Skip to Content

Aug 2, 1995 Minutes

Present:  Bible, Ford, Horne, Hunter, Middlebrook, Sawey, Stedman, Swinney,
and Winek.

Absent: Caverly, Deduck, Glassman, Lyman, Pascoe, and Weller.

Guests: VPF&SS Bill Nance, Assoc. VP-AA Pat Cassidy, Librarians
Margaret Vaverek and Leigh Kilman; Mike Moore, Sandra Akridge.


108 BUDGET CYCLE, FY96 (Guest: VPF&SS Bill Nance)
02 SENATE MINUTES OF 6/7/95 and 7/19/95

The meeting was called to order at 4:04, Chair Swinney presiding.

108 BUDGET CYCLE, FY96 (Guest: VPF&SS Bill Nance)

Mr. Nance explained a handout on the FY96 budget plan, i.e. what SWT
receives from the State under House Bill 1, plus locally generated increases
(General Fee increase and projected recapture funds from the University's
divisions) and where those monies will be spent. Maximum available funds
from increases are $3,955,101. "Available" means what is left over for
salary increases and strategic plan initiatives after subtracting built-in
cost increases (promotion pay, insurance increases, hail damage, etc.).
The 3 percent pay increase will cost $1,472,899, leaving $2,482,202.
Out of this $2.4 million, $1,129,424 will be dedicated to some form of
salary catch-up effort for faculty and staff (the form is yet to be
determined for this 2 percent increase) and $1,046,106 will go to approved
initiatives in various departments and support services. $105,000 will
be transferred to auxiliary non-pledged funds. That leaves $201,672 for
other possible unknown strategic plan initiatives. Copies of this spread
sheet are available on request from the Senate Office, 8323.

One point that hit home in the legislative debates was that the
State is saying that any new funding in the future is going to be our
responsibility. The law has been changed to allow universities to charge
general fees up to the level of tuition. Other universities have increased
this fee a great deal. SWT has raised it one dollar. The VPs are currently
examining what is going on at other schools, and plan a comprehensive review
of the SWT fee structure.

The question of what becomes of the 2 percent pay increase top-off
($1,129,424) was discussed. The Legislative Budget Board questions the
legality of "bonuses" but the term "award" still has a code number in the
law and "merit" is business as usual. The State Attorney General could be
asked for an opinion, or a "letter of legislative intent" could be requested
from someone on the Education Committee. (The latter is quicker and easier
to get, but will it stand up in court?) Under law State employees cannot
be paid more for past performance than their contract called for, and yet
we can pay "merit" for expectations based on past performance. Very murky.
"Merit" gets permanently fixed on future salaries, but "bonuses" and
presumably "awards" are a one-shot deal. It was pointed out that "merit"
in the past may have lead to part (not all) of our salary inequities.
Prof. Swinney noted that previous Senates had serious concerns regarding
the last four merit increases (FY89, FY90, FY91, and FY93).

The situation of career-ladder librarians was commented upon.
Mr. Nance noted that increased library fees could be used to alleviate
the problem, but this was not in the current plan. All salaries will
be examined for inequities after the 3 percent almost across-the-board
raise. "Almost" means department heads have the option of not including
someone in the 3 percent pool.

Funding for departments releasing teachers for the Honors Program
did not appear in the "initiatives" budget. Lack of funding could mean
the eventual disappearance of the Honors Program, according to Honors Program
Director Jon Bible.

The School of Health Professions reorganization budget was commented
upon. About five program heads will become chairs, with concomitant

The bottom-line is that as a group SWT employees are underpaid, but
some are much more underpaid than others--with regard to affording some minimal
quality of life. Dr. Susan Griffith and Joseph Meyer of the Office
of Institutional Research and Planning will present their linear regression
model for rectifying pay inequities to the Senate in September. The model
includes only tenure and tenure-track faculty.

After motions were made and withdrawn during discussion, the following
motion, presented by Jon Bible, passed: That the Faculty Senate do an
opinion survey of the faculty at SWT and explain what the options are
regarding the 2 percent (on top of the 3 percent) raise. Prof. Swinney will
bring a draft of a survey to the Senate before its distribution in the latter
part of August.

Issues of equity and jurisprudence will have to be explained to get
informed opinions. Decisions on the distribution of the 2 percent will be
forthcoming from the President's Cabinet in Fall 1995 so we need quick feedback
to affect any decision. Please read the survey when you get it and respond


The following persons were unanimously agreed upon as appointees to fill
vacancies on University Committees:

Academic Core: Lydia Garner (History); Suspension Committee: Alvin
Short (Sociology); Committee on Committees: Mike Boone (EAPS); Insurance
Committee: Leslie Jones (EAPS); Retirement Committee: Joy Boone
(Health Administration)

With these final changes, the Committee report is ready for publication.
The Senate Office will forward rosters to Committee Chairs as soon as final
proof reading is completed.


The Senate recommended that the University Club be opened to Faculty
from 7:00 to 9:30 or 10:00 weekday mornings for coffee, doughnuts, etc.
This is viewed as the first step toward the reestablishment of a Faculty
Lounge on campus.


Profs. Ford and Winek were appointed to serve this function.

02 SENATE MINUTES OF 6/7/95 and 7/19/95

The minutes were approved.


(1) A letter has been received from Dr. Samuel Tarsitano (Associate
Prof., Biology) re "official oppression," on campus. He argues that
supervisors (e.g. chairs, deans, directors, etc.) should not use their
positions to stifle opposition and suppress opinion. He proposes that the
Senate support workshops for SWT administrators and employees so
everyone will know such actions are illegal under the criminal code of the
State of Texas.

In addition, Prof. Tarsitano alleges that anonymous complaints are
being kept in personnel files of faculty and staff. This too, he says, is
illegal and must be stopped.

Prof. Swinney will check with the University attorney on these
questions. The item will be returned to the agenda of the next meeting.

(2) Dean John Beck (School of Education) requested approval of a non-
substantive name change of the M.A. degree with a major in Developmental
Education to "Developmental and Adult Education" to reflect the curriculum
dealing with "at risk" students of all ages and populations. The Senate voted
to support the Curriculum Committee's recommendation of the name change
as requested.

(3) Prof. Middlebrook raised the question of what happens with social
security, etc. when contracts begin September 1st but school begins prior to
that. Prof. Swinney will obtain clarification for the next meeting.

The next meeting will be August 23, 1994 at 4:00 p.m., place t.b.a.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:01 p.m.

Ramona Ford