Procedure:
1. To obtain official authorization to conduct on campus fund raising, write a memorandum outlining the purpose of the fund raising activity, identifying the sponsor(s), and indicating how and where collected monies will be deposited and dispersed. Send or deliver this memorandum to the Office of the President at least two weeks prior to the planned activity. The President or the President's designee shall respond as promptly as possible to the request.
(a) The President may request further information and/or endorsement by the appropriate Vice-President prior to making a decision about whether or not to authorize the fund raising activity.
(b) Fund raisers shall present a copy of the President's authorization when requesting space reservations, use of campus mail service, or other University services in connection with the fund raising, event(s).
2. Use of campus mail service for fund raising is limited to approved institutional fund drives or other fund raising activities authorized by the University President or the President's authorized representative.(OAR 571-11-005).
3. Solicitation of funds from students is governed by OAR 571-11-005 and OAR 571-11-010.
4. Solicitation of funds from off campus donors is governed by OAR 571-11-005 and University of Oregon Policy Statement 7.000: Foundation Practice and Procedure "Access to Prospective Donors for Gifts of $5,000 or More."
To describe procedure for obtaining permission to conduct fund raising on campus and to provide rule citations on which procedures are based.
08 February 2010 - Policy number revised from 6.000 to 06.00.04
04 January 1985 - Reviewed and Approved by the university president's staff
04 January 1985 - Issued by the university vice-president for Administration
Individual departments or other units of the University are charged with stewardship responsibility for the equipment under their control. However, ownership of University equipment is vested in the University of Oregon on behalf of the Oregon State Board of Higher Education, and not in any specific unit or department regardless of whether the equipment was purchased with University funds or donated by an external agency or private individual. Such items need not be listed on the University's equipment inventory to qualify as University equipment.
University equipment may be used only in the conduct of University-related activities. Except as required for the proper accomplishment of the University's mission or for the obvious and recognized purposes of an individual unit or department, University equipment may not be borrowed by, or rented or loaned to any person or group for non-University purposes without the prior written approval of the Vice-President for Administration, on the recommendation of the appropriate dean or director.
Department heads and unit directors may loan or rent equipment under their stewardship to other units of the University for University purposes and are free to transfer control of equipment to other University units upon the agreement of both unit directors and in compliance with University inventory control procedures.
They also may negotiate with equipment vendors for the trade-in value of equipment they intend to replace in compliance with State Board purchasing policies and procedures.
When an item listed on the University's equipment inventory is no longer needed or when it is judged to be of no value, the Office of Business Affairs shall be notified. The Office of Business Affairs is authorized to declare such equipment surplus or scrap and to determine how it shall be disposed of according to appropriate State Board policies and procedures.
(See also OAR 580-50-035 and FASOM 02.40A[2], 4101, 4102, 4111, 4113, 4150, 4201)
To identify limitations on use and disposal of University equipment.
08 February 2010 - Policy number revised from 4.000 to 04.00.06
04 April 1986 - Issued by VP for Administration; approved by the university president's staff
When the University seeks to fill a position through a local, regional, national, or internal search process, any of the University's current employees who meet the published qualifications and are interested in the position are encouraged to apply for it. Participation as a candidate makes participation in the candidate review and evaluation process improper, however. Therefore, internal candidates must observe the following guidelines:
1. Individuals who accept appointment to a search committee and participate in any of its deliberations may not enter that process later as a candidate. If, however, the search fails to find a suitable candidate, a member of the search committee may accept a temporary appointment to the position on an acting basis.
If after an unsuccessful search, a second search, effort is commenced, a member of the first search committee may stand as a candidate, so long as he or she does not become a member of the second search committee.
2. Internal candidates should not participate in the evaluation of other candidates. However, an internal candidate who is asked by another candidate to submit a recommendation may do so, but should disclose her or his own candidacy to the other candidate, and allow that person to withdraw the request. Any such references submitted should include notice of this disclosure and of the candidate's own status in the search.
3. An internal candidate should not participate in any meeting, presentation, or other event at which another candidate is being evaluated. This is not to say that an internal candidate may not attend a meeting of his or her own discipline or profession if interviews will be conducted there. Rather, the candidate should not attend those sessions at which other candidates may be performing or being interviewed.
4. When an internal candidate is officially informed that she or he will not be considered further as a candidate within the search process, she or he may begin to participate as a non-candidate within the search process.
5. An internal candidate, who is asked to give any kind of evaluative comments for another candidate by a member of the search committee or by anyone else involved in the selection process, should decide on the grounds of his or her own candidacy.
6. This policy should not be allowed to disenfranchise units from participating in the search process. Therefore, when a candidate, who because of his or her current position would have represented a unit in the evaluation process, is unable to take part, an alternate participant should be identified and asked to represent the unit.
7. This policy is not intended to require changes in the traditional internal selection processes for department heads, program directors, or other internally determined leadership positions. Examples are if department heads are traditionally elected, or if the responsibility for certain administrative processes is rotated, or when the unit has some other process than one in which candidates "apply," so long as these local processes have the ongoing approval of the members of that unit.
To define the proper role within the University's search processes of candidates who are currently University employees.
04 October 2016 - Policy name updated for clarification (formerly: “Faculty: Internal Candidates for Instructional and Administrative Academic Positions”)
08 February 2010 - Policy number revised from 3.120 to 02.01.02
The university will conduct criminal, credit and related background checks on finalists for designated positions as necessary to ensure a safe and secure work environment in which university faculty, staff, students, resources and assets are protected. In addition to the background checks described here, reference checks on employment history and other checks will also be conducted as appropriate. Note: the criminal background checks covered by this policy do not include nationwide fingerprint-based criminal records checks.
The University of Oregon, Office of Human Resources will be responsible for administering, interpreting, and maintaining this policy. Questions regarding this policy should be directed to the Director of Talent Acquisition and Development, Human Resources, 677 East 12th Avenue (PeaceHealth North Building), Eugene, OR 97403.
Applicability:
This policy will apply to finalists for job searches conducted after August 1, 2008 on:
Types of background checks and designated positions:
Criminal background checks will be conducted to ensure that the candidate does not have relevant criminal convictions that would make him or her unsuitable or ineligible to perform the responsibilities of a specific position. A conviction includes a plea of no contest, plea of guilty, or court determination of guilt.
Criminal background checks will be conducted for positions that include the following access and/or with the following responsibilities:
Credit background checks will be conducted to ensure that the candidate's background has no financial irregularities that would make the individual unsuitable or ineligible to perform the responsibilities of a specific position. (Note: Federal law prohibits discrimination as a result of bankruptcy.) Credit background checks will be conducted as appropriate for positions with the following responsibilities:
Designated positions:
The Associate Vice President (AVP) for Human Resources, the Assistant Director of Human Resources, or the Human Resources Employment Manager, will designate those positions requiring criminal and/or credit background checks, using the criteria described above and in consultation with the hiring supervisor. The designation will be applied after reviewing specific job duties and requirements and, in most cases, will not be applied generally to all jobs in a classification or employment category. This process will apply to both criminal and credit background checks.
Determination of relevance of criminal and credit background information: Not all criminal convictions or financial problems will preclude applicants from university employment. The criminal and/or credit background report(s) will be reviewed for the type of offense (if any) and its relevance to the position and a determination made if the information received in the background check disqualifies the candidate from that specific job. This decision will be made by at least two of the following: the AVP for Human Resources, the Assistant Human Resources Director, and/or the Employment Manager in consultation with the hiring supervisor. In addition, staff in the Department of Public Safety, Business Affairs Office, and/or Office of Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity may be consulted.
An unsuccessful finalist will be informed that he/she is not eligible to fill the position based on the unsatisfactory results of a check and notified of the appeal process.
Position posting notification and release authorization:
Recruitment announcements and job postings for positions designated as requiring one or more background check will include a standard statement notifying potential applicants of the intent to conduct a criminal and/or credit background check(s).
A finalist for a position requiring criminal and/or credit background check(s) must sign the university release authorization form. The release form will inform the applicant that criminal convictions do not necessarily preclude employment. In addition, the release form will provide the finalist a summary of rights, including the right of access to credit and/or criminal background check(s) information and a description of the appeal process.
As part of the recruitment process, applicants will be informed of the university policy on confidential handling of documents related to background checks.
Confidentiality and restricted access to records:
Information received from criminal and credit background checks will be considered sensitive and disclosure will be restricted. Files pertaining to background checks will be maintained in Human Resources.
Appeal Process:
Applicants who are denied employment based on unsatisfactory results will receive notification of rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, including his/her right to review the results and obtain information about contacting agencies that provided the background check(s) results.
Unsuccessful applicants will also be given the opportunity to submit a statement in writing to the AVP for Human Resources describing how the information in the report is incorrect or irrelevant to the position in question. In consultation with the appropriate vice president or designee, the AVP will make the final determination of the appeal.
Legally mandated checks:
Some university positions carry legally mandated background check requirements imposed by outside entities. The university will ensure that these checks are conducted for those engaged to work in these positions, which include, but are not limited to, the following programs:
04 November 2010 - Reviewed by HR; no changes needed.
08 February 2010 - Policy number revised from 3.110 to 03.09.01
30 September 2008 - Reviewed and Approved by the university president's staff
A written reprimand is a serious disciplinary action. A written reprimand, a letter from a responsible University supervisor to an employee of the University in which that employee's unsatisfactory or unacceptable behavior or work performance is described and the necessity for change is noted. A reprimand also warns of future disciplinary procedures that shall be taken in the absence of improved performance. A written reprimand is often in order when previous oral or written warnings have not had their hoped for effect. Certain circumstances may warrant issuing a written reprimand as the first disciplinary action taken against an employee. A written reprimand can be distinguished from a written warning or admonition in that a reprimand is placed in an employee's personnel file and retained there for a predetermined amount of time.
To describe the purposes for which written reprimands are appropriately issued and to establish procedures for issuing written reprimands and maintaining them in University files.
When a supervisor believes that issuing a written reprimand to a classified, or student employee, may be appropriate, the supervisor should consult with the Director of the Office of Human Resources to make sure that all appropriate University policies, procedures, and contractual relationships are observed.
When a supervisor believes that issuing a written reprimand to a member of the faculty may be appropriate, the supervisor should contact the vice president to whom the supervisor is responsible to make sure that all appropriate University policies and procedures are observed.
Formal processes, such as a hearing by a peer panel, that must be made available to employees before sanctions more serious than written reprimands may be imposed are not required prior to issuing a written reprimand. However, employees do have the right to know with specificity what behavior or performance has been found to be deficient and to respond to or dispute the findings, before a written reprimand may be issued. Providing this opportunity to the employee to be heard may be accomplished either in a face-to-face meeting between the supervisor and the employee, with any representatives the parties may wish to have present, or it may take place in writing. In either case, the supervisor must tell the employee what the deficient behavior is, and ask for any information, explanation, or other evidence that the employee may have that might change the supervisor's understanding of the situation. Supervisors have the responsibility to consider any information or contrary evidence the employee may submit before issuing a letter of reprimand.
A written reprimand should be in letter form addressed to the employee and signed by the supervisor. It should be delivered to the employee in confidence or sent via the U.S. Postal Service with a return receipt requested, and it should contain the following elements:
1. A description of the behavior or performance that has been found to be unacceptable or unsatisfactory. If University rules or policies have been violated, those should be cited.
2. A description of the supervisor's expectations for future behavior or work performance or any suggested or required remedial activities that the employee must undertake or should consider undertaking.
3. A description of any further disciplinary processes and sanctions that may be pursued if the employee does not improve or repeats the unacceptable behavior.
4. The period of time that the written reprimand shall remain in the employee's personnel file.
5. Notice to the employee that he or she has the right to place a rebuttal of the written reprimand in the personnel file to be retained there so long as the written reprimand is also present.
Written reprimands are documents relating to employee discipline, and therefore are confidential under state law and university policy. It is a violation of law and policy to disclose such personal information to anyone who does not have a University imposed need to know, The University may acknowledge to those inquiring that institutional action has been taken regarding an employee, but the existence of a written reprimand or any of the reprimand's contents may not be disclosed.
08 February 2010 - Policy number revised from 3.01 to 03.04.04
27 October 1993 - Reviewed and Recommended by the university president's staff
Supersedes 7 March 1986 Procedure Guideline: Written Reprimands
