EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Present: Bryant,
DiMagno, Fuller, Logan-Peters, Miller, Sawyer, Scheideler, Spann, Whitt, Wolf
Absent: King,
Prochaska Cue, Siekman
Date:
Location: 420 University Terrace,
1.0 Call to
Order
Bryant called the meeting to order at
2.0 Announcements
2.1 Formation
of Subcommittee to Look at Promotion & Tenure Documents
Bryant reported that he will join Professor Scheideler, Animal Science, Professor Humes,
Political Science, and Professor Ragsdale, Biochemistry, to review the
promotion and tenure documents collected by SVCAA Edwards from each of the
colleges.
2.2 Chancellor’s Commission on the Status of
Women Subcommittee
Bryant reported that Chancellor Perlman has requested a list of faculty to serve on the
subcommittee to review the gender equity study.
He noted that there are concerns with the model that has been used by
Institutional Research and Planning in conducting the study, particularly in
the area of number of years in rank for faculty. He reported that the Chancellor’s Commission
on the Status of Women will also be providing a list of possible members for
the subcommittee.
2.3 Retirement Cap Update
Bryant reminded the committee that the bill to remove the cap on the percentage the university is permitted to contribute to retirement plans would not be presented to the State Legislature until 2003.
2.4 Meeting with President Smith
Bryant reported that the Presidents of the Academic and Faculty Senates will be meeting with President Smith in early January.
3.0 Approval
of
Spann moved and Whitt seconded approval of
the minutes as amended. Motion approved.
4.0 Faculty
Compensation Advisory Committee Meeting (Miller)
Miller reported that the Faculty Compensation Advisory Committee met to
begin discussions on faculty salary increases for next year. He stated that the committee is disturbed
that the recommendations they made last year were not followed by
administration. He reported that the
committee is concerned with salaries for lower paid faculty and staff,
particularly in light of the recent increases to health care. Scheideler pointed
out that many faculty members have been dissatisfied with the salary increase
process this year and have taken their complaints to the Academic Rights and
Responsibilities Committee. Wolf noted
that in English several faculty members received outstanding evaluations but
only received a cost of living raise. Scheideler suggested that the FCAC should raise the idea of
negotiating for the minimum standard of living increase. Miller stated that he will work closely with
the FCAC to get more data regarding faculty salaries.
5.0 Emeriti
Association (Dr. Richard Fleming)
Dr. Fleming, President of the Emeriti Association, thanked the committee
for inviting him to speak on behalf of the association. He stated that there are several issues of
major concern for members of the association.
The first is the cost of health insurance. He pointed out that for two people, health
insurance plus Medigap insurance, which helps pay for
prescriptions, will cost $500 per month.
He stated that he has requested President Smith to appoint a retired
person to the Blue Ribbon Panel on Health Care.
Fleming stated that the Wisherd foundation
account was established to help provide support for emeriti faculty. He stated that in recent years it has been
used to help subsidize the cost of health insurance. He reported that the association mailed a
ballot to its members to see if they agreed that the fund could be used to help
cover the health care costs of domestic partners of retired professors. He stated that the members voted to approve
this funding support. He stated that
they then checked with the University Foundation to see if the fund would help
cover these costs. He pointed out that
the fund would allow this support, providing the domestic partner was insured
by the same entity. He noted that since
the University does not cover domestic partners, the foundation is not able to
use the Wisherd foundation to assist in health
coverage for domestic partners. Fleming
distributed a copy of a letter sent to President Smith, Chancellor Perlman, and the Board of Regents from the Emeriti
Association stating that the current university policies prohibit the
association from fulfilling the will of its members to provide assistance to
Emeriti and partners through the Wisherd fund and
calling for the Board to change the university policy regarding coverage of
domestic partners. Fleming pointed out
that the Wisherd fund can also be used to support
research and that the association has provided $1000 research grants.
Dr. Fleming stated that the other concerns of the Emeriti Association
deal with parking permits and fees and space allocation. He noted that currently emeriti faculty can
park on campus for free. He stated that
several years ago there was a proposal to change this so that emeriti faculty
would have to pay for parking. He
pointed out that lack of parking forces the association to meet off
campus. He noted that, in the past,
rooms were available in Nebraska Hall for emeriti faculty to use. He noted that they realize that space is
limited but they would appreciate it if some office space could be found on campus.
Miller asked how emeriti faculty members are treated by their home
departments. Fleming stated that it
varies. He noted that they are trying to
develop more collegiality between emeriti faculty and departments. He stated that they hope to obtain more
information from departments regarding retired faculty. He reported that the association has raised
and promoted the issue of having emeriti housing available near campus. He stated that this is still in consideration
under the Antelope Valley Plan. He
pointed out that emeriti faculty are interested in working and helping the
university and such a living arrangement could accomplish this goal. DiMagno asked if
retired faculty have access to email.
Fleming stated that they can still use the university email. Miller asked how the university could help
emeriti faculty and vice versa. Fleming
stated that in the past emeriti faculty members have volunteered to give tours
around campus. He suggested that
departments and colleges should get emeriti faculty involved whenever possible
and to make sure they feel welcomed. He
discussed the emeriti faculty programs at the
6.0 Unfinished
Business
6.1 Distribution
of Executive Committee Minutes
Spann suggested that a message be sent to Senators explaining the process and the legal reason behind the need for the Executive Committee to approve the minutes before they are distributed. The committee agreed that the minutes should be approved before being sent out. DiMagno suggested that an executive summary could be sent after the Executive Committee meeting and before the minutes are distributed. Bryant stated that he would write a brief summary of the meetings and distribute them to senators.
6.2 Quality Indicators
Scheideler questioned why
we had to go through the process of identifying quality indicators when some
programs are barely able to keep operating with the recent budget cuts. She questioned whether the campus was being
co-opted into eventually cutting programs.
DiMagno pointed out that the faculty have had essentially no input in developing the
quality indicators. He noted that the
timing of the distribution of the indicators is such that it provides little
chance for faculty discussion and participation. Scheideler stated
that the overall comprehensive goal of the university needs to be discussed
before quality indicators are identified.
Spann questioned whether the Academic Planning Committee has had the
opportunity to review the quality indicators.
He pointed out that the APC developed quality indicators during the
prioritization process. The committee
expressed concern that the quality indicators were just a revision of the
Nebraska Performance Model and that if adopted, they could be used to make
decisions affecting departments and faculty.
The committee agreed to discuss the issue further with Chancellor Perlman and SVCAA Edwards.
6.3 Evaluation
Process of Administrators
Item
postponed due to lack of time.
6.4 Steps in Helping to Reduce the Budget
Cuts – Partnering with ASUN
Item postponed due to
lack of time.
7.0 New Business
No new business was discussed.
The meeting was adjourned at