FA Home Executive Committee  >  Minutes — 11/30/06


EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING

Thursday, November 30, 2006

CSU 204

Approved Minutes

 

In attendance: Stephen Bohnenblust, Roger Severns, Paul Hustoles (recorder), Mary Visser, Glen Peterson, Anne O’Meara, Pat McKinzie, Daardi Sizemore, Theresa Salerno, Wayne Allen, Jean Haar, Gerald Schneck, Paul Brennan, Ron Browne, Scott Page, Linda Duckett, Steve Gilbert, Cheryl Radeloff, Dan Cronn-Mills

 

President Bohnenblust called the meeting to order at 3:06 p.m.

 

1.  Minutes of November 2, 2006Schneck/Sizemore moved to approve.  Passed.

           

2.   Call for Additional Items/ Reordering of Agenda—Bohnenblust: We will add an  IPSEL update under discussion items. I did try to include those items most likely to go to Meet and Confer, which will be the last one of the semester.

 

3.   President’s Report

      a. FA Executive Spring Retreat (January 11, 2007, 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., Heritage Room, CSU)—Bohnenblust: This is a longer time than maybe we thought. We’ll have breakfast and then maybe not meet on January 18 as originally planned. 

      b. Enrollment Management—Bohnenblust: Thanks to Salerno, McKinzie, O’Meara and Schneck for their attendance. We did talk about making sure that we get a bang for the buck if we do make any changes.  Haar: What are the consultant’s backgrounds? Bohnenblust: One was a professor at Ohio State but they all have university experience. They seem pretty perceptive. O’Meara: One worked in financial affairs for 35 years. Haar: Are they together as a group? O’Meara: No, they are individual. I urge you to look at the website.  There were a lot of Student Affairs people there. We are not well represented.  If you have time, it would help to give feedback.

 

4.   IFO/MnSCU Committees

      a.   MnSCU's Spring Diversity Conference Planning Committee (1 Needed Statewide)

      b.   Board of Trustees Academic & Student Affairs Policy Council (1 Rep from State University System)

      c.   Instructional Management System (IMS) Advisory Council

 

5.   FACULTY ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS NEEDED

a.   College of Business Representation on the following: General Education (2 Years)

      b.   General Education 1Year Replacement for Education

 

6.   2006 FALL APPOINTMENTS

      a.   Parking Advisory – Autumn Benner

      b.   Academic Calendar Committee — Paul Hustoles (A&H); Gregg Marg; Youwen Xu (SET)(Confirmed by electronic vote 11/15/06)

      c.   Health & Wellness Committee – Sue Fredstrom; Penny Knoblich; Judith Luebke; Mark McCullough; Mary Visser

      d.   Affirmative Action Council  – Scott Granberg-Rademacker

      e.   Presidential Scholarship Group – Anne Dahlman (Educ)

O’Meara/Schneck moved the slate.  Passed.

 

7.   Discussion Items

      a. IPSEL Update: Cronn-Mills: We have over 100 applications from over 90 faculty. We have 42 to give out. Bohnenblust: What have you heard around campus? Visser: Some people complained about the timeline but the committee is doing a great job. Cronn-Mills: We knew that this would be a very tight timeline.  It is interesting to note that there are a lot of senior faculty involved. Bohnenblust: FYI this has not been popular on other campuses at all. This is a big issue with our Negotiating Team. This is under the umbrella of performance pay. I believe that the faculty are interested in incentive pay. Peterson: Would it make sense to go back through MnSCU to find out if there is any money left? We should request it?  Severns: We have talked about ranking the rejected applications just in case of the possibility of more money coming in. Cronn-Mills: All proposals are being rank ordered.  Duckett: Can you talk about collective proposals? Brennan: In the past, some applied separately for a joint initiative. Cronn-Mills: We will give the $5,500 per faculty member so joint proposals can be funded to the number of faculty members in there.  Hustoles: I would be one that would disagree with this incentive pay concept.  It makes sense to add to the base if we could.  Some of us are working so hard, we don’t even have time to apply.  Visser: Some of us work very hard and still really worked hard to get the grants in.  Severns: Economically, I agree with Hustoles, but there are some things that you are going to have trouble to have MnSCU fund. Most of these grants are things we would like MnSCU to do but wont normally happen. Brennan: What seems to be most important is how good you are at writing your proposal. Maybe there are some departmental things that might be worked into a grant.

      b. Graduate Faculty Status—Bohnenblust: Page and Dean Blackhurst and colleagues have spent a lot of time on this. It is time to give the group feedback.  It is my understanding that this has not yet gone to Academic Council. Page: We sent out a draft and got about 35-40 comments. Then we sent out several more drafts through the IFO. We were concerned about the review process. Schneck: If this is approved, how will this be implemented?  Page: That’s the discussion we are going to have on Monday. We are thinking that we would grandfather everyone in and focus on the new doctoral faculty. We donÔt want everyone to go through the review process this spring.  We want to go with our regular four-year cycle. Cronn-Mills: It is going to be a challenge the first time around in this cycle.   Page: The standards are very similar for what you do for tenure and promotion. Cronn-Mills: But someone who has been here for 20 years might not have published in the last year or two. Page: We had one person state that the research level should be based upon their entire career rather than in a four-year cycle. But we decided that they should really be current in their field.  Cronn-Mills: A slight change perhaps: The line that begins ÒRegular Graduate Faculty Status is intendedÉÓ seems to be a slight to those who are already established. Page: Give me some language. Sizemore: The way I interpreted it is that each department makes a recommendation, so you would not be penalized by the timelines of your discipline. Severns: One of the areas that could be a challenge is in Business as the accreditation standards in the college do not square with the standards that you have written. Page: We understand that the colleges have different emphases. Bohnenblust: I’m assuming that this would be a minimum requirement. Page: It is. Browne: For promotion and tenure, are your faculty looked at differently (in Business)? Radeloff: Some of us junior faculty members are concerned about if we don’t achieve graduate faculty status, will that affect tenure and promotion? Bohnenblust: We had a meeting with the new faculty and there were some who were very concerned about this from one college. We did hear from VP Olson that there has not been a significant shift in promotion requirements. He will be talking to Dean Alessio about this. Bohnenblust: Maybe this should be discussed at Meet and Confer. Cronn-Mills suggested an edit on page 1. Severns suggested a change on page 4. Schneck: Some individuals are hired into programs that are solely at the graduate level—if they don’t achieve this, they couldn’t teach. Cronn-Mills: I’m wondering about the ex-officio members and what privileges that they have. Page: The same as regular graduate faculty. They could serve on a committee or on a sub meet. Cronn-Mills: I just think we could spell these out. Page suggested a change to clarify. Schneck: On page 7, Emergency Clause, why is it just for a new person?  Sizemore: In an emergency you can’t always know who would be available. Page: We will take out the word “new.”  Browne: In regards to the compensation, what feedback have you received? Page: We can’t require this so we felt more comfortable putting in recommendations. Severns/Cronn-Mills moved that the Executive Committee approve this document with the changes. Sizemore: I would like to thank the Graduate Committee for all their hard work on this. Cronn-Mills: And thanks to Page who has been the focal point for a lot of grief!  Motion passed. 

      c.   Campus Dining—Bohnenblust: It looks like we may be in a situation with both dining and the Pepsi contract where there are going to be some tight interpretations of the rules.  We received a document that, during the Meet and Confer, became a draft” document.  I looked through the Sodexho contact. Again someone is signing contracts that seem to have no input from the faculty. As a starting point, maybe they should bring in Cindy Janney and ask her to explain what it is that they think we can or cannot do.  Faculty are not being properly consulted.  I would also suggest that if the rules are in effect, we find out what the punishments would be. Hustoles: We have quite a concessions business in the Performing Arts. Why aren’t we consulted on these issues? Bohnenblust: There is a lack of consultation.  Mid-level manager decisions are killing us.  We are going to have our annual gathering at the FA office and we are not using Sodexho. Sizemore: In general, this information is not new but carries over from previous contracts. However, there is different enforcement. I don’t think anyone has the right to come into my office to tell me what pop I can drink. If we are buying things out of non-MSU monies, who should care? Duckett: We did talk about contacts that should come to the Planning Submeet. McKinzie: We sponsored an event in Ostrander and we did ask them to match the price that we could get from Dominos or Hy-Vee and Sodexho did match the price. But we are really talking about contracts. Before they make one, they need to make it right. Schneck: Are contracts reviewed by Carol Stallkamp?  She used to, but not any more.  Allen: We are so supportive of international students and diversity; we need to make sure that they are allowed to do their own thing.  Visser: It is too late for our review if a contract is in its final stages. We need to participate at the beginning.  Bohnenblust: Again, it sounds like we should put this on Meet and Confer. Gilbert: Could contracts be folded into the Policy on Policies group?  Bohnenblust: That could be the focus of the discussion at Meet and Confer. 

      d. Affirmative Action Committee—Bohnenblust: We did receive this at Meet and Confer but it has been slightly revised. One of the co-chairs is also on our Executive Committee (Duckett).  Duckett: We need to participate in this. Hustoles/Cronn-Mills moved to support this initiative.  Passed.

      e. Safety Committee—Bohnenblust: This goes back to last spring. This is one that we knew nothing about. We asked last spring for a committee charge and that we have some representatives from Trafton, from the Athletic complex and one general faculty member.  We did hear yesterday that VP Straka is concerned about the length of time it takes to write a charge.  We will put this on Meet and Confer.

      f. Van Rates—Bohnenblust: Is this taken care of?  Haar: I’m not sure.  We looked at this with VP Straka and it looked like things were equaling out. Salerno: There was a huge increase for Biology.  I sent a letter to VP Olson and have not received a reply.  Severns: Did the letter come to the Budget Committee? Haar: Are other departments affected?  Hustoles: We discovered that it was close to a wash for us. Cronn-Mills: But some departments don’t even know about this. Bohnenblust: I could send out something to all faculty.  Duckett: It would be interesting to see how this breaks out for Athletics.  McKenzie: It does seem to favor longer trips.  Bohnenblust: I will send a memo requesting feedback.  

      g.   Departmental Web Pages—Bohnenblust: there is some difficulty in changing departmental web pages.  Schneck: I had been doing content pages, when they switched to the new template.  Now you have to have a designated person. There’s some training that’s associated with it.  Cronn-Mills: The biggest issue is how big your website is.  Browne: Does this agenda item stem from the College of Allied Health? There’s more to it than web pages.  IT was to put into effect a better flow of information. There are fees being charged that we don’t have access too.  Schneck: They are charging for certain services.  Severns: Are they going to change individual changes? Browne: It was for departmental web pages and also the flow of information.  We want to seek input from the other College Reps. Do you have college technology committees? Could this be developed into a Meet and Confer item?  Bohnenblust: You have raised some issues. We need to find if these are widespread.  Would it be appropriate to ask your committee to get a list of concerns and ask the faculty for a response?  Browne: They are meeting with VP Schneider next week and, depending on that, the summary will be based. Schneck: The other problem is with budget.  Departments have not been prepared for this. McKinzie: This goes back to the van rates too. When they change things that impacts budgets, they don’t take it into consideration and increase the budgets to pay for the change.  

      h. Athletics—Bohnenblust: This is becoming a big issue. The NCC has dissolved.  We have to figure out which direction we are going. There will be pressure to move some sports to Division I. There is going to be a variety of other proposals that are going to be out there.  I speculated to President Davenport and VP Olson that a big issue for the faculty is, What is going to be the cost? Visser: It is really going to affect us in Human Performance.  If we go to Division I, we are very concerned about scheduling the facilities.  Bohnenblust: Do we put this on Meet and Confer? Visser: We must, to demonstrate our concern and to insist on being involved in the planning process. McKinzie: Maybe MnSCU could go to the legislature to ask for emergency funding.  Bohnenblust: I don’t think that is going to happen. Haar: We addressed this at the Budget Sub meet.  Bohnenblust: I will be meeting with the coaches in a week or so and this is going to be one of the topics. Browne: Maybe we should figure out what we want to say in the Meet and Confer. Should we say that curriculum should be priority number one and that league affiliation is not as important? Visser: And this also affects the facilities and the students’ time away from campus. Radeloff: A move to Division I would require more support services too.  And we are going to start doctoral programs that will also stress our resources. Visser: I have a problem with giving athletes special services that we don’t offer to other students. Brennan: Are the people going with Division I using it as an enrollment booster? McKinzie: Now teams are really marketing devices for a university. Severns: There are problems any way we wind up going. We need to have a wider discussion. I think there are gender equity problems. Schneck: During the process of going to Division I status for hockey, there was some concern about Division II even existing in a couple of years. Bohnenblust: We might also recommend to President Davenport that this get widespread discussion. Cronn-Mills: If they go to Division I, it will draw from SAC and other SAC programs might be negatively impacted. Visser: Dean Trauger is now a special assistant working with Athletics. I think he is part of building toward Division I.  Severns: But I think Trauger really has a handle on what these actual costs are.  Schneck: Would there be a squeeze on the fitness facilities?  Visser: We would lose some access for classrooms.  Could you prepare a statement?  Bohnenblust: I will use our notes to prepare that. 

      i. 2008/2009 CalendarHustoles/Visser moved that the Faculty supports the principle of retaining classes on Veterans’ Day while supporting the development of and the participation in Veterans’ Day activities.  Passed. Bohnenblust: We will recommend this at Meet and Confer

      j. D2L—Schneck: There was some concern that changes were made without consultation with faculty. We discussed this at LTR and now there is a group of faculty that have to be consulted before any changes are made. We have to continue to watch this.  Bohnenblust: These discussions are also happening at the statewide level.

      k.   Term Limits for FA Secretary and FA Treasurer—Bohnenblust: Severns and I were talking about the wisdom of keeping these term limits. We could change the Constitution. Brennan: How about with a super-majority vote? Visser: I think it would be a good idea to remove them and it would seem to me that it would be relatively easy to do this.  Cronn-Mills: These positions require continuity.  Hustoles: I disagree with changing the Constitution. We don’t want these positions to just become staff. We have the ability to install Officers if the need demands, as happened in my case. Visser: I support what Hustoles just said. McKinzie: Maybe we just eliminate term limits. Then we can elect qualified people as long as we want. Page: May I suggest that you put some language together so we can look at it at the next meeting?  Bohnenblust: We can do that.

      l.    Parking—Bohnenblust: We did send this to faculty and we didn’t receive any comment.  I will brief the new Faculty Rep on this.

 

8. Informational Items

a.   Holiday Gathering – Tuesday, December 5, 2006 – FACR 11:00 to 1:30 p.m.

b.   Next Executive Meeting – Thursday, January 11 @ 8:00 a.m., Heritage Room – CSU 101

c.   Next FA/AD Meet & Confer – Thursday, February 01, 2007 @ 3:00 p.m., CSU 204 (FA Chair/AD Agenda)

d.   Spring, 2007 Calendar of Meetings (UPDATED)(Terra Green)

 

The meeting adjourned at 5:04 p.m.

 

Paul J. Hustoles

Recording Secretary


Return to the beginning

FA Home  >  Executive Committee