Meeting Minutes

---

Present: Andrews, Areen, Bates, P.Betz, Bloch, Breall, Brown, Cole, Danielson, Davis, DeGioia, Diamond, Fasold, Fink, Finkel, Fisher, Fort, Glazer, Goldfrank, Hauser, Iglarsh, Jacobs, Joyner, Lauerman, Lawton,S.J., Lieber, Martire, McFadden,S.J., McGrail, Moran Cruz, Morris, A.Myers, Nishioka, Noyes, Pfeiffer, Pinkard, Rameh, Ronkainen, Sitterson, Soudee, Spiegel, Subramanian, Vroman, T.Walsh, Wientzen, Witek,S.J., Young, Zuccarelli (A.Haramati & M. Lumpkin - guests)

Absent: Arend, Byrne, Cohn, Dover, Gallucci, Haft, Lepgold, McCabe, Mujal-Leon, K.Myers, Nelson, Oakley, Peck, Puto, Richardson, Rothstein, Serene, Stent, Terrio, Tracy, Wasserstrom, Weidenbruch, Wiesel.

The meeting was called to order by Prof. Bates at 4:30 p.m.

Prof. Bates presented the minutes of the last meeting, which were approved by acclamation.

Prof. Bates announced that Prof. Vukowich has asked to be replaced as chair of the Grievance Code Committee to prepare for a sabbatical leave next year.  Prof. Bates has appointed Prof. Sherman Cohn to replace him.

Prof. Bates announced that the date of the presentation of the Task Force on Catholic identity will not be March 17 as previously announced.  It will be rescheduled.

Prof. Bates announced that the Board will be considering final approval of the new Faculty Handbook, with printing of the hard copy this spring.  Prof. Bates also mentioned that University counsel and administration had recommended that the section on tuition benefits be moved into the section on fringe benefits which had been in an appendix in previous editions of the Handbook.  The Administration has indicated that maintaining separation does not indicate an endorsement of a sense that the tuition scholarships are different from other benefits.  The implications were discussed.  Changes in the appendix do not require the same degree of faculty consultation as changes in the Handbook.

It was moved and seconded that "The Senate supports Prof. Bates in his effort to ensure that the tuition benefit statement in the new Faculty Handbook not be changed until the Senate has been fully apprized of the implications and fully consulted."  Dr. DeGioia stated that the Handbook, as currently written, will be presented to the Board, with no qualifications.  The motion was withdrawn, based on the Senate's understanding of Dr. DeGioia's statement.

Prof. Bates announced that there is still a vacancy on the Univ. Retirement Plan Pension Fiduciary Committee.  He urged that a member be identified.  Prof. Bates was himself nominated and appointed.

Prof. Kevin McGrail presented a petition by Medical Center faculty for proportional representation on the Senate.  It is signed by 172 faculty.  Prof. McGrail stated that the Medical Center Caucus voted unanimously to support the increased representation called for in the new draft Senate Constitution, with a reconsideration of representation after the on going restructuring of the Medical Center.

The petition and motion were briefly discussed.

Dr. Jack DeGioia made a presentation on developments of the Comprehensive Review Team, which had as its charge the review of compensation policies and issues at the Medical Center.  The CRT unanimously has recommended recission of the current (suspended) compensation plan which has been also struck down by the Grievance Committee.  Another motion was passed (12-3) to appoint a subcommittee to study further the issue of compensation plan in the Medical Center.  Prof. Glazer expressed the view that the CRT is revisiting an issue which has already been decided.  Prof. Myers expressed his thought that the committee is being manipulated and does not represent a legitimate exercise in faculty participation in governance.  Prof. Hauser said that an attack on tenure at the medical Center is ultimately an attack on tenure at the University in general.  Prof. Haramati questioned the lack of accountability of Medical Center leadership for their fiscal losses and inappropriate focus on faculty member and compensation.  Profs. Davis and Bates said the CRT is a useful platform at which issues are being discussed and worked out.

Father Witek reported on the work of the Senate Special Committee on Rank and Tenure.  The committee's report recommends several changes in rank and tenure procedures.  Some of the recommendations are as follows:

• If a dept. or school's procedures vary from the norm, the procedures should accompany applications for tenure and promotion.
• New appointments at the senior level must be accompanied by outside letters, just as an inside application would be; its consideration at the University Rank & Tenure and at higher levels should be facilitated for recruiting purposes.
• Additional recommendations were made regarding outside letters.
• Tenure track faculty should receive feedback on a regular basis on their progress toward tenure.
• Faculty should receive timely information on departmental tenure votes.
• Departments and schools should specify their expectations re service by tenure track faculty.
• Deadlines for applications should be better enforced and exemptions be more judiciously considered.

Father Witek said that rank and tenure guidelines of the University Committee are an implementation of Faculty Handbook provisions; dates specified are part of the handbook.  Father Witek moved that the recommendations of the committee be accepted by the Senate; the motion was seconded.  After some discussion, the motion was made that the resolutions made by the committee, subject to changes in verbiage, be accepted in principle.  A motion to table this item was made, seconded and approved by unanimous consent.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m.

Back to the top