Common use of Outcomes Clause in Contracts

Outcomes. The Committee’s recommendation must be approved by the Chair and by the Division Head. The Chair shall advise the candidate in writing of the outcome of the advancement process by December 31st, or before if possible for F and Y courses, by April 30 for S courses, and by August 31 for any advancement process undertaken in a Summer academic session. A candidate who is advanced to the rank of Sessional Lecturer II shall assume that rank for purposes of consideration for vacancies in the following academic session which are circularized to the pool after the date of the Chair’s letter. Where a Department does not adhere to the timelines for the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process, and where the candidate has fulfilled all of the obligations and requirements in accordance with the advancement process, then the candidate shall be entitled to be remunerated at the advanced rate for position(s) held in the subsequent academic term. If the Departmental delay described above continues beyond that subsequent academic term then the candidate shall continue to be remunerated at the advanced rate until the end of the academic term in which the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process has been provided to the candidate. A candidate who is not advanced to the rank of Sessional Lecturer II may be eligible for re-evaluation after a further two (2) years of employment and a minimum of four (4) further half courses or the equivalent. It is understood and agreed that a candidate who is not advanced to the rank of Sessional Lecturer II remains eligible for appointment at the rank of Sessional Lecturer I. It is understood and agreed that the decision not to advance the candidate, in and of itself, will not be considered in future hiring decisions. The letter to a candidate advising of an unsuccessful advancement shall contain a summary of the reasoning and evidence that formed the basis for the decision.

Outcomes. The Committee’s recommendation must be approved by the Chair academic administrator responsible for the advancing Writing Centre, and by reported for information to the Division Head. The Chair Committee Co-chairs shall advise the candidate in writing of the outcome of the advancement process by December 31st, or before if possible for F and Y coursesfall term, by April 30 for S coursesspring term, and by August 31 for any advancement process undertaken in a Summer academic session. A candidate who is advanced to the rank status of Sessional Lecturer II Writing Instructor2I shall assume that rank status for purposes of consideration for vacancies in the following academic session which are circularized to the pool after the date of the Chair’s Committee Co-chairs’ letter. Where a Department Writing Centre does not adhere to the timelines for the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process, and where the candidate has fulfilled all of the obligations and requirements in accordance with the advancement process, then the candidate shall be entitled to be remunerated at the advanced rate for position(s) held in the subsequent academic term. If the Departmental Writing Centre’s delay described above continues beyond that subsequent academic term then the candidate shall continue to be remunerated at the advanced rate until the end of the academic term in which the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process has been provided to the candidate. A candidate who is not advanced to the rank status of Sessional Lecturer II Writing Instructor 2 may be eligible for re-evaluation after a further two (2) years of employment and a minimum of four three hundred (4300) further half courses or the equivalenthours of employment. It is understood and agreed that a candidate who is not advanced to the rank of Sessional Lecturer II Writing Instructor 2 remains eligible for appointment at the rank of Sessional Lecturer I. Writing Instructor 1. It is understood and agreed that the decision not to advance the candidate, in and of itself, will not be considered in future hiring decisions. The letter to a candidate advising of an unsuccessful advancement shall contain a summary of the reasoning and evidence that formed the basis for of the decision.

Outcomes. The Committee’s recommendation must be approved by the Chair and by the Division Head. The Chair shall advise the candidate in writing of the outcome of the advancement process by December 31st, or before if possible for F and Y courses, by April 30 for S courses, and by August 31 for any advancement process undertaken in a Summer academic session. A candidate who is advanced to the rank of Sessional Lecturer II III shall assume that rank for purposes of consideration for vacancies in the following academic session which are circularized to the pool after the date of the Chair’s letter. Where a Department does not adhere to the timelines for the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process, and where the candidate has fulfilled all of the obligations and requirements in accordance with the advancement process, then the candidate shall be entitled to be remunerated at the advanced rate for position(s) held in the subsequent academic term. If the Departmental delay described above continues beyond that subsequent academic term then the candidate shall continue to be remunerated at the advanced rate until the end of the academic term in which the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process has been provided to the candidate. A candidate who is not advanced to the rank of Sessional Lecturer II III may be eligible for re-evaluation after a further two one (21) years more year of employment and a minimum of four two (42) further half courses or the equivalent. It is understood and agreed that a candidate who is not advanced to the rank of Sessional Lecturer II remains eligible for appointment at the rank of Sessional Lecturer I. It is understood and agreed that the decision not to advance the candidate, in and of itself, will not be considered in future hiring decisions. The letter to a candidate advising of an unsuccessful advancement shall contain a summary of the reasoning and evidence that formed the basis for the decision.

Outcomes. The Committee’s recommendation must be approved by the Chair academic administrator responsible for the advancing Writing Centre, and by reported for information to the Division Head. The Chair Committee Co-chairs Director shall advise the candidate in writing of the outcome of the advancement process by December 31st, or before if possible for F and Y coursesfall term, by April 30 for S coursesspring term, and by August 31 for any advancement process undertaken in a Summer academic session. A candidate who is advanced to the rank status of Sessional Lecturer II Writing Instructor 2 shall assume that rank status for purposes of remuneration retroactively to the beginning of the first term in which the advancement process was undertaken, and for consideration for vacancies in the following academic session term which are circularized to the pool after the date of the ChairCommittee Co-chairs’ Director’s letter. Where a Department Writing Centre does not adhere to the timelines for the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process, and where the candidate has fulfilled all of the obligations and requirements in accordance with the advancement process, then the candidate shall be entitled to be remunerated at the advanced rate for position(s) held in the subsequent academic term. If the Departmental Writing Centre’s delay described above continues beyond that subsequent academic term then the candidate shall continue to be remunerated at the advanced rate until the end of the academic term in which the written communication of the outcome of the advancement process has been provided to the candidate. A candidate who is not advanced to the rank status of Sessional Lecturer II Writing Instructor 2 may be eligible for re-evaluation after a further two (2) years of employment and or a minimum of four three hundred (4300) further half courses or the equivalenthours of employment, whichever comes first. It is understood and agreed that a candidate who is not advanced to the rank of Sessional Lecturer II Writing Instructor 2 remains eligible for appointment at the rank of Sessional Lecturer I. Writing Instructor 1. It is understood and agreed that the decision not to advance the candidate, in and of itself, will not be considered in future hiring decisions. The letter to a candidate advising of an unsuccessful advancement shall contain a summary of the reasoning and evidence that formed the basis for of the decision.