******************************************************************
Page 6190 Minutes of Senate Meeting 251 6 Mar 1996
THE SENATE OF MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
Minutes of Meeting No. 251
6 March 1996
Synopsis: The Senate
(1) heard that President Tompkins has approved Proposal 10-96, M.S.
Degree in Environmental Policy and will take it to the Board.
(2) needs three members for the Charter School Committee.
(3) heard that the Department of Chemistry will be moved to the
College of Sciences and Arts.
(4) agreed that President Bornhorst should convey to the Board of
Control members that the Senate would like them to explore all
possibilities for providing legal counsel to the University.
(5) referred the report from the Faculty Development/Sabbatical Leave
Policy Task Force to the Academic Policy Committee to put into
the form of a proposal(s).
(6) approved the administrative revisions of Proposal 13-95, Faculty
Grievance Policies and Procedures.
(7) needs faculty nominations to fill two positions, elected by the
faculty at large, on the new Grievance Review Committee.
(8) approved Proposal 15-96, Sharing of Interval Between Classroom
Use.
(9) approved Proposal 16-96, Guidelines to Petition for Senate
Constituency.
_______________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
President Bornhorst called the Senate Meeting 251 to order at 5:34
p.m. on Wednesday, 6 March 1996, in Room B37 of the Electrical Energy
Resources Center.
Secretary Glime called roll. Absent were at-large Senators Robert
Filer and Laurie Whitt, and representatives from School of Technology,
Enrollment Management, Auxiliary Enterprises, and Academic
Services/Engineering. Liaisons in attendance were Steve Hellmann (USG)
and Ted Soldan (Staff Council).
2. RECOGNITION OF VISITORS
Guests included Fred Dobney (Provost), Marcia Goodrich (Tech
Topics), Kelly McLean (Computer Science), and Ellen Horsch (Human
Resources). Secretary Glime introduced the new USG liaison, Steve
Hellmann.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
President Bornhorst announced that Ingrid Cheney would not be at
the meeting to make her presentation on Tech Select, so item 6a would
be an announcement from him. Soldan MOVED and Lutzke seconded the
motion to accept the agenda as amended. The motion PASSED by voice vote
with no dissent. [Appendix A. NOTE: only official Senate and Library
archival copies of the minutes will contain a full complement of
appendices.]
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM MEETING 250
Senator Leifer requested that his statement in Other Business, p.
6115, paragraph 4, be corrected. According to the tape of that meeting,
Leifer stated, "That basically there is this plan that was proposed,
this pay-as-you-go-plan, that has drawbacks in it. I could talk
extensively about it but time is late." Dobney asked if we are near
having a report from the Task Force. Leifer responded. "You (Dobney)
will be at the next Task Force meeting on Monday, as far as I know, and
you're going to be talking to the Benefits Committee on Friday at 10:00
and I think I would prefer to wait until after that." Dobney responded
that we do not have a recommendation. Leifer responded, "they have a
recommendation, we have a very definite recommendation and basically
everybody on that Task Force can live with that level of funding plan.
There's no doubt about that and as a matter of fact that plan is so good
that it will fund as it is right now will fund everybody on this campus
until the year 2023. With a minor amount of tweaking it will fund
everybody in perpetuity. So I might say that that's a very good plan."
Senator Mroz asked that his statement in paragraph 2
on page 6115 be clarified. Senator Mroz asked if the Governor's budget
plan implies that if MTU were to increase the number of graduate
students would MTU receive more funding from the state.
Heyman MOVED and Sandberg seconded the motion to approve the
minutes of Meeting 250 as corrected. The motion PASSED by voice vote
with no dissent.
5. REPORT FROM SENATE PRESIDENT
President Bornhorst reported that President Tompkins approved
Proposal 10-96, M.S. Degree in Environmental Policy, to take forward to
the Board of Control. [Appendix B]
Proposal 11-96, Conflict of Interest Procedures, was sent to the
Administration for approval. [Appendix C]
The Ad Hoc Committee to Investigate Policies and Procedures
Regarding Tenure-Track Academic Appointments has been given their
charge. Committee members are Christa Walck, Interim Chair (Bus.),
Betty Chavis (Ed. Op.), Beth Flynn (Hu), Jimmy Diehl (Geo), and Tom
Snyder (Bio). [Appendix D]
President Bornhorst has received a memo from President Tompkins
regarding charter schools. [Appendix E] The Senate should appoint three
members instead of having the Senate President appoint these. Following
past tradition, President Bornhorst asked for volunteers and for Senate
members to solicit potential members. The terms will be for 2, 4, and
6-year staggered terms. Names of nominees should be submitted to the
Senate Assistant within one week. Discussion ensued on how we should
decide on the final members. Senator Beck suggested that if there are
three candidates and they are open-minded on the issue, we do not need
to vote, but if the candidates' minds are made up, we need to vote on
membership. Senator Fynewever suggested that President Bornhorst submit
three nominees to the Senate and if there are problems we should deal
with them at that time.
******************************************************************
Page 6191 Minutes of Senate Meeting 251 6 Mar 1996
President Bornhorst reported that, based on a recommendation from
Secretary Glime and himself, President Tompkins has appointed Dennis
Harbour, a local school superintendent, to be an outside member as one
of the three Presidential appointments.
The Senate officers had no prior knowledge of the recent RISE
questionnaire that was sent to the Senators.
President Bornhorst announced that effective July 1 the Department
of Chemistry will be moved to the College of Sciences and Arts.
President Bornhorst announced that Board of Control Attorney Bob
Vercruysse has terminated his relationship with Butzel-Long and has
formed his own company. He has requested continuation of his
relationship with Michigan Tech. As Senate President Bornhorst intends
to discuss this issue with members of the Board of Control. His sense
is that most faculty and professional staff would strongly support
action by the Board of Control to discontinue our relationship with
Attorney Vercruysse. Such a move would be positive for employee morale
and the Board of Control with respect to employees. President Bornhorst
would like to get the sense of whether the Senate supports his views.
Senator Sloan asked whether Andrea R. Dickson left Butzel-Long;
Ellen Horsch replied she did not. Senator Mroz stated that it would be
good to continue our relationship with Butzel-Long. Senator Heyman said
that we should convey to the Board of Control that this is an
opportunity to consider all possibilities for university legal counsel.
President Bornhorst will convey the sentiments of the Senate to Board
members.
6. COMMITTEE BUSINESS/REPORTS
A. Tech Select
Faculty and staff have received copies of the times available to
learn about Tech Select. Senator Sloan stated that her constituents
asked if this really needed two hours - if given the formula, they could
calculate needed figures. Ellen Horsch (Human Resources) stated that
persons could come to the early part of the meeting and get the
guidelines. Senator Beck questioned the meaning of reference to both
plans available in 1996 - would the current plan discontinue after that?
Horsch replied that was not intended. Senator Sweany asked if we could
get details before the meeting so we would know if we had questions;
Horsch replied anyone could call Ingrid Cheney to get the guide before
the meeting.
B. Faculty Development/Sabbatical Leave Policy Task Force - Jack Jobst
and Christa Walck [Appendix F]
Jack Jobst (Humanities) and Vice President Walck presented the
report of the Task Force. Other Task Force members were Mangalam Gopal,
James Rafert, Doug McDowell, and Tim Collins.
Walck reported that the conclusions of the committee were that the
average number of sabbatical leaves taken at MTU (3.9%) were
considerably less than at other schools in Michigan (6-7, up to 11%).
People in Sciences and Arts take more sabbatical leaves at MTU. The
stated primary impediment to taking one was reduced wages, but the
greatest number of leaves taken were by those who are paid lowest
(Sciences and Arts). The task force recommended that the administration
should encourage department members to take sabbatical leaves, and all
faculty should be encouraged to take one at least every 10-15 years.
Incentives should be provided for the under-represented colleges.
Funding for the recommendations would provide a competitive pool for
added expenses such as travel, housing, and replacement teachers for
departments; the anticipated award would average $5,000, totaling
$50,000 needed to fund approximately half of those taking a sabbatical.
These grants would be non-taxed. More faculty take 3-term leaves, the
fewest take 2 terms. MTU should aim to double the number of faculty
taking a sabbatical. Karl Markgraf is pursuing funding for
international travel and related expenses.
Jobst reported that the Sabbatical Leave Committee would determine
who is funded. They recommended no increase in pay for those who take
2-term leaves (disagreeing with the Senate Proposal passed last year
that raised it to 85%). They also recommended ways to bring back
benefits of the experience to the MTU community through presentations
and seminars, as well as seminars prior to the leave to learn strategies
from those who had had sabbatical leaves. Since spouse employment was
a concern of many faculty, the task force suggested that spouses be
guaranteed an equivalent job on return to MTU. There should be a staff
individual to help with details such as moving, new housing, and also
to offer suggestions to help new faculty and graduate students find
housing.
Senator Beck stated that lumping faculty by college was a
disservice to some departments with low sabbatical leave participation
and that these departments should also have the incentives; Jobst
responded that these were only general guidelines. Senator Leifer asked
that if the 2-term leave pay would not be increased, what about the
others; Jobst responded that the question was moot because the Board of
Control had refused to increase the salary percentage; other factors
seemed to be more important in deterring faculty from taking sabbatical
leaves. Vice President Walck stated that our salary percentage is in
line with other institutions. Leifer stated that if others earn more
salary, then half that is more than we get for a sabbatical leave.
Senator Kitalong expressed concern about guaranteeing some staff
a job on return from a spouse's sabbatical, but that other staff who
needed leave for other reasons would not be guaranteed a job when they
return. President Bornhorst noted that it was a valid concern.
Senator Pegg asked if the task force considered whether the
sabbatical leave must be away from the Houghton area; Senator Brokaw
(chair of the Sabbatical Leave Committee) stated that Proposal 1-95, now
in effect, encourages faculty to leave Houghton but does not require it.
Jobst commented that the committee has become more flexible on
permitting people to remain in the area. Pegg stated that the
consideration is important
******************************************************************
Page 6192 Minutes of Senate Meeting 251 6 Mar 1996
for some sabbaticals. Walck stated that there was no intent to change
the policy, but that the policy encourages people to go away.
Senator Thayer asked why the grants were competitive; everyone
should get travel money. Walck responded that it was because of limited
funds. Thayer responded that the administration finds funds for their
agenda. Jobst responded that the task force had recommended what they
thought was reasonable and might be possible to get. Leifer responded
that if you don't ask, you will never get it.
Brokaw asked what had happened to the administrative change that
you had to apply by 15 March; the Sabbatical Leave Committee did not
intend to limit the application time, and the number of people applying
decreases as the end of the year approaches. Provost Dobney responded
that the date had been added at the request of deans and chairs who
wanted to know if they needed to replace a faculty member for teaching,
but that the Senate had convinced him the deadline was unnecessary and
the Administration had dropped the deadline completely. Brokaw stated
that the date was in the guidelines being given out and it is often hard
to get everything lined up that early. Bornhorst stated that we need
to look at the Board of Control policy. Walck added that we do need a
cut off date to apply for funds; Dobney countered that the successful
application for travel funds may determine whether someone would want
to apply for the sabbatical leave. Walck stated that someone could stay
in this area and apply for funds to take three trips to conferences, one
of which might be out of the country.
Shonnard asked who would judge the proposal and coordinate the pre
and post leave seminars, etc. Jobst stated the Center for Teaching
Excellence and the Sabbatical Leave Committee would probably be
responsible for these activities.
Dobney stated that he needs to know the wishes of the Senate
because this is a budgeting issue. Bornhorst asked if the Senate wanted
to refer it to a standing committee. Senator Beck said we need to
evaluate its effect - does it increase the number of sabbatical leaves
taken and what must be sacrificed to put this funding in effect?
Senator Thayer said that everyone should be encouraged to take a
sabbatical leave because the institution gains too. Senator Leifer
asked what protocol is needed to do this.
Senator McKimpson asked if the task force discussed the
professional staff; Walck stated that the professional staff are
addressing that issue.
Senator Reed stated that we are nearly through this year and it
would be two years before we would spend the money, so there should be
no rush.
Keen MOVED and Sandberg seconded the motion to refer the
recommendations to the Academic Policy Committee. Walck asked when the
Sabbatical Leave Committee would need to know if funding was available
for sabbatical leaves in the 1997-98 academic year. Brokaw stated that
they usually start getting requests in November. Leifer stated that
Christa (Walck) "almost had it and dropped the ball;" if your leave is
to Australia, their academic year starts in February and you need to
know in September. Bornhorst stated that Peg Gale chairs the Academic
Policy Committee. There was no more discussion. The motion to refer
the recommendations to the Academic Policy Committee PASSED on voice
vote with no dissent by the full Senate.
7. OLD BUSINESS
Proposal 13-95, Faculty Grievance Policy and Procedures [Appendix G]
President Bornhorst brought the administrative changes to Proposal
13-95 to the floor. Senator Heyman, who worked on the original
proposal, stated that he likes the changes, they resolve what needs to
be done, are fair, and he endorses it. Senator Keen, who also worked
on the original proposal, agrees with Heyman, but asked to whom the
annual report need be submitted. Heyman responded that it makes sense
to go to the Senate, President, and anyone else who wants to see it.
Keen MOVED and Heyman seconded the motion to accept the revised Proposal
13-95. Keen MOVED and Thayer seconded the motion to amend Proposal
13-95 to add the words "to the Senate" on page 2 of 5 after "shall
submit" in the new text in the paragraph below 2b. The recommended
voting units were academic-degree-granting departments, other course-
offering units, and research units, as in the original proposal. There
were no objections to the voting units so they stood as published. The
motion to amend PASSED on voice vote with no dissent. President
Bornhorst ruled that the change was editorial and there were no
objections.
Senator Reed stated that there is no way for the committee to know
the number of grievances that are not appealed; Bornhorst responded that
the committee would survey the departments to get numbers. Secretary
Glime asked if it could be required as part of the Department Chair or
Dean end-of-year report; Provost Dobney stated that such a report was
not required university-wide.
Senator Pegg asked why the President was excused from explaining
if he/she disagreed; Dobney explained that the attorney advised that a
written report could result in a law suit. Sweany stated that the same
argument could be used on the whole process. Dobney responded that that
is why the committee needs the consultation with a human resources
representative. Pegg responded that the same advice was available to
the President and Dobney stated that the advice is "don't write it."
Heyman reminded the Senate that currently there is no policy. Dobney
further clarified that the attorney advised the President not to notify
anyone, simply make the decision; this Proposal permits the President
to notify the committee of the decision in writing, but not to write the
reasons.
There was no more discussion. The motion to approve the revised
Proposal 13-95 PASSED on voice vote with dissent.
By passing this procedure, we now need a committee to review
appeals regarding grievances. Bornhorst
******************************************************************
Page 6193 Minutes of Senate Meeting 251 6 Mar 1996
requested volunteers for the committee. There must be two members not
from the same department, to be elected by the faculty at large. The
third member is the ombudsperson. Senator Moore asked who can serve on
the committee; Heyman responded it should be eligible faculty and these
should probably be tenured (for their own protection).
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Proposal 15-96, Sharing of Interval Between Classroom Use
[Appendix H]
Discussion opened on Proposal 15-96. Senator Sloan commented that
the Senate had previously passed a similar proposal many years ago, with
the same time provisions. Senator Keen responded that the Provost's
Office said the policy did not exist. Provost Dobney stated that it is
not in writing anywhere in his office. Thayer MOVED and Leifer seconded
the motion to accept Proposal 15-96. Senator Diebel asked who enforces
this rule; will it solve the problem. Keen responded that it should
solve the problem. Discussion ended. The suggested voting units were
academic-degree-granting departments; there were no objections, so
voting units stood. The motion PASSED on voice vote with no dissent.
B. Proposal 16-96, Guidelines to Petition for Senate Constituency
[Appendix I]
Discussion opened on Proposal 16-96. This proposal had been
requested by the Senate. The officers used previous criteria, adding
that those petitioning must have long-term commitment to the university
to be admitted.
Senator Bradley asked why we had criterion 2; what unit of
governance includes a person not already in the Senate? President
Bornhorst responded that there is nobody, there are no fringe benefits
for individuals employed less than 3/4 time. Bradley responded that if
they get benefits, they should be constituents. Senator Moore explained
that in the humanities there are some people who get no benefits but
have been with the university for a long time and have a long-term
commitment. Senator Beck commented that post docs are full time but
have no long-term commitment. Senator Reed stated that we need to
define what is meant by 10 discontinuous years of employment. Bornhorst
stated that 3/4 time for 9 months counts as one year. Keen MOVED and
Soldan seconded the motion to adopt Proposal 16-96. Sandberg MOVED and
Sweany seconded the motion to amend the proposal to strike the sentence
before the first set of numbers. The suggested voting units were the
full Senate; there were no objections. The motion to amend PASSED on
voice vote with dissent. Senator Moore suggested that the two items in
the first set of criteria be "or" and that the numbers be removed.
President Bornhorst ruled this to be an editorial change. Senator Beck
objected, thus requiring a vote; the vote on treating it as an editorial
change PASSED on voice vote with dissent. There was no more discussion,
so a voice vote was taken on the motion; there were many dissenting
votes. Secretary Glime took a roll call vote and the motion to adopt
Proposal 16-96 PASSED with 17 yes, 14 no, and 1 abstention.
Evensen - no Greuer - yes
Glime - abstain Beck - no
Reed - yes Heyman - no
Walck - yes Manninen - no
Keen - no Goldstein - yes
Brokaw - no Moore - no
Leifer - yes Fynewever - no
Shonnard - yes McKimpson - yes
Sandberg - yes Diebel - yes
Sweany - yes Bradley - no
Sloan - no Chavis - no
Mroz - no Lutzke - yes
Pegg - yes Ouillette - yes
Gopal - yes Soldan - no
Arici - yes Way - no
Thayer - yes Kitalong - yes
Senator Bradley questioned whether citing only Bylaw C.1. was
appropriate since some units were also covered in Bylaw C.3. President
Bornhorst stated that the numbering had been changed by recent Senate
decisions and did not appear in the copy of the Constitution in the
Senate handbook; all units are now covered in C.1. He will recheck the
new Bylaws to be certain.
C. Proposal 17-96, Reaffirm Approval of Proposal 22-95 [Appendix J]
President Bornhorst introduced Proposal 17-96. He hopes to
conclude action on this proposal on April 3. He has asked the Chair of
Staff Council, Kelly McLean, to present a statement at the next meeting
of the Senate.
Thayer MOVED and Diebel seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 7:12 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted by Janice M. Glime
Secretary of the Senate
.