(1) This Policy informs prospective applicants about how La Trobe recognises and rewards the achievements of academic staff by providing promotion pathways. (2) This Policy applies to all academic staff employed at La Trobe University whether full time or part time, fixed-term or continuing, and those with joint appointments who seek promotion to: (3) This Policy does not apply to casual or sessional academic staff or recent professional practice employees. (4) Applicants for promotion should normally have held an academic position at La Trobe for a minimum of one year prior to seeking promotion. (5) Fixed-term staff are eligible to apply for promotion but if a promotion is granted it will not extend a fixed-term appointment. (6) La Trobe seeks to attract, retain and develop very high quality staff to achieve the University’s strategic goals. As part of this commitment, it seeks to encourage, by way of promotion, those members of academic staff who demonstrate outstanding qualities in performing their responsibilities. (7) The University will recognise and reward sustained academic excellence through a transparent and consistent process of promotion. Promotion will be awarded based on evidence of the quality and impact of contributions to the University’s strategic goals at the academic level sought in each of the domains: (8) Where an academic appointment specifically precludes or constrains contribution to one of these domains (for example, research-only positions), the application will be judged against the relevant domains of contribution. (9) Academic promotion at La Trobe University will be based on the following principles: (10) Applicants will demonstrate high levels of performance and achievement (relative to opportunity), appropriate to academic level, disciplinary field, type of appointment and agreed work plan, in the following three domains of academic work: (11) It is expected that performance and achievements are demonstrated at a level commensurate with the Minimum Standards for Academic Levels for the academic level sought. (12) For the purposes of this Policy, teaching activity includes but is not limited to: (13) Research activity includes but is not limited to: (14) Service activity includes but is not limited to: (15) Promotion is based on: (16) In addition to the above, consideration is also given to the following: (17) Applicants must provide supporting evidence for any claims made in their application, in accordance with the Instructions for Applicants available on the Academic Promotions Intranet. (18) Applicants for promotion must hold a relevant doctorate or possess and demonstrate equivalent qualifications and experience. (19) The Committee will, in the context of the level for which promotion is applied, consider the appropriateness of levels and types of formal qualifications and/or substantial progress towards such qualifications or, where relevant consider and determine the equivalence of alternative qualifications and/or experience held by applicants. (20) Applicants will assess whether they are eligible for promotion and merit promotion with reference to the Minimum Standards for Academic Levels and the Academic Performance Framework. (21) Applicants are strongly encouraged to seek guidance and discuss their application with the following before making an application for promotion: (22) The Academic Promotions Committee will convene once per year to consider applications. The dates of Academic Promotions Committees’ meetings and the cut-off dates for inclusion in those meetings will be published on the Academic Promotions Intranet at the start of the calendar year. (23) Applications not submitted or incomplete by the cut-off date for a meeting of the Academic Promotions Committee will be held over to the next meeting. Late applications will only be accepted in exceptional circumstances with the approval of the Chair. (24) Applicants must follow the “Instructions for Applicants” and submit applications electronically via the Academic Promotions link that will be available on the Internal Jobs intranet page. The submission must include: (25) Applicants will receive an automatic acknowledgement once their application has been lodged. (26) It is the responsibility of the applicant to obtain a report from their Dean (or equivalent) prior to submitting their application. (27) The applicant should provide the Dean with their completed application, at least five weeks prior to the closing date for applications. (28) If the applicant does not complete the above steps within the required timeframe, it will be at the Dean's discretion as to whether the report: (29) The Dean will: (30) The Dean may delegate to the Head of Department or the applicant’s Career Success Manager and/or Academic Reviewer as appropriate to draft the Dean Report. The Dean is required to review and be accountable for the content of reports prepared by their delegate. (31) The Dean Report will not be provided to assessors or referees during the promotions process. (32) All applicants will contact each of their academic/professional referees to request a referee report on their suitability for promotion. The referee report provides evidence to augment and support the applicant’s case for promotion. (33) Applicants will send the following documents to referees who have agreed to provide a referee report: (34) The referee report is to be forwarded by the referee via email to: academic.reference@latrobe.edu.au by the application close date (as noted on the Academic Promotions Intranet). (35) All applicants will provide the names and details of their referees with their application for promotion to enable the Executive Officer to identify any outstanding reports. (36) The Executive Officer will advise the applicant if a referee report has not been received by the application close date. The applicant will need to follow up with their referee to ensure the report is provided. (37) Applicants must not nominate their Career Success Manager/Academic Reviewer or members of the Academic Promotions Committees as referees, but they are encouraged to seek advice from them regarding referee selection. (38) Academic referees must be at or above the level for which the applicant is seeking promotion. Professional or industry referees are expected to hold national standing or equivalent in the applicant’s field of expertise. (39) Applicants must declare any personal, familial or ongoing relationship with a referee when they submit their promotion application. (40) After the outcome of the application is known the applicant (and/or their Dean) may be provided with copies of the referee reports if referees have agreed to make them available. Referees may elect not to make their report available to the applicant/Dean by indicating this in their report. (41) The role of independent external assessors is to provide an objective, expert and confidential assessment of claims of excellence made in the application in relation to teaching, research and service. (42) The Dean is responsible for providing the names and contact details of assessors, as per the requirements specified in Table 1 above, and confirming that the assessors have agreed to provide a report. (43) The Dean may discuss potential external assessors with the applicant, but the final selection will be provided by the Dean in confidence. (44) In nominating independent external assessors the Dean will make every attempt to ensure that those persons are appropriately qualified to comment on the quality of the application and are independent. As a guideline, for assessors to be considered ‘independent of the applicant’ they should not have: (45) The nominated external assessors will normally be Level E. They will be experts of national or international standing within the relevant discipline and/or academic domain, and readily identified as distinguished leaders in their field. (46) Where applicants do not want the Academic Promotions Committee to approach a particular assessor(s), they may inform the Dean when submitting their application, briefly outlining the reason for their request. (47) The Executive Officer will contact external assessors by email to request Assessor Reports. Assessors will be sent copies of the Academic Promotion Application form, CV and Supporting Evidence Document, and La Trobe’s Academic Promotion Policy. Assessors will be requested to provide their report within four weeks of receiving the request. (48) After the outcome of the application is known the applicant (and/or their Dean) may be provided with copies of the assessor reports where assessors have agreed to make them available. Assessors may elect not to make their report to available to the applicant/Dean by indicating in their report. (49) The Vice-Chancellor will appoint the Academic Promotions Committees. (50) The Committees shall meet once per year. (51) The term of membership of appointed members shall be three years and retiring members shall not be eligible for direct re- appointment. Retiring members may be eligible for a one year extension to their appointment. (52) The Office of the Provost will provide administrative support to the Committees. (53) There will be two Academic Promotions Committees. Committee membership will depend on the academic level for which promotion is being sought. (54) For promotion to academic Levels B and C, the Academic Promotions Committee will comprise: (55) For promotion to Academic Levels D and E, the Academic Promotion Committee will comprise: (56) The Academic Promotions Committees are deliberative committees that will base their decisions on the application provided, the case made by the applicant and the evidence provided to support the case. They will not take into account information that is known to the Committee, but which is not referred to and supported by evidence in the application. In addition to the views provided by the relevant Dean, referees and external assessors, the Committees will fulfill an important role in applying their expertise and bringing to bear a University-wide perspective, to determine the outcome of an application. The Academic Promotions Committees reserve the right to seek additional information from applicants, assessors, referees or other internal or external advisors to assist them to make a decision about an application. (57) Disciplinary differences will be taken into account and, where possible, the Committees will refer to appropriate disciplinary norms when assessing applications. If there are matters that require clarification, additional information may be sought by the Committees from the Dean or other appropriate senior person with a knowledge of a particular discipline or specialist area. (58) The Academic Promotions Committees will provide recommendations to the Vice-Chancellor arising from each of their meetings. (59) The Vice-Chancellor is responsible for approving, or not approving, the recommendations of the Academic Promotions Committees. (60) The Vice-Chancellor will report promotions to the Academic Board and the wider University community through All Staff communications. (61) Applicants will be advised in writing of a successful promotion outcome and the date from which the promotion will take effect. (62) Promotion will be effective from the first of January in the year following the Academic Promotions Committee meeting at which the promotion was recommended. (63) All promotions will be to the first salary point of the level to which the applicant is promoted, except where the employee is in receipt of a coordination responsibility payment to the promoted level, when they shall be appointed at the increment level required to ensure that they do not suffer any reduction in remuneration. (64) Following the Vice-Chancellor's approval of the Academic Promotions Committee recommendations, the Executive Officer will advise unsuccessful applicants and the respective Dean in writing. In doing so the Executive Officer will invite the applicant to seek a meeting with the Chair or nominated member of the Academic Promotions Committee to discuss the outcome of their promotion application. (65) The Dean (or equivalent) will meet with each unsuccessful applicant to provide information that would be useful for the future guidance of the applicant. Meetings for this purpose will take place as soon as possible after the applicants have been advised of their application outcome. (66) Unsuccessful applicants must ensure they have updated, new and relevant information and evidence to support a new application, and that all feedback provided by the Academic Promotions Committee has been addressed, before re-applying. (67) Unsuccessful applicants may request reconsideration of their application only on the grounds that a procedural irregularity has occurred. (68) A request for reconsideration will normally only be considered after the applicant has met with the Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee to discuss the outcome of their promotion application. (69) When requesting reconsideration, applicants must provide a written statement to the Chair within 28 days from the date of the letter of outcome, detailing the procedural irregularity, supported by evidence. (70) Requests for reconsideration will be considered by the Reconsideration Review Group, convened by the Executive Director, Human Resources or nominee, who will advise the Vice-Chancellor whether a procedural irregularity has occurred and if an application should be reconsidered by the original Academic Promotions Committee. (71) Where a procedural irregularity was determined not to have affected the Academic Promotions Committee outcome, the original decision will stand. (72) Where a procedural irregularity was determined to have adversely affected the Academic Promotions Committee outcome, the original committee will reconvene and reconsider the application and provide a new recommendation to the Vice-Chancellor. (73) The Vice-Chancellor is responsible for approving the outcome, based on the recommendations presented by the Academic Promotions Committee. (74) The applicant will be informed in writing of the final outcome by the Vice-Chancellor. (75) Unsuccessful applicants have the right to use the University Workplace Issue Resolution (Staff) Procedure or the Dispute Resolution Procedure outlined in the Enterprise Agreement or consult the University or State Ombudsman (Ombudsman Statute 2009). Typically, the Dispute Resolution Procedure would only be used only after the final outcome of a request for reconsideration is known. (76) A staff member who holds a continuing substantive position and is appointed as a result of an externally competitive process to a fixed-term academic position at a higher level at La Trobe, may apply for promotion to upgrade their reversionary substantive position. (77) Provided that the fixed-term appointment and the substantive position are both research-only positions, the staff member may submit their appointment application in place of the narrative section of their promotion application. All other promotion documentation and reports are required as for a standard application. (78) A current Level C member of staff who has been awarded an ARC Future Fellowship or an NHMRC Investigator Grant at equivalent to Level D may apply for promotion on the basis of excellence in research to upgrade their substantive position. Provided the applicant applies within 18 months of being awarded the Future Fellowship or Investigator Grant, the Committee will accept the reports for the Future Fellowship or Investigator Grant application in place of the usual assessor reports. The applicant should submit a full standard application for promotion together with the relevant reports, including the Dean Report, and also may wish to submit a rejoinder. (79) In the case of joint appointments, the promotion decision by the majority participant (employer) will be recognized by the other participating employer unless otherwise agreed in writing. (80) In the case where joint appointments are equal (50:50), the employers will agree in writing on which party will take responsibility for the one promotion process of staff and that decision will be accepted by the other partner. (81) The staff member must provide written confirmation of the promotion from the other partner institution to the Dean, Executive Officer and Chair of the Academic Promotions Committee. (82) In exceptional circumstances, and when it is deemed by the Vice-Chancellor to be an appropriate mechanism to support the University’s strategic operational goals, an application for promotion may be considered outside of the normal promotions schedule. This may include situations where the University wishes to counter an offer received by a high performing staff member. (83) The criteria for out-of-cycle expedited applications will be consistent with the standards expected for promotion through the normal promotions round. The Committee also will consider the strategic significance of the staff member’s contributions to the School and University. (84) The Provost may put forward to the Vice-Chancellor a recommendation that a staff member be considered for out-of-cycle promotion. Documentation submitted by the Provost should include: (85) The Provost should forward all of the above documentation in electronic form to the Executive Officer, Academic Promotions Committee, at the time the submission is made to the Vice-Chancellor. (86) The Vice-Chancellor will advise the Executive Officer, Academic Promotions Committee, whether they endorse the application. (87) The Executive Officer will ensure the application is considered by the Academic Promotions Committee as soon as practicable. (88) After reviewing the case, the Committee may recommend the payment of a retention allowance as an alternative to promotion. (89) For applications presented out of cycle and/or in exceptional circumstances, the Vice-Chancellor is responsible for approving any variations to the academic promotions process and the outcome of the application. (90) For the purpose of this Policy and Procedures:Academic Promotions Policy
This Policy is being updated to reflect the new Enterprise Agreement and may currently contain out of date information. If you have any questions, please lodge an Ask HR ticket.
Section 1 - Background and Purpose
Section 2 - Scope
Section 3 - Policy Statement
Principles
Top of PageSection 4 - Procedures
Part A - Domains of Academic Work
For further information, please refer to the Academic Promotions Intranet.
Part B - Basis for Promotion
Qualifications and/or Relevant Experience
Preparing and Lodging the Application
Part C - Referee and External Assessor Reports
Table 1: Summary of Referee and Assessor Requirements, by Academic Level
Promotion to level
Applicant’s self-nominated Referees
Independent External Assessors, nominated by Dean
Sign off on application
Level B
1 or 2 required (may be internal or external to La Trobe)
Not required
Dean
Level C
2 or 3 required (at least one must be external to La Trobe)
Not required
Dean
Level D
2 required (at least one must be external to La Trobe)
1 required
Dean
Level E
2 required (at least one must be external to La Trobe)
2 required
Dean
Dean (or equivalent) Report
Referee Reports
Independent External Assessors for Applications to Level D and E Only
Part D - Academic Promotions Committees
Membership of Academic Promotions Committees
Assessment of Application
Approval Process
Part E - Outcomes
Effective Date of Promotion and Salary Point
Unsuccessful Applicants
Reconsideration
Part F - Special Cases
Upgrading a Reversionary Substantive Position
Promotion of Joint Appointments
Out of Cycle Expedited Promotion – Exceptional Circumstances
Section 5 - Definitions
View Document
This is the current version of this document. To view historic versions, click the link in the document's navigation bar.