This starts out well, giving the departments the responsibility to develop all guidelines for area-specific promotion criteria. It becomes too micromanaging when it is says ‘Personal statement: A 3-5 page personal statement…’ The Union and/or central Administration should not specify a page number!
The faculty member should be required to provide ‘Student evaluations’ as stated in the draft.
And only SIGNED ‘written comments from students’ should be part of the package.
This sentence should be amended: ‘Faculty members have the right to 2 have a Union representative or colleague present at any such hearings or meetings.’ to read ‘Faculty members have the right to 2 have a Union representative or colleague present at any such hearings or meetings, but are not required to do so.’
NOTE: Thumbs up/down on comments has been disabled due to misuse by PR Flack supporters. Sorry!
Darby { Not long after opening, the first floor water fountain had been leaking causing major damage to the very expensive flooring... }
Mike { Crappy concrete, crappy inspection...GO DUX! }
John Q { Public records requests for the city of Eugene inspections / approvals of these construction projects? }
honest Uncle Gangsta { Yes, the Harbaugh Institute for Advanced Study is planned for the Inner Courtyard. We all await this glorious culmination of... }
Fishwrapper { It wasn't built for indoor T&F events, so what's the complaint? }
Townie { Hayward Field does not offer adequate rain cover. Poor execution. }
UO Matters { Agreed. I know from family connections predating my time at UO that Mr. Knight has long had a taste for... }
honest Uncle Gangsta { Maybe they should subcontract the dorm projects to Good Old Uncle Phil (GOUP). Say what you will, he gets the... }
honest Uncle Gangsta { A sportsmanlike encounter today of our magnificent Ducks with stately Portland State. A gentlemanly send off, I take it. We... }
honest Uncle Gangsta { A deeply moving saga. This man has enriched us all. Starting with himself. His influence on this great University is... }
UO Matters { Surely the payouts are in proportion to the mandatory "contributions". }
Anas clypeata { So if you make $48,000 a year, you pay $480 per year, or 1% of your income. (Technically, the UO... }
I, Robot { uom does not seem to take material from my computer. It asks me to check a box affirming that I... }
thedude { They could have split even like social security, medicare, other payroll taxes. They intentionally stuck us with more of it... }
UO Matters { Thanks for the link, which states "Employers can choose to pay the employee portion, in full or in part, as... }
SkitterFootedScarab { Is that an option for large employers? Like PERS match? https://paidleave.oregon.gov/resources/common-questions.html#:~:text=The%20Oregon%20Employment%20Department%20decides,rate%20for%202023%20is%201%25. The 60% employee contribution is State mandated but the... }
UO Matters { State law requires UO to have this program (or use the state plan), but it does not require UO to... }
Inquiring minds { I am perplexed by your discontent directed at UO. This is a state law. Most employees in Oregon have been... }
This starts out well, giving the departments the responsibility to develop all guidelines for area-specific promotion criteria. It becomes too micromanaging when it is says ‘Personal statement: A 3-5 page personal statement…’
The Union and/or central Administration should not specify a page number!
The faculty member should be required to provide ‘Student evaluations’ as stated in the draft.
And only SIGNED ‘written comments from students’ should be part of the package.
This sentence should be amended: ‘Faculty members have the right to 2 have a Union representative or colleague present at any such hearings or meetings.’ to read
‘Faculty members have the right to 2 have a Union representative or colleague present at any such hearings or meetings, but are not required to do so.’