appendices

appendix i

This policy is the Faculty Code of Conduct as approved by the Assembly of the Academic Senate on June 15, 1971, and amended by the Assembly on May 30, 1974, and with amendments approved by the Assembly on March 9, 1983, May 6, 1986, May 7, 1992, October 31, 2001, and May 28, 2003, and by The Regents on July 18, 1986, May 15, 1987, June 19, 1992, November 15, 2001, and July 17, 2003. In addition, technical changes were made September 1, 1988.

Additional policies regarding the scope and application of the Faculty Code of Conduct and the University’s policies on faculty conduct and the administration of discipline are set forth in APM 016, the University Policy on Faculty Conduct and the Administration of Discipline.


THE FACULTY CODE OF CONDUCT AS APPROVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE

(Code of Professional Rights, Responsibilities, and Conduct of University Faculty, and University Disciplinary Procedures)

Preamble

The University seeks to provide and sustain an environment conducive to sharing, extending, and critically examining knowledge and values, and to furthering the search for wisdom. Effective performance of these central functions requires that faculty members be free within their respective fields of competence to pursue and teach the truth in accord with appropriate standards of scholarly inquiry.

The faculty’s privileges and protections, including that of tenure, rest on the mutually supportive relationships between the faculty’s special professional competence, its academic freedom, and the central functions of the University. These relationships are also the source of the professional responsibilities of faculty members.

It is the intent of the Faculty Code of Conduct to protect academic freedom, to help preserve the highest standards of teaching and scholarship, and to advance the mission of the University as an institution of higher learning.

Part I of this Code sets forth the responsibility of the University to maintain conditions and rights supportive of the faculty’s pursuit of the University’s central functions.

Part II of this Code elaborates standards of professional conduct, derived from general professional consensus about the existence of certain precepts as basic to acceptable faculty behavior. Conduct which departs from these precepts is viewed by faculty as unacceptable because it is inconsistent with the mission of the University. The articulation of types of unacceptable faculty conduct is appropriate both to verify that a consensus about minimally acceptable standards in fact does exist and to give fair notice to all that departures from these minimal standards may give rise to disciplinary proceedings.

In Part II a clear distinction is made between statements of (1) ethical principles and (2) types of unacceptable behavior.

1. Ethical Principles
These are drawn primarily from the 1966 Statement on Professional Ethics and subsequent revisions of June, 1987, issued by the American Association of University Professors. They comprise ethical prescriptions affirming the highest professional ideals. They are aspirational in character, and represent objectives toward which faculty members should strive. Behavior in accordance with these principles clearly precludes the application of a disciplinary sanction. These Ethical Principles are to be distinguished from Types of Unacceptable Faculty Conduct referred to in the following paragraph. The Types of Unacceptable Faculty Conduct, unlike the Ethical Principles, are mandatory in character, and state minimum levels of conduct below which a faculty member cannot fall without being subject to University discipline.

2. Types of Unacceptable Faculty Conduct
Derived from the Ethical Principles, these statements specify examples of types of unacceptable faculty behavior which are subject to University discipline because, as stated in the introductory section to Part II, they are “not justified by the Ethical Principles” and they “significantly impair the University’s central functions as set forth in the Preamble.”

The Ethical Principles encompass major concerns traditionally and currently important to the profession. The examples of types of unacceptable faculty conduct set forth below are not exhaustive. It is expected that case adjudication, the lessons of experience and evolving standards of the profession will promote reasoned adaptation and change of this Code. Faculty may be subjected to disciplinary action under this Code for any type of conduct which, although not specifically enumerated herein, meets the standard for unacceptable faculty behavior set forth above. It should be noted, however, that no provision of the Code shall be construed as providing the basis for judging the propriety or impropriety of collective withholding of services by faculty. Rules and sanctions that presently exist to cover such actions derive from sources external to this Code.

Part III of this Code deals with the enforcement process applicable to unacceptable faculty behavior. That process must meet basic standards of fairness and must reflect significant faculty involvement. In order to guide each campus in the development of disciplinary procedures that comply with this policy and Senate Bylaws, Part III provides an outline of mandatory principles to which each Division must adhere and discretionary principles which are strongly recommended.

Part I: Professional Rights of Faculty

In support of the University’s central functions as an institution of higher learning, a major responsibility of the administration is to protect and encourage the faculty in its teaching, learning, research, and public service. The authority to discipline faculty members in appropriate cases derives from the shared recognition by the faculty and the administration that the purpose of discipline is to preserve conditions hospitable to these pursuits. Such conditions, as they relate to the faculty, include, for example:

5. the right to be judged by one’s colleagues, in accordance with fair procedures and due process, in matters of promotion, tenure, and discipline, solely on the basis of the faculty members’ professional qualifications and professional conduct.

This listing of faculty responsibilities, ethical principles, and types of unacceptable behavior is organized around the individual faculty member’s relation to teaching and students, to scholarship, to the University, to colleagues, and to the community. Since University discipline, as distinguished from other forms of reproval or administrative actions, should be reserved for faculty misconduct that is either serious in itself or is made serious through its repetition, or its consequences, the following general principle is intended to govern all instances of its application:

University discipline under this Code may be imposed on a faculty member only for conduct which is not justified by the ethical principles and which significantly impairs the University’s central functions as set forth in the Preamble. To the extent that violations of University policies mentioned in the examples below are not also inconsistent with the ethical principles, these policy violations may not be independent grounds for imposing discipline as defined herein. The Types of Unacceptable Conduct listed below in Sections A through E are examples of types of conduct which meet the preceding standards and hence are presumptively subject to University discipline. Other types of serious misconduct, not specifically enumerated herein, may nonetheless be the basis for disciplinary action if they also meet the preceding standards.

A. Teaching and Students
Ethical Principles. “As teachers, the professors encourage the free pursuit of learning of their students. They hold before them the best scholarly standards of their discipline. Professors demonstrate respect for students as individuals and adhere to their proper roles as intellectual guides and counselors. Professors make every reasonable effort to foster honest academic conduct and to assure that their evaluations of students reflect each student’s true merit. They respect the confidential nature of the relationship between professor and student. They avoid any exploitation, harassment, or discriminatory treatment of students. They acknowledge significant academic or scholarly assistance from them. They protect their academic freedom.” (AAUP Statement, 1966; Revised, 1987)

The integrity of the faculty-student relationship is the foundation of the University’s educational mission. This relationship vests considerable trust in the faculty member, who, in turn, bears authority and accountability as mentor, educator, and evaluator. The unequal institutional power inherent in this relationship heightens the vulnerability of the student and the potential for coercion. The pedagogical relationship between faculty member and student must be protected from influences or activities that can interfere with learning consistent with the goals and ideals of the University. Whenever a faculty member is responsible for academic supervision of a student, a personal relationship between them of a romantic or sexual nature, even if consensual, is inappropriate. Any such relationship jeopardizes the integrity of the educational process.

In this section, the term student refers to all individuals under the academic supervision of faculty.

Types of unacceptable conduct:

1. Failure to meet the responsibilities of instruction, including:

(a) arbitrary denial of access to instruction;

(b) significant intrusion of material unrelated to the course;

(c) significant failure to adhere, without legitimate reason, to the rules of the faculty in the conduct of courses, to meet class, to keep office hours, or to hold examinations as scheduled;

(d) evaluation of student work by criteria not directly reflective of course performance;

(e) undue and unexcused delay in evaluating student work.

2. Discrimination, including harassment, against a student on political grounds, or for reasons of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, national origin, ancestry, marital status, medical condition, status as a covered veteran, or, within the limits imposed by law or University regulations, because of age or
   citizenship or for other arbitrary or personal reasons.
    
3. Violation of the University policy, including the pertinent guidelines, applying to nondiscrimination against students on the basis of disability.
    
4. Use of the position or powers of a faculty member to coerce the judgment or conscience of a student or to cause harm to a student for arbitrary or personal reasons.
    

5. Participating in or deliberately abetting disruption, interference, or intimidation in the classroom.
    

6. Entering into a romantic or sexual relationship with any student for whom a faculty member has, or should reasonably expect to have in the future*, academic responsibility (instructional, evaluative, or supervisory).
   
   *A faculty member should reasonably expect to have in the future academic responsibility
   (instructional, evaluative, or supervisory) for (1) students whose academic program will require them
   to enroll in a course taught by the faculty member, (2) students known to the faculty member to have
   an interest in an academic area within the faculty member’s academic expertise, or (3) any student for
   whom a faculty member must have academic responsibility (instructional, evaluative, or supervisory)
   in the pursuit of a degree.
    

7. Exercising academic responsibility (instructional, evaluative, or supervisory) for any student with whom a faculty member has a romantic or sexual relationship.

B. Scholarship
Ethical Principles. “Professors, guided by a deep conviction of the worth and dignity of the advancement of knowledge, recognize the special responsibilities placed upon them. Their primary responsibility to their subject is to seek and to state the truth as they see it. To this end professors devote their energies to developing and improving their scholarly competence. They accept the obligation to exercise critical self-discipline and judgment in using, extending, and transmitting knowledge. They practice intellectual honesty. Although professors may follow subsidiary interests, these interests must never seriously hamper or compromise their freedom of inquiry.” (AAUP Statement, 1966; Revised, 1987)

Types of unacceptable conduct:

Violation of canons of intellectual honesty, such as research misconduct and/or intentional misappropriation of the writings, research, and findings of others.

C. The University
Ethical Principles. “As a member of an academic institution, professors seek above all to be effective teachers and scholars. Although professors observe the stated regulations of the institution, provided the regulations do not contravene academic freedom, they maintain their right to criticize and seek revision. Professors give due regard to their paramount responsibilities within their institution in determining the amount and character of the work done outside it. When considering the interruption or termination of their service, professors recognize the effect of their decision upon the program of the institution and give due notice of their intentions.” (AAUP Statement, 1966; Revised, 1987)

Types of unacceptable conduct:

1. Intentional disruption of functions or activities sponsored or authorized by the University.
    
2. Incitement of others to disobey University rules when such incitement constitutes a clear and present danger that violence or abuse against persons or property will occur or that the University’s central functions will be significantly impaired.
    
3. Unauthorized use of University resources or facilities on a significant scale for personal, commercial, political, or religious purposes.
    
4. Forcible detention, threats of physical harm to, or harassment of another member of the University community, that interferes with that person’s performance of University activities.
    
5. Discrimination, including harassment, against University employees on political grounds, or for reasons of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, national origin, ancestry, marital status, medical condition, status as a covered veteran or, within the limits imposed by law or University regulations, because of age or citizenship, or for other arbitrary or personal reasons.
    
6. Violation of the University policy, including the pertinent guidelines, applying to nondiscrimination against employees on the basis of disability.
    
7. Serious violation of University policies governing the professional conduct of faculty, including but not limited to policies applying to research, outside professional activities, conflicts of commitment, clinical practices, violence in the workplace, and whistleblower protections.

D. Colleagues
Ethical Principles. “As colleagues, professors have obligations that derive from common membership in the community of scholars. Professors do not discriminate against or harass colleagues. They respect and defend the free inquiry of associates. In the exchange of criticism and ideas professors show due respect for the opinions of others. Professors acknowledge academic debts and strive to be objective in their professional judgment of colleagues. Professors accept their share of faculty responsibilities for the governance of their institution.” (AAUP Statement, 1966; Revised, 1987)

Types of unacceptable conduct:

1. Making evaluations of the professional competence of faculty members by criteria not directly reflective of professional performance.
    
2. Discrimination, including harassment, against faculty on political grounds, or for reasons of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, national origin, ancestry, marital status, medical condition, status as a covered veteran, or, within the limits imposed by law or University regulations, because of age or citizenship or for other arbitrary or personal reasons.
    
3. Violation of the University policy, including the pertinent guidelines, applying to nondiscrimination against faculty on the basis of disability.
    
4. Breach of established rules governing confidentiality in personnel procedures.

E. The Community
Ethical Principles. “Faculty members have the same rights and obligations as all citizens. They are as free as other citizens to express their views and to participate in the political processes of the community. When they act or speak in their personal and private capacities, they should avoid deliberately creating the impression that they represent the University.” (U.C. Academic Council Statement, 1971)

Types of unacceptable conduct:

1. Intentional misrepresentation of personal views as a statement of position of the University or any of its agencies. (An institutional affiliation appended to a faculty member’s name in a public statement or appearance is permissible, if used solely for purposes of identification.)
    
2. Commission of a criminal act which has led to conviction in a court of law and which clearly demonstrates unfitness to continue as a member of the faculty.
    

Part III: Enforcement and Sanctions

The Assembly of the Academic Senate recommends that each Division, in cooperation with the campus administration, develop and periodically re-examine procedures dealing with the investigation of allegations of faculty misconduct and the conduct of disciplinary proceedings.

Procedures shall be consistent with the Bylaws of the Academic Senate. Each Division should duly notify the University Committee on Rules and Jurisdiction and the University Committee on Privilege and Tenure of the procedures it has adopted and any subsequent changes therein. These Committees in turn are directed to report periodically to the Assembly of the Academic Senate on procedures adopted by the Divisions and to recommend to the Assembly such action as they deem appropriate for assuring compliance with the Bylaws of the Academic Senate or the promotion of uniformity among Divisions to the extent to which it appears necessary and desirable.

A.  In the development of disciplinary procedures, each Division must adhere to the following principles:

1. No disciplinary sanction for professional misconduct shall be imposed by the administration except in accordance with specified campus procedures adopted after appropriate consultation with agencies of the Academic Senate, as prescribed in the introduction to this part of the Code. Systemwide procedures for the conduct of disciplinary hearings are set forth in Academic Senate Bylaw 336.
    
2. No disciplinary sanction shall be imposed until after the faculty member has had an opportunity for a hearing before the Divisional Committee on Privilege and Tenure, subsequent to a filing of a charge by the appropriate administrative officer, as described in Academic Senate Bylaw 336.
    
3.  No disciplinary action may commence if more than three years have passed between the time when the Chancellor knew or should have known about the alleged violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct and the delivery of the notice of proposed disciplinary action.
    
4. The Chancellor may not initiate notice of proposed disciplinary action unless there has been a finding of probable cause. The probable cause standard means that the facts as alleged in the complaint, if true, justify the imposition of discipline for a violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct and that the Chancellor is satisfied that the University can produce credible evidence to support the claim. In cases where the Chancellor wants a disciplinary action to proceed, the Divisional hearing committee must hold a hearing and make findings on the evidence presented unless the accused faculty member settles the matter with the Chancellor prior to the hearing or explicitly waives his or her right to a hearing.
    
5. The procedures adopted shall include designation of the following disciplinary sanctions authorized in the University Policy on Faculty Conduct and the Administration of Discipline, of which this Faculty Code of Conduct is an integral part: written censure, reduction in salary, demotion, suspension, denial or curtailment of emeritus status, and dismissal from the employ of the University. The Divisional Committee on Privilege and Tenure shall not recommend the imposition of a sanction more severe than that in the notice of proposed disciplinary action. More than one disciplinary sanction may be imposed for a single act of misconduct, e.g. a letter of censure and a suspension.

B. In the development of disciplinary procedures, it is recommended that each Division adhere to the following principles:

1. In order to facilitate the efficient and timely handling of disciplinary matters, it is recommended that procedures be developed that allow each Divisional Committee on Privilege and Tenure to sit in hearing panels smaller than the full committee.
    
2. There should be an appropriate mechanism for consideration and investigation of allegations of misconduct received from members of the faculty, staff, students, the administration, and other members of the University community. Procedures should be developed which encourage a single formal investigation of the allegations leading to the proposed disciplinary action.
    
3. Because it is desirable that the faculty meaningfully participate in its own self-discipline, and in order to provide the administration with faculty advice in the beginning stages of what may become formal disciplinary proceedings, appropriate procedures should be developed to involve the faculty in participating in the investigation of allegations of misconduct and/or in making recommendations to appropriate administrative officers whether a disciplinary charge should be filed. Divisions are encouraged to develop procedures to provide faculty investigators with training, consultation, or legal counsel to assist with the investigation of faculty disciplinary cases.
    
4. There should be provision for informal disposition of allegations of faculty misconduct before formal disciplinary proceedings are instituted. Procedures should be developed for mediation of cases where mediation is viewed as acceptable by the Chancellor and the faculty member accused of misconduct. Mediators should be trained in mediation, be regarded as neutral third parties and have experience in the University environment. In cases where a settlement resolving disciplinary charges is entered into after a matter has been referred to an Academic Senate committee, the Chancellor is encouraged to consult with the Chair of the Divisional Committee on Privilege and Tenure prior to finalizing the settlement.
    
5. Appropriate precautions should be taken to safeguard the confidentiality of investigative and disciplinary proceedings. Procedures should be developed that allow information about an ongoing disciplinary proceeding, including information about the outcome, to be shared with complainant(s), to the extent allowable by State law and University policy.
    
6. There should be provision, to the maximum feasible extent, for separating investigative and judicial functions. A faculty member who has participated in investigating an allegation of misconduct or in recommending that a charge should be filed should thereafter not participate, as a member of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure, in the hearing of that charge.
    
7. In the implementation of all procedures, specific provisions should be made for the time span within which certain actions may or must be taken. Every effort should be made to conform to reasonable, specified time frames. Ideally, a hearing should commence within 90 days of the date on which the accused faculty member has been notified of the intention to initiate a disciplinary proceeding. A faculty member who is entitled to a hearing should not be permitted thereafter to delay imposition of discipline by refusing to cooperate or being unavailable for a scheduled hearing. A hearing shall not be postponed because the faculty member is on leave or fails to appear.
    
8. There should be consideration of provision for the availability of removal or termination of a sanction, either automatically or by administrative discretion, in individual cases. The nature and circumstances of the offense should determine the severity and type of discipline.
    
9. Procedures should be developed for keeping records of disciplinary matters in a confidential manner and sharing such records with Senate and administrative officers with a need to know in accordance with State law and University policy.

 

Academic Personnel Manual Section 015
Revised July 24, 2003
Available online at http://www.ucop.edu/acadadv/acadpers/apm/apm-015.pdf

appendix ii

NONDISCRIMINATION AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN EMPLOYMENT

A. Nondiscrimination
It is the policy of the University not to engage in discrimination against or harassment of any person employed or seeking employment with the University of California on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, physical or mental disability, medical condition (cancer-related or genetic characteristics), ancestry, marital status, age, sexual orientation, citizenship, or status as a covered veteran.¹ This policy is intended to be consistent with the provisions of applicable State and Federal laws and University policies.

Sexual Harassment
The University of California is committed to creating and maintaining a community in which all persons who participate in University programs and activities can work together in an atmosphere free of all forms of harassment, exploitation, or intimidation, including sexual. Specifically, every member of the University community should be aware that the University is strongly opposed to sexual harassment and that such behavior is prohibited by law and by University policy. It is the intention of the University to take whatever action may be needed to prevent, correct, and, if necessary, discipline behavior which violates this policy.

Complaints
Upon an employee’s request, the UCLA Academic Personnel Office, (310) 825-3841 (3109 Murphy Hall) shall provide information regarding applicable policies and procedures for resolving complaints of discrimination and for pursuing available remedies. Inquiries regarding disability compliance may be directed to the Chancellor’s ADA and 504 Compliance Office, (310) 825-2242.

B. Affirmative Action
It is the policy of the University of California to undertake affirmative action, consistent with its obligations as a Federal contractor, for minorities and women, for persons with disabilities, and for covered veterans. The University commits itself to apply every good faith effort to achieve prompt and full utilization of minorities and women in all segments of its workforce where deficiencies exist. These efforts conform to all current legal and regulatory requirements, and are consistent with University standards of quality and excellence. In conformance with Federal regulations, written affirmative action plans shall be prepared and maintained by each campus of the University, by each Department of Energy Laboratory, by the Office of the President, and by the Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Such plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Office of the President and the Office of the General Counsel before they are officially promulgated. Contact the Academic Personnel Office at (310) 825-3841 for current information.

- - - - - - -

¹Covered veterans are special disabled veterans, recently separated veterans, Vietnam era veterans, or any other veterans who served on active duty during a war or in a campaign or expedition for which a campaign badge has been authorized.

Academic Personnel Manual Section 035
Revised June 21, 2002                                 
Available online at http://www.ucop.edu/acadadv/acadpers/apm/apm-035.pdf

appendix  iii

MEMBERSHIP OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE

1. The Academic Senate shall consist of the President, Vice Presidents, Chancellors, Vice Chancellors, Deans, Provosts, Directors of academic programs, the Chief Admissions Officer on each campus and in the Office of the President, Registrars, the University Librarian on each campus of the University, each Lecturer who has full-time teaching responsibilities in any curriculum under the control of the Academic Senate and whose academic title is Senior Lecturer with Security of Employment or Lecturer with Security of Employment and each person giving instruction in any curriculum under the control of the Academic Senate whose academic title is Instructor, Instructor-in-Residence; Assistant Professor, Assistant Professor-in-Residence, Assistant Professor of Clinical (e.g., Medicine); Associate Professor, Associate Professor-in-Residence, Associate Professor of Clinical (e.g., Medicine), Acting Associate Professor; Professor, Professor-in-Residence, Professor of Clinical (e.g., Medicine) or Acting Professor; however, Instructors and Instructors-in-Residence of less than two years service shall not be entitled to vote. Members of the faculties of professional schools offering courses at the graduate level only shall be members also of the Academic Senate, but, in the discretion of the Academic Senate, may be excluded from participation in activities of the Senate that relate to curricula of other schools and colleges of the University. Membership in the Senate shall not lapse because of leave of absence or by virtue of transference to emeritus status.
2. The Academic Senate shall determine its own membership under the above rule and shall organize and choose its own officers and committees in such manner as it may determine.
3. The Academic Senate shall perform such duties as the Board may direct and shall exercise such powers as the Board may confer upon it. It may delegate to its divisions or committees, including the several faculties and councils, such authority as is appropriate to the performance of their respective functions.

NOTE the following titles that do not hold membership in the Senate: Assistant Adjunct Professor, Assistant Clinical Professor (Compensated), Assistant Professional Researcher, Associate Adjunct Professor, Associate Clinical Professor (Compensated), Associate Professional Researcher, Adjunct Professor, Clinical Professor (Compensated), Professional Researcher, Acting Assistant Professor, Visiting Professor, Lecturer (other than those mentioned above), Librarian and Associate.
 

Standing Order of the Regents 105.1
Revised March 20, 1987                                 
Available online at http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/bylaws/so1051.html

appendix iv

RIGHTS AND AUTHORITY OF SENATE MEMBERS

Bylaw 55. Departmental Voting Rights

A. General Provisions

1. According to the Standing Orders of the Regents, ". . . the several departments of the University, with the approval of the President, shall determine their own form of administrative organization . . ." No department shall be organized in a way that would deny to any of its non-emeritae/i faculty who are voting members of the Academic Senate, as specified in Standing Order 105.1(a), the right to vote on substantial departmental questions, excepting only certain personnel actions as detailed in Article B of this Bylaw
2. In all matters other than those specified in paragraphs 1 to 5 of Article B of this Bylaw, the right to vote may be delegated to duly elected committees.

B. Designation of Voting Rights

1. All tenured faculty in a department have the right to vote on all new departmental appointments that confer membership in the Academic Senate. Prior to such a vote, all the non-emeritae/i departmental members of the Academic Senate must be afforded an opportunity to make their opinions known to the voters
2. Professors have the right to vote on all cases of promotion to the ranks of Professor, Professor-in-Residence and Professor of Clinical (e.g. Medicine). Professors and Senior Lecturers with Security of Employment (SOE) have the right to vote on all cases of appointment or promotion to the rank of Senior Lecturer (SOE)
3. Professors and Associate Professors have the right to vote on all cases of promotion to the ranks of Associate Professor, Associate Professor-in-Residence and Associate Professor of Clinical (e.g. Medicine). Professors, Associate Professors, Senior Lecturers (SOE) and Lecturers (SOE) have the right to vote on all cases of appointment to the rank of Lecturer (SOE)
4. For voting purposes, all cases that involve the removal of the Acting modifier from the title of a member of the Academic Senate shall be treated as promotions to the rank in question
5. All cases of non-reappointments or terminations of Assistant Professors, Assistant Professors-in-Residence and Assistant Professors of Clinical (e.g. Medicine) or Lecturers and Senior Lecturers, shall be voted upon by those faculty eligible to vote on promotions to the ranks of Associate Professor, Associate Professor-in-Residence, Associate Professor of Clinical (e.g. Medicine) or appointments to the titles Lecturer (SOE) and Senior Lecturer (SOE), respectively
6. All cases of advancement within any rank that confers membership in the Academic Senate shall be voted upon by those persons entitled to vote on promotion or non-reappointment to the rank in question under the provisions of paragraphs 2 to 5 of this Article B
7. In none of the instances specified in paragraphs 1 to 5 of this Article B may the right to vote be delegated to a committee. The actual method of voting shall be determined by the eligible voters; subject, however, to the provision that no voter may be denied the option to require a secret ballot. In cases of advancement within rank, the eligible voters for each rank in question shall either follow the same procedures used for promotions and non-reappointment or may, by two-thirds majority vote and subject to the approval of the divisional Committee on Academic Personnel or its equivalent, delegate the authority for such actions to a duly elected committee or other agency or adopt some other method acceptable to the divisional Committee on Academic Personnel or its equivalent. Any such method or delegation of authority shall remain in effect for at least one calendar year (twelve months). Thereafter, upon the request of any faculty member entitled to a vote on the cases in question under the provisions of paragraph 6 of this Article B, the eligible voters shall reconsider the question of how such cases shall be handled
8. The tenured faculty members of a department shall establish the method by which personnel matters other than those listed in paragraphs 1 to 6 of this Article B are determined. The method adopted must have the approval of the divisional Committee on Academic Personnel or its equivalent.

C. Extension of Voting Privileges to non-Emeritae/i Faculty

Voting privileges on personnel matters within any department may be extended to one or more of the classes of non-Emeritae/i Academic Senate members of that department, as a class, who are not otherwise entitled to vote under the provisions of paragraphs 1 to 6 of Article B of this Bylaw, upon at least a two-thirds majority vote by secret ballot of those faculty entitled to vote on the cases in question under the provisions of paragraphs 1 to 6 of Article B of this Bylaw. Any extensions of the voting privilege under this Article C must remain in effect for at least one calendar year (twelve months); thereafter, any faculty member entitled to a vote on the cases in question under the provisions of paragraphs 1 to 6 of Article B of this Bylaw may request reconsideration. Following a request for reconsideration and prior to any subsequent vote on the cases in question, the Chair or other appropriate departmental officer shall put the question of renewal of privileges to a vote. An extension of voting privileges will be renewed only upon at least a two-thirds majority vote by secret ballot of those faculty entitled to vote on the cases in question under the provisions of paragraphs 1 to 6 of Article B of this Bylaw.

D. Rights and Privileges of Emeritae/i Faculty

1. Emeritae/i members of the Academic Senate retain membership in the departments to which they belonged at the time of their retirement. They do not have the right to vote on departmental matters, except as provided in this Article D
2. With the exception of personnel actions, Emeritae/i members of the department have the right to receive the same notice of meetings as other Academic Senate members. They have the right of access to materials relevant to those meetings, the privilege of the floor at those meetings and the right to make their opinions known to the voting members
3. Emeritae/i, while recalled to service in a department from which they have retired, regain voting rights on all departmental matters, except personnel matters, during the period of such service. They may be accorded voting privileges on personnel matters only as a class consisting of all recalled Emeritae/i and only as specified in paragraph 4.c of this Article D
4. Additional privileges in a department from which they have retired may be extended, either to all Emeritae/i as a class of the whole or to all Emeritae/i recalled to active service, during the period of such service, as follows:

1. Voting privileges on all non-personnel matters may be extended to all Emeritae/i upon a majority vote by secret ballot of the total non-Emeritae/i Academic Senate membership of that department
2. The privilege of notice of meeting on personnel actions, access to materials and/or privilege of the floor, may be extended to Emeritae/i upon at least a two-thirds majority vote by secret ballot of those faculty entitled to vote on the cases in question under the provisions of paragraphs 1 to 6 of Article B of this Bylaw
3. Voting privileges on personnel matters may be extended to Emeritae/i upon at least a two-thirds majority vote by secret ballot of those faculty entitled to vote on the cases in question under the provisions of paragraphs 1 to 6 of Article B of this Bylaw

5. Any extensions of privilege to Emeritae/i under paragraph 4 of this Article D must remain in effect for at least one calendar year (twelve months); thereafter, any faculty member entitled to a vote on the question of an extension of privilege under the provisions of paragraph 4 of this Article D may request reconsideration. Following a request for reconsideration and prior to any subsequent vote on the cases in question, the Chair or other appropriate departmental officer shall put the question of renewal of privileges to a vote. An extension of privilege will be renewed only under the procedures specified for the initial extension of voting privileges by paragraph 4 of this Article D.

E. Other Units

In Divisions or schools or colleges where the term "department" is not used, this Bylaw refers to those units from which academic appointments and promotions are recommended to administrative officers.

Bylaws of the Academic Senate University of California
Title VI. Rights and Authority of Senate Members
Revised May 4, 1995                              
Available online at http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/senate/manual/blpart1.html#bl55

 

appendix v

ORGANIZED RESEARCH UNITS

Health Sciences

Brain Research Institute (310) 825-1868

Crump Institute for Molecular Imaging (310) 825-4903

Dental Research Institute (310) 206-8045

Jules Stein Eye Institute (310) 825-5000

Mental Retardation Research Center (310) 825-0313

UCLA-DOE Laboratory of Structural Biology & Molecular Medicine (310) 206-4708

Life Sciences

Molecular Biology Institute (310) 825-1018
 

Physical Sciences and Engineering

Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics*  (310) 825-1418

Institute of Plasma Science and Technology (310) 825-4789

_________

* Multicampus research unit of the University of California

Social Sciences

American Indian Studies Center (310) 825-7315

Asian American Studies Center (310) 825-2974

Center for African American Studies (310) 825-7403

Chicano Studies Research Center (310) 825-2363

Center for the Study of Women (310) 825-0590

Institute for Social Science Research (310) 825-0711

Cotsen Institute of Archaeology (310) 206-8934

Institute of Industrial Relations (310) 794-5957

UCLA International Institute

Center for European and Russian Studies (310) 825-4060

Gustave E. von Grunebaum Center for Near Eastern Studies (310) 825-1181

James S. Coleman African Studies Center (310) 825-3779

Latin American Studies Center (310) 825-4571
 

Arts and Humanities

Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies (310) 825-1880

Center for Seventeenth & Eighteenth Century Studies (310) 206-8552

appendix vi

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PATENT POLICY

I. Preamble

It is the intent of the President of the University of California, in administering intellectual property rights for the public benefit, to encourage and assist members of the faculty, staff, and others associated with the University in the use of the patent system with respect to their discoveries and inventions in a manner that is equitable to all parties involved.

The University recognizes the need for and desirability of encouraging the broad utilization of the results of University research, not only by scholars but also in practical application for the general public benefit, and acknowledges the importance of the patent system in bringing innovative research findings to practical application.

Within the University, innovative research findings often give rise to patentable inventions as fortuitous by-products, even though the research was conducted for the primary purpose of gaining new knowledge.

The following University of California Patent Policy is adopted to encourage the practical application of University research for the broad public benefit; to appraise and determine relative rights and equities of all parties concerned; to facilitate patent applications, licensing, and the equitable distribution of royalties, if any; to assist in obtaining funds for research; to provide for the use of invention-related income for the further support of research and education; and to provide a uniform procedure in patent matters when the University has a right or equity.

II. Statement of Policy

1. An agreement to assign inventions and patents to the University, except those resulting from permissible consulting activities without use of University facilities, shall be mandatory for all employees, for persons not employed by the University but who use University research facilities, and for those who receive gift, grant, or contract funds through the University. Such an agreement may be in the form of an acknowledgment of obligation to assign. Exemptions from such agreements to assign may be authorized in those circumstances when the mission of the University is better served by such action, provided that overriding obligations to other parties are met and such exemptions are not inconsistent with other University policies.
    
2. Those individuals who have so agreed to assign inventions and patents shall promptly report and fully disclose the conception and/or reduction to practice of potentially patentable inventions to the Office of Technology Transfer or authorized licensing office. They shall execute such declarations, assignments, or other documents as may be necessary in the course of invention evaluation, patent prosecution, or protection of patent or analogous property rights, to assure that title in such inventions shall be held by the University or by such other parties designated by the University as may be appropriate under the circumstances. Such circumstances would include, but not be limited to, those situations when there are overriding patent obligations of the University arising from gifts, grants, contracts, or other agreements with outside organizations. In the absence of overriding obligations to outside sponsors of research, the University may release patent rights to the inventor in those circumstances when:

1. the University elects not to file a patent application and the inventor is prepared to do so, or
2. the equity of the situation clearly indicates such release should be given, provided in either case that no further research or development to develop that invention will be conducted involving University support or facilities, and provided further that a shop right is granted to the University.

3. Subject to restrictions arising from overriding obligations of the University pursuant to gifts, grants, contracts, or other agreements with outside organizations, the University agrees, following said assignment of inventions and patent rights, to pay annually to the named inventor(s), or to the inventor(s)' heirs, successors, or assigns, 35% of the net royalties and fees per invention received by the University. An additional 15% of net royalties and fees per invention shall be allocated for research-related purposes on the inventor's campus or Laboratory. Net royalties are defined as gross royalties and fees, less the costs of patenting, protecting, and preserving patent and related property rights, maintaining patents, the licensing of patent and related property rights, and such other costs, taxes, or reimbursements as may be necessary or required by law. Inventor shares paid to University employees pursuant to this paragraph represent an employee benefit.

When there are two or more inventors, each inventor shall share equally in the inventor's share of royalties, unless all inventors previously have agreed in writing to a different distribution of such share.

Distribution of the inventor's share of royalties shall be made annually in November from the amount received during the previous fiscal year ending June 30th, except as provided for in Section II.D. below. In the event of any litigation, actual or imminent, or any other action to protect patent rights, the University may withhold distribution and impound royalties until resolution of the matter.

4. The DOE Laboratories may establish separate royalty distribution formulas, subject to approval by the President. Distribution of the inventor's share of DOE Laboratory royalties shall be made annually in February from the amount received during the previous fiscal year ending September 30th. All other elements of this policy shall continue to apply.
    
5. Equity received by the University in licensing transactions, whether in the form of stock or any other instrument conveying ownership interest in a corporation, shall be distributed in accordance with the Policy on Accepting Equity When Licensing University Technology.
    
6. In the disposition of any net income accruing to the University from patents, first consideration shall be given to the support of research.

    

III. Patent Responsibilities and Administration

1. Pursuant to Regents' Standing Order 100.4(mm), the President has responsibility for all matters relating to patents in which the University of California is in any way concerned. This policy is an exercise of that responsibility, and the President may make changes to any part of this policy from time to time, including the percentage of net royalties paid to inventors.

2. The President is advised on such matters by the Technology Transfer Advisory Committee (TTAC), which is chaired by the Senior Vice President--Business and Finance. The membership of TTAC includes the Provost and Senior Vice President--Academic Affairs, the Director of the Office of Technology Transfer, and representatives from the campuses, DOE Laboratories, Academic Senate, the Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the Office of the General Counsel. TTAC is responsible for:

1. reviewing and proposing University policy on intellectual property matters including patents, copyrights, trademarks, and tangible research products;
2. reviewing the administration of intellectual property operations to ensure consistent application of policy and effective progress toward program objectives; and
3. advising the President on related matters as requested.

3. The Senior Vice President--Business and Finance is responsible for implementation of this Policy, including the following:

1. Evaluating inventions and discoveries for patentability, as well as scientific merit and practical application, and requesting the filing and prosecution of patent applications
2. Evaluating the patent or analogous property rights or equities held by the University in an invention, and negotiating agreements with cooperating organizations, if any, with respect to such rights or equities
3. Negotiating licenses and license option agreements with other parties concerning patent and or analogous property rights held by the University
4. Directing and arranging for the collection and appropriate distribution of royalties and fees
5. Assisting University officers in negotiating agreements with cooperating organizations concerning prospective rights to patentable inventions or discoveries made as a result of research carried out under gifts, grants, contracts, or other agreements to be funded in whole or in part by such cooperating organizations, and negotiating with Federal agencies regarding the disposition of patent rights
6. Approving exemptions from the agreement to assign inventions and patents to the University as required by Section II.A. above
7. Approving exceptions to University policy on intellectual property matters including patents, copyrights, trademarks, and tangible research products.

Revised October 1, 1997
Available online at http://www.ucop.edu/ott/patentpolicy/patentpo.html.

 

appendix vii

POLICY ON THE REQUIREMENT TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS AND TO RECEIVE AWARDS FOR GRANTS AND CONTRACTS THROUGH THE UNIVERSITY

It is the policy of the University of California that employees who receive any part of their salary through the University or whose activities use any University resources or facilities, must submit their proposals for extramural support through the appropriate local contracts and grants office. Awards must be made to The Regents of the University of California.

This requirement is necessary to insure that all research and other extramurally funded projects conducted by University employees or with the use of University resources or facilities, are approved by the appropriate University contract and grant office and comply with relevant University policies and guidelines, including but not limited to those governing:

• integrity in research
• appropriateness of the activity to the University
• protection of human and animal subjects and the environment
• use of University facilities
• adherence to personnel policies
• compensation plans
• intellectual property
• conflicts of interest
• recovery of direct and indirect costs
• liability insurance and indemnification and
• medical malpractice coverage

In the case of projects to be conducted by the University in collaboration with other organizations, the University can be either the prime contractor or a subcontractor. In all cases, all resources required for the conduct of the portion of the work which will be directed by University employees must be included in the award to the University.

Exceptions to the requirement to submit proposals and awards through the University may be granted by Chancellors in unusual circumstances on a case by case basis, after consideration of the policy areas cited above, when it is in the best interest of the University. When an exception is granted, there must be a clear distinction between service to the University and service to the external party; relevant personnel policies shall be followed; the name of the University shall not be used by the external party; and in no case shall the University assume liability for a third party’s action without the approval of The Regents as required by the Bylaws and Standing Orders of The Regents.

University of California Office of the President December 15, 1994 Available online at:
http://www.ucop.edu/ucophome/coordrev/policy/12-15-94att.html

 

 

appendix viii

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EQUITY POLICY

(Policy on Accepting Equity when Licensing University Technology)

The University of California recognizes the importance of encouraging the practical application of the results of University research for the benefit of the general public. One important way in which the University supports this transfer of technology is through an active technology licensing program.

Technologies disclosed by University faculty, research scientists and other staff are offered to potential licensees, often during the early stages of developmental research. These technologies typically require a considerable amount of additional research to prove the value of the technology or to support good patent protection, if appropriate. Therefore, the University seeks licensees able to demonstrate that they currently are adequately financed or that adequate financing will be available and that they are willing to focus such resources on the developmental research necessary to advance the technology to a marketable condition. Further, such licensees must be able to meet regulatory requirements for introduction of the technology into the marketplace and to satisfy adequately the market demand for the technology.

The University generally will seek from the licensee the costs of obtaining patent or other intellectual property protection and other customary financial considerations. The resulting licensing income provides an incentive to University inventors and authors (hereafter, inventors) to participate in the complex technology transfer process, funds further University research and supports the operation of the University technology transfer program.

The combination of developmental costs and risk and uncertainty as to the potential value of the technology, occasionally make it difficult for the University to identify a licensee possessing both the requisite capabilities and willingness to assume such financial risks. Small or startup companies may find it particularly difficult to commit significant cash outlays for both developmental and licensing costs.

Accordingly, the University may accept equity in a company as partial consideration for technology licensing-related transactions in appropriate circumstances pursuant to the following provisions of this Policy:

1. When the company selected to develop, market and deliver the technology to the marketplace is not reasonably able to provide adequate compensation for licensing in cash, the University may choose to accept equity in that company, in partial lieu of cash, to facilitate the practical application of a University technology for the general public benefit
2. University acceptance of equity in consideration of licensing a University technology shall be based upon the principles of openness, objectivity and fairness in decision-making and preeminence of the education, research and public service missions of the University over financial or individual personal gain. Such licensing activity shall be conducted in accordance with the University Guidelines on University-Industry Relations, the Conflict of Interest Policy, the University Policy on Integrity in Research and related University policies and guidelines
3. The University shall neither seek nor accept representation on the board of directors of a licensee in which it holds equity, nor exercise any voting rights on board actions, regardless of the level of its equity interest
4. The University shall handle all subsequent relationships with a licensee in which the University has accepted equity in a business-like manner pursuant to relevant University policies and guidelines
5. The terms of a technology licensing-related transaction, other than those related to the acceptance of equity in the company by the University, shall be consistent with University transactions for comparable technologies
6. University investigators on the campus/Laboratory that generates a licensed technology may perform clinical trials or other comparable licensed-product testing for companies in which the University holds equity as part of the technology licensing-related transaction only upon the specific approval of a campus/Laboratory independent substantive review committee or other body authorized by the Chancellor/Director to assess any real or perceived organizational conflict of interest in the performance of such trials or testing activities
7. The University generally shall not accept more than a ten percent (10%) share ownership in a licensee
8. When the University accepts equity in a company as partial consideration for a technology licensing-related transaction, the University, taking into account any legal restrictions and the wishes of each inventor involved, shall:

1. arrange for the inventor(s) to receive his or her share of equity directly from the company upon execution of the relevant agreement; or
2. take all equity, including the inventor(s)’ share, in the name of The Regents of the University of California; in which case, the Treasurer will make decisions regarding equity disposition based upon sound business judgment and publicly available information and will coordinate with the appropriate University officials if necessary; the inventor(s)’ sole right being the receipt of the appropriate share of such equity or its cash equivalent at such time and in such form as the Treasurer shall deem appropriate.

The University shall determine the inventor(s)’ share of equity consistent with formulas established in the University of California Patent Policy or other relevant policies, with the exception that expenses identified in such policies will not be applied to any inventor(s)’ share distribution made in the form of equity.

The University shall distribute cash proceeds, upon conversion of equity to cash, in accordance with the schedules and formulas established in the University of California Patent Policy or other relevant policies, recognizing the inventor(s)’ equity distributions, if any, already made pursuant to (a) or (b), above.

This Policy applies to licensing-related transactions concerning University rights in patents, copyrights and tangible research property at the Office of the President, individual campuses and all other University facilities and locations. Applicability to the Department of Energy (DOE) Laboratories is to the extent that this Policy does not conflict with the contractual obligations of the University to the DOE.

The Senior Vice President - Business and Finance shall issue administrative guidelines for use by campuses, Laboratories and the Office of the President in implementing this Policy. Such guidelines shall require compliance with this Policy and approval by the Senior Vice President - Business and Finance of each University licensing-related transaction involving the acceptance of equity. Exceptions to this Policy shall be approved by the Senior Vice President - Business and Finance.

University of California Office of the President
February 16, 1996
Available online at http://www.ucop.edu/ott/equi-pol.html

 

appendix ix  

DISCLOSURE OF STUDENT RECORDS

Pursuant to the Federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, the California Education Code and the University of California Policies Applying to the Disclosure of Information from Student Records, students at UCLA have the right:

1. to inspect and review records pertaining to themselves in their capacity as students, except as the right may be waived or qualified under the Federal and State Laws and the University Policies
2. to have withheld from disclosure, absent their prior consent for release, personally identifiable information from their student records, except as provided by the Federal and State Laws and the University Policies
3. to inspect records maintained by UCLA of disclosures of personally identifiable information from their student records
4. to seek correction of their student records through a request to amend the records or, if such request is denied, through a hearing
5. to file complaints with the U.S. Department of Education regarding alleged violations of the rights accorded them by the Federal Act.

Where the law is silent, the campus is guided by these principles:

– The privacy of an individual is of great weight and the information in a student’s file should be disclosed to the student on request unless there are compelling University interests for nondisclosure of particular information.

– Without the written consent of the student, disclosure of confidential information from student records to faculty members is limited to those records in which the faculty member has a "legitimate educational interest."

Find the complete policy on Disclosure of Student Records online in the UCLA General Catalog at http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog or contact the Registrar’s Office at (310) 825-1091 for more information.

appendix x

OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION

The publications listed below are the primary sources of information about the University policies and procedures referred to in this manual, as well as other official publications of the University. Also included are the offices responsible for issuing each publication; in most cases these publications are available on the web.

Academic Personnel Manual - General description of policies for administering the University’s academic personnel program. Academic Personnel Office, http://www.ucop.edu/acadadv/acadpers/apm, (310) 825-3841.

The UCLA CALL: A Summary of Academic Personnel Policies and Procedures - Policy and procedure guide for processing UCLA academic personnel actions. Academic Personnel Office, http://www.apo.ucla.edu/call, (310) 825-3841.

Manual of the Academic Senate, Systemwide - The all-governing policy instrument for the University containing bylaws and regulations of the Universitywide Academic Senate. Academic Senate Executive Office, http://www.ucop.edu/senate, (310) 825-3851.

Manual of the Academic Senate, Los Angeles Division - Specific bylaws and regulations dealing with the organization of the Senate on the UCLA campus. Academic Senate Executive Office, http://www.senate.ucla.edu, (310) 825-3851.

UCLA Administrative Policies & Procedures (formerly the UCLA Policy & Standard Procedures Manual) – Contains administrative policies and procedures applicable to all campus units. The official source for implementing policies issued by the campus. Office of Administrative Vice Chancellor, http://www.adminvc.ucla.edu/appm, (310) 825-7531.

University of California Contract and Grant Manual - Policies and procedures for administering research contract and grant activities. http://www.ucop.edu/raohome/cgmanual.

UCLA Regulations on Activities, Registered Organizations and Use of Properties - A booklet setting forth the regulations and procedures relative to use of campus facilities for non-classroom activities. Center for Student Programming, (310) 825-7041, http://www.saonet.ucla.edu/campus_regs/.  [Also see the Administrative Policies & Procedures Manual, Policy 860: Extracurricular Use of University Facilities, http://www.adminvc.ucla.edu/appm] 

Policies Applying to Campus Activities, Organizations and Students - A Universitywide publication outlining policies and regulations on the general functioning of the campuses.  Local campus offices may be consulted regarding campus implementation.  Center for Student Programming, (310) 825-7041, http://www.ucop.edu/ucophome/uwnews/aospol/toc.html.

UCLA Student Conduct Code - Procedures for adjudicating student conduct matters. Dean of Students, (310) 825-3871, http://www.deanofstudents.ucla.edu.

The TA Handbook - An easy reference for TAs on most of the administrative and teaching issues they are likely to encounter during the year. Office of Instructional Development, (310) 794-5117, http://www.oid.ucla.edu/Tatp/ta-handbook/handbook-frame.htm.

The Teacher’s Guide - A summary of policies, procedures and facilities relating to undergraduate instruction as well as useful teaching suggestions. Office of Instructional Development, (310) 825-9149, http://www.oid.ucla.edu/Publications/teachersguide/course_planning_body.htm.

Academic Apprentice Personnel Manual - Policies and procedures governing the appointment and responsibilities of teaching assistants, associates and fellows. Graduate Student Support, (310) 825-1025, http://www.gdnet.ucla.edu/gss/appm/appmintro.htm.

Standards and Procedures for Graduate Study at UCLA - A summary of degree requirements, regulations, policies and special programs to facilitate progress toward the degree for graduate students. Graduate Admissions/Student Academic Affairs, (310) 825-3819, http://www.gdnet.ucla.edu/gasaa/library/spintro.htm.

Graduate Adviser's Manual – A comprehensive guide to assist Graduate Advisors in understanding the many policies, procedures and other matters that are encountered in counseling students. Graduate Division, (310) 206-6086, http://www.gdnet.ucla.edu/faculty.html.

UCLA General Catalog - Gives detailed descriptions of all undergraduate and graduate majors, courses and degree programs, plus academic requirements. Office of the Registrar, (310) 825-1091, http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/.

Schedule of Classes - Provides quarterly information on classes, meeting places, times, instructors, exam schedule, fee payments, class enrollment and URSA – University Records System Access. Office of the Registrar, (310) 825-1091, http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/schedule/.

UCLA Faculty Handbook and Resource Guide - A reference guide to the services and facilities available to academic employees of UCLA and where to find them. Academic Personnel Office, (310) 825-3841, http://www.apo.ucla.edu/facultyhandbook.

UCLA Fact Book - A campus profile issued annually which summarizes interesting and important data about UCLA enrollments, budgets organization and facilities. Office of Academic Planning and Budget, (310) 825-2321, http://www.apb.ucla.edu/profile.htm.

Collective Bargaining Agreements – Terms and conditions of employment for employees covered by labor agreements. Campus Human Resources, www.chr.ucla.edu/chr/ppaa/index.html, (310) 794-0800.

Group Insurance Regulations – Policies, regulations and procedures for the UC Health and Welfare programs. Campus Human Resources, www.ucop.edu/bencom, (310) 794-0800.

Retirement Manual, UC (System Plan Documents) – Policies, regulations and procedures for the UC Retirement System. Campus Human Resources, www.ucop.edu/bencom/hw/ygip/intro.html, (310) 794-0800.

Personnel Policies for Staff Members – Policies for all non-represented staff employees. Campus Human Resources, www.ucop.edu/humres/policies, (310) 794-0800.

UCLA Non-Academic Title and Pay Plan – Title and pay scale for staff employees. Campus Human Resources, www.chr.ucla.edu/chr/tpp/tab_title_pay.html, (310) 794-0800.

 

Table of Contents | Previous: Faculty Referral Information | Next: Index