Merit Review Clause Samples

Merit Review. The department chair shall conduct an annual evaluation of every bargaining unit faculty member in accordance with the department's bargaining unit faculty member evaluation criteria established pursuant to Subsection (A). 1. In preparation for the chair's evaluation, all members of the bargaining unit will submit to the chair a report of their teaching, scholarship, and service during the preceding academic year. For the purposes of merit review only, the academic year is defined as beginning on the first (1st) day of the first summer session and concluding with the day prior to the first day of the following year’s first summer session. Bargaining unit faculty hired to begin either summer or fall semester of the preceding academic year shall be eligible for raise pools as outlined in Sections 1, 2, and 3 of this article. Bargaining unit faculty hired to begin in the spring semester shall be eligible for only the across-the-board raise pool if he/she is reappointed for the coming year. A three (3) year rolling average may be the basis for the evaluation, if appropriate. In addition to any materials required by this Agreement, by department merit criteria, or by the department chair, bargaining unit faculty may include whatever material will provide evidence of successful teaching, scholarship or service. 2. For each area -- teaching, scholarship, and service -- the Chair will provide a written evaluation and assign a ranking of "unsatisfactory," "satisfactory," "meritorious," "outstanding," or "extraordinary." 3. After conducting the evaluations, the department chair/director shall send to each member of the bargaining unit a copy of his or her evaluation before or simultaneously with submission to the ▇▇▇▇. 4. Any member who disagrees with the chair's evaluation may send a written response to the chair. This rebuttal shall be attached to the original evaluation and forwarded to the college ▇▇▇▇ for resolution. The ▇▇▇▇ shall provide a copy of his or her decision to the member and department chair. 5. Merit evaluation shall not be grievable unless the bargaining unit faculty member has been rated less than meritorious and then only as to procedural error and/or inadequate consideration in the review process. A bargaining unit faculty member may appeal a merit evaluation with which they disagree to the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.

Merit Review. A. Annual Merit Review for NTT Faculty. In addition to review for renewal, NTT faculty, like all instructional staff including tenure-track faculty, must be evaluated annually according to Article VIII: Merit Evaluation. These evaluations of performance will take the form of standard faculty review procedures. The chair of the department is responsible for annual evaluation of the NTT faculty member for teaching, service and scholarship according to department criteria. Departmental/unit criteria for merit must be developed by departmental/unit faculty and be approved by them, and the departmental/unit chair, ▇▇▇▇, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇. The official department criteria must include the date of faculty approval. Since NTT faculty have responsibility primarily for teaching, peer review by senior faculty should be utilized by the department chair. Evaluations will be kept on file as one basis for decisions regarding reappointment. The general criteria for annual review for merit (salary) raises of NTT faculty are shown below, but the specific criteria will be developed by departmental/unit faculty and be approved by them, and the departmental/unit chair, respective ▇▇▇▇, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and may vary depending on department and college needs. Teaching and teaching-related activities and professional development 70% Service to the faculty member’s profession, FHSU and the community 20% Scholarship 10% B. Appeal. Any NTT who is not satisfied with his or her annual merit review, or who has not been reappointed and believes the decision did not follow the procedures required by this policy may file an appeal using the grievance procedure (Article XXIII) of the MOA. The grievance procedure may not be used to simply challenge the decision to not reappoint NTT faculty.

Merit Review. In any review of merit selection procedures, Station Managers will be involved in the process of selecting station staff to act in higher grade.

Merit Review. Your salary will be reviewed along with the general review date for all other Rockwell Automation employees on a pro-rata basis or at such time as the Company may decide from time to time. Your increment is discretionary and will be subject to and on the basis of effective performance and results delivered during the period.

Merit Review. The department chair/director shall conduct an annual evaluation of every bargaining unit faculty member in accordance with the department's bargaining unit faculty member evaluation criteria established pursuant to Subsection (A). 1. In preparation for the chair/director's evaluation, all members of the bargaining unit shall submit to the chair/director a report of their teaching, scholarship, and service during the preceding calendar year by the end of week three (3) of the Spring semester. 2. For each area -- teaching, scholarship, and service -- the chair/director shall provide a written evaluation to the faculty member by the end of week eight (8) of the Spring semester and assign a rating of "unsatisfactory," "satisfactory," "meritorious," "outstanding," or "extraordinary." 3. Any member who disagrees with the chair/director's evaluation may send a written rebuttal to the chair/director by the end of week ten

Merit Review. Each department will appoint two faculty members to an advisory review committee that will be charged with tracking the progress and providing advice to Professor [XXXX]. The advisory committee will be chaired by a member of the Department of [Home Dept]. While Professor [XXXX] is a junior faculty member, the advisory review committee will meet with the latter annually, review the record, and provide recommendations to each department regarding the teaching, research, and service. The committee members are expected to keep in close communication with Professor [▇▇▇▇] regarding teaching, research, and service. After receiving merit recommendations from the advisory committee, the Chairs of the two departments will consult to reach a common understanding of the progress and merit of Professor [XXXX]. If possible, this consultation should take place before the annual meeting that each Chair will have with Professor [XXXX] Merit reviews will be handled according to the policies of each department. When the reviews have been completed the Chair/Director of [Dept1] and the Chair/Director of [Dept2] will confer and agree on a salary increase. Recommendations for salary increases must take into account both merit and equity. Both the Chairs/Directors will advise on the relative levels of merit and the amount of the salary increase that should be given on the basis of merit. Salary inequities will be considered relative to the salary profiles of both departments.

Merit Review. (a) It is the policy of DOE that discretionary financial assistance be awarded through a merit-based selection process. A merit review means a thorough, consistent, and objective examination of applications based on pre-established criteria by persons who are independent of those submitting the applications and who are knowledgeable in the field of endeavor for which support is requested. (b) Each program office must establish a merit review system covering the financial assistance programs it administers. Merit review of financial assistance applications is intended to be advisory and is not intended to replace the authority of the project/program official with responsibility for deciding whether an award will be made.

Merit Review. See Section E, Part 2. All items listed in initial review will be given a merit review.

Merit Review. The Employee shall be eligible for an annual merit review based on performance and profitability of the Company.