• Section 1 - Context
• Section 2 - Authority
• Section 3 - Scope
• Section 4 - Procedure
• Lodging an Appeal Against an Intent to Apply Decision
• Lodging an Appeal Against a Promotion Outcome
• Appeal Outcome
• Section 5 - Compliance

Section 1 - Context

(1) This procedure details all management aspects and general conditions to be followed for the lodgement of an academic promotion appeal by academic staff at RMIT for all academic levels.

Section 2 - Authority

(2) Authority for this document is established by the Academic Promotion Policy.

Section 3 - Scope

(3) This procedure applies to all RMIT academic staff  when lodging an academic promotion appeal.

Section 4 - Procedure

Lodging an Appeal Against an Intent to Apply Decision

(4) An academic staff member whose ‘Intent to Apply’ (or equivalent Promotion to Level B application) was not endorsed by the Dean or equivalent, or the Deputy Vice-Chancellor or equivalent (or nominee) on the grounds that they are not ready to apply, may appeal this decision.

(5) The staff member must lodge a written appeal with the Chair of the University Academic Promotion Appeals Committee (UAPAC) via the Committee’s Executive Officer no later than five (5) working days following receipt of written advice that their Intent to Apply form has not been endorsed.

(6) The appeal must:

1. detail why the application should be considered by the UAPAC.
2. set out a case which demonstrates they are ready to apply for promotion based on:
   1. demonstrated achievements against the nominated criteria; and
   2. any applicable performance benchmarks as outlined in Educator and Researcher Framework or its subsequent replacement.

Lodging an Appeal Against a Promotion Outcome

(7) An academic staff member whose application for promotion was not successful may appeal on procedural grounds only. Disagreement with the promotion outcome or the Academic Promotion Committee's feedback is not grounds for appeal.

(8) The staff member must lodge a written appeal with the Chair of the UAPAC via the Committee’s Executive Officer no later than 15 working days following receipt of the panel’s written feedback.

(9) The appeal must:

1. identify the specific clause(s) of the relevant procedure/s it is alleged were not followed.
2. outline the precise grounds and circumstances to support the appellant’s case that an alleged breach of procedure(s) occurred.

Appeal Outcome

(10) The UAPAC will consider the appeal within 30 working days and refer the case to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor Education (or nominee) with a recommendation to:

1. dismiss the appeal; or
2. uphold the appeal and arrange that the application be assessed (eligibility) or reassessed (procedure) by the appropriate Promotion Committee, comprising of new membership.

(11) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor Education(or nominee) will:

1. consider the recommendation of the UAPAC and make a decision in accordance with the governing policy; and
2. write to the appellant to notify them of the outcome of the appeal.

(12) There is no further right of appeal as a result of recommendations or decisions made under clauses 9 and 10.

(13) Any further decision of a Promotion Panel as a result of an appeal being upheld and an application being re-assessed is final and is not appealable.

Section 5 - Compliance

(14)  Breaches of this Procedure are monitored by the RMIT People Promotions Team and reported on an annual basis to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor Education.

(15)  The Deputy Vice-Chancellor Education reports breaches on an annual basis to Academic Board.

(16)  Breaches of this procedure are reportable via the Organisational Breach Reporting Form and are managed in accordance with the Compliance Breach Management Procedure.