Meeting 4 November 13, 2002
The Faculty Senate met at 3:15 p.m. in Union 240 with President Shellie Myers presiding.
ROLL CALL: Twenty-one senators present and five alternates were present (Amnet for Atkinson, Cambell for Callahan, Stark-Wroblewski for Kemp, Wilson for Palmer and Ewing for Raveill). Also present were President Patton, Provost Carter, Associate Provost for Academic Programs Fran Waller and SGA President Munatsi Manyande.
Provost Carter reported that some faculty, department chairs, Dean Wilson and he had attended a working session sponsored by the Higher Learning Commission and KAG. The focus was on accreditation and assessment. Consultants from AAHE & the HLC were very complimentary about the work at CMSU related to assessment. Carter shared his concern that there is no university-wide system assessment in academic and non-academic areas. He reported and Myers confirmed that Elaine Frank-Ragan would give a report on the progress and plans that the institution is making for institution-wide assessment in preparation for the visit of the Higher Learning Commission at the Faculty Senate meeting on December 4.
Waller reported that Zinna Bland, chair of the Faculty Awards Committee, has sent out the requests for nominations for the Byler Award.
Eason referred to the printed reports from the Council of Deans and Academic Affairs General Council. Contact Eason via email with any questions.
Student Government Association President Munatsi Manyande reported that the SGA Constitution requires a Faculty Senate Liaison elected by the FS to the SGA. The SGA will be sending out an email to all students regarding a survey on issues that the SGA has been dealing with over the last several months, such as use of student’s social security numbers, the Old Drum Transportation System and the newspaper readership program. The SGA will start planning soon for allocation of funds generated from the student activity fee.
Myers announced that the Faculty Senate Office has updated the office equipment and thanked the President’s Office for its help in acquiring the equipment.
Eason referred to the committee charge proposal from the International
Affairs Committee that
That the Faculty Senate forward to President Patton progress reports on their discussion of the Conference Committee’s Faculty Compensation Proposal.
Myers reminded the Senators that the recommendations about Faculty Compensation are due to President Patton following the next FS meeting on November 20.
Myers referred to the printed Faculty Compensation Policy and reported the EC recommendations. The EC thoroughly investigated the possibility of making a recommendation that a single salary figure be used rather than a range. After spending a great deal of time collecting information, the EC came to the conclusion that the range is something needed by the administration for the flexibility to offer potential new hires a dollar amount that would entice them to come to Central. Best reported that the single point salary puts well over 90% of the incoming faculty with market pay. Myers reported the EC recommendations to retain the range for new hires at 90-105% and to remove the idea that the annual across the board increases are dependent on meeting satisfactory performance. Part of the rationale for the latter recommendation is that faculty do not know how satisfactory performance would be defined and department chairs would potentially be put in difficult situations. The EC worked to formalize the role of the Faculty Senate Salary & Fringe Benefits Committee would play in offering assistance to the Provost in determining salary benchmark data sources that would be used for market adjustment considerations. Myers referred to the Implementation Recommendations document item 3. c. that the Senate makes a recommendation that a committee work to develop and identify equity issues, which would be in line with the Board of Governors’ Policy.
Myers opened discussion on the Faculty Compensation Proposal. Senators discussed recommendations as presented in the draft for the meeting. The following items were identified for further discussion in the form of recommendations for the next meeting: 1) a recommendation for a minimum salary equal to that of the current system for new hires at the ranks of Assistant and Associate, 2) a statement to address potential conflict between the proposed salary compensation plan and Academic Procedures and Regulations #19, 3) a definition of Market Discipline, and 4) a request for recommendations of institutional priorities regarding future salary adjustments. No action was taken.
Myers noted that the length of the Senate meeting may need to be extended on November 20. Ewing suggested that the Senate bring a motion at 5 p.m. and if needed to stay longer. Eason stated that if someone teaches a 6 p.m. class, they may want to make arrangements for an alternate to replace them when they need to leave the meeting.
Myers opened discussion on the distribution of the next agenda for the November 20 FS meeting. Myers reported that the Academic Policy and Procedure is rigid as to when the agenda for our next meeting has to go out, and it has to go out today. One way through this would be for Myers to receive the Senate’s unanimous consent that the agenda be sent out on Friday, November 15. Approved unanimously.
Myers announced the Jennies Volleyball game and encouraged the Senators to attend.
The FS meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m.
Meeting 5 November 20, 2002
The Faculty Senate met 3:15 p.m. in Union 236 with President Shellie Myers presiding.
Roll Call: Twenty-four Senators present and two alternates were present Wilson for Bryant and Heming for Lynch. Also present were Provost Carter and Assistant Provost to Academic Affairs Fran Waller.
Eason made reference to a document distributed at the FS meeting as items
for consideration to
Within the Faculty Compensation Policy proposal document Section 1 (2) to remove the word new before monies to read (in allocation of monies….) Motion was made, seconded and passed with 16 yes votes, 7 no votes and 1 abstention.
Best requested to make an amendment to the language of the proposal in Section 3 (4) moving benchmark and deleting mean to read: “Market disciplines shall be defined as those whose approved salary data indicates that the benchmark salary of their faculty exceeds the upper limit on the base salary range.” Amendment passed. Motion and second on section passed with 23 yes votes, 1 no vote and 1 abstention. After discussion, Morgan motioned to accept as distributed the language for Section 3 (3). Motion passed with 24 yes votes, 1 no vote and 0 abstentions.
Within the Implementation Recommendations add item 3 to read: If an issue regarding faculty compensation arises that is not covered by the Faculty Compensation Policy or an existing university administrative policy and regulation, the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Senate Salary and Fringe Benefits Committee, will develop a procedure to address it. This procedure will be submitted to the Faculty Senate for its review and recommendation to the President. If the situation demands an immediate response, the Provost, working with the Faculty Senate Salary and Fringe Benefits Committee, will develop and recommend to the President an interim policy, which will be submitted without delay to the Senate for its review and recommendation. A request to amend the language deleting ‘recommend to the President an interim policy’ and replacing with ‘implement an interim procedure’. The change was approved and motion to add item 3 passed unanimously.
Item (4) (e) to create an Ad Hoc Faculty Salary Equity Committee to develop a plan for mitigating existing inequities…. Motion failed with 7 yes votes, 13 no votes and 5 abstentions.
Myers opened discussion on the Faculty Compensation Policy Proposal for Base Salary and Market Pay components the FS EC Working Document dated November 18, 2002.
Page 1 under section 1. (1) to add (most recently available) before the word AAUP. Motion was made and seconded, passed unanimously.
Palmer referred to Page 2 item (2) (b). Palmer asked if the comparable level is referring back to section 1. (1). Eason responded they are talking about the comparable rank and credentials of a new hire. If the total salary of the new hire exceeds the total salary of the incumbent, the comparison is made between the pay of the new hire and what is being paid to the incumbent faculty who are at the same rank.
Myers opened discussion on the Faculty Compensation Systems Implementation Recommendations FS EC Working Document dated November 18, 2002.
Best motioned to remove item (4) (e) Young seconded. Myers responded to a request for the original language from the Conference Committee, “Provost work to identify inequities in incumbent base and market salaries and prepare a plan for mitigating existing inequities. Plan should include priorities, sources of funds, and a timetable to accomplish the required adjustments.” Best moved to make substitution motion to item (4) (e) to read as the Conference Committee originally proposed. Riley seconded. Atkinson moved to amend substitution motion to read Provost work with the Faculty Salary & Fringe Benefits Committee to identify inequities…. After a discussion, Young called the question which passed unanimously. Amended motion passed with 17 yes votes, 7 no votes, 0 abstentions. Changes to item (4) (e) passed with 23 yes votes, 1 no vote and 0 abstentions.
Eason made reference to item (4) (f). Best moved to make change to item (4) (f) to read: Monitor the implementation plan described above in (4) (e) as part of their annual review of the base salary range and market adjustments. Passed unanimously.
Senator Callahan made reference to the Faculty Compensation Policy page 5 section 6 item 3 for clarification of the language. Myers responded that the Executive Committee’s recommendation was to use the inclusive language previously adopted by the institution.
Myers restated the Eason & Morgan motion.
For: 25 Against: 0 Abstentions: 0 Passed (2002-2003-5)
Myers reported that the President will respond back to the Senate from our work today. The Senate will vote up or down on this document at the next FS meeting on December 4.
Provost Carter reported he had talked with President Patton and they will have feedback no later than the close of business on Tuesday, November 26.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m.