retaliation.”

 

3.2.5. Conduct which can adversely affect MTU’s educational function, disrupt community living on campus, or interfere with the right of others to pursue their education or to conduct their MTU duties and responsibilities–refer to MTU Faculty Handbook, Section C05, “Rights and Responsibilities at the Mesarya Technical University.””Visitor Code of Conduct,””Student Code of Conduct,”and UAP 2220″Freedom of Expression and Dissent.”

3.2.6. Unethical conduct–refer to MTU Faculty Handbook, Section B, Appendix V, “Statement of Professional Ethics.”

 

  1. Supervisor Responsibilities

 

Supervisors, at all levels, are responsible for addressing indications of destructive actions and resolving them in an appropriate, fair, and prompt manner in accordance with applicable MTU policy.

 

Applicability

 

This Policy is applicable to all MTU faculty and academic administrators, including the Health Sciences Center and Branch Campuses.  The reporting and investigatory procedures listed in this Policy document are applicable whenever a MTU faculty member or academic administrator is accused of actions destructive to a respectful campus.  Whenever other members of the MTU Community are accused of actions destructive to a respectful campus, refer to the following policies for reporting and investigatory procedures:

 

  • Staff member accused: Report the destructive action in accordance with UAP 2200“Whistleblower Protection and Reporting Suspected Misconduct and Retaliation” and UAP 2240“Respectful Campus.”

 

  • Student accused: Report the destructive action to the Dean of Students Office.

 

  • Unknown Identity of Alleged Wrongdoer: In incidents of anonymous destructive behavior when the wrongdoer is unknown, a staff or faculty member should report the destructive behavior to his or her supervisor, and a student should report the destructive behavior to Dean of Students Office or any of the resources listed in UAP 2200 “Whistleblower Protection and Reporting Suspected Misconduct and Retaliation.”

 

  • Revisions to the remaining sections of this document may be amended with the approval of the Faculty Senate Policy and Operations Committee in consultation with the responsible Faculty Senate Committee listed in Policy Heading.

 

Definitions

 

Bullying.  Refer to sections 3.1.1 through 3.1.1.4 above for detailed definition.

 

Who should read this policy

  • Board of Trustees
  • Faculty
  • Academic staff
  • Academic deans and other executives, department chairs, directors, and managers

 

Related Documents

University Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual:

Policy 2200“Whistleblower Protection and Reporting Suspected Misconduct and Retaliation”
Policy 2210“Campus Violence”
Policy 2220“Freedom of Expression and Dissent”
Policy 2240“Respectful Campus”
Policy 2720“Equal Opportunity, Non-Discrimination, and Affirmative Action”
Policy 2730 “Sexual Harassment”
Policy 3220“Ombuds Services and Dispute Resolution for Staff”
Policy 3750 “Counseling, Assistance, and Referral Services”

 

Faculty Handbook:
Policy C05“Rights and Responsibility at the Mesarya Technical University”
Policy C07 “Faculty Disciplinary Policy”
Policy C70 “Confidentiality of Faculty Records”
Section B,Section 5.5.  “Suspension” and “Appendix V”

 

MTU Student Handbook:
Student Code of Conduct
Visitor Code of Conduct

 

Contacts

 

Direct any questions about this Policy to the Office of the Provost or the Office of the HSC Chancellor.

 

Procedures

 

Actions reasonably believed to constitute actions destructive to a respectful campus as described in this Policy should be reported in accordance with the procedures listed herein. These procedures are designed to encourage use of informal and/or formal processes for reporting and resolving destructive action.  Individuals impacted by the negative action may use any of the procedures listed below.  Taking informal action does not preclude individuals from taking formal action.

Extreme incidents that result in a fear for one’s safety should be reported directly to MTU Police in accordance with UAP 2210″Campus Violence.”

  1. Informal Processes

 

When the destructive actions described in this Policy occur, it is in the best interest of MTU and all parties involved that the actions be stoppedas soon as reasonably possible.  When possible and practical under the circumstances, all efforts should be made to address and resolve complaints informally.

In many cases resolution can be achieved by bringing the negative action to the attention of the impacted individual’s supervisor or the alleged wrongdoer’s supervisor.  If the impacted individual is not comfortable reporting the destructive actions to a supervisor, the individual may report the actions in accordance with the provisions described in this document.

MTU processes and resources can help individuals with informal resolution.  These resources which include Counseling, Assistance, and Referral Services (CARS) for faculty and staff, HSC Office of Professionalism, Ombudsman Dispute Resolution Services for Faculty, Ombudsman Dispute Resolution Services for Staff, Ombudsman Dispute Resolution Services for Graduate Students, and the Dean of Students office for undergraduate students, and are described in Section 8 below.

 

  1.  Formal Processes and Written Complaints

 

2.1. A formal written complaint pursuant to this Policy should be brought to the attention of the person who has direct supervisory responsibility over the individual(s) whose actions are in question (e.g., chairperson, supervisor, director, dean, Provost, Chancellor for Health Sciences), or who is the supervisor of the unit in which the alleged destructive action occurred.  A formal complaint may also be made by using the procedures specified in UAP 2200 “Whistle Blower Protection and Reporting Suspected Misconduct and Retaliation,” which includes a MTU Hotline phone number.

 

2.2. A complainant should report suspected destructive action as soon as reasonably possible, preferably within 60 calendar days from the time the complainant becomes aware of the suspected destructive action.  The complaint should only include those events that occurred no earlier than one year before the date of the complaint.  The complaint should include as much of the following as possible:

 

2.2.1. Clear specific allegations against the named person or persons.

 

2.2.2. Dates, times, locations, and witnesses to incidents, when possible.

 

2.2.3. Factual description of events with direct quotes where possible.

 

2.2.4. Indication of how each incident made the complainant feel.

 

2.2.5. Documentary evidence.

 

2.2.6. Description of any action the complainant or others have already taken.

 

2.3.A report of destructive action that is made under this Policy may or may not identify a specific individual as the alleged wrongdoer.  A report of anonymous destructive action can be made under this Policy,even though the alleged wrongdoer is unknown.  Regardless of the identification of an alleged wrongdoer, the procedures delineated below will be followed, including an investigation if warranted.

 

2.4. Regardless of the mechanism chosen for the formal complaint, a written complaint must be prepared and signed by the complainant or – if the complainant chooses to remain anonymous – by the preparer.  All written complaints must be brought to the attention of the cognizant supervisor.  If an alleged wrongdoer is named in the report, the report will be shared with the person accused of the action so that he or she is made aware that the action described may have been perceived as destructive to a respectful campus. The alleged wrongdoer may provide a written response within 14 calendar days from receipt of the written complaint.  The written response from the alleged wrongdoer will be provided to the complainant.

 

2.5. Upon receipt of a formal written complaint, the responsible supervisor should interview the complainant, unless the complaint has been anonymous.  If an alleged wrongdoer is named, the supervisor should interview both the complainant and the alleged wrongdoer.  Based on the written complaint, the interview(s), and written responses, the responsible supervisor may make an initial effort to effect an informal resolution of the matter, but only if an informal approach has not already been tried prior to the receipt of the formal complaint.  The supervisor may suggest any of the processes specified in this document or other informal processes as appropriate.  In most cases, the alleged wrongdoer may be given a reasonable opportunity to correct or otherwise cease the action before any formal action is taken.

If informal processes are not pursued or are not successful in resolving the matter, the supervisor will make a determination whether the allegation, if substantiated, would constitute a violation of this Policy.  If so, the supervisor will initiate an investigation as specified below.  If the supervisor determines that the alleged destructive action would not be a violation of this Policy C09, but might be a violation of another MTU policy, the supervisor will refer the matter for review and action as appropriate.  If the supervisor determines that the alleged destructive action would not be a violation of MTU policy, but that the situation would benefit from some positive intervention, the supervisor should intervene as appropriate. If the supervisor determines that no further action is needed, the supervisor will submit a written report that includes a copy of the initial complaint, a description of the findings, and the reasons for not conducting an investigation in accordance with Section 3 of these Procedures.  The report will be submitted to the supervisor’s supervisor with a copy to the complainant and the alleged wrongdoer.  If the complainant is not satisfied with the determination, he or she may appeal the decision in accordance with Section 4 of these Procedures.

2.6. Faculty may also consult with the Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee (AF&T) if there are allegations of possible violations that are within the jurisdiction of the AF&T Committee.  If the AF&T Committee decides that the complaint is within their jurisdiction, they will follow the procedures in Section B of the Faculty Handbook.

 

  1. Investigation

 

The procedures specified below apply to cases in which both the complainant and the alleged wrongdoer are named.  In cases in which the complaint is anonymous or the alleged wrongdoer is not named, or both, the Office of University Counsel (OUC) will advise the responsible supervisor on how to modify the specified procedures.

The responsible supervisor is charged with initiating the investigation by appointing an unbiased investigator within 14 calendar days of receiving the written complaint, or following the conclusion of informal processes if they have been unsuccessful.  It is of paramount importance that the investigation be conducted by an unbiased investigator.  Prior to appointing an unbiased investigator, the responsible supervisor must confer with the OUC for guidance in interpreting this Policy, and in formulating the specific steps to be followed in conducting an unbiased investigation, and in preparing the final investigatory report.  The OUC will inform the supervisor of the responsible supervisor that it has counseled the responsible supervisor on the specific matter.  Following the advice of OUC, the supervisor who receives the complaint will appoint an independent investigator with no connection to either the complainant or the alleged wrongdoer; the investigator must confer with OUC for guidance.

As soon as it has been determined who will conduct the investigation and how it will be conducted, the investigator will notify the complainant, the alleged wrongdoer, and the supervisor of the alleged wrongdoer, that an investigation has been initiated.  If either the complainant or the alleged wrongdoer wishes to request that a different investigator be appointed, a written request, including a detailed justification, must be provided to the supervisor of the alleged wrongdoer within seven (7) calendar days.  The supervisor will take the request into consideration and will either confirm the appointment of the original investigator or will appoint a different investigator.  The parties will be notified of the supervisor’s decision no later than seven (7) calendar days after receipt of the request.  If the investigator decides to appoint an ad hoc committee to assist with the investigation, the alleged wrongdoer and the complainant will be notified in writing and given 14 calendar days to submit a written objection to the membership of the ad hoc committee. The investigator will take the objections into consideration before finalizing the appointments.  The membership of the investigatory committee must be finalized no later than 28 calendar days after the alleged wrongdoer and complainant have been provided with the initial notification referenced above.

The investigation should normally include interviews with all parties to the complaint, as well as any others who the complainant or alleged wrongdoer believes will be able to provide material information relevant to the complaint.  Additional information may be provided by any of the parties at any point during the investigation.  The investigation should normally be completed no later than 42 calendar days after the formal written complaint has been brought to the supervisor of the alleged wrongdoer, or after the membership of the ad hoc committee has been finalized, whichever is later.  If the investigation cannot be completed within this time frame, a written notification of the delay, and the reasons for delay, should be provided to the complainant, the alleged wrongdoer, and the supervisor of the alleged wrongdoer. When the investigation has been completed, a confidential report of the investigation will be sent for appropriate action to the supervisor of the alleged wrongdoer, with a written copy provided to the alleged wrongdoer and the complainant, unless the complainant is anonymous.

The confidential report will include, at a minimum, the following information:

  • Identity of investigator and others involved in conducting the investigation
  • Allegations and responses
  • Investigative process, including the number of witnesses interviewed, but excluding the

identities of the witnesses

  •       Summary of facts
  • Final determination of whether this Policy was violated

 

The investigator may also choose to include recommendations in the report.  Information or recommendations pertaining todisciplinary action will not be included in any documents provided to the complainant.

The investigator will make reasonable efforts to maintain confidentiality.  The identities of the alleged wrongdoer and the complainant should be treated with sensitivity.  It is recommended, but not required, that the investigator ask everyone involved in the investigation, including witnesses, to sign confidentiality agreements.

The investigator is responsible for thoroughly documenting the investigation and creating an investigatory file.  Except as noted in Section 7 below, this file will be maintained in the alleged wrongdoer’s personnel file. The file is confidential and shall be secured in accordance with PolicyC70 “Confidentiality of Faculty Records.”

The file should include the following:

  • Formal written complaint and responses
  • Evidence collected from all sources, including interviews
  • If applicable, documentation associated with the selection of ad hoc committee members, including any objections made by the alleged wrongdoer and complainant
  • If applicable, signed confidentiality agreements
  • If applicable, ad hoc committee meeting minutes
  • Copy of investigation report

 

  1. Appeals of Investigatory Findings

 

If the responsible supervisor does not resolve the issue to the satisfaction of the parties to the complaint or within the required time frame, the parties will have 14 calendar days from the date on which they received written notification of the results of the investigation to appeal the decision to the next higher level person in the supervisory chain, who will review the record and determine whether the investigation was reasonably conducted and the findings supported by the evidence. The reviewing official will usually obtain the advice of OUC on how to conduct the review.  The reviewing official may uphold, reverse, or modify the findings or may remand the matter for further investigation.  A written copy of the reviewing official’s decision, concerning whether a violation of this policy occurred, will be provided to the supervisor of the alleged wrongdoer and the initial investigator; a summary statement will be provided to the alleged wrongdoer and the complainant.  If the reviewing official’s determination is not satisfactory to the complainant or the alleged wrongdoer, a final appeal can be made to the Provost or Chancellor for Health Sciences, who in his or her discretion may review the record.  Absent discretionary review by the Provost or Chancellor for Health Sciences, the decision of the reviewing official, concerning whether a violation of this policy occurred, shall be final.  If the Provost or Chancellor for Health Sciences reviews the matter, his or her decision shall be final.

 

  1. Actions Following Investigation

 

If the final determination is that an individual has violated this Policy, MTU shall take appropriate action, which may include disciplinary sanctions up to and including dismissal from MTU in accordance with Policy C07“Faculty Disciplinary Policy.”

Whether or not an individual is found to have violated this Policy, reasonable efforts will be undertaken to ensure that complainants who make allegations of destructive actions in good faith and others who cooperate in good faith with inquiries and investigations of such allegations are not retaliated against for initiating or participating in the investigation.  Refer toUAP 2200for information on retaliation.

  1. False Information

An employee who knowingly gives false information or knowingly makes a false report of alleged violation of this Policy or who knowingly provides false answers or information in response to an ongoing investigation will be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal, by MTU.

  1. False or Inaccurate Accusations

 

It is important to protect individuals from false, unsubstantiated, or inaccurate accusations. Therefore, when an allegation of violation of this Policy is not substantiated, the file containing all documents relating to the report, review, or investigation will be sealed and delivered to University Counsel’s office. The file will be stored for six (6) years after the date the file is sealed, after which time it may be destroyed.

  1. MTU Processes and Resources that can Assist Individuals Impacted by Destructive Actions

 

The following MTU processes and resources are available to assist individuals impacted by destruction actions.  Participation is voluntary.  With the agreement of the individuals involved, these services may be utilized in a stand-alone fashion or before, during, or after the investigatory procedure.

 

8.1.The MTU Counseling, Assistance, and Referral Services (CARS) is an important resource available to all benefits-eligible MTU faculty and staff. CARS can help faculty or staff members to better understand their experience, facilitate resilience, identify options and take action in a constructive manner.  Refer to UAP 3750 “Counseling, Assistance, and Referral Services.”

 

8.2. The HSC Office of Professionalism provides services to the members of the HSC, including faculty, learners, and staff.  Services include advice regarding MTU policies and available resources, remedial and growth-oriented coaching, and group/team-based interventions.

 

8.3. Ombudsman Dispute Resolution Services for Faculty is a confidential, impartial, informal and independent resource for addressing concerns about respectful campus interactions and for exploring the possibility of resolving difficulties at the least adversarial level.  Services include confidential respectful consultations about experiences and concerns, discussion of options, information about policies and relevant MTU resources, collaborative problem-solving, and mediation.  In the mediation process, the individuals decide if and how they will resolve their difficulties and they can write agreements for moving forward. These services are voluntary and are available to faculty at all levels and to faculty administrators.  This office coordinates services with Ombudsman Dispute Resolution for Staff, Ombudsman Dispute Resolution for Graduate Students, and with the Dean of Students office as needs arise.

 

8.4.Ombudsman Dispute Resolution Services for Staff provides constructive conflict management support for staff and faculty who supervise staff as described in UAP 3220 “Ombudsman Services and Dispute Resolution for Staff.”    This is an informal, confidential, impartial, and independent resource.

 

8.5. Ombudsman dispute resolution services are available for graduate students at the Office of Graduate Studies.  With the graduate student’s permission, the Ombudsman for Graduate Students coordinates with the Ombudsman for Faculty or the Ombudsman for Staff for any continued services.

 

8.6. The Dean of Students Office is available to undergraduate students for addressing concerns about respectful campus interactions.

 

C10: Employment and Advanced Degrees

Policy

Approved by Rector 01.10.2019

Approved by Board of Trustees on 02.10.2019

 

 

  1. Faculty Members

 

  1. No member of the faculty may be awarded an advanced degree by the University in the same department or degree program in which he or she is employed.
  2. Faculty members are encouraged to take courses outside their own departments, whether or not toward a degree.  A master’s degree may be sought in such a department by following all of the normal procedures applying to such a pursuit, with the provision that a full-time faculty member may not enroll for more than six hours per semester.
  3. Similarly, a Ph.D. degree in a clearly separate program in a different unit of the University may be sought, with the following additional provisions;
    1. advance written approval of the faculty member’s department chairperson and Faculty dean, with information copies filed with the Office of Graduate Studies and the Office of the Provost/Vice Rector for Academic Affairs;
    2. except during the Ph.D. residence semesters, maximum enrollment in any semester may not exceed six hours;
    3. during the two semesters of residence requirement the faculty member may:
    4. take a leave of absence without pay, or
    5. become part time, with an academic workload not to exceed half time;
    6. during the residence semesters the faculty member must complete at least nine credit hours each semester or an equivalent program of study and research.
    7. Graduate Students

 

  1. A qualified graduate student may, in accordance with the graduate policies of the University, be appointed as a teaching assistant or teaching associate, neither of which is a faculty rank, in the major department or, with the approval of both chairpersons involved, in a department other than the major.

 

b.

  1. A graduate student, i.e., a student who is formally pursuing a graduate degree at this University and who does not hold a faculty appointment, may not be given a concurrent faculty appointment in the same department or degree program.  Where the student’s degree program is not clearly departmentalized, faculty appointment is prohibited within the Faculty or school awarding the degree.

 

  1. A graduate student may be offered a faculty appointment outside his or her department and degree program only with the approvals of the Graduate Studies Dean and the Provost/Vice Rector for Academic Affairs, in addition to the normal department and Faculty or school approvals.  In such a case, the individual becomes a faculty member governed by section 1 above.

 

  1. Paragraphs 2.b.(1) and (2) above also apply to graduate students during summer sessions, whether or not they are enrolled at the time.

 

C20: Employment of MTU Graduates

Policy

Approved by Rector 01.10.2019

As a general policy, no person who has received a degree from the Mesarya Technical University shall hereafter be employed as a regular member of the faculty in a position which may lead to permanent tenure unless subsequent to the last degree at the Mesarya Technical University, he or she has taken at least one academic year of advanced work at another reputable institution or has established himself or herself professionally elsewhere.  Such work or professional experience must be in his or her teaching field.

At the discretion of the Provost/Vice Rector for Academic Affairs or the Vice Rector for Health Sciences for Health Sciences faculty, an exception may be made to this general policy in the case of a person who has taken a master’s degree, its equivalent, or pursued other substantial graduate work at another reputable institution before receiving a more advanced degree at the Mesarya Technical University.

In case of the above or any other exceptions to the general policy, it is recommended that the Provost/Vice Rector for Academic Affairs consult with the Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee before taking action.

For further information refer to “Employment of MTU Graduates” Section 5.3, Board of Trustees’ Policy Manual.

 

C30: Employment of Relatives

Policy

Adopted by the Board of Trustees 02.10.2019

Hiring officers may not hire or supervise a family member or a family member of a line supervisor without the advance approval of the Rector. For the purposes of this policy, family members are defined as any individuals related by blood, adoption, marriage, or living in the same household. This applies to all categories of employees, including regular, temporary, and on-call employees. If a change in an employee’s family relationship results in a violation of this policy, the situation must be corrected within six (6) months through the transfer, resignation, or discharge of one (1) or more of the related employees. Any exceptions must be approved in writing by the Rector and the approval must be placed in the employee’s official personnel file. (See University Business Policies and Procedures Manual, Section 3210 for entire policy on Recruitment and Hiring.)

C35: Appointment and Continuation of Deans

Policy

(Adopted by the Rector  01.10.2019

 

The following policy procedures will be utilized for the appointment, periodic review, and terms of office of deans and their administrative equivalents at the Mesarya Technical University. All appointment policies will be in accordance with affirmative action guidelines.

 

  1. Deans will normally serve terms of five years. Administrative equivalents at branch campuses will also serve terms of five years.
  2. Annual evaluations of the dean by faculty and chairs in the Faculty shall be required and will be administered by the Faculty Senate. These evaluations shall be used by the Provost or Chancellor for Health Sciences for performance improvement and salary increment determinations for the dean. The results of the evaluations shall be made available to the Faculty Senate Rector by the end of the semester in which the evaluation is completed. The Faculty Senate Rector will review the evaluations of the appropriate Deans or equivalent persons with the Provost or with the Chancellor for Health Sciences.
  3. Terms of office may be renewable. Appointments and reappointments to terms of office are to be made by the Provost or Chancellor for Health Sciences after consultation with departmental Faculty and chairs, University officers, and other such persons as they shall see fit. The consultation with Faculty and chairs shall include the taking of a vote by secret ballot on any potential appointment or reappointment. The vote shall be administered by the Faculty Committee on Governance. The results of the vote shall be transmitted to the Provost or Chancellor of Health Sciences and be made available to the faculty and department chairs of the respective Faculty. Reappointment must also be guided by the stated willingness of the deans to continue in that position, the results of the evaluation in the fourth year, and the willingness of the faculty and chairs, evidenced by secret ballot, to have the deans continue in office. The appointment or reappointment of the Dean of Graduate Studies shall be made by the Provost after appropriate consultation with the Senate Graduate Committee, University officers, the graduate faculty, and other interested persons.
  4. It shall be understood that a policy of terms of office for deans does not abrogate the long-standing policy of the University that deans serve in any Faculty at the pleasure of the Provost or Chancellor for Health Sciences and that a dean’s appointment and continuing appointment occurs with the advice of and in consultation with the faculty and chairs of the Faculty. This means, simply, that deans may be replaced during a term of office; also, they may resign.

    Resolution of a disagreement: In the case of a disagreement between the administration and the faculty and chairs of a Faculty, an amicable resolution will be found. A dean serves at the pleasure of the Provost or the Chancellor for Health Sciences, but a dean’s appointment and continuing appointment occurs with the advice of and in consultation with the faculty and chairs of the Faculty. A dean who has lost the confidence and support of his or her faculty and chairs cannot provide the positive leadership needed by the Faculty.

C40: Appointment and Continuation in Office of Department Chairpersons

Policy

Adopted by Rector 01.10.2019

Preamble:
The following policy guidelines will be utilized for the appointment, periodic review, and terms of office of departmental chairs at the Mesarya Technical University unless a Faculty  adopts a modified policy that would decrease the term by no more than one year.  All appointment policies will be in accordance with affirmative action guidelines.

 

  1. Departmental chairs will normally serve terms of four years.  Administrative equivalents at branch campuses will also serve terms of four years.
  2. Annual evaluations of the chair by faculty shall be required.  These evaluations shall be forwarded to the dean, and shall be used in salary increment determinations for the chair.
  3. Terms of office may be renewable.  The initial appointments and reappointments to terms of office are to be made by the dean after consultation with departmental faculty, University officers and other such persons as he/she shall see fit.  In the case of appointments to departments conducting graduate programs, consultation with the Dean of Graduate Studies will also be included.  The consultation with departmental faculty shall include the taking of a vote by secret ballot on any potential appointment. Reappointment must also be guided by the stated willingness of the chairperson to continue in that position, the results of the evaluation in the third or penultimate year, and the willingness of the majority of the faculty, evidenced by secret ballot, to have the chair continue in office.
  4. It shall be understood that a policy of terms of office for chairpersons does not abrogate the long-standing policy of the University that chairpersons serve in any Faculty or school at the pleasure of the dean of that Faculty or school.  Additionally, a chair’s appointment and continuing appointment occurs with the advice of and in consultation with the faculty. This means, simply, that the chairpersons may be replaced during a term of office; also, they resign.

    Explanation:

As indicated in the preamble, any Faculty or school may decide to decrease its term of office for chairpersons to three years.

Resolution of a disagreement:

In the case of a disagreement between the administration and the faculty in a department, an amicable resolution will be found.  A chair serves at the pleasure of the dean, but a chair’s appointment and continuing appointment occurs with the advice of and in consultation with the faculty.  A chair who has lost the confidence and support of his or her faculty cannot provide the positive leadership needed by the department and Faculty or school.

 

C50: Faculty Contracts

Policy

Contracts are usually issued during May or June for the following year. For most faculty members, contracts call for nine months of service (see Dates of Campus Duty).

Payments in every case are made in monthly installments, on the last working day of each month. Faculty members who are employed on a nine-month basis have the option of choosing payment of their salaries in ten or twelve installments. For example: for a given year, the first check is paid at the end of August; faculty members may decide whether they wish to receive their contracted salaries in twelve equal installments ending on July 31 or in ten equal installments ending on May 31.

The following procedure has been established for computing the salary of a faculty member whose period of employment (1) does not begin with the start of the academic year, or (2) ends before Commencement.
Count the number of weeks of service and relate that number to 39 weeks in the nine-month academic year.

Example A: A faculty member starts work in February on a date which is 14 weeks before Commencement; salary amount will he 14/39 of a nine-month base salary.

Example B: A faculty member who starts work one week before classes begin, as is customary, finishes work at the end of the first semester; salary amount will be 50% of a nine-month base salary, and contract dates for one semester will include 19.5 weeks.

The contract of a person employed for the fiscal year administrators and certain faculty is written to indicate a 12-month period of employment, it being understood that a one-month vacation, i.e., annual leave on an accrual basis, is implicit in the agreement. One month here is construed as 21 working days, and a paid holiday in a vacation period is counted as a holiday and not as a day of vacation. While vacations will be granted whenever possible to satisfy individual requests, continuity of operations must be maintained. Consequently, vacation must be scheduled with the approval of the dean or director concerned.

For full-time faculty members on 12-month contracts: vacation is accrued at a rate of 1.75 days per month for a total of 21 days per year; to earn vacation during a given month, faculty must receive pay for at least twelve days during that month; faculty may accrue up to a total of 31.5 days.*

 

For part-time faculty members on 12-month contracts for at least 1/2-time but less than 3/4-time work, vacation is accrued at a rate of 7 hours per month for a total of 84 hours per year with maximum allowable accrual of 126 hours. For such persons working at least 3/4-time but less than full-time, the accrual rate is 11 hours per month, or 132 hours per year with a maximum allowable accrual of 189 hours. To earn vacation for a given month, 1/2-time employees must work a minimum of 48 hours in that month, and 3/4-time employees must work a minimum of 64 hours in that month.

Employees on 12-month contracts with the University who are terminating their employment are expected to take all accrued annual leave within the contract period. If, however, accrued annual leave extends beyond the contract period, and if the employee has given adequate notice of termination, the employee’s supervisor may request that an additional contract be issued to include payment of accrued annual leave (not to exceed 21 days for full-time faculty, 15.75 days for 3/4 time faculty, and 10.5 days for ‘/2 time faculty.)

Employees terminating employment for retirement purposes (under The Northern Cyprus (TRNC) Educational Retirement Act) would be paid for the full unused annual leave credits not to exceed the maximum allowed accrual.

When a nine-month faculty salary is converted to a twelve-month salary, the nine-month salary is multiplied by 11/9. A twelve-month salary figure is converted to a nine-month salary by multiplying the twelve-month figure by 9/11. This procedure recognizes the different leave policies required by the contracts and compares nine months’ work with eleven months’ work, with no annual leave accruals for those on nine-month contracts and one month’s annual leave within the twelve month contract.

For a person on a 12-month contract whose period of employment does not coincide with the start and end of the fiscal year (July l-June 30), salary is computed as follows:
________________
*Faculty members on 12-month contracts may not accrue annual leave while on sabbatical leave.

C60: Visiting Scholars

Approved by: Rector          Effective: 01.10.2019
Responsible FS Committee: Policy Committee

Office Responsible for Administration: Office of the Provost or Chancellor for Health Sciences

Revisions to the Policy Rationale, Policy Statement, and Applicability sections of this document must be approved by the full Faculty Senate.

Policy Rationale

 

As a matter of academic tradition and courtesy, the Mesarya Technical University (MTU) welcomes on its campus scholars from other universities who, because of sabbatical or research opportunities, wish to spend a period of time on campus and to have an official affiliation with MTU during that period.

 

Policy Statement

 

When such affiliation takes the form of lectureships or visiting professorships, appointment procedures follow regular administrative channels. When a visitor wishes not to teach, but to conduct independent research, another form of appointment becomes appropriate.  It is important to establish a clear understanding of the prerogatives and obligations of such visitors; therefore, this Policy Document provides procedures and guidance for the appointment process.

 

 

 

Applicability

 

Visiting Scholars to MTU.

Revisions to the remaining sections of this document may be amended with the approval of the Faculty Senate Policy and Operations Committee in consultation with the responsible Faculty Senate Committee listed in Policy Heading.

Definitions

 

No specific definitions are required for the Policy Statement.

 

Who should read this policy

 

  • Faculty
  • Department Chairs, academic deans and other academic administrators and executives

 

Related Documents

 

None

Contacts

 

Direct any questions about this policy to the Office of Faculty Affairs and Services or the HSC Faculty Contracts Office.

 

Procedures

 

For the benefit of visiting scholars and faculty members who are asked or wish to promote such visits, the following procedures apply.

  1. Appointments. Suggested titles are Visiting Scholar, Visiting Research Scholar in . . (department or field)… The visitor or the department should initiate the negotiations and work out the specific arrangement, subject to approval by the dean and Provost/Executive ViceRector for Academic Affairs or the Chancellor for Health Sciences and the issuance of a letter of appointment by the latter.

    2. Auditing of Courses. With the consent of the classroom teacher, Visiting Scholars should be allowed freely to audit MTU courses. At the discretion of the teacher or the department, such scholars may be invited to participate in fields of their competency, but no formal teaching or lecturing arrangements should be entered into without consideration having been given to the question of adequate compensation.

    3. Departmental Affiliation. Traditionally, visiting appointments are made in academic departments. While other forms of affiliation are feasible (for instance with a Faculty, the School of Law, or the School of Medicine), the chairpersons or deans most closely interested in such an arrangement should always have the opportunity of weighing the merits of the appointments. Therefore, they should be consulted, and if they concur, should have the privilege of writing the official letters of invitation. Depending on the inviting department’s inclinations, such a visitor may be included in departmental activities, consistent with established MTU policies and regulations.
  2. Financial Arrangements.It is important to specify in writing what the financial arrangements under a visiting appointment are to be, if any. Typically, if a scholar comes to MTU on his sabbatical with his own university’s normal support, or with partial support from a foundation MTU should absorb the costs of making library resources or desk space available.  If on the other hand the visitor is in a scientific or engineering field and expects to use MTU equipment for his research, other equitable arrangements should be mutually agreed to.  If the visitor is officially sponsored by a government agency or foundation such as the National Science Foundation, the Conference Board of Associated Research Councils, or the Commonwealth Fund then MTU should attempt to recover some of the administrative and other costs it incurs in having the scholar on campus. A contribution of perhaps $500 might be solicited from the sponsor, to become available principally to the department of affiliation. Agencies and foundations are increasingly aware of the fact that such arrangements are equitable in the case of visiting scholars sponsored by them. The Provost/Executive ViceRector for Academic Affairs or the Chancellor for Health Sciences should be responsible for negotiating such financial arrangements.

    5. Foreign Visitors.The MTU Global Education Office should be involved from the very start in any plans for appointments of foreign scholars so that misunderstandings and embarrassments arising out of visa and immigration status can be avoided.
  3. Housing.It is presumed that MTU will bear no responsibility for housing arrangements, and that dormitory space will not be made available to visitors.

    7. Insurance.Prospective visitors should understand the importance of having health and accident insurance coverage in force while visiting MTU. Presumably their own home-campus coverage would extend to a stay here, but the appointing person at MTU should assure himself or herself that reasonable arrangements exist. This is particularly critical in the case of foreign visitors.

    8. Records. It is beneficial that simple records of such appointments be centrally kept by the Office of Faculty Affairs and Services or the HSC Faculty Contracts Office.  Where this is neglected, embarrassment may ensue. Visitors have been known to have stated, in good faith, that they spent Semester I of academic year “X” at University “Y,” but when a prospective employer or a federal agency checks, no record of affiliation emerges.

 

  1. Time.Typically, such appointments should only be considered where the stay is planned for a period longer than one month. It might be for one semester, but should not exceed one academic year.

 

C70: Confidentiality of Faculty Records

Policy

Adopted by Rector 01.10.2019

Adopted by the Board of Trustees  02.10.2019

Personnel files concerning faculty of the Mesarya Technical University, shall be gathered, retained, disclosed, and used by academic or administrative units of the University subject to the following rules:

  1. Collection and Retention of Information

 

1.1 No more than one personnel file shall be maintained in each of the following locations:

(1) the faculty member’s department (or other primary academic unit),
(2) the faculty member’s Faculty,
(3) and/or in the office of the Provost or Vice Rector for Health Sciences.

 

Collectively, these documents are referred to in this Policy as “faculty personnel files.” Designated faculty personnel files must include any written information used to any degree in making a decision concerning the employment, rank or status of a faculty member.

Faculty personnel files shall be compiled or retained by an academic or administrative units of the University solely for the purposes of administering the University personnel system, including the consideration of promotion, tenure and separation from employment.

1.2 An item of information may be introduced into a faculty personnel file only if accompanied by written identification of the source of the information subject to the right of peer or student evaluators to keep their identities confidential from the faculty member evaluated as provided in section 2.2.

1.3 Administrators with responsibility for the creation of faculty-personnel identified in 1.1 above are responsible to maintain the file and its security during the faculty member’s employment at the University and at least five years thereafter (files of emeritus faculty shall be maintained during the faculty member’s lifetime and at least two years thereafter).

1.4 The administrative officer responsible for maintaining faculty personnel files shall notify faculty in writing of any material deleted from their faculty personnel files, the nature of the material and the reason for the action. In a similar manner, faculty shall be notified in writing of any material added to their file(s) with respect to which they have not been copied. Faculty members have the right to know and the responsibility to examine their personnel files. However, as defined in sections 2.2 and 2.3, faculty cannot have access to confidential information.

  1. Access to Information by the Faculty Member

 

2.1 Each faculty member has the right to inspect and review without unreasonable delay by the university (normally within two weeks) any record or file maintained on him or her by the University subject to the provisions of this Policy and any limitations imposed by law. If additional time is needed to produce a record for inspection, the faculty member shall be informed in writing of the reason for the delay and the date such record will be available. Each faculty member has the right to challenge the accuracy of any item of information in her or his faculty personnel file, including the right to introduce rebuttal statements or evidence into the files. The faculty member may request the administrative officer of the unit maintaining the file to amend or delete any item of information contained in the file. The administrative officer shall respond to a faculty member’s request within two weeks, and if the request is denied, shall state in writing the reasons for the denial. The decision of the administrative officer must be approved by the Dean and the Provost’s Office/Vice Rector for Health Sciences.

 

2.2 The University respects the desire of many authors of faculty evaluations to keep their identities confidential, including from the faculty member being evaluated. Such matters of opinion include letters of reference for employment, internal peer evaluations of a faculty member, student evaluations, and letters received from peer reviewers outside the University, as well as those portions of the recommendations of the faculty member’s chair or dean or the Associate Provost that may reveal the identities of peer or student evaluations.

  1. If a faculty member makes a request to review and/or copy such evaluations, an academic administrator, prior to permitting such review or copying, shall redact material that may reveal the identity of the author. If it does not appear feasible to protect the identity of the author through redaction, the document may be accurately summarized in writing for the faculty member instead. If the author of an evaluation submits a written waiver of confidentiality, the evaluation may be reviewed or copied by the faculty member without redaction. If requested by the faculty member, a member of the Provost/VPHS office and a member of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure designated by the Chair of the Committee shall verify the accuracy of the redacted or summarized documents.

 

  1. If such information is requested by a third party, the faculty member shall be advised of the request prior to the release of the information.

 

2.3 To the extent information is confidential under this Policy, or privileged under law (for example, materials subject to attorney-client privilege), it shall not be available for inspection by the faculty member. Such information shall be retained separately and shall be available for inspection only by University officials whose duties make it necessary for them to know the particular information. In the case of privileged information, the administrative officer of the academic or administrative unit maintaining the files shall introduce a memorandum that states the nature of the privileged information, its date and source and the type of privilege asserted.

 

  1. Public Access to Information about Faculty Members

 

3.1 Any person is entitled to the following public information maintained by the University concerning a faculty member: present position, department, salary, dates of employment, and curriculum vitae, including educational qualifications, past employment, progress at the University (initial employment, promotions, attainment of tenure, sabbaticals), publications, news items, awards and achievements A faculty member may give written authority for the release of other information, said letter to be maintained in the faculty member’s faculty personnel file.

 

3.2 Other than as provided in Section 3.1, records or information concerning a faculty member shall be made available by the custodian of a file of record only to those members of the University who have an official role in the evaluation of that faculty member for purposes of employment, rank, status, salary, or other such decisions and whose role makes it necessary for them to know the contents of that faculty member’s file.

 

3.3 All requests for information from persons who are not members of the University shall be referred to the University Custodian of Public Records, which will coordinate a proper response with the appropriate Faculty Contracts Office. The Custodian shall attempt to advise the faculty member by email and his or her telephone number of the request for the release prior to the release of any records. In coordination with the Custodian, the appropriate Faculty Contracts Office shall make available for inspection upon request the releasable information concerning a faculty member. A record of the name and address of any member of the public making such request shall be kept in the faculty member’s faculty personnel file at the Provost/VPHS office and be available for inspection by the faculty member.

C80: Faculty Office Hours

Policy

It is expected that each faculty member will be available for student consultation at regular hours. These hours are to be posted on the faculty member’s door. Although the situation will vary among departments and individuals, a total of from three to five hours per week is recommended. If only a single hour is to be set aside for a given day, it should be chosen to cover parts of two class periods to accommodate more students

C90: Dates of Campus Duty

Policy

Except for authorized holidays, vacations, or other recesses listed in the academic calendar or otherwise announced, it is the obligation of each faculty member to perform all assigned duties and commitments within the period designated by the beginning and ending dates of service in a particular contract period. Standard faculty appointments are for the academic or fiscal year. For academic appointments, faculty members will be notified of the date they are expected to be available for duty. (Normally, one week before the start of Monday classes at the beginning of each regular semester.) The period of duty for department chairpersons, if different from that of other faculty members will be as determined by the several Faculties and schools.

C100: Academic Load

Policy

Adopted by Rector

The term “academic load” includes all the officially recognized University duties carried out by members of the tenured and probationary faculty, including branch faculty, and excluding Health Sciences Center faculty, at any given time. It is the sum of teaching, scholarly work, and service, as described and defined in Section B 1.2.1-1.2.3 of this Faculty Handbook. Academic programs, units, departments, centers, etc. shall all hereinafter be referred to as “departments”.

The typical teaching load each semester is evaluated by department chairs annually on a scale of 0 to 18 load units according to standards set by the faculty of the department and approved by the cognizant Dean. Policy C110 of the Faculty Handbook, “Teaching Assignments”, indicates that the “typical” teaching load will be 9 load units per semester as defined by the formula available in the Office of the Provost/Vice Rector for Academic Affairs.

The normal scholarly work load each semester is to be evaluated by department chairs annually and will be measured on a scale of 0 (no scholarly work) to 18 load units (outstanding performance) according to standards set by the departmental faculty and approved by the cognizant Dean.

 

A “typical” scholarly work load will be 9 load units per semester.

The typical service load each semester is also evaluated by department chairs annually, but on a scale of 0 (no service) to 10 (outstanding service) according to standards set by the departmental faculty and approved by the cognizant Dean. A “typical” performance of service will be 5 load units per semester.

The “typical” academic load as defined herein and referenced in policy C110 will be 23 load units, which is the sum of 9 teaching load units, 9 scholarly work load units, and 5 service load units. For any given faculty member, the typical academic load of 23 load units each semester can be achieved by different mixes of load units from the three work categories, above. For department and school/Faculty administrators, such as department chairs, the academic load will be determined by the Deans using units which are suitable substitutes for those provided here for teaching and research, in order to recognize the efforts of these faculty in academic administration. (See also “Teaching Assignments” C110, Faculty Handbook).

 

C110: Teaching Assignments

Policy

Approved by Rector 01.10.2019

Approved by the Board of Trustees 02.10.2019

  1. This policy has been developed pursuant to the resolution of the Board of Trustees at their meeting 13 June 1977.
  2. 2.Faculty “teaching” assignments are measured in “load units” as defined and calculated in accordance with the University’s load formula.

 

  1. “Instructional faculty FTE” measures the percentage of time charged to an instructional budget. A portion of the time of faculty-administrators and of faculty engaged in contract research or projects is charged to other budgets. The guidelines in paragraph 5 relate to the teaching assignments of full time faculty members ( 1.00 FTE), i.e., those whose salaries are charged entirely to instructional budgets. The teaching assignments of faculty members charged in part to instructional budgets (less than 1.00 FTE) would be modified proportionately.

 

  1. The guidelines established in paragraph 5 do not apply to the School of Medicine or to library faculty members. Separate policies will be developed for these groups.

 

  1. The following guidelines are established with respect to minimum* teaching assignments (Section I of the load formula):

5.1 A full-time faculty member normally shall be assigned a minimum teaching load of nine load units each semester.

5.2 In all cases in which it is proposed that a full-time faculty member be assigned a semester teaching load of less than nine load units (but at least six load units), advance approval by the dean of the faculty member’s Faculty shall be required.

5.3 Any reduction in teaching load below six load units shall be granted only with the advance approval of the Office of the Provost/Vice Rector for Academic Affairs.

5.4 It is recognized that in rare cases, a teaching load of nine or more load units may be planned for a faculty member, but that the required minimal teaching load of nine load units may in fact not materialize because of a shortfall in student enrollment. This should be the only circumstance in which the teaching load of a full-time faculty member will be less than nine load units, except with the advance approval of the appropriate dean’s office. Departments, schools and Faculties should be prepared to explain load reductions of this kind and present plans to minimize their repetition.

5.5 At the end of each semester each dean shall report to the Provost/Vice Rector for Academic Affairs a list of the names of all persons to whom reduced teaching loads have been assigned with the justification for each.

5.6 Justification for reduced teaching loads may include (but not be limited to) the following:

5.6.1 exceptional current productivity in scholarship, research, and/or creative work;

5.6.2 released time for development of contract research proposals;

5.6.3 released time for course or curriculum development;

5.6.4 special administrative assignments or exceptionally heavy committee assignments; and/or

5.6.5 load reduction in compensation for a teaching overload in an alternate semester.

5.7 The Office of the Provost/Vice Rector for Academic Affairs shall review all decisions by deans to allow reduced teaching loads to assure that the justifications used were adequate and that approval of such assignments in the future will not have the effect of creating or continuing unjustifiable inequities in faculty teaching loads among the departments, schools, and Faculties. It is an expected result of this policy and the required review that a faculty member will not regularly be released from the obligation of carrying nine teaching load units.

C120: Summer Session Teaching

Policy

The Summer Session offers a wide range of course selections in most of the academic divisions of the University. Regular Summer Session courses last for eight weeks and run from early June to late July, leaving roughly a two-week break after commencement and another two-week interval before the beginning of the first semester. Faculty members are generally limited in teaching during the summer to two out of three consecutive years or according to a department plan.

Regular contract faculty will be remunerated for teaching an eight-week summer course based on a set amount per three credit hours, which will be adjusted for more or less credit hours or based on a maximum specified each summer for a full load of six semester hours.

Generally, adjunct, visiting faculty and emeriti faculty are paid within the salary guidelines established in each Faculty used for Temporary, Part-time Faculty during the academic year.

The total FTE, which includes any teaching, summer research and outside consulting, of a faculty member during any given week of the Summer Session cannot exceed 125% from all sources.

C130: Outside Employment and Conflicts of Commitment

Policy

Approved by the Board of Trustees,02.10.2019

Employment as a full time, tenured, probationary, or clinician educator faculty member at the Mesarya Technical University requires an individual’s full time professional commitment and expertise. Notwithstanding this, and subject to certain restrictions, full time faculty members of all types are subject to this policy and are encouraged to engage in appropriate outside professional activities that will enhance their professional growth and reputation. Outside activities such as writing, consulting, lecturing, and similar outside endeavors contribute to the quality of both instruction and the scholarly or creative work of the faculty, bring great credit to the University and may contribute to the economic development of the Northern Cyprus (TRNC) state.

Conflict of Commitment

 

The Mesarya Technical University has adopted in the Faculty Handbook (Section B, Appendix V) the Statement on Professional Ethics of the American Association of University Professors, which includes the statement “Professors give due regard to their paramount responsibilities within their institution in determining the amount and character of work done outside it.” In particular, a “conflict of commitment” exists when the external professional activities of the faculty member are so extensive and demanding of time and attention as to interfere with the individual’s responsibilities to the unit to which the faculty member is assigned by contract, to students, or to the University. In particular, the total time spent in outside employment may not exceed the equivalent of one workday per seven day week during the contract period. For faculty members with nine-month contracts this is the equivalent of 39 work days, and for faculty members with twelve-month contracts this is the equivalent of 52 work days per contract period.

 

Outside Consulting

 

In outside employment faculty members are paid directly by the outside entity and the University is not concerned with the amount of earnings. However, a faculty member should charge fees similar to those charged by firms or individuals doing comparable work, except when advice or services are given free in the public interest.

 

Prohibited Activities

 

Faculty members should not provide consulting or other services to an outside entity when those services would conflict or be in competition with services offered by the University itself. In undertaking outside employment the faculty member may not make use of University facilities, equipment, or personnel without prior written approval from the head of the unit responsible for the facilities or personnel. When necessary the Associate ViceRector of Business/Comptroller shall determine to what extent the University shall be reimbursed for such use. Work of a routine or repetitive nature such as tests, assays, chemical analyses, bacteriological examinations, etc. which involve use of University property is prohibited except where it is considered in the public interest and where facilities or personnel for doing such work exist only at the University.

University titles, offices, addresses, and telephone numbers may not be used in city directories or similar publications for the purpose of publicizing non-University interests. Consultants must make it clear to outside employers that the work to be undertaken has no official connection with the University. The University cannot assume any responsibility for private consulting activities provided by members of the faculty.

Exceptions for Remunerated Scholarship

 

It is not the intent of the University to restrict expected scholarly activities of faculty members. In some disciplines, such as the performing arts, professional activity may be remunerated. In many disciplines scholarly service activities such as reviewing, colloquia presentations, etc., are compensated by small honoraria beyond expenses. Such activities, referred to as “remunerated scholarship” generally relate to research or creative work that is expected in a faculty member’s discipline. Teaching outside the contracted department for compensation [see Policy C140] is not considered to be remunerated scholarship. Such activities would normally be added to a c.v. and be considered in promotion, tenure, merit pay, etc. Activities of remunerated scholarship need not be reported and the hours so spent do not count against the 39 or 52 workday limit unless the Chair or Director finds the extent of such activities threatens a faculty member’s ability to carry out his/her regular University duties. In this case approval to continue this activity should be sought.

Reference: See also Board of Trustees Policy Manual 5.5

 

COMPLIANCE

 

Intentional failure to comply with the provisions of this policy will be considered a violation of university policy and may lead to appropriate corrective action which can include censure, warning, disciplinary probation, or dismissal, as set forth in theFaculty Handbook.

PROCEDURES REGARDING OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT

 

In consultation with the academic units, the Offices of the Provost and the Executive ViceRector for the Health Sciences Center will be responsible for developing procedures for compliance with this policy. The procedures should include the following items, but may be more stringent for effective monitoring of the policy.

  • Requirements for approval by the approving authority (Advance written approval is not required for periods of activity consisting of two days or less per semester)
  • Requirements for STC approvals and payments
  • Faculty reporting and compliance responsibilities
  • Required signatory approvals
  • Deans/Directors monitoring and enforcement responsibilities
  • Maintenance of Records and supporting documentation.

 

C150: Political Activities of MTU Faculty

Policy

Approved by Rector 01.10.2019

Approved by Board of Trustees 02.10.2019

  1. The Faculty or university faculty members that are the citizens of Northern Cyprus(TRNC) and, like other citizens, should be free to engage in political activities so far as they are able to do so consistent with their obligations as teachers and scholars.

 

  1. Many kinds of political activity (e.g., holding part-time office in a political party, seeking election to any office under circumstances that do not require extensive campaigning, or serving by appointment or election in a part-time political office) are consistent with effective service as members of a faculty. Other kinds of political activity (e. g., intensive campaigning for elective office, serving in a state legislature, or serving a limited term in a full-time position) may require that the professor seek a leave of absence from the University.

 

  1. In recognition of the legitimacy and social importance of political activity by faculty members, the University should provide institutional arrangements to permit it, similar to those applicable to other public or private extramural service. Such arrangements may include the reduction of the faculty member’s workload or a leave of absence for the duration of an election campaign or a term of office, accompanied by equitable adjustment of compensation when necessary.

 

  1. Faculty members seeking leave should recognize that they have a primary obligation to the University and to growth as educators and scholars, and they should be mindful of the problem which leaves of absence can create for administration, colleagues, and students. If adjustments in their favor are made, such as a reduction of workload, they should expect them to be limited to a reasonable period. A leave of absence should be sought by anyone who becomes or anticipates becoming overly committed to either a major political campaign, an appointive post in an agency of government, an elective position in public office, or to any political activity which results in interference with University function. Such leave should not be automatic and should be governed by the priority needs and considerations of the department, school, Faculty, or division concerned.

 

  1. A leave of absence incident to political activity should come under the University’s normal rules and regulations for leaves of absence. Such a leave should not affect unfavorably the tenure status of a faculty member, except that time spent on such leave from academic duties need not count as probationary service. The terms of a leave and its effect on the professor’s status should be set forth in writing.

 

  1. All such activity, except that clearly of a consultative nature or under contract through the University and which is directly in the field or fields of one’s professional competencies, should be entirely disassociated from one’s University relationship. By this is meant that the faculty member should not create the impression that he/she is acting either for, in behalf of, or with the approval of the University rather than as an individual citizen. Also, care should be taken not to use University supplies, postage, or clerical time for such activities.

 

  1. An advisory opinion may be requested from the Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee about the meaning or application of this policy.

 

Political Activity Guidelines

 

The following guidelines apply to all MTU employees who are candidates or who campaign for candidates for political office:

  1. Campaigning during work hours at the University is prohibited.
  2. University supplies or equipment for campaign purposes may not be used.
  3. Personal political views or views of any candidate may not be represented as being those of the University.
  4. Employee mailing labels (either home or office addresses) will not be produced by the University for distributing campaign materials. (A candidate may obtain addresses from the MTU student, faculty, staff directory or other published address lists.)
  5. Campaign material will not be distributed through Campus Mail unless it has been received from a Northern Cyprus (TRNC) post office and is properly postmarked. Campus Mail may not be used internally to distribute campaign literature.

See also “Political Activity” Policy 3735, University Business Policies and Procedures Manual and “Political Activity of Employees,” Section 6.5, Board of Trustees’ Policy Manual

C170: Endowed Chairs and Named Professorships

Approved by: Rector 01.10.2019       Effective Date: 02.10.2019
Responsible FS Committee: Operations
Office Responsible for Administration: Office of Faculty Contracts

Revisions to the Policy Rationale, Policy Statement, and Applicability sections of this document must be approved by the full Faculty Senate.

Policy Rationale

Because the strength of a great university resides in its faculty, the identification, recruitment, appointment, and support of faculty members is a major priority of the Mesarya Technical University (MTU). Endowed chairs and named professorships enable MTU to attract and retain faculty members who have outstanding records of scholarly work and/or teaching. These positions, secured at least in part by an endowment, are recognized as the most prestigious honor MTU can award its best accomplished faculty.

Policy Statement

Endowed positions are established and named by the MTU Board of Trustees after recommendations by the Rector, who will consult with the Faculty Senate and the Provost/Executive ViceRector for Academic Affairs or the Chancellor for the Health Sciences Center (HSC), as appropriate. These officers, in turn, will consult with the appropriate dean, department chair, and the faculty in the disciplinary area of the contemplated position. The parameters of the positions will be governed by standard MTU faculty personnel regulations as set forth in the Faculty Handbook, together with a donor agreement negotiated by the MTU Foundation and the donor or donor’s estate. Before accepting an endowment the Board of Trustees, Rector, the Provost or HSC Chancellor, and the relevant department chair or program director will carefully consider the appropriateness of the proposed position. Not all proposed gifts or names may be appropriate to accept.

The selection of external candidates for endowed chairs or named professorships will occur through nationally competitive searches or alternative procedures as allowed by the normal faculty appointment processes, overseen by the MTU Office of Equal Opportunity (see Section III, OEO Faculty Hiring Guidelines). The search committees will be constituted in the usual way, except that the Faculty Senate, Provost or HSC Chancellor, and the donor may suggest one or more additional members. A majority of the members of the search committee must be full-time MTU faculty, and departments or units in whom the appointment is made may vote to limit the number of non-faculty members. While a donor may suggest potential candidates, MTU retains the responsibility and authority to name the successful candidate and confer the rank and/or tenured status according to its existing standards and by its existing procedures.

For internal appointments, each Faculty or school shall establish and utilize its own procedures for awarding endowed chairs and named professorships.

Applicability

All MTU academic faculty and administrators, including the Health Sciences Center and Branch Campuses.

 

Definitions

Full-time Service: Service time equivalent to that of a faculty member employed on a contract designated as 1.0 full-time equivalent (FTE). For example, a faculty member whose contract is designated 0.5 FTE would have to multiply his or her service by a factor of two or reduce the leave time taken by one-half to meet the full-time service requirements listed in this policy.

Revisions to the remaining sections of this document may be amended with the approval of the Faculty Senate Policy and Operations Committee in consultation with the responsible Faculty Senate Committee listed in Policy Heading.

Who should read this policy?

  • Board of Trustees
  • MTU Foundation officers
  • Academic deans and other executives, department chairs, directors, and managers

 

Related Documents

MTU Board of Trustees’ Policy Manual:
Policy 2.11 “Naming University Facilities, Spaces, Endowments, and Programs”
Policy 5.18 “Endowed Faculty Chairs”
Policy 7.13 “Receipt and Investment of Gifts to the University”

 

Faculty Handbook:
Section B “Policy on Academic Freedom and Tenure”

 

University Business Policies and Procedures Manual:
Policy 1020 “Naming Facilities, Spaces, Endowments, and Programs”
Policy 1030 “Gifts Made to the University”
Policy 7500 “Endowments”

Office of Equal Opportunity:
“Faculty Hiring Guidelines”

 

Contacts

Direct any questions about this policy to your chair and/or dean or the Office of Faculty Contracts.

 

Procedures

Holding an endowed chair or named professorship does not affect the faculty member’s existing MTU appointment, which may therefore be permanent or visiting, probationary or tenured, at an appropriate rank. It is envisioned that most of these honorific appointments will accrue to tenured full professors, although certain temporary or rotating positions are also possible.

Unless the donor agreement specifies otherwise the initial appointment period for endowed chairs and named professorships will be for a specific term, not to exceed five years. Faculty members holding these positions are subject to the normal faculty review procedures as described in the Faculty Handbook. If the cumulative reviews on multi-year accomplishments are satisfactory, the appointment may be continued for another agreed-upon term, which is eligible for further renewal. Otherwise the appointment may be transferred to a new occupant, with the previous occupant, assuming he or she is tenured, retaining his or her normal MTU appointment.

The holder of an endowed chair or named professorship is responsible for fulfilling the duties set forth in the donor agreement at the initiation of the appointment. This will in all cases at least include an annual report of scholarly and/or teaching activities which will be made available to the appropriate chair, dean, Provost or HSC Chancellor, the MTU Foundation, and the Board of Trustees upon request.

C180: Special Administrative Component

Approved by: Rector 01.10.2019                      Effective Date: 02.10.2019
Responsible FS Committee: Policy and Operations
Office Responsible for Administration: Office of the Provost and HSC VC Academic Affairs

Revisions to the Policy Rationale, Policy Statement, and Applicability sections of this document must be approved by the full Faculty Senate.

Policy Rationale

 

This policy is designed to ensure appropriate oversight, fairness, and transparency in the establishment and allocation of Special Administrative Components. A Special Administrative Component (SAC) is a salary amount, in addition to base salary, which is designed to provide incentive to and compensation for a faculty member who is willing to take on extra administrative duties. This policy is applicable to SACs and other similar salary components that are paid to faculty members for carrying out certain specified administrative duties.

 

Policy Statement

 

SACs cannot be paid for work that is considered a normal part of faculty service workload, for example, serving on search committees or other assignments that are limited in scope and time, and for which special qualifications are not required.  All SACs are incorporated into faculty contracts, and thus are ultimately approved by the Office of the Provost or the Chancellor for Health Sciences as a part of the faculty contract approval process.

Faculties and other administrative units which award SACs must have written policies that specify the type of administrative work for which a SAC may be awarded; how the compensation is determined, including a standardized payment scale to ensure equity; and established SAC terms and criteria for renewals.  These policies must be approved by the Office of the Provost or the Office of the Chancellor for Health Sciences, and be available for review in the offices awarding the SACs (e.g. offices of the chair, dean, director or other administrator).

Applicability

 

All MTU academic faculty and administrators, including the Health Sciences Center and Branch Campuses.

Revisions to the remaining sections of this document may be amended with the approval of the Faculty Senate Policy and Operations Committee in consultation with the responsible Faculty Senate Committee listed in the Policy Heading.

Revisions to the remaining sections of this document may be amended with the approval of the Faculty Senate Policy and Operations Committee in consultation with the responsible Faculty Senate Committee listed in Policy Heading.

Definitions

 

Special Administrative Component (SAC).   A SAC is a component of a faulty member’s salary that is paid to the faculty member for carrying out certain specified administrative duties that are in addition to the faculty member’s non-administrative duties.

 

Who should read this policy?

 

  • Professors and academic staff
  • Academic deans and other executives, department chairs, directors, and managers
  • Administrative staff responsible for academic appointments

 

Related Documents

 

Faculty Handbook:
Policy C50 “Faculty Contracts”
Policy C140 “Extra Compensation

Related HSC Procedures

Contacts

 

Direct any questions about this policy to the Office of the Provost or the Office of the Chancellor for Health Sciences, as appropriate.

Procedures

 

  1. SACs are generally built into departmental budgets and based on historical labor-cost calculations.  In some cases they are set by negotiation to persuade a faculty member to assume a particular responsibility.  For administrative efforts within an academic department, the chair normally sets the value of each SAC, and the Faculty or school deans review and approve the departmental SACs; for deans and directors the Provost or the Chancellor for Health Sciences sets the value of the SAC. For SACs awarded in independent centers and institutes, and for cross-Faculty activities, SAC recommendations may be made collaboratively by appropriate administrative officers; these recommendations require approval by the Provost or the Chancellor for Health Sciences. The Chancellor for Health Sciences may define different procedures and guidelines for HSC SACs provided they are consistent with items 2, 3, 4, and 5 below.

 

  1. The Office of the Provost or the Chancellor for Health Sciences has the responsibility to approve all SACs.  Therefore, guidelines governing the creation and administration of SACs are set by those offices.  The following guidelines set the appropriate values, eligibility requirements, and processes for initiating and terminating SACs.  Equity considerations and the tracking and reporting of SACs are functions of those offices as well.  The Associate Provost for Academic Personnel or the HSC Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs is charged with implementing and monitoring these guidelines.

 

  1. Faculties and other administrative unit policies should include the following:

 

  1. The work and title for which the SAC is awarded should be specified (this should make clear the duties and responsibilities connected with this work).
  2. A compensation amount should be assigned to the SAC; this amount could be based on the following factors: the numbers of people being managed (faculty, staff, graduate/undergraduate students); budget; grants administered by the unit; and special programs or projects which have impact and contribute to the larger University mission.  If other factors are used, these should be clearly identified.
  3. The compensation amount referred to in 3.b. should derive from a general standardized payment scale; the amount of the SAC should reflect the factors identified in 3.b., and in the interests of equity should be awarded consistently.  (The amounts could be a set dollar amount or a range, or the SAC could be a set percentage of base pay.)
  4. The term of the SAC should be defined, and criteria for renewals should be clear. Once the term of service is complete, the SAC will also end.

 

  1. In practice, when a SAC is awarded, the request to create the appropriate faculty contract should include a brief description of the specific qualifications of the individual for the carrying out the duties and responsibilities as described above.  That request should also include the term of the SAC.

 

  1. At the end of each fiscal year the Office of the Provost or the Office of the Chancellor for Health Sciences will submit a report to the Faculty Senate Operations Committee that lists all SACs.   This report will be posted on the Provost’s and Chancellor’s websites.  The report will include each faculty member’s name, Faculty or school, amount of SAC, and purpose of the SAC.

 

 

 

C190: Lecturer Annual and Promotion Reviews

Approved by: Rector 01.10.2019            Effective Date: 02.10.2019
Responsible FS Committee: Policy Committee
Office Responsible for Administration: Office of the Provost and Office of the HSC Chancellor

Revisions to the Policy Rationale, Policy Statement, and Applicability sections of this document must be approved by the full Faculty Senate.

Policy Rationale

 

This document provides policies and procedures for annual reviews of lecturers and for promotion requirements for Senior and Principal Lecturers in accordance with Section B:  Academic Freedom and Tenure, 2.3.2, 3.4.2, and 4.10.

 

Policy Statement

 

  1. Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, and Principal Lecturers
    Faculty may be appointed to the position of Lecturer I, II, or III. These appointments are for professionals with appropriate academic qualifications, who are demonstrably competent in the relevant areas of their disciplines. While not eligible for tenure, lecturers in each numerical class may hold the rank of Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, or Principal Lecturer.

 

  1. Lecturer
    Most newly hired lecturers are hired as either Lecturer I, II or III unless the department determines that they qualify as a Senior Lecturer or Principal Lecturer based on experience teaching at another Faculty or university as described in sections 2.and 3.below.In such cases the designation of the newly hired lecturer will be Senior Lecturer I, II, or III; or Principal Lecturer I, II, or III.

 

  1. Senior Lecturer
    (a) Lecturers with at least five years of continuous service to the University at 0.5 FTE or greater who have demonstrated professional excellence and shown a conscientious interest in improving their professional skills.

(b) Appointment at, or promotion to, the rank of Senior Lecturer represents a judgment on the part of the department, School or Faculty, and University that the individual has made and will continue to make sound contributions in their professional areas. The appointment should be made only after careful investigation of the candidate’s professional and leadership accomplishments and promise.

  1. Principal Lecturer
    (a) Senior Lecturers with at least eleven years of continuous service to the University at 0.5 FTE or greater who have sustained consistently high standards in their professional contributions, consistently demonstrated their wider service to the University community and its mission, and shown a conscientious interest in improving their professional skills. It is expected that Principal Lecturers will continue to develop and mature with regard to their professional activities and leadership within the University.

(b) Appointment at, or promotion to, the rank of Principal Lecturer represents a judgment on the part of the department, School or Faculty, and University that the individual has attained and will continue to sustain an overall profile of professional excellence and engagement in the wider profession. The appointment should be made only after careful investigation of the candidate’s professional and leadership accomplishments and promise.

  1. Term Appointments and Performance Reviews

 

  1. Annual Performance Reviews of Lecturers.  All Lecturers will have annual performance reviews, which should be conducted according to Section B:  Academic Freedom and Tenure, 4.0 of the MTU Faculty Handbook and as specified in this document, as appropriately modified by each School, Faculty, Department or equivalent to conform with each unit’s standard faculty review processes and to reflect each unit’s specific requirements for continuation and promotion of Lecturers.  The annual review in the first year must be conducted in the spring, in time for the Chair to provide written notice to the Lecturer no later than March 31 whether the Lecturer’s contract will be renewed.  In the second and subsequent years, the review must be conducted in the fall, in time for the Chair to provide written notice to the Lecturer no later than December 15.  The Department Chair’s written notice to the Lecturer will be copied to the Dean for inclusion in the Lecturer’s personnel file.

If any performance review of a Lecturer on a one-year appointment produces a negative evaluation, the Chair may exercise the University’s discretion not to renew the Lecturer’s contract.  Alternatively, the Chair may provide the Lecturer a written description of the areas in which the Lecturer must improve if she or he is to continue as a member of the faculty.  The Chair and the Lecturer must both sign this document.  The Lecturer may then be issued a one year contract, with the understanding that if concerns are not adequately addressed, this contact will not be renewed.

  1. Term appointments. Lecturers serve on one-year renewable term appointments.  Senior Lecturers serve on renewable two-year term appointments, and Principal Lecturers serve on renewable three-year term appointments.  In addition, Lecturers who have completed at least three academic years of continuous service are eligible for renewable two-year term appointments.  One-, two- and three-year term appointments are renewable at the discretion of the University.  In the first contract year, written notice of renewal or non-renewal will be given to the Lecturer no later than March 31.  In the second and subsequent contract years, notice of the status of the term appointment will be given no later than December 15.  Those Lecturers who serve on two- or three-year term appointments will be provided written notice of the status of their appointments by December 15 of the final year of the term appointment.

Lecturers on two- or three-year term appointments will have annual performance reviews every fall.  A negative review in the first year of a two- or three-year term appointment – or in the second year of a three-year term appointment – will result in a written remedial plan with specific requirements.  A negative review in the second year of the two-year term appointment – or in the third year of a three-year term appointment – may result in a decision not to renew the appointment.  Written notice of this decision must be given to the Lecturer no later than December 15.

  1. Year Three Review of Continuing Lecturers: During the fall semester of a Lecturer’s third year of service the Lecturer will be approximately half way to the earliest point at which he or she might seek promotion; after three years a Lecturer will also be eligible for a two-year term appointment.  Consequently, to assess the Lecturer’s progress at this time as well as the appropriateness of a two-year term appointment, the annual performance review will include an assessment based on these two issues.  If the Lecturer receives a positive rating he or she can expect to retain the title of Lecturer (I, II, or III), with the assurance that promotion expectations are being met, and that the prospects for promotion are favorable.  The Lecturer will continue to be eligible for renewable one-year appointments.  If the Lecturer’s performance has been evaluated as outstanding, the Lecturer may be offered a two-year term appointment that would start at the beginning of the next contract year.  If the Lecturer receives a negative evaluation, the Chair may exercise the University’s discretion not to renew the Lecturer’s contract.  Alternatively, the Chair may provide the Lecturer a written description of the areas in which the Lecturer must improve to continue as a member of the faculty.  Both the Lecturer and the Chair must sign this document, which will be copied to the Dean.  The Lecturer may then be issued a one-year contract, with the understanding that if concerns are not adequately addressed, this contract may subsequently not be renewed.

 

  1. Promotion to Senior Lecturer.  Upon completion of at least five years of service, a Lecturer will be eligible to apply for promotion to Senior Lecturer.  The Lecturer interested in seeking promotion will generate a Promotion Package, the contents of which will be determined by each School or Faculty, or equivalent.  Materials appropriate for such a package might include, but are not limited to, an updated CV, teaching evaluations by students, letters of support from other faculty members, reports from teaching observations by peers, professional recertification (if appropriate), other evidence of professional development, and a personal statement.

Each School or Faculty or equivalent will determine how the Lecturer’s promotion package is to be evaluated. The process should be similar to the process used to evaluate tenure-track and clinician educator (CE) faculty promotions, and should include input from departmental faculty members, including other Lecturers, the Department Chair, and the School or Faculty Dean, who may use an ad-hoc advisory committee.  The Department Chair’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Dean. The Dean’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Provost or Chancellor for Health Sciences.  The Provost or Chancellor makes the final decision on promotion.  The Provost/Chancellor’s decision will be communicated in writing to the Lecturer, the Dean, and the Department Chair.

If the promotion is approved, the Lecturer may expect the following.

  • Promotion to Senior Lecturer.
  • A renewable two-year term appointment.
  • A salary increase that is consistent with the policies and practices of the HSC, the Faculty or School, and the Department.

 

  • Years of service at other institutions of higher learning may be used to meet the years needed to apply for promotion, at the discretion of the Department Chair and/or Associate Chair.

 

  1. Promotion to Principal Lecturer.  Upon the completion of a minimum of eleven years of service, a Senior Lecturer will be eligible to apply for promotion to Principal Lecturer, following the procedures described above for promotion to Senior Lecturer.  If the promotion is approved, the

 

Lecturer may expect the following:

  • Promotion to Principal Lecturer.
  • A renewable three-year term appointment.
  • A salary increase that is consistent with the policies and practices of the HSC, the Faculty or School, and the Department.
  • The opportunity to apply for a one-semester of academic leave(See Policy C250)with pay to pursue other academic and/or professional opportunity activities.  A Principal Lecturer will subsequently be eligible to apply for such leave every six years.

 

  1. Denial of Promotion.  In the event of a negative promotion decision (either from “Lecturer” to “Senior Lecturer” or from “Senior Lecturer” to “Principal Lecturer”) the Lecturer will retain his or her former title and benefits, including – if applicable – eligibility for a two-year term appointment.  After a two year period, the Lecturer may reapply for promotion.

 

  1. Appeals:  A Lecturer may appeal certain decisions not to renew his or her appointment.  Non-renewal decisions made at the following time points are at the University’s discretion:
  • By the appropriate notice date for a Lecturer on a one-year appointment;
  • By the appropriate notice date in the final appointment year of a Lecturer on a two-or three-year term appointment.

Because non-renewal decisions made at these times are at the University’s discretion, such decisions can only be appealed on the basis that they violated laws, statutes, governmental regulations, or MTU policies.  The Lecturer has the burden of proof.

Non-renewal or non-continuation decisions made at times other than those at which continuation or renewal is discretionary to the University may be appealed (see Section B:  Academic Freedom and Tenure 5.4 and 6.2 of the Faculty Handbook).  These times are:

  • During a contract period, if an immediate termination is imposed;
  • At the end of an annual contract that does not coincide with the end of a two- or three-year term appointment.

A Lecturer may appeal an unfavorable promotion decision by the Provost or Chancellor for Health Sciences, as delineated in Section B:  Academic Freedom and Tenure, 6.2  the Faculty Handbook.

 

Applicability

All MTU academic faculty and administrators, including the Health Sciences Center and Branch Campuses.

Definitions

 

No specific definitions are required for this Policy.

 

Revisions to the remaining sections of this document may be amended with the approval of the Faculty Senate Policy and Operations Committee in consultation with the responsible Faculty Senate Committee listed in Policy Heading.

 

Who should read this policy?

  • Board of Trustees
  • Faculty
  • Academic staff
  • Academic deans and other executives, department chairs, directors, and managers

 

 

 

 

Related Documents

 

MTU Faculty Handbook
Section B:  Academic Freedom and Tenure, 2.3.2, 3.4.2, and 4.10.
Policy C250, “Academic Leave”

 

Contacts

 

Direct any questions about this policy to the Office of the Provost or the Office of the Chancellor for Health Sciences, as appropriate.

 

Procedures

 

Each Faculty or school is responsible for developing detailed procedures for implementation of this policy. These procedures require approval by the Faculty/school faculty members and dean, with final approval by the Provost or Chancellor for Health Sciences.

 

  • Leave Policies and Faculty Absence from Assigned Duties
    • C200: Sabbatical Leave
    • C205: Annual Leave
    • C210: Sick Leave
    • C215: Parental Leave
    • C220: Holidays
    • C225: Professional Leave
    • C230: Military Leave of Absence
    • C235: Leave for Service Abroad
    • C240: Leave of Absence Incident to Political Activity
    • C245: Faculty Absence from Assigned Duties
    • C250: Academic Leave For Principal Lecturers
    • C255: Jury/Court Duty
    • C260: Religious Accommodations
    • C280: Leave Without Pay