P L E A S E P O S T
DEANS, DEPARTMENT CHAIRS, and DIRECTORS
Re: Proposed Revisions to APM 360 and APM 210-4, Librarian Series
The University invites comments concerning the following two proposed policies involving the Librarian Series, which are currently under a second formal review:
- APM 360 — Librarian Series
- APM 210-4 — Instructions to Review Committees which Advise on the Appointment, Merit Increase, Promotion, Career Status Actions for Members of Librarian Series
The Council of University Librarians (CoUL), in consultation with CoUL's Administrative Services Advisory Group (ASAG), and the Librarians Association of the University of California (LAUC) proposed that APM 360 and APM 210-4 be revised. Key points include the following:
APM 360-4 updates the definition of the Librarian Series to reflect the changing nature of their responsibilities in an evolving information environment.
APM 360-17-a provides that the Chancellor may grant, under exceptional circumstances, career status upon hire.
APM 360-17-7 provides that a written remediation plan and process must be provided if a review of a career status appointee results in an unsatisfactory review.
New APM 360-17-d changes references from "steps" to "salary points" to reflect the new point based salary scale which will be fully implemented by June 30, 2016. For more information concerning the salary-point-based scale, please refer to Article 18, Salary, of the agreement, at http://www.ucop.edu/academic-personnel-programs/_files/apm/apm-360.pdf
APM 360-18-h states that the Chancellor may now withhold or postpone a merit-based increase for an appointee when a corrective action has been taken.
APM 360-35-d adds that candidates for review must be allowed a reasonable period of time to review and respond to the personnel file and the candidate may include a written statement commenting on material in the file.
APM 360-80-2a removes references to "abbreviated reviews” for the Associate Librarian and Librarian ranks at the highest salary points; reviews for these appointees will be conducted using the normal review process in their normal review cycles.
APM 360-80-k states that authority for implementing APM 360 and APM 210-4, may be redelegated by the Chancellor unless otherwise restricted.
The proposals are available online at:
Please make these proposed policies available to your faculty and other interested parties for comment. Opinions of faculty members are of particular importance, given the central role of shared governance in the University.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I would appreciate receiving your comments on or before Friday, May 13, 2016.
Sincerely
Carole Goldberg
Vice Chancellor, Academic Personnel
Jonathan D. Varat Distinguished Professor of Law
cc: Virginia Steel, University Librarian
