October 17, 1997
Fac: Are we publicizing this deadline?
Chan: I just found out about this today. We need to get people working on this.
Fac: If people are not aware of the deadlines, they will be upset.
Chan: I agree, but we need to coordinate efforts at various levels and offices.
Fac: What is Bloomington doing about the issue?
Chan: I have not heard. The IU regional campus Chancellors will be getting together next week and the issue will be discussed. The following week, we will meet with the President and try to get this item on the agenda for that meeting.
Fac: Do the enrollments off site indicate that we are getting new students or are existing students just going to a different site?
VC Vasquez: The Fall data has not yet been analyzed. However the Summer data showed an increase in new students, but I'm reluctant to make assumptions based on a small sample. One good sign is the diversity among the students. We are getting a large Hispanic and African American population.
Fac: We've heard a lot about these session, but what are they about?
VC Kroepfl: I went to the first one. There are group activities and role playing. It's a good experience which requires a time commitment.
Fac: Who are these geared towards, faculty, students, faculty-student relations?
VC Kroepfl: These are intended for faculty
Fac: Outside consultants are conducting the sessions, which are just for faculty and staff
Fac: Two questions: what happened to orders placed 1-2 years ago for new equipment and upgrades, and what is the status of the Website?
VC Moran: The faculty upgrade project is moving ahead slowly, primarily due to staffing issues. I have drafted a letter to update the faculty on the project's status. The letter will be reviewed by the Computer Committee this afternoon. The Website is now maintained by a full-time Webmaster.
Fac: Where is this issue coming from?
Ciminillo: It may be a defensive move constructed within the context that it is better to be proactive on the issue than wait for it to be imposed upon us.
Fac: Has anyone raised the idea of tenure as a property right?
Ciminillo: Interesting point which I do not think was discussed.
Fac: Well, this is an issue the Board of Trustees is interested in.
Ciminillo: Yes. We are a long way from a policy being developed. To date, all we have are some position statements and the IUPUI document.
Fac: I'm sure you know why this has come before you. This recent situation is disturbing. Budget issues always seem to be a concern, yet where is this money coming from? Why does it seem that there is money for raises for administrators and not others?
Fac: Let's keep in mind that it might be necessary to entice people out of the classroom and into administrative positions with these stipends, but the change proposed in this resolution would be a fairer way of dealing with the issue and may improve morale.
Fac: Why does the current practice exist?
Chair: can anyone shed light upon this question?
Fac: the practice may be a result of trying to simplify accounting.
Fac: keeping administrative salary after an individual has returned to the classroom does occur elsewhere; look at the IUSB situation involving the former Chancellor. The practice may be an incentive to keep good teachers from leaving the university after completion of administrative responsibilities. Asking an individual to give up a portion of their new salaries to return to the classroom would be very difficult, as would expecting someone to change their lifestyle.
Fac: however, the increases in these individuals salaries means there is less money available in the overall salary pool
Fac: the same good be said for granting promotions
Chan: if this resolution passes, I will take it under consideration. Based upon my understanding implementing this resolution would affect an individuals other benefits. If should be remembered that the resolution is advisory, and it is for the future not the past. These are useful principals for us to look at.
Fac: what has been the practice in the past? Has anyone ever given back the stipend?
Fac: it's not a stipend, but a salary increase.
Fac: seems like someone either gave the money back or suggested something similar to this resolution.
Fac: this problem is system wide
Fac: the 18/20 plan would be affected
Fac: this resolution creates an enormous disincentive to resign from an administration position, particularly if they've been in the position for a long time.
The issue was called for a vote and the resolution was passed.
Fac: as a friendly amendment, I suggest striking the word "children" and replacing it with "dependents"
Fac: I thought about that, but the definition of "dependents" is much broader. It seemed much less likely to be passed by the Board of Trustees with the broaden scope.
Fac: leaving the "children" makes it more likely to be accepted by the Board.
Fac: I withdraw my amendment
Chan: how are you going to proceed with this?
Fac: if passed, we are asking our UFC representative to bring the resolution to the UFC
Fac: how does this effect out of state residents?
Fac: if we included the non-resident children it would be less likely to be approved by the Board, so the resolution intentionally avoids the issue
Fac: keep out the non-resident issue. We don't know what rasing that issue could lead to.
Fac: the non-resident issue is unfairly discriminatory, particularly since educational cost remission is presented as part of your benefits package.
Fac: are there any other benefits affected by residency requirements?
Fac: yes, healthcare.
Fac: what about people whose children chose a different college? Is there any parallel benefit?
Fac: I can't think of anything. Reciprocal agreements with other state schools would help.
Fac: IU has pursued reciprocal agreements with other schools over the years
Fac: what about tuition waivers? Is tax charged on them?
Fac: I do not believe the waivers are taxable because they're benefits.
Fac: the Board of Trustees is going to decide this issue based on costs not on its merit.
Fac: what happens at other schools.
Fac: Ball State gives full tuition remission and Purdue 50%
Fac: there used to be a reciprocal agreement with Purdue
Fac: passing this resolution would make IU's benefit package more competitive in attracting new faculty
Fac: that's a good point, and the resolution is appropriate, however it looks self-serving.
Fac: I call the question.
The resolution was passed.
Fac: the first-tier salary committee was not used this past year. It seemed appropriate for it to convene and had divisional representation. The way it was handled this past year did not provide divisional representation. Why was an ad hoc committee put together? I don't understand why the first-tier committee was not used.
Chan: I called the ad hoc committee together to address market adjustments not equity. The committee looked at the disciplines, used national studies, and requested information from every division for the purposes of market comparisons. This was not an equity or third-tier salary issue.
Fac: there are two committees dealing with salary and budget issues and it sounds like their histories have been merged. In the past, the recommendations of the first-tier committee were ignored.
Fac: the process is confusing and the resolution's wording further confuses the issue.
Fac: what this resolution is saying is that we want the first-tier committee to resume normal operations.
Fac: we have seen more committees go out of the faculty's control and this resolution is a call for us to take back some control.
Fac: the ad hoc committee asked each division to chose a national base by which to be measured. That's what was done. If the market adjustment for your division seems inappropriate, then your issue is with your divisional dean, not the ad hoc committee.
Fac: I've never heard this. If the first-tier committee would have been used, then we would have had better communication.
Chan: I understand your frustration. I thought the first tier determined how the 3% was divided.
Fac: I'd like to refocus our discussion on the resolution at hand. Let's forget the past and look to the future. It's a good idea to bring the first-tier back.
Fac: is the first-tier currently formulated?
Chair: We are currently in the processes of forming the committee. Letters have been sent to each division requesting representation.
Fac: it should be noted that last year the Executive Committee tried to formulate the first-tier, however responses were not received from all divisions.
Fac: I call the question.
The resolution was passed.
Fac: what is the status of the awards? It sounds like the process may be changing.
Fac: the Teaching and Classroom Technology Committee will probably be prepared to report on this issue next month.
Fac: has the meeting time of this Organization been changed?
Chair: We voted at the April 1997 meeting to try alternating the meeting times to allow those who teach in the morning an opportunity to attend. We will continue to talk about the issue.