FACULTY SENATE MINUTES

Nov. 20, 2002

Officers attending: Pam Chambers, President; Cindy Beckett, Vice President

Officers not attending: Fred Thomas, Secretary

Senators attending: Jim Brooks, Susan Callender, Frank Clay, Roxann DeLaet, Kenneth Melendez, Jackie Myers, Nick Reeder (Acting Secretary), Shari Rethman, Vann Rogers, Ellen Rosengarten, Marsha Wamsley

Senators not attending: Rick Jurus

Others attending: Forrest Cope, Laurel Mayer, Ned Young

Pam called the meeting to order at 2:30 in room 6142.

1.      Minutes from Nov. 13th

Roxann moved to approve the minutes for Nov. 13, 2002. The motion passed.

2.      FITs Update (Continued from Nov. 13 meeting)

Pam welcomed Ned Young, who distributed a summary of the hand-written comments that faculty made on the faculty survey.

Ned: Comments on the surveys parallel the numerical results distributed earlier, with an emphasis on summer pay, overload, and merit. Question: Are faculty willing to cap number of overload hours if we see a significant raise in overload pay?

Pam: The existing 57-hour rule is routinely ignored, raising concerns among many faculty about quality.† This issue has been on matrix for some time.

Ned: faculty is shooting itself in the foot by agreeing to these large numbers of overload hoursóadmin is getting cheap labor, so it has no incentive to make a serious effort to reduce number of overload hours.† Russís analysis last year showed average of about 10 overload hours per year per faculty.† Question: General salary increases in recent years have been reasonable, is this the right time to aggressively go after a raise in overload and summer pay?

Cindy: Doing so may serve as an incentive to get more faculty to teach summer courses, which would make admin happy.

Frank & Ned: ďIncidental overloadĒ is becoming more common as we see more 5- and 6-credit hour courses.

Shari: Full-timers teaching summer should not be required to keep office hours since part-timers are not required to do so, and full-timers who teach during summer are being paid as part-timers.

Pam: Given state of economy and the fact that weíre bringing in a new president, this will probably be a 1-year contract.

Ken: All the more reason to focus on summer and overload pay this time.

Jim: If we do raise the 57-hour limit, we should be sure to keep the 18-hour check-off, so that faculty must agree to teach more than 18 (general agreement among senators on this point). Question: Can summer pay and overload pay be divorced, or can they be paid at different rates?† Question: Why canít our contracts allow us to choose which three quarters we want to teach? May not be practical in some departments, but could encourage more faculty to teach during summer.† (General agreement that this is an interesting proposal.)

Cindy: Donít want to divorce summer and overload.† Separate point: itís unfair that faculty receive the extra $10 per hour for night classes only if the class starts after 4:00.† Some classes run from 2:30 to 10:00 at night, they should get the extra amount, but they donít.

Frank: Overload should be paid at a rate of 1/45 of the faculty memberís base pay.

Laurel: Many valid points raised here, but in the past the admin has felt that any increase in summer or overload pay would have to be offset by decreases in the base pay increases.

Cindy: Nowís the time to go after summer and overload pay, letís focus on these.

Shari: As faculty teach more overload and take on more additional responsibilities, weíre creating the impression that teaching 15 hours is not a full-time job.† Weíre sending wrong message to outside observers.

Frank: Teaching is becoming an increasingly smaller part of our jobs, almost to the point where itís a distraction from other responsibilities.

Cindy: Much inconsistency across the college in how reassigned time is administered for these additional responsibilities.

Pam: Perhaps the number of committees that weíre expected to serve on should be defined and included as part of our workload.† Faculty-ratios group chaired by Dick Jones is looking at overload.

Cindy: Another benefit to focusing on summer and overload pay is that we can work on this before spring, rather than having to wait for the average-pay data to come out in spring.

Ned: Question: Should merit be a major point of discussion for FITs?

Marsha: Paying overload and merit as a lump sum in the same check as regular payroll, pushes you temporarily into such a high tax bracket that you donít see much of the extra amount in your net pay.

Jackie: Thereís nothing in tax law that says it must be done this way.† A separate check could be issued for merit & institutional merit, though it would have to be taxed according to a different tax schedule. Overload may be different, and it may have to be included on same check as regular pay)

Frank: Taking up the issue of merit, we should do away with the limit on the number of people who can get it, and we should increase the dollar amount.

Ned: Dr. Sifferlen has made comments that heís worried that merit pay is already getting too high, itís already about a 6% bonus.

Ken & Ned: What about red-line increase?† In past, faculty have had little input into how much the red-line increases.

Cindy: Itís unfair that some faculty need merit-on-base to get to closure.

Several senators mentioned anecdotes regarding inequities among pay for different faculty doing the same work.

Cindy moved to charge the FITS team to address overload pay in the coming discussions.† MOTION PASSES.

Cindy moved to charge the FITS team to address summer pay (either in conjunction with, or independently of, overload pay) in the coming discussions.† MOTION PASSES.

Jim: The closure issue was supposed to be reviewed every few years to see if itís having the intended effect.† Has this been done?† Do we know what impact it has had?

Cindy: Senate passed a recommendation a couple of years ago to have this studied, but it got lost in the shuffle when Karen Wells left.† Itís still on the matrix under the rubric of ďparity.Ē

Frank: Didnít the Barressi report stipulate that these issues would be reviewed periodically?

Several senators: Tuition reimbursement is another item that should be looked at.

Pam invited senators to send additional thoughts to her and Ned.† She meets tomorrow with Dr. Jacobs, and on Friday with the other faculty members of the FITS team.

Shari: Another issue may be the fact that faculty cannot take personal leave on days before or after holidays; widespread inconsistency in how personal leave and sick leave are administered.

Ken & Pam: This is probably not an issue for FITS team.† Senate can address it through a recommendation.

3.      Open Forum

Pam reminded Senators that they should send her suggestions for handbook revisions.

The meeting adjourned at 3:50.

Submitted by Nick Reeder and Fred Thomas

Approved by Senate, Jan. 15, 2003