Mike explained that no one had received the transitional department head stipend with the September 30 paycheck. He said that he had met with Dr. Friedman to get clarification as to why this had occurred. Dr. Friedman indicated that this was because the listings of transitional department heads that he had received were not accurate. He said that accurate listings were being prepared and that the transitional department heads would receive two stipend payments with the October checks. (Note: since this time, this had been changed and separate checks will be cut prior to the October 31 payday.)
The Senate Officers met with both Dr. Friedman and Dr. Fonte to discuss the issues outlined by the Senate the August 29th meeting. The more significant of these are:
Administrators, roles in task force activities were clarified. Task force meetings are open meetings, and therefore open to any interested parties, including administrators. However, administrators are not members of task forces, and are therefore not eligible to vote, nor do they count in any full-time/part-time ratios.
The problem of the Spring schedule first draft being due in the second week of classes was discussed. This was acknowledged as a serious problem by all. Several possible solutions were discussed, including the possibility of doing one-year schedules, or taking some of the dean/provost time-timeline and giving it to the task forces, among others. This will be discussed further at the next Senate meeting.
One Senator indicated at the August 29 meeting that he had been told he must be in class five days per week. Dr. Friedman indicated that were was no policy on this at this time. However, he also said that the Academic Policies and Standards committee would be reviewing faculty workloads this year, and he would welcome Senate input on the faculty workload issue.
Concerns have been raised as to why the Provosts, rather than the Deans, have ultimate authority for scheduling. The concern here is that this is a step away from the single college concept since the Provosts are affiliated with specific sites, while the Deans are college-wide in orientation. There is also concern that final authority for scheduling outside the academic chain of command. This issue was discussed with Dr. Fonte, since he was the one who decided on this set-up. He indicated that he thought it appropriate that Provosts hold this authority since they would be most familiar with the needs of specific sites. He did, however, indicate that he was amenable to further discussion and review of this situation.
During the recent budgetary crisis, the full-time faculty accepted a 2.5% increase for the year. Further, during this past summer, moneys were taken from program operating budgets to help balance the overall budget. The faculty accepted both of these situations without undue grumbling or reaction since they believed that the budgetary crisis was real, and consequently, wanted to do their part to keep the college afloat. However, the faculty also noted that the Provosts and other administrators received raises significantly in excess of this 2.5%. This causes serious concern among the faculty regarding who is included, and who is excluded, from any necessary belt-tightening. This was pointed out to Dr. Fonte. He indicated that these increases were part of reorganizing these positions, and that this reorganizing was finished. The officers did point out that faculty were reorganized too.
Communications continue to be a problem. For example, there is some confusion as to where task forces are to be notified by the Provosts if changes are made to the schedule. Dr. Friedman indicated that the task forces are to be notified, and that this process will be clarified for the next scheduling go-round.
