Tenure Modifications

Committee Chair, 2012-2013: Marie Monaco

The Tenure Modifications Committee considers any proposals affecting tenure; examines problems experienced under tenure rules and considers alternative solutions.

Library Proposal to Create a Non-Tenure Track

Background

The Joint Committee, Tenure Modifications and Personnel and Affirmative Action, convened to discuss the proposed revisions to the Bylaws of the New York University Libraries Faculty Handbook. The revisions centered around the creation of a new non-tenure track faculty position. Currently, there are no long-term, non-tenured faculty positions in the library. A three-year appointment as a Library Associate is a position currently offered to potential tenure-track candidates who lack the necessary double degree to qualify for a tenure-track position. The rationale for creation of a non-tenure track appears to be two-fold: 1] the need to hire librarians for limited durations, and 2] the need to hire librarians whose duties will have limited scope. It has been pointed out that every other school of the University has such non-tenure track positions.

Recommendation by the Joint Committee

While the committee members acknowledged the trend in hiring non-tenure track faculty personnel and conceded that overall this proposal should be approved, certain objections were raised to specific aspects of the revision that need explanation.

• The committee members had a problem with wording of the introduction, namely the sentence “As with all NYU and School policies, these guidelines are subject to change and it is the policies in effect at the time of any action that apply.” It was the understanding of the committee that in certain instances it is the policy in effect at the time of hire that is controlling. This issue needs to be clarified. In addition, the last sentence of the introduction with respect to the ease by which changes to the bylaws could be made needs further clarification as to the process and approvals required for such changes.
• The committee had questions relating to the process by which this proposal was generated. In particular, were the changes proposed to the Library Council discussed beforehand with said Library Council? Was the general proposal brought to the Council before being presented to the whole faculty for a vote?
• With respect to reappointments and promotions on the new non-tenure track, it is unclear what the criteria are and who will do the evaluation. Exactly what are the “expected performance standards?"
• The committee suggested that in the case of appointments made for 2, 3 or 5 years, notification of reappointment or non –reappointment be made no less than 1 year before the appointment expiration date.
• Will it be possible to switch tracks between tenure and non-tenure track? And if so, under what circumstances?
  

Draft of Electronic Communications and Social Media Policy

The Tenure Modifications and Personnel and Affirmative Action Committees reviewed the draft of the Electronic Communications and Social Media Policy and found it problematic in numerous respects. Their recommendations and main areas of concern were sent to the administration following the February FSC meeting. Read recommendation

Revision of Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure Document for Dentistry and Nursing

The Tenure Modifications and Personnel and Affirmative Action Committees reviewed this document and recommended approval of the proposal to allow assistant professors on non-tenure tracks who are not promoted at the end of ten years to remain employed.

Review of School of Medicine Proposal for Extension of the Tenure Clock for individuals impacted by Hurricane Sandy

The Tenure Modifications Committee met on January 23, 2013 to discuss the proposal of the School of Medicine to extend the tenure clock from 1 to 3 years for individuals negatively impacted by Hurricane Sandy. The members are in agreement that steps are necessary to ensure that those tenure-track faculty members who experienced significant losses will have sufficient time to demonstrate their qualifications for attaining tenure. The attached annotated
version of the proposal describes two sections (9 and 10) where the committee felt that modifications were appropriate.

In section 9, it is recommended that any grievance of the chair’s recommendation to the Dean be brought before the duly elected Grievance Committee of the School of Medicine, rather than an ad hoc committee appointed by the Dean. The committee felt that there was no reason to constitute a separate committee to perform a function charged to the existing Grievance Committee. In addition, any perception of bias that might ensue as a result of the appointment of an ad hoc committee would be precluded.

In section 10, the committee felt that the decision by the Dean should also be amenable to grievance at the level of the University Grievance Committee.

The FSC approved these recommendations and they were sent to the administration in January.

The School of Medicine reviewed the FSC's suggestions for amending the grievance structure and process and adopted these recommendations.

Review of revisions to the Policies and Procedures for Appointment, Promotion and Tenure at the School of Medicine

The Tenure Modifications Committee and PAAC reviewed this document, which incorporates the establishment of a full-time non-tenure track for librarians and sent their recommendations to members of the University and School of Medicine administration. A response addressing their recommendations was sent by the Provost office and the Council sent a follow-up response in December.

Committee Chair, 2011-2012: Marie Monaco

The Committee met to discuss proposed revisions to the Policies and Procedures for Appointment, Promotion and Tenure at the School of Medicine. The revisions incorporate the establishment of a full-time non-tenure track for librarians. The Committee, along with PAAC, is waiting on more information on several issues before making a final recommendation.

In late spring of 2011, the Tenure Modifications Committee reviewed and made recommendations to the administration on the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World (ISAW)’s Tenure and Promotion Guidelines and the Institute for Fine Arts (IFA)'s Promotion and Tenure Guidelines. The Provost sent a response memo and addressed the FSC's recommendations, which were not incorporated in the final document.

Among its recommended changes, the Committee emphasized the general importance of requiring closed (i.e. secret) balloting for all tenure and promotion votes. While closed balloting is required by most school-level T and P guidelines, and common across much of the university, closed balloting is not a required condition for T & P procedures according to existing University policy. FSC believes that University policy should require closed balloting on tenure and promotion votes without exception and we are making efforts to have that view adopted by the administration.