Athabasca University Policy

Annual Performance Assessment - AUPE Support Staff Policy

Department Policy Number

050 002

Effective Date

Revised April 1, 2004
Revised June 1, 2000

Purpose

This policy outlines the annual performance review process for staff members under the AUGC/AUPE Collective Agreement.

Definitions

Agreement:	Collective Agreement between Athabasca University Governing Council (AUGC) and Alberta Union of Public Employees, Local 069 (AUPE).
Articles:	Referenced from the Collective Agreement.
Personnel File:	The staff member’s permanent personnel file maintained in Human Resources.
Performance Year:	July 1 to June 30

Policy

The University conducts a formal assessment process annually as one component of a performance management process that supports and encourages ongoing discussion and evaluation of the staff member’s performance between the staff member and supervisor on a regular basis. A formal assessment must be completed for all permanent and temporary employees who have been on staff for at least three months of the performance year. The assessment must be submitted to Human Resources by June 30. The following steps and procedures will normally be observed in the performance review process. A Performance Work Plan and Assessment template, which accompanies this process, is available on the Human Resources web site.

Regulation

Procedure

1.0	The supervisor will inform the employee of the pending performance review and arrange for a meeting. Prior to the meeting date, the employee should complete and submit a self-evaluation outlining their achievements against the agreed to job expectations/work plan as well as include any additional achievements that occurred. The self-evaluation should include work completed (results) as well as how the employee thought they performed in key job behaviours or competencies.
2.0	The supervisor and the employee meet to discuss the self-evaluation. The supervisor should confirm those aspects that they agree with, discuss any missing results, and any differences of opinion. The review should be balanced with both positive and constructive two-way discussion. The learning plan and next year’s expectations/work plan can be discussed at this time or at a follow up meeting.
3.0	The supervisor writes their comments on the assessment template or attaches a comment sheet. The comments should not be a surprise to the employee. An overall performance level is also put at the top of the assessment. Assessments that the supervisor is recommending unsatisfactory or outstanding must be sent to the Executive for approval prior to the communication of the performance level to the employee. This is to make sure that these assessments are consistent with similar assessments throughout the university. The Executive member is to get back to the supervisor with approval or denial of the recommended performance level and the rationale.
4.0	The assessment with comments and overall performance level is signed by the supervisor and given to the employee to sign. The employee’s signature acknowledges that they have read and understand the assessment. It does not necessarily imply agreement.
5.0	The original assessment is sent to Human Resources for the employee’s personnel file.
6.0	Job expectations or a work plan needs to be completed for the upcoming performance year by September. This is based on the key job responsibilities in the job description. If the job description is out of date it should be updated and submitted to Human Resources.
7.0	A Learning Plan should be completed for all employees who need to develop for current or future demands in their current job and/or employees who aspire to job enrichment or career advancement.
8.0	Performance Levels:
	Outstanding - Approved by appropriate Executive Officer after review by Executive Group - Extra merit awarded Employee has mastered the technical and operational functions of their role. Performance in all-important ways is significantly above the fully satisfactory level on a consistent basis. This implies that any knowledgeable observer would be aware of the overall high quality of results and competence demonstrated in all areas of job emphasis. Superior-Merit given Performance is consistently at a fully satisfactory level in all areas of job emphasis and exceeds that level in some important areas. The employee’s achievement in at least one key area has noticeably pushed the unit or job forward. Fully Satisfactory-Work goals and competency expectations are set at this level-Merit given A good job, well done. Performance is consistently at an expected level in all-important or priority areas (results and competency/behaviours). Marginal-Merit Withheld - Approved by appropriate Executive Officer after review by Executive Group Performance is noticeably below expectations in one or more important or priority areas of job emphasis. Performance at a fully expected level has not been attained. An improvement plan should be put in place with the employee and if they demonstrate fully satisfactory performance within 6 months merit will be reviewed. Not Acceptable-Merit Withheld - Approved by appropriate Executive Officer after review by Executive Group Performance is clearly not acceptable. The employee has received discipline during the performance year and will not be able to reach fully satisfactory performance within 6 months.

Approved By

President, April 2004
Executive Group; May 31, 2000

Amended Date/Motion No.

Related References, Policies and Procedures

Annual Merit Increments-AUPE and AUFA Staff Members Policy

Applicable Legislation/Regulation

AUGC/AUPE Collective Agreement

Responsible Position/Department

This policy is maintained and administered by Human Resources. For further information please contact the Director, Human Resources.

Keywords

Return to Previous Page

L. Gordon, Office of the President, May 2004