Revised Review Process for Dean Authority Senate Appointments

---

April 8, 2022

ACADEMIC DEANS

Dear Colleagues:

I write to announce a change in the review procedures for a set of senate appointment files that fall under your authority, which are currently appointments to Assistant Professor/ Assistant Teaching Professor/ Assistant Astronomer, steps 1-3, up to the published salary scale rate for Professor/ Teaching Professor/ Astronomer, step 3. This change is being made in response to a request from the deans to the Committee on Academic Personnel (CAP) dated September 20, 2021, endorsed by CAP in letters to me dated October 26, 2021, December 10, 2021, and April 4, 2022. This change is intended to expedite the process of getting formal offers out to candidates so that you do not lose top candidates.

As described in Chancellor Blumenthal’s January 17, 2018 memo, review by CAP is currently not required for dean authority appointment files for Assistant Professors where there are no dissenting votes in the department.

Effective immediately, review by CAP is not required for dean authority Assistant Professor, Assistant Teaching Professor, or Assistant Astronomer appointments with 25% or fewer dissenting votes by the Bylaw 55 voting faculty. CAP review is still required for all other senate appointment and advancement actions.

Only “yes” and “no” votes will be included for the purpose of calculating whether the 25 percent threshold is met or exceeded; “abstain”, “waive”, “absent not voting”, and “recused” will not be included.

In the case of multiple department votes taken, final authority for the appointment decision is based on the highest step and salary with a majority positive departmental vote. Once it is determined by this method that the appointment falls under the dean’s authority, the vote which determines whether or not CAP will review the case is the one corresponding to the step and salary at which the dean makes the appointment offer.

In the course of hiring negotiations, the dean has authority to revise the salary offered (up to Professor 3 equivalent) without the review returning to CAP or to the department for a new vote. You will consult with CAP if you have any reason to believe that a salary offer would not have support from greater than 25% of the voting faculty.

Academic personnel policy allows for such abbreviation of the personnel review process (see APM 220- 80.k and 220-82.a). CAP has been consulted and supports this abridgement in procedure, and CAP has my commitment that it may at any future time determine that CAP review shall be reinstated. CAP will continue to be provided with a quarterly report from the Academic Personnel Office regarding new dean authority appointments, including rank, step,
and salary.

If you have any questions, please contact the Academic Personnel Office at apo@ucsc.edu.

Sincerely,
Cynthia K. Larive
Chancellor

cc:
CAP Chair Profumo
VPAA Lee
Campus Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor Kletzer
Academic Personnel Office
Department Chairs
Department Managers
Divisional Academic Personnel Coordinators
Academic Senate Office