KFActs: Faculty Search and Vetting Processes

By Rachelle Hollaway and Rebecca Yoshizawa, Members-at-Large

The KFA often receives questions about KPU’s hiring and search processes. It is typical for anyone applying for a new employment position to undergo a hiring process that includes submission of a CV and several interviews.

At KPU, faculty members are often asked to go through a second or even third search process if they are interested in teaching new courses or if they want to increase their workload percentage. In this article, we’ll explain some of the rationales behind these processes and explain your rights as a faculty member under the Collective Agreement.

Search Committees

Article 4 in the Collective Agreement describes search procedures, beginning with details in Article 4.02 about how to form search committees. Usually, a search committee includes an Associate Dean, two to three faculty members, and up to three alternate faculty members. The alternate faculty members may serve on the committee if the original members are unavailable or if any member has a conflict of interest.

Departments/Areas are responsible for holding annual elections for their search committees. Usually, the Chair is responsible for initiating an election. Elections can be held in a number of ways but they must adhere to the principles of fairness and transparency. Faculty in the discipline/program must be provided reasonable notice about the opportunity to be nominated or to self-nominate and to vote. The format of the vote, nomination dates, and voting periods should be communicated to all voting faculty members. Elections can be formal (email votes) or informal (raising one’s hand during a Department meeting), a combination of the two, or really any process that is fair and transparent and agreed upon by the Department. Voting periods should allow ample time for participation (for example, one week if voting online or advanced notice of the date of the Department meeting if voting in person). If voting in-person, consider offering people the option to vote or self-nominate via an alternate method if they are unable to attend the in-person meeting. Alternate methods could include an email option or asking a colleague to provide a person’s nomination or vote. Essentially, the nomination and voting process needs to be accessible, fair, and transparent.

If a Department does not elect a search committee, the KFA is responsible for creating one. According to Article 4.02 (a), “In the event no Search Committee member or alternate member is available, the Union shall appoint a replacement to the Search Committee. Where possible, the replacement shall be appointed from the affected discipline/program.”

Because search committee members can be drawn from outside the Department, it is preferable that each Department makes sure it has a functioning search committee and elections process. Faculty members from the Department are more likely to be the subject matter experts for their courses and programs than faculty members from other Areas.

Once the Search Committee is elected, it is responsible for conducting fair and transparent searches for new hires as well as for vetting current faculty members who wish to teach additional courses. Article 4.02(a) explains that “the Administrative designate will be responsible for providing institutional support; the faculty members will provide expertise on subject/instructional matters.” The Associate Dean or Dean has the responsibility to make sure the Collective Agreement is followed, the various administrative details are taken care of (such as posting the search ad), and the process unfolds in a logical and efficient manner. The faculty members, as the subject matter experts, make the hiring recommendation based on the needs of the Department and/or Program. The Associate Deans or Deans most likely will not share the same areas of expertise as the Department and are not qualified to make this decision for the faculty members.

Search Processes

According to Article 4.02 (f) to (o), when a position is proposed, the job description and job posting are developed in consultation with the Search Committee. The competition runs for a minimum of two weeks. The Search Committee reviews all written applications, develops a short list of candidates to interview, provides rationales for their choices, and recommends the successful candidate(s) to the University President or designate.

If a member of the committee does not agree with the recommendation, they may make separate recommendations with a rationale. The University President or designate will attempt to resolve the matter as per Article 4.02 (h) before deciding whether to make an appointment, recommence the search, or cancel the vacancy.

Vetting

When a faculty member is hired, the Search Committee prepares a list of courses they are qualified to teach. Search Committees are further responsible for vetting existing faculty members who would like to be qualified to teach additional courses. All faculty categories can request to be vetted for additional courses: NR1 faculty, NR2 faculty, and part-time or full-time regularized faculty. The Department/Area should have a fair and transparent process for vetting along with fair and transparent criteria for qualifications. The vetting process may include submission of written requests, documentation, evidence, and/or interviews.

A Search Committee has the discretion to decide when it may hold vetting activities and/or interviews. Sometimes Search Committees will time vetting activities or interviews to coincide with a search process for posted vacancies and external hiring processes. This can reduce workload and increase efficiency. Some Search Committees send out notices for vetting interviews to the entire Faculty, such as in the Melville School of Business. Keep your eyes open for these vetting opportunities. Eventually, though, a Search Committee should agree to set up a time to vet you for additional courses if you request this, but please allow them time to do so.

If your Dean, Associate Dean, or Chair denies you the right to be vetted for additional courses because you are a non-regular faculty member, contact the KFA right away.

Qualified Faculty List (QFL) and Qualified to Teach (QTT) List

As per Article 4.04 (c)(i), the Search Committee, including the administrator responsible, must maintain an updated, viable qualified faculty list (QFL). This list is predominantly used for NR1 work, such as emergency hires and substitute work in case of sudden medical leaves or other emergencies. A posted search to populate the QFL may include outside candidates and internal candidates at KPU.

Some Departments or Areas have a separate list for Regular faculty called the Qualified to Teach (QTT) list. The QFL or QTT list should include the courses you were vetted to teach by the Search Committee when you were first hired and any additional courses for which you have since been vetted. Feel free to contact your Dean’s Office to confirm if your details on the QFL/QTT list are current and accurate. 

Bias and Conflicts of Interest

Every faculty member has the right to a fair and transparent search process as per Article 4: “The search process is guided by the principles of fairness and transparency as per Article 4.02.”

If you are concerned that the Search Committee is biased or if there is a known or perceived conflict of interest between you and someone on the Search Committee, you have rights under Article 4.02 (e):

If a candidate has any concerns relating to bias or conflict of interest on the part of a Search Committee member, those concerns should be brought to the Employer’s attention by the Union before the commencement of the interview process. Otherwise, the Employer will assume that the composition of the Search Committee is acceptable.

It is extremely important that you bring any issues related to bias (either positive or negative) or conflicts of interest or perceived conflicts of interest to the attention of the KFA in advance of the interview process. It is difficult to prove bias or a conflict of interest after the fact, so please exercise your rights to a fair search by communicating any issues before the search process begins. If you communicate your issues to your Dean or Associate Dean, they should likewise tell you about Article 4.02 (e); however, the KFA is aware of several instances of administrators not following the Collective Agreement when engaged in various university processes, including vetting. So, protect yourself and your rights, and contact the KFA right away. We will make sure Article 4.02 is followed correctly, which can include requests for an alternate search committee so that any bias, conflict, or perceived conflict of interest is eliminated.

Some examples of perceived or real conflicts of interest on search committees may include personal friendships or relationships, past history of complaint processes, mediation, or interpersonal conflict, direct personal financial benefit outside of the employment relationship with KPU, and so on.

Search Committees and Article 7

Faculty members who have been issued layoff notices under Article 7 have the right to be vetted based on the minimum qualifications table. Any interviews conducted under Article 7 provisions must be conducted with the rights of affected faculty members in mind. If in doubt, Search Committees or faculty members who have been issued layoff notices should consult with the KFA in advance of any vetting processes to ensure the Collective Agreement is being upheld.

If you have any questions about Search Committees or the information in this KFActs article, please reach out to the KFA.