Senators Present: Anderson, Bible, Conroy, Gillis, Gordon, Hays, Irvin,
McGee, Pascoe, Renick, Sawey, Skerpan, Stimmel and Winek.
Absent: None
Guests: Pres. Supple, VPAA Gratz, Pat Cassidy (AVPAA), Don Hazlewood (Math), Ev
Swinney (History), Cliff Ronan (English), Margaret Vaverek (Library), Mike Moore
and Rebecca Bell-Metereau (English).
CONTENTS
PAAG
PPS 7.10 MERIT AND PERFORMANCE PAY
FACULTY GRIEVANCE PROCESS
VPIT SEARCH
FACULTY RESEARCH ENHANCEMENT GRANT PPS
ART/TECHNOLOGY BUILDING
FACULTY PARKING
AUTOMATED GRADE REPORTING
SUMMER ORIENTATION
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES OF 1-27-99
Chair Bible called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
PAAG
PPS 7.10, MERIT AND PERFORMANCE PAY
Prof. Swinney pointed out sections in the proposed revision of PPS 7.10
which are inconsistent with wording found in the Regents' Rules and the draft
of the new Faculty Handbook, stressed the need for these three documents to be
consistent, and presented a new draft of PPS 7.10 which is consistent with
other documents. Senators discussed the the sections Dr. Swinney pointed out.
Pres. Supple explained the rationale for the administration's proposal
to revise procedures by having deans hold a percentage of the money available
for merit and performance pay in order to make adjustments following review of
department recommendations. The goal is to cut down on the number of grievances
filed over merit pay, and he believes this would be accomplished in two ways.
First, deans could use the funds to increase the amount available to individual
departments if there are faculty who are evaluated as meritorious but not
recommended for merit pay because the money allocated to the department is not
sufficient to award merit pay to all meritorious faculty. Second, chairs would
notify faculty about their recommendations before the deans make their final
decisions which would allow faculty to "plead their case" to the dean who could
then choose to recommend that they be awarded merit pay.
Senators discussed this at length. Some recall that when deans had more
voice in this process it did not seem to work any better than it does now; some
think it was actually worse then, because among other things it was widely
perceived that in at least some instances the withheld merit money was used for
non-merit purposes. Other senators see some advantages to the proposed change;
for example, it would seem that if faculty could demonstrate that an adjustment
is in order, chairs and deans would be more willing to make this adjustment
before the overall merit determinations become final and while money is
available for that purpose.
This item will be placed on the agenda for the joint Senate/CAD meeting
on February 17 and then returned to the Senate agenda afterward.
FACULTY GRIEVANCE PROCESS
Senator Skerpan and her visiting colleagues, all of whom were involved
recently in a merit grievance, expressed their frustration with the process.
The Senate is on record as clearly viewing the present faculty grievance
process as untenable.
Pres. Supple, VPAA Gratz, and the Senate discussed the idea of a school
level grievance process which would supplement the University level grievance
process. The school level committee might be composed of faculty, the chair,
and the dean. The goal would be to try to solve problems at the school level
before taking them to the University Faculty Grievance Committee. Senators saw
some potential advantages to this. They also pointed out that faculty
generally try to do this, but some chairs and deans appear to be unwilling to
attempt to work in good faith to solve problems.
VPIT SEARCH
The President's Cabinet has recommended that the search be continued, a
head-hunter be employed to help identify candidates, and two of the candidates
already interviewed be asked to continue as candidates for the position.
FACULTY RESEARCH ENHANCEMENT GRANT PPS
VPAA Gratz reported that the revisions proposed by the Senate will be
circulated to CAD for review.
ART/TECHNOLOGY BUILDING
Pres. Supple reported that there is not a 7 million dollar "overrun,"
but that there is a problem because the cost estimated by the architect is way
below current cost estimates. Some of the blame for the difference is the
architect's and some of the difference is due to rising prices of materials.
Pres. Supple reported that the architect met with faculty who will work
in the building and that they agreed upon a list of things which could be "cut"
to pare down the cost. Sen. Conroy, however, said that this is not so; she said
that a few faculty may have talked informally with the architect, but that the
faculty who will work in the building have not agreed upon a list of things to
be cut.
Pres. Supple is negotiating with the contractor to approach the
building as a "contractor at-risk building."
FACULTY PARKING
Increases in parking fees will be proposed by the Transportation and
Parking Committee, sent to the University Council and then to the Senate. Pres.
Supple reported that the fee increases proposed will be based on data about what
other universities charge.
AUTOMATED GRADE REPORTING
Senators were given a copy of a memo summarizing the pros and cons of
this idea which Dr. Smallwood sent to the deans on 1/25/99. RTA'd until 2/10.
SUMMER ORIENTATION
RTA'd until 2/10
NEW BUSINESS
None
MINUTES OF 1-27-99
The Minutes of 1/27/99 were approved as written.
The Senate adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
