FACULTY SENATE MINUTES

October 3, 2001

Officers attending: Russ Marcks, President; Pam Chambers, Vice President; Fred Thomas, Secretary

Senators attending: Cindy Beckett, Susan Callender, Frank Clay, Forrest Cope, Roxann DeLaet, George Hageman, Rick Jurus, Ellen Rosengarten, Mike Smith, Karen Winston

Not attending: Kenneth Melendez, Bob Reas

Others attending: Karen Blake, Laurel Mayer, Gary Tucker

Russ called the meeting to order at 2:30.

1.      Minutes from Sept. 26, 2001

It was moved and seconded that the minutes from Sept. 26 be approved as distributed. The motion passed.
Fred, Russ and Pam discussed procedures for recording and disseminating the minutes. Senators agreed that after the minutes and accompanying documents are approved they should be posted to the Senate web site, where they will be available to the entire Sinclair community. At least until the web site is restructured, it will still be necessary to distribute print copies.

2.      Change to Recommendation/Resolution Form (deferred from Sept. 26)

Russ reported that Jeanne Jacobs had raised questions about the Faculty Senate Resolution/Recommendation Form, used by Senate to forward resolutions or recommendations for further action. The existing form provided only the options of "Approved" or "Disapproved" as responses by the appropriate college authority. Russ distributed a proposed revision of the form, adding categories of "Pending" and "Further Review." After further discussion, Roxann moved that the options instead be "Received on (date)," "Approved" and "Disapproved." The motion was seconded by Ellen, and passed unanimously.

3.      Membership of Faculty Development Advisory Council

Russ reported that Senators Ellen, Cindy, Mike and George have volunteered to serve on the Council, and he expressed the desire to obtain the names of several non-Senators. Roxann recommended Marsha Wamsley (NUR). Ellen recommended Cindy Kennedy (PSY). Frank and Karen reported that they have contacted potential members from their divisions and expect to identify Council members soon. At this point, only the Business Division is not represented on the Council.

4.      Membership of VPBO Search Committee (deferred from Sept. 26)

Russ distributed a list provided by Steve Johnson of Proposed Membership, Vice President for Business Operations Search Committee and asked for Senate's input regarding faculty representation on the Committee. Bob Reas is included as a representative from Senate, along with Boikai Twe (PSY) and Surinder Jain (EET). Tayara Carter is listed as representing "Instruction," although she is not a faculty member. Frank moved to accept the proposed membership, Ellen seconded and the motion passed unanimously.

5.      ACF Issue to Assembly

Russ reminded the Senate of previous discussions on this topic, including his suggestion that the Senate direct its Personnel Committee to prepare a resolution to take to Faculty Assembly for a bottom-line vote on whether or not Senate represents adjuncts and, if so, how. Russ expressed concern about the possible implications of not representing adjuncts, particularly if that leads to a situation in which ACFs are represented by some other organization, whether union or not.
Fred presented a Proposed Process to Resolve the Adjunct Issue, expressing the opinion that the question can only be resolved by either (1) Assembly passing a Constitutional amendment that explicitly restricts membership to tenure-track faculty, or (2) Senate implementing a series of Handbook changes that align the Handbook with the existing Constitution.
Forest expressed his opinion that ACFs should be represented by Senate in some way, perhaps following the model provided by Senate's relationships with counselors and other specific groups at Sinclair.
Frank supported Forest, but expressed concern about what would happen if a proposed change to the Constitution and proposed changes to the front of the Handbook were both to fail.
Mike offered to obtain additional information from other institutions in Ohio about their handling of similar issues. Discussion followed on the extent to which Sinclair's situation is unique, but Mike was encouraged to seek the additional information through his membership in State Faculty Senate.
Karen expressed the opinion that it ought to be possible to resolve the question in a simple manner, and discussion followed about both the bottom-line issue of whether Senate represents adjuncts and the processes by which it can be resolved.
Cindy raised questions about the distinction between adjuncts and Instructors or Assistant Professors, and discussion followed on the differences in the Handbook, on differences and similarities in actual practice, and on the possibility of converting ACF positions to tenure track. State funding cuts are likely to inhibit conversions.
Russ called for a motion in line with Fred's proposal that the Personnel Committee develop an amendment restricting Assembly membership to tenure-track faculty and an alternative set of recommendations to change the Handbook and incorporate ACFs. Cindy, Ellen and others expressed concern that such a motion would not reflect adequate leadership from Senate in setting the stage for a simple, concise solution.
Cindy stated that when Senators surveyed full-time tenure track faculty within their divisions last spring, most did not want Senate to represent adjuncts but they did favor granting adjuncts grievance rights. Reading from earlier minutes, Pam summarized the outcome of previous Senate and Assembly votes related to the question.
Cindy moved
(1)   Senate charge the Personnel Committee with developing lists of the pros and cons of Faculty Senate representing ACF and report back to Senate with the list,
(2)   Senators then conduct divisional meetings to educate faculty and to vote division-by-division as to how faculty believe that Senate should proceed with a possible Constitutional amendment and/or Handbook changes, and
(3)   Senate then proceed to initiate Handbook and/or Constitutional changes in accordance with the outcome of the divisional votes.
 Forest seconded the motion.
Discussion included a question from Susan about the timeline for receiving a report from Personnel Committee. Russ responded that Jim Houdeshell has asked to be relieved as chair, and the process of reforming the Committee may require extra time.
The motion passed unanimously.

6.      Proposal to Remove Social Security Numbers from Faculty Documents

Russ distributed copies of a recommendation approved by Senate 7 March 2001 to remove Social Security Numbers from all unsecured documents. The recommendation as passed by Senate (and redistributed today) was not forwarded in its final form to college authorities, so the Senate has been asked to revote on the recommendation.
After discussion on the use of Tartan card numbers and other issues, the recommendation passed unanimously.

7.      FITs

Russ reported that the old and new FITs teams will meet together Friday, Oct. 5. As background information, he indicated that the set of schools used to calculate the AAUP benchmark for salaries dropped by about 300 schools, since Dept. of Education data was not available as before to replace non-reporting schools. Despite the sample change, FITs has agreed to proceed with the originally agreed upon benchmark.
Mike suggested that FITs use the data that is available from the Ohio Board of Regents, and also raised questions about integrating health care issues with FITs. The administration has generally opposed including health with FITs, at least in part because it involves all Sinclair employees, not just faculty. Several Senators expressed a desire to at least establish better communications between Senate and the Health Care Team. Russ suggested that the topic of health care should be raised in discussions with Steve Johnson and Steve Jonas when they attend next week’s Senate meeting.
Institutional merit is another area of concern, including questions about faculty’s role in establishing the KPIs that are used to determine the institutional merit. Steve Jonas believes strongly that institutional merit should be viewed as a merit reward and not incorporated in FITs, but it was part of the quid pro quo that shaped the current salary agreement.
Another question concerned the timing of the Institutional Merit bonus. It is now scheduled to be paid after July, but the administration is investigating the possibility of paying it sooner, especially since this would benefit retirees.

8.      Open Forum

Steve Johnson and Steve Jonas have asked to attend the Senate meeting of Oct. 10, to discuss R16, health care and the state budget. Senate agreed to devote the agenda to that meeting.
Forest asked about due process in the case of a faculty member who recently resigned. Russ provided Senators with information about the case
Roxann expressed concern that faculty must actually deposit money into their Tartan cards to receive the 5% discount, rather than simply using the card to prove that they are faculty members. Russ described the economic reasons for the policy.

The meeting adjourned at 4:22.

Submitted by Fred Thomas

Approved by Senate, Oct. 17, 2001