Faculty Range Adjustment Program Approved      November 29, 2000

On October 25, 2000, a Union meeting of full-time faculty was held to discuss the tentative "Faculty Range Adjustment Program" agreement. At that meeting, it was decided to conduct a mail ballot on this important issue since that would provide the greatest opportunity for faculty to express their opinions.

The tentative agreement and mail ballot were distributed and the results tabulated. The new
program was approved by a vote of 73 to 15 and the agreement was recently signed by the Administration and Union and is now in effect.

This document, Memorandum of Agreement # 51, can be viewed on the AFTís website at:


as either a web page or MSWord file by making the appropriate choice.

During negotiations, Local 2364ís team, comprised of Ralph Edelbach, Tony Evangelisto, Roseann Conway, John Krimmel and Jose Valentin, convinced the Administration that prior to the normal application deadline of April 15 for range adjustments to be effective September 1, 2001, faculty should have the opportunity to apply for range adjustments which would be retroactive to September 1, 2000. The deadline of January 8, 2001 has been agreed to for the submission of the range adjustment applications. This date will ensure that faculty who want to apply for a retroactive range adjustment have the opportunity to do so after the end-of-the-semester rush and holiday season are over.

During negotiations on this issue, it was agreed that any faculty range adjustment program agreed to must not be a substitute for normal promotions but rather should provide opportunities for deserving faculty to be recognized when a promotion is either not possible as in the case of full professors or not likely under current promotions criteria for some other faculty at the rank of assistant or associate professor.

The specific language pertaining to this issue is:

"The addition of multiple ranges is meant to supplement, not supplant, the existing promotions process. For full professors who currently have no opportunity for promotion to a higher range, it provides a means whereby sustained outstanding performance associate professors, it allows for the recognition of deserving faculty who, due to special circumstances, do not meet the criteria for promotion."

This agreement goes on to state that "The application must be accompanied by the materials specified in the Career Development Assessment process" which can be found in the Faculty Handbook which is on-line at:


The applicable information is contained in Article I.C.1.

Your negotiating team felt that by basing the application on the Career Development Assessment process already in place on our campus, the duplication of effort required by another promotions-type process would be avoided. Any eligible faculty can apply for a range adjustment even if they are not presently participating in the Career Development Assessment Process or havenít done so in the recent past. The only requirement is that the materials submitted follow the Career Development format.

The range adjustment program offers the opportunity for faculty to both be recognized for their achievements and to receive additional compensation, and therefore should be appealing to many.

Like our existing promotions system, it is a "peer-review" based process with faculty having a major role in controlling it. There is a requirement that Deans, and the Provost prepare written statements indicating concurrence or non-concurrence with the assessment they are to review. These statements will be shared with the applicant at the same time as they move to the next level.

Additionally, the President must provide an applicant with the reasons for a non-concurrence if the Provost makes a positive recommendation. These safeguards will, in our opinion, ensure that there is accountability at all levels of the process.

The Administration assured us that anyone deserving of a range adjustment will be awarded one. It is our intention to closely monitor the process to make certain that it is working as originally discussed at state-wide negotiations and agreed upon by both the State and Union for our Master Agreement as well as what we negotiated on our campus. Please contact us if you have any questions about this process. o