The University Senate
of Michigan Technological University
Proposal 8-14
(Voting Units: Full Senate)
“Proposal
to Amend the University Senate Bylaws
on
Standing Committees”
I.
Rationale
Currently—with the exception
of the Elections Committee—every University Senate Standing Committee is
assigned a University Vice President as a “Resource/Liaison.” This assignment is not defined in the Senate
Constitution, nor is it defined in the Senate Bylaws.
1. Although the interests of Senate constituents
and the interests of the “Executive Team” may often be consonant with one
another, there may be occasions when this is not the case;
2. Senate representatives are not routinely
included in meetings of the Executive Team;
3. There is a significant power differential
between Executive Team members and members of Senate Standing Committees (for
example, between a Vice President and a staff member who may serve at the
pleasure of that Vice President or whose next raise or promotion may be at the pleasure of that Vice President); and
4. Free and open discussion among members of the
Senate Standing Committees is essential to the healthy functioning of the
committees, to the vitality of the University, and to meaningful shared
governance, unrestricted attendance of Executive Team members at University Senate
Standing Committee meetings may have an undesirable, chilling effect on the
free exchange of ideas within the committee.
In order to avoid placing Senate Standing Committee chairs in the position of negotiating with University Vice Presidents every year the terms of the Vice Presidents’ participation in Standing Committee meetings, it is proposed that this issue be specifically addressed within the Bylaws of the University Senate.
III.
History of the Current Policy
Former University Senate (2009-2012) President Rudy Luck reports that in September 2009, he initiated a policy whereby Michigan Tech Vice Presidents would serve as liaisons to University Senate Standing Committees. He describes this initiative as follows:
I think I had discussions with Provost Seel on this, and he passed this on to President Mroz, who then approved the idea. Provost Seel then
suggested who the appropriate liaisons should be.
It made absolutely no sense to have committees discuss matters of importance
without having the right to seek insight from the people who are in charge of effecting the policy. The idea behind this was that the
committee should have the right to demand the presence of the people in charge
if they wanted this. Technically speaking, this should lead to policies that
are easier to implement.
These people are not
expected to attend meetings of the Senate committees (they could if invited),
but, essentially, matters deemed important to the Senate committee could be
deliberated upon by senators in the committee, and then the group should have
the right to seek information from one of those VPs, which would allow for more
intelligent or feasible crafting of Senate policy (meaning policies that would
be approved by the administration and the BOC).
What should be understood is that this was supposed to strengthen the Senate committees. They could reach resolutions as they did previously without the presence of these VPs, and then, if they wanted, they had the right to summon the VPs for additional information. The concern about people lacking the “security” of tenure is important, and the committee should derive ways to protect this.
It does make sense to put this into the by-laws. These things do have a tendency to evolve into a different format and perhaps the sense of history was lost. No reason why it should not be codified.
It is clear, then that the
original intent of this initiative was that University Vice Presidents would
attend Senate standing committee meetings at the invitation of the
committees. It is also clear that in the
mind of the Senate president who initiated this policy, unrestricted
participation by University Vice Presidents could have a chilling effect on the
free and open exchange of ideas on such committees—especially with respect to
committee members who do not have the benefit of tenure. Hence, the Senate President who initiated
this policy suggests that the original intent (Vice Presidents to attend
committee meetings as invited) be codified in the Senate Bylaws.
Proposal:
According to the University Senate Constitution Article VI, Section A, “The number, responsibilities and membership of committees of the Senate shall be determined by the Senate using procedures contained in the By-laws.”
It is proposed that Section C of the By-laws be amended as
follows (amendments in boldface):
C. Senate
Standing Committees - Organization
1. Normally, each senator or alternate is expected to serve on one standing committee of the Senate.
2. Only senators or alternates may vote in Senate standing committees.
3. Each committee shall elect its own chair, who shall be a senator or alternate.
4. Given the issues likely to be addressed by
the committee in any given year, in electing a chair, committees are encouraged
to consider whether tenure would be an asset.
5. Any member of the university community may serve without vote on any Senate standing committee, subject to the approval of the committee.
6. Administrative liaisons will be invited to
attend, as needed, at the discretion of the committee.
7. The full Senate must approve yearly the membership of each standing committee before it begins to function.
8. Normally, the Senate officers and officers-elect will draft a preliminary list of committee assignments before the first meeting of the Senate in the fall term.
Introduced to Senate: 20 November 2013