Key Features of the Step Plus System
1. An advancement of only 0.5 step is not an option in the Step Plus system. This potential addition to Step Plus will be reconsidered once the campus has gained some experience with the new system.
2. Advancements of greater than 2 steps are permitted in Step Plus, although they are expected to be extremely rare.
3. New appointments will only be allowed at full steps.
4. As with the previous system, sabbatical and professional leaves count toward the normative time for advancement. Leaves without pay (LWOP) also count toward the normative time, unless excluded from on-the-clock time based on our campus work-life policies (e.g. due to childbirth, child adoption, serious illness of candidate or close family member, or research infrastructure catastrophe).
5. As with the previous system, candidates may request a Career Equity Review (CER) coincident with a merit/promotion (and limited by other conditions imposed by CAP), if applicable to their title series.
6. As with the previous system, following a denial, candidates at all ranks are allowed to come up as early as the following year.
7. As with the previous system, following a deferral, candidates at all ranks are allowed to come up as early as the following year.
8. As with the previous system, candidates may defer a normatively timed two-year merit three times and a normatively timed three-year merit twice. In their fifth year they must seek a merit, a promotion or a “Five-Year Review.”
9. The home department reviews, votes on, and summarizes the merit case, as in the previous system. Standards of scholarship, practices of evaluation, and reporting formats are highly variable amongst departments, subject to By-law 55 and Academic Personnel Manual (APM). Minimally, departments must vote on an action. Departments are encouraged to provide additional evaluation by peers.
10. Advancement requests of less than 2 steps are normally redelegated, unless the recommendation is a promotion or crosses a barrier step (i.e., Step 6 or equivalent barrier steps, or Above Scale) or a committee or dean make a recommendation for a 2.0-step advancement. Redelegated merit reviews may require review by the appropriate review committee prior to final decision by the Dean. Actions equal to or greater than 2 steps will go to the appropriate review committee for review and the Vice Provost- Academic Affairs for decision.
11. As with the previous system, first actions since appointment or promotion may go directly to the Dean for decision without FPC review. The dean also has the authority to award a 1.5-step merit in the case of a first action after appointment or promotion and FPC consultation is optional. However, if the Dean disagrees with the department, then the case should be sent to the FPC. Reminder: if the first merit after appointment crosses a barrier step, the action is non-redelegated.
12. It is recommended that the Academic Senate carefully monitor the new Step Plus system during its first 2-3 years and conduct a thorough evaluation that assesses progress using Step Plus, the possible need for a half step option, and any unanticipated consequences of the new system.