TO: Dr. Tony Frank, President

FROM: Dr. Paola Malpezzi Price, Co-Chair and members of the CWGE

SUBJECT: Extension of the tenure clock

DATE: May 3, 2012

Background

Beginning in 2009, the Commission has been making recommendations regarding parental leave policies at CSU.  The following recommendation is one aspect of these recommendations.

Recommendations

Currently, Section E.10.4.1.2 of the Faculty Manual: Extension of the Probationary Period states:

A faculty member may request an extension of the probationary period due to exceptional circumstances, including, but not limited to, childbirth, personal health issues, and care of immediate family members (this is separate from the issue of leaves, which are addressed in Section E.10.4.1.2.c).  The tenure committee may recommend up to two (2) separate extensions of the probationary period, each for a period not to exceed one (1) year.

We suggest the following changes:

A faculty member may request an extension of the probationary period due to exceptional circumstances, including, but not limited to, birth or adoption of a child, personal health issues, and care of immediate family members (this is separate from the issue of leaves, which is addressed in Section E.10.4.1.2.c).  The tenure committee may recommend up to two (2) separate extensions of the probationary period, each for a period not to exceed one (1) year.

Rationale

The current interpretation of this section is that there must be an exceptional circumstance in connection with childbirth, not that the birth of a child alone is sufficient reason to seek an extension of the tenure clock.  The practice is that the birth of a child for a woman is sufficient reason to approve an extension to the tenure clock.  Our recommended change would in essence clarify that a woman can receive an extension due to the birth of a child, and would also include fathers and cases of adoption; important additions to be competitive in the recruitment and retention of faculty.

Another reason to consider this change is that we know perspective faculty are looking at codified languages around work life balance when choosing a future institution as an employer.  Our current language is not encouraging regarding parental responsibilities, not accurate to our practice in connection with women, nor sufficiently broad in that it does not obviously include fathers or adoptions; all of which hamper our efforts at recruitment and retention of faculty.

It is noted that these changes are made through Faculty Council and our intent is to work with the Chair of Faculty Council in making our recommendation.

Copy of Recommendation