Open Collections

UBC Publications

UBC Publications

UBC Publications

[Meeting minutes of the Senate of The University of British Columbia] 2003-01-22

Item Metadata


JSON: senmin-1.0390120.json
JSON-LD: senmin-1.0390120-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): senmin-1.0390120-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: senmin-1.0390120-rdf.json
Turtle: senmin-1.0390120-turtle.txt
N-Triples: senmin-1.0390120-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: senmin-1.0390120-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

Vancouver Senate Secretariat
Senate and Curriculum Services
Enrolment Services
2016-1874 East Mall
Vancouver, BCV6T1Z1
Present: President M. C. Piper (Chair), Vice President B. C. McBride, Dr. P. Adebar, Mr. R.
Affleck, Mr. O. Alasaly, Ms. C. Bekkers, Dr. B. Bemmels, Dean J. Blom, Prof. C. Boyle, Mr. P. T.
Brady, Dr. J. Brander, Dr. L. Brinton, Dr. M. A. Cameron, Dr. J. Carolan, Dr. D. Cherchas, Dr.
B. Crawford, Dr. J. Dennison, Ms. M. Friesen, Dean N. Gallini, Dr. J. H. V. Gilbert, Dr. D.
Granot, Dean F. Granot, Dr. L. Gunderson, Dr. P. G. Harrison, Dr. R. Irwin, Dean M. Isaacson,
Dr. J. Johnson, Mr. D. Jones, Mr. P. Kahlon, Dr. B. S. Lalli, Ms. J. Lau, Dr. V. LeMay, Ms. C.
Lenis, M. Litchfield, Mr. G. Lloyd, Ms. Y. Lu, Dr. M. MacEntee, Dr. P. L. Marshall, Mr. A.
McEachern, Mr. W. B. McNulty, Dr. D. Paterson, Dean M. Quayle, Mr. J. Rogers, Dr. A. Rose,
Dr. H. J. Rosengarten, Dr. C. Shields, Mr. B. Simpson, Dean R. Sindelar, Dr. C. E. Slonecker, Mr.
C. Ste-Croix, Dr. B. Stelck, Dr. R. C. Tees, Dr. J. R. Thompson, Dr. S. Thorne, Dean R. Tierney,
Mr. D. Tompkins, Mr. D. Verma, Dr. M. Vessey, Dr. R. Wilson, Dr. R. Windsor-Liscombe, Dr.
R. A. Yaworsky, Dean E. H. K. Yen, Mr. M. Yung, Mr. C. Zappavigna.
Regrets: Mr. P. T. Burns, Dean J. A. Cairns, Dr. D. Fielding, Mr. E. Greathed, Dr. R. Harrison,
Ms. M. Hassen, Dr. J. Hepburn, Mr. R. Hira, Ms. J. Hutton, Dr. S. B. Knight, Mr. T. P. T. Lo,
Mr. R. W. Lowe, Dr. K. MacQueen, Dean D. Muzyka, Dr. P. Potter, Ms. C. Quinlan, Dr. B.
Rodrigues, Dean J. N. Saddler, Mr. B. J. Silzer, Ms. L. Sparrow, Ms. G. Tsai, Dr. H. J. J. van
Vuuren, Dean pro tem. L. Whitehead, Ms. S. Yim.
Minutes of the Previous Meeting
Dr. Tees l        That the minutes of the meeting of December
Dr. Rosengarten i        1$> 2002 be approved as circulated.
Remarks from the Chair and Related Questions
The President reported that an urgent trip to Ottawa to participate in discussions about
the federal budget had precluded her attendance at the December meeting of Senate. The
budget was sched-
Vol. 2002/03 13034
 Vancouver Senate 13035
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Curriculum Committee
uled for release in late February 2003, and the President expressed optimism that
universities would be significantly featured.
A UBC delegation including the President, Dean Frieda Granot and Associate Vice
President Michael Goldberg had recently spent three days in each of Singapore and Hong
Kong. In Singapore, the President was appointed to the board of governors of the
National University of Singapore. The President was pleased to participate as the first
non-Singaporean to be appointed to the board of this strategic university in the Asia
Pacific. The delegation met with friends and alumni of UBC in Singapore, and was also
pleased to secure a major grant from the Lee Foundation in support of the annual
exchange of 20 students between Singapore, Canada and the United States.
In Hong Kong, the UBC group was pleased to meet with each of the three new presidents
of the following Hong Kong institutions: Hong Kong University, the Hong Kong
University of Science and Technology, and the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Each of
these three important universities had experienced recent changes in leadership. More
than 200 people attended an alumni gathering, which the President stated was evidence of
the incredible support for UBC in Hong Kong and other parts of Asia. A group of
Johanians, who support St. John's College at UBC, hosted a luncheon in honour of Dean
Granot. The President described the trip as extremely productive, and thanked Dean
Granot and Associate Vice President Goldberg for their participation.
Curriculum Committee
Please see also 'Appendix A: Curriculum Change Summary.'
Dr. Marshall presented the reports, as Chair of the Committee. He reported that the
Curriculum Committee was working toward a proposal to amend its terms of reference.
Once approved, the
 Vancouver Senate 13036
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Curriculum Committee
change would reduce the level of detail in the curriculum reports submitted to the entire
Senate, as more of the proposals would receive final approval from the Committee and be
forwarded directly to the Calendar editors. The anticipated result would be that Senate
would only need to grant explicit approval for new programs, issues of importance for the
entire University, and controversial proposals.
Dr. Marshall l        That the curriculum proposals from the
Dean Quayle J       Faculty of Agricultural Sciences be approved.
Dr. Marshall l        That the curriculum proposals from the
Dean Isaacson J        Faculty of Applied Science be approved.
In response to a query from Dr. Carolan about the relatively low crediting of courses in
relation to contact hours (including laboratory hours), Dr. Adebar stated that the Faculty
had reviewed the amount of work done by students during the laboratory period to
determine whether additional credit was warranted. Dr. Marshall pointed out that the
number of credits assigned to a course had a direct effect on the tuition fees paid by
students, and that the Faculty of Applied Science had attempted to keep the credit loads
for all of its programs at a reasonably low level.
In response to a question about MECH 221, a new course worth 11 credits, Dr. Adebar
stated that students who failed this course would also likely fail their entire year and
would be required to repeat. There would be no opportunity for remediation for
individual sections of the course. In response to a further query, Dr. Adebar clarified that
the existing smaller courses that had con-
 Vancouver Senate 13037
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Curriculum Committee
tributed material to MECH 221, such as APSC 278 and APSC 279, would not be deleted
due to their status as service courses for other departments within the Faculty.
The motion was
put and carried.
Dr. Marshall l        That the curriculum proposals from the
Dean Gallini J        Faculty of Arts be approved.
In response to a query from Mr. Brady about ARBC 420, Dr. Vessey defined "mirrors for
princes" as a vulgar medieval genre of literature written to offer advice to rulers on
courtly behaviour in the form of didactic manuals depicting rulers in action.
In response to a query from Dr. Tees, Mr. Eric Smith, Coordinator of Curriculum and
Elections, stated that the Curriculum Committee intended to make a gradual shift from
using "equivalent to" to "same as" when describing equivalent courses.
The motion was
put and carried.
Dr. Marshall l        That the curriculum proposals from the
Dr. Tees J       Faculty of Commerce and Business
Administration be approved.
Mr. Ste-Croix, referring to COMM 371, asked why the course had been deleted, only to
be reinstated some years later. Dr. Bemmels replied that the course had been deleted from
the Calendar because it had not been offered for several years; since the Faculty had
recently identified a faculty member willing to teach the course, the Faculty wished to
reinstate it in the Calendar. Dr. Marshall stated that, because the process to reinstate
deleted courses was perceived as "onerous,"
 Vancouver Senate
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Curriculum Committee
many Faculties tended to leave defunct courses in the Calendar for excessively long
periods of time.
The motion was
put and carried.
Dr. Marshall
Dean Tierney
That the curriculum proposals from the
Faculty of Education be approved.
Dr. Marshall reported that the Master of Management program and its related courses
had been tabled for further consideration by the Graduate Council, and he hoped to be
able to present this new program for approval at the February 2003 meeting of Senate.
Dr. Marshall
Dean Granot
}That the curriculum proposals from the
Faculty of Graduate Studies, with the
exception of the Master of Management and its
related courses (BAFI 522, BAIT 515, BAIT
516, BAIT 521, BAIT 523, BAIT 525, BAIT
527, BAAC 550, BAHR 550, BAPA 550,
BAMS 550, BAIT 550, BABS 550, BASM
550), be approved.
Dr. Johnson asked whether the proposed Bridge Program represented a new program, and
how it would be integrated with existing programs. Dean Granot stated that UBC had
received funding for this new superstructure from the Canadian Institute for Health
Research (CIHR), and that the Bridge Program aimed to combine the courses and
expertise of nine participating units. The Dean expressed optimism that the Bridge
Program would continue to receive granting agency funding following the initial five year
commitment. Dr. Johnson expressed concern about the development of a new
superstructure in the institutional hierarchy, particularly in view of the interdisciplinary
nature of the Program. She asked whether sufficient consideration had been
 Vancouver Senate 13039
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Curriculum Committee
given to the resource implications and how UBC will support and sustain programs such
as the Bridge Program over the longer term. Dean Granot stated that the intention was to
operate the Bridge Program for as long as there was external funding available.
Vice President McBride urged caution in this unusual situation, and asked whether the
Curriculum Committee had discussed the resource implications of the Bridge Program.
Dr. Marshall responded that the evaluation of resource implications did not fall within
the mandate of the Curriculum Committee. Vice President McBride asked that it be
recorded that the Bridge Program, if approved, would be funded for a period of five years
from external sources, and that there was no commitment to identify ongoing internal
funding for the Program. Vice President McBride urged the proposers of the program to
include a note about funding constraints in any Calendar entry describing the Bridge
Dr. Tees suggested that the Budget Committee would be the appropriate body to examine
the financial issues and report back to Senate. He noted that, normally, when a program
receives Faculty approval, the dean involved must indicate that the necessary financial
support is in place; given the interdisciplinarity of the proposal, the Senate Budget
Committee might take on this role. Dr. MacEntee stated that new programs are normally
sent by the Provost's Office to the Senate Budget Committee for approval before
appearing on a Senate agenda.
Mr. Brady l        That consideration of the Bridge Program and
Dr. Shields J        the six BRDG courses be postponed, pending a
report back to Senate on financial viability.
 Vancouver Senate 13040
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Nominating Committee
Mr. Brady requested clarification about which body should be directed to report back to
Senate. The President stated that the Budget Committee, in cooperation with the
Curriculum Committee and the Provost's Office, should be the body to examine the issues
and report back to Senate.
The motion to
postpone was put
and carried.
The motion to approve the
graduate curriculum
proposals, with the
exception of the postponed
items, was put and carried.
Dr. Marshall l        That the curriculum proposals from the
Dr. Harrison J       Faculty of Science be approved.
Nominating Committee
As Chair of the Nominating Committee, Dr. Gilbert presented the following proposed
terms of reference for the recently constituted Teaching and Learning Committee.
1. To advise Senate on such matters of teaching and learning, as it may consider
appropriate, or as may be referred to it from time to time.
2. To promote both Senate and university-wide discussion regarding matters of
teaching and learning.
3. To make recommendations, as appropriate, on matters of teaching and learning
Quorum =6
Dr. Gilbert l        That the proposed terms of reference and
Dean Isaacson J        quorum for the Teaching and Learning
Committee be approved.
 Vancouver Senate 13041
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Nominating Committee
Dr. Gilbert invited Dr. Paul Harrison, Chair of the Teaching and Learning Committee, to
comment. Dr. Harrison stated that the Teaching and Learning Committee saw itself as a
forum for issues related to teaching and learning that did not previously have a formal
place for discussion. The Committee did not wish to portray itself as a panel of experts,
but hoped that people would be free to bring new ideas and initiatives to the Committee
for feedback. Dr. Harrison stated that the Teaching and Learning Committee would not
represent an additional step in the curriculum approval process, nor would it serve as
another level of bureaucracy. He believed, however, that there was a role for the
Committee to gauge the relative success or failure of the institution as it strikes out in new
directions. The Committee's discussions would not always result in formal
recommendations or motions for approval by Senate.
As a member of the Teaching and Learning Committee, Mr. Ste-Croix stated that he
hoped that the Committee would promote dialogue on campus and provide students with
an enhanced sense of agency over their education. He expressed the opinion that too little
discussion had previously taken place between students and the professoriate.
In response to a question from Vice President McBride about the proactivity of the
Committee, Dr. Harrison stated that the Committee would both identify matters of
interest and serve as a receptor of issues referred to it.
There was some discussion about whether the third proposed term of reference was
necessary, given that the function of making recommendations seemed to be subsumed
within the first term of reference, namely to provide advice to Senate. Dr. Harrison stated
that the Committee saw the two terms of reference as distinct, because advising Senate
would not always necessarily entail actions or recommendations.
 Vancouver Senate 13042
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Reports from the Vice President, Academic & Provost
Mr. Affleck stated that the proposed terms seemed somewhat vague, and asked whether
the Committee intended to conduct concrete research. Mr. Tompkins agreed that concrete
measurements were desirable, and stated that the proposed terms of reference would
allow the Committee significant flexibility in its activities.
The motion was
put and carried.
Reports from the Vice President, Academic & Provost
The Vice President reported that, in accordance with University policy, he had struck a
senior level committee to oversee the academic integrity of the University during the
pending possible job action. The committee was to begin disseminating information to the
campus community in the near future. Dr. James Carolan had been identified as the
University's academic arbiter.
Please see also 'Appendix B: Report from the Vice President, Academic & Provost on
Post-Retirement Contracts.'
As requested by Senate at its May 2002 meeting, the Vice President McBride presented a
proposed new policy on post-retirement faculty employment contracts. He briefly
summarized the history of the ad hoc Committee on the Academic Implications of
Mandatory Retirement and the Committee's recommendations, noting particularly the
recommendation that the University amend Policy #27 to allow faculty appointments
after the age of 65. The ad hoc Committee expected a hiring crisis in the following few
years, precipitated by the combination of large numbers of faculty retirements, growing
numbers of students, and an inadequate supply of new faculty recruits.
 Vancouver Senate 13043
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Reports from the Vice President, Academic & Provost
In introducing the proposed new Retirement and Post-Retirement Policy (see "Appendix
B' for the text of the Policy), Vice President McBride stated that most of the document
simply formalized the current practice at UBC. One new aspect of the policy, however,
would be a requirement that departments demonstrate that the advantages of a post-
retirement appointment outweighed the advantages of a new tenure-track faculty
appointment before a post-retirement contract would be approved. Post-retirement
contracts would not be considered a right or a reward, and post-retirement appointees
would be expected to carry a full teaching load in addition to conducting research.
Mr. Brady expressed the opinion that a revised policy should consider the appointee's
competence, rather than simply his/her age. He stated that the current University Policy
#27 was 25 years old and should be updated. He questioned the "revenue-neutral" aspect
of the policy, asking whether a faculty member might find him/herself performing the
same job after the age of 65 for much less money than before. Vice President McBride
replied that it was the ad hoc Committee that had made the recommendation concerning
revenue neutrality, and that the administration had not made any statement on that issue.
Dr. MacEntee, who had served as a member of the ad hoc Committee, recalled that the
Committee envisioned the following:
• a retiring faculty member might earn, for example, $100 K.
• a replacement new faculty member would be appointed at a lower starting salary,
e.g., $60 K
• $40 K would therefore be available for deployment in the form of a post-
retirement contract.
Mr. Brady raised concern about the following parts of the proposed policy:
1. Policy, #1: if there are regular exceptions, retirement at age 65 was not, in fact,
mandatory and should not be referred to as such.
2. Procedure #2b: language about "immediate and specific need" appeared to be
inconsistent with Procedure #3c, which stated that a post-retirement contract may
be signed up to two years before it is due to commence.
3. Procedures #2e and #2f: "should" should be replaced by "shall."
 Vancouver Senate 13044
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Reports from the Vice President, Academic & Provost
4. A Post-Retirement Employment contract under Procedure #3a for up to three years
was inconsistent with the language about Special-Purpose Retirement Contracts
under Procedure #2.
5. Procedure #3a: factors that would result in termination of the contract should be
6. Procedure #3f: does not specify "whose" decision.
The Vice President clarified that Special-Purpose Retirement Appointments, which might
be for just one course, would be distinct from Post-Retirement Employment Contracts,
which might last for up to three years, with a further extension of two years. In response
to #6 above, the Vice President stated that the department head or dean would make the
Dr. Brander spoke in favour of the proposed policy as a real step forward, and was
hopeful that this progress was not obscured by debate over mandatory retirement. He
noted that the senior faculty in Faculty of Commerce and Business Administration had
much expertise to offer, and that it seemed silly to disallow their contributions after the
age of 65, particularly considering that all faculty salaries were relatively low compared to
market value. Since many of the senior faculty had indicated willingness to remain on
staff, Dr. Brander stated that a policy that would permit their employment after age 65
without insulting them was the best solution.
In response to a question from Dr. Dennison, Vice President McBride stated that there
was varying opinion about whether mandatory retirement could be a bargaining issue.
Dr. Dennison asked whether the Faculty Association had responded to the Senate
discussions on the matter. As one of a number of unhappily-retired faculty members, he
expressed the opinion that mandatory retirement should be abolished retroactively. Vice
President McBride stated that the University was not yet encountering a hiring crisis and
was having no difficulty filling its vacant faculty positions with first-rate recruits.
Dr. Windsor-Liscombe stated that the University unfortunately seemed to forget the
contributions of professors soon after their retirement. He cited the example of a former
department head
 Vancouver Senate 13045
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Reports from the Vice President, Academic & Provost
in the Faculty of Arts, who had received a major award after the age of 70. Vice President
McBride agreed, adding that he knew people who had published in excess of 100 research
papers post-retirement.
Dr. Tees, as a member of the ad hoc Committee, stated that the Committee had consulted
very widely in a very short time period with emeriti, department heads, and the Faculty
Association. He stated that he was positive with respect to the proposed policy and was
hopeful that it would send the message that senior faculty who perform exceptionally well
have a place on the UBC campus. He urged the Vice President to recognize the pending
hiring crisis, emphasizing that, in three to five years' time, the University would face
significant difficult in recruiting adequate numbers faculty to fill vacancies.
Dean Gallini spoke in support of the policy, stating that she viewed senior and new
faculty members as complementary, rather than one being a replacement for the other.
She was hopeful that a policy that allowed productive senior faculty to remain employed
would also help the University to more effectively recruit new faculty members.
In response to a question from Mr. Tompkins, Vice President McBride stated that the
next step forward for the proposal would be approval by the Board of Governors.
Dean Isaacson stated that the proposal did offer some flexibility, but still did not address
the fact that faculty members in their 50's were less willing to be recruited by UBC, due to
mandatory retirement. The new policy would not offer any guarantees to those
individuals. Vice President McBride stated that the administration was not willing, at that
point in time, to make any such guarantees.
 Vancouver Senate 13046
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Reports from the Vice President, Academic & Provost
In response to a question from Dr. Thorne, Vice President McBride stated that the
administration was reluctant to extend the policy to cover administrative positions.
In response to a question from Mr. Lloyd about clinical faculty, Vice President McBride
stated that the regulations for clinical faculty were different from those applied to regular
faculty, and that clinical faculty contracts were frequently extended.
Dr. MacEntee spoke in support of the proposal as including everything the University
required at the moment, but expressed some discomfort about the idea that retaining a
post-retirement faculty member necessarily meant not hiring a new person. He expressed
the opinion that departments should attempt to both retain productive retirees and
actively recruit new faculty.
Dr. Vessey stated that many faculty members approaching retirement would likely wish to
take advantage of this proposed policy, but suggested that it would likely only apply to a
limited number of people. He likened the approval process for post-retirement contracts
to the promotion and tenure process, and stated that adjudication could be expensive if
implemented on a large scale. He also pointed out that employing large numbers of post-
retirement appointees would have a serious impact on the faculty bargaining unit, because
of the number of contracted individuals performing bargaining unit work. Vice President
McBride stated that post-retirement contracts would be restricted to a limited number of
people who had full support from their departments.
Mr. Rogers pointed out that, when all issues were considered, including pension
contributions and withdrawals, post-retirement contracts might not be as "revenue-
neutral" as they appear.
The President thanked Vice President McBride for his report and indicated that the
proposed policy would be sent to the Board of Governors for further discussion and
eventual approval.
 Vancouver Senate 13047
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Other Business
Other Business
Dr. Slonecker, as Chair of the Tributes Committee, stated that all but two of the
candidates to receive honorary degrees at the 2003 congregation ceremonies had
responded to the University's invitation. Once all the candidates had responded, and their
availability for individual ceremonies had been confirmed, Senate was to be informed of
the results.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The next regular meeting of
the Senate will be held on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 at 7:00 p.m.
 Vancouver Senate 13048
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Appendix A: Curriculum Change Summary
Appendix A: Curriculum Change Summary
AGRO 324, 326, 328, 401, 402, 403, 424
AGSC 496
CHBE 401, 402
EECE 310, 423, 452, 492
Computer Engineering Third Year
Software Engineering Option Third Year
MECH 220, 221, 222, 223
Mechanical Engineering Second Year
Electro-Mechanical Design Engineering Second Year
MMAT 460, 462
Environmental Engineering: First through Fifth Years (Third and Fourth Years New)
ARBC 420
MUSC 167, 364
Harpsichord Major
WMST 201
HESO 400, 449, 499
COMM 201, 300, 301, 302, 379
CUST 431, 432
Arts: Journalism
JRNL 510, 525, 535
ATSC 595
 Vancouver Senate 13049
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003	
Appendix A: Curriculum Change Summary
CPSC 540, 545, 554
EOSC 538, 539
ZOOL 524, 553, 554
Commerce & Business Administration
COMM 657
BAAC 550
BAHR 550
BAPA 550
BAMS 550
BAIT 550
BABS 550
BASM 550
Master of Health Administration Program
Applied Science
CHBE 580
CIVL 545
EECE 500, 501, 502, 540, 541, 546, 549, 562, 580, 586, 588
ATSC 448
BIOL 316, 317, 351,443
CPSC 101, 111, 121 211, 213, 221, 313, 424
EOSC 110, 111, 114, 115, 116, 117
MATH 342, 437
MICB 318
 Vancouver Senate 13050
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Appendix B: Report from the Vice President, Academic & Provost on Post-Retirement Contracts
Appendix B: Report from the Vice President, Academic & Provost on Post-
Retirement Contracts
January 9,2003
To: Senate
c/o Lisa Collins, Manager of Secretariat Services
From: Barry C. McBride
Vice President Academic and Provost
Re: Post-Retirement Contracts
Since 1978, UBC has had mandatory retirement at 65 years of age. There are sound reasons for
this mandatory retirement policy. These include:
• ensuring systemic opportunities for faculty renewal through the hiring and promotion of
newly qualified faculty members. The lifeblood of universities is dependent on a
continuing flow of new ideas and perspectives. It is critical that University faculty draw
upon recently qualified individuals who are committed to developing new areas of
knowledge and who advocate change and renewal. To attract and retain those individuals
the University must provide an environment that provides opportunities for tenure,
promotion and advancement.
• creating an environment in which it is acceptable to have a deferred compensation system
that involves lower pay in earlier years and higher pay in later years.
• encouraging and enabling faculty to plan in advance for retirement.
• requiring retirement at the age that corresponds with the commencement of both private
and public pension plans and tax concessions.
• enabling the University to plan for change and renewal.
Despite the desirability of mandatory retirement in a university context, UBC requires sufficient
flexibility to be able to retain faculty past the age of 65 years when it is in the best interests of the
University to do so. Since 1977, the University has utilized post-retirement appointments for
academic staff beyond the age of 65 years. These post-retirement appointments are made only
under special circumstances to meet an immediate and specific need, and are limited to terms of
up to one year at a time. The University should also be able to retain, for general academic duties,
exceptional faculty who have received the highest acclaim from the academic community and who
continue to distinguish themselves as scholars. To be competitive in recruitment, the University
may also wish to offer post-retirement employment contracts as part of a recruitment package
offered to an outstanding senior scholar.
Attached is a draft policy for Retirement and Post-Retirement for discussion.
 Vancouver Senate 13051
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Appendix B: Report from the Vice President, Academic & Provost on Post-Retirement Contracts
DRAFT - January 9, 2003
1. To continue the mandatory retirement age at 65 years.
2. To continue special purpose contracts with academic staff for one-year term positions.
3. To enable UBC to benefit from the continuing contributions of our highest achieving
faculty who are beyond the mandatory retirement age 65.
1. Mandatory Retirement: Except as may be explicitly set forth in this Policy, the mandatory
retirement age is 65 years.
2. Special-Purpose Post-Retirement Appointments: Where there is an immediate and specific
need and it is in the best interests of the University to reappoint a retiring or retired faculty
member to meet that need, a special-purpose post-retirement appointment may be made
for a term of up to one year at a time.
3. Post-Retirement Employment Contracts:
a. A limited number of exceptional faculty who have received the highest acclaim
from the academic community and who continue to distinguish themselves as
scholars will be eligible for consideration for post-retirement employment
b. Post-retirement employment contracts will only be made if it can be demonstrated
that the benefits to the Faculty outweigh the advantages of making a new faculty
c. Post-retirement employees will not be tenured.
d. Post-retirement employees will be expected to teach and maintain a strong
scholarly program.
e. Post-retirement employment contracts require the approval of the Provost.
f. Post-retirement employment contracts are not a right or a reward and will be
approved only if they are in the best interests of the University.
4. Review: This policy will be reviewed in 3 years.
1.   Mandatory Retirement:
 Vancouver Senate 13052
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Appendix B: Report from the Vice President, Academic & Provost on Post-Retirement Contracts
a. A full-time faculty member whose 65th birthday falls between January 1 and June
30 inclusive will continue in his or her rank and salary with applicable benefits
until June 30. A faculty member whose 65th birthday falls between July 1 and
December 31 inclusive will continue in his or her rank and salary with applicable
benefits until December 31.
b. A sessional lecturer or other part-time faculty member who reaches his or her 65th
birthday during the term of his or her appointment may continue in service until
the expiry date of the appointment.
2. Special-Purpose Post-Retirement Appointments:
a. There will be no requirement to grant any appointment beyond age 65.
b. There must be an immediate and specific need within the unit concerned and the
special-purpose post-retirement appointment must address this need.
c. A special-purpose post-retirement appointment must not be in place of renewing
the department through the appointment of tenured or tenure track faculty
d. Special-purpose post-retirement appointments are to be made primarily for
teaching/collection development duties, and occasionally for service on committees.
e. Remuneration should be commensurate with the services performed (e.g.
depending on the circumstances, teaching could be on a pro bono basis, or involve
a salary ranging from very modest to the scale amount for lecturers).
f. The title used by a special-purpose post-retirement appointee should reflect the
status of the appointee immediately prior to retirement (e.g. Professor Emeritus).
g. No payment will be made for occasional honorific or voluntary duties (e.g.
chairing doctoral oral examinations, supervising graduate students).
h.   Special-purpose post-retirement appointments are to be recommended by the head
of the unit concerned to the dean/librarian to the Vice-President, Academic &
Provost for approval. Agreement-in-principle should be sought by the head before
any assurances are given to possible appointees.
3. Post-Retirement Employment Contracts:
a. Post-retirement employment contracts may be concluded between UBC and a
member of faculty to start no earlier than age 65 and end no later than age 70. The
first contract will be for up to three years, with the understanding that it could be
renewed for up to an additional 2 years. All contracts will be reviewed yearly and
may be terminated with the appropriate notice.
b. The nature and evaluation of the duties must form part of the agreement. Duties
will include both teaching and research.
 Vancouver Senate 13053
Minutes ofIanuary 22,2003
Appendix B: Report from the Vice President, Academic & Provost on Post-Retirement Contracts
c. A post-retirement employment contract may be signed no earlier than two years
before it is due to commence.
d. Compensation will be determined when the contract is negotiated.
e. In making a decision on a post-retirement employment contract the Provost will
consider the recommendation of the Department, the Head and the Dean.
f. The decision will be based on evidence of outstanding success in teaching and in
research. Where appropriate there must be evidence of ongoing financial support
for research.
g. Post-retirement employment contracts may be full or part-time, but must include a
teaching component.


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items