Meeting Minutes
FACULTY AFFAIRS UPC
Minutes of the Meeting of
March 28, 2008
PRESENT: Pat Simpson, Chair, Harvey Boller, Heather Cannon, Pamela Caughie, Gloria Jacobson, Susan Mezey, Tim O’Connell, David Prasse.
ABSENT: Donna Halinski, Peter Schraeder.
Minutes taken by: Francesca Pirovano
Introductory Matters:
The Chair called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m.
Minutes of the meeting of February 15, 2008 were amended and unanimously approved.
Old Business:
Policy and Program Documentation
There was a general discussion on the document and minor revisions were made.
A motion to accept document as amended was unanimously approved.
It was noted that the document will go through the UCC for approval before it is put online and that the UCC is very supportive of UPCs developing these types of documents.
It was clarified that the Office of the Provost and the UCC are responsible for ensuring that all appropriate proposals are vetted by FA-UPC.
Family Friendly Proposals
It was noted that the Subcommittee on Family Leave Policies should be commended on the revisions they have made to the proposal.
There was a brief discussion on what data trends should be taken into consideration when considering the Family Friendly Proposals. It was decided that frequency data would be the data considered while evaluating these proposals.
It was noted that Human Resources and Faculty Administration have not yet been consulted about the Family Friendly Policies.
-
Tenure Clock Extension
It was emphasized that although the tenure clock would be extended, the extension will in no way affect the tenure standards and criteria. The importance of educating faculty to clarify the fact that individuals who receive extensions are not to be held to higher standards was discussed.It was decided that the proposal should state that in order to be eligible for an extension based on caring for someone with a serious health condition, the faculty member must be the primary care giver for a partner, son, daughter, or parent with a serious heath condition.
A motion to break the proposal into two parts (the first of which extending the 1 year tenure clock extension to two years and the second of which describing the conditions for which a tenure extension can be requested) and to approve the proposal as modified was unanimously approved.
-
Family Leave
It was clarified that parenthood is not a disability and that 14 weeks of paid parental leave will benefit students and add less distraction to classes because faculty will be less likely to leave in the middle of the semester.A concern was raised as to the costs associated with implementing this proposal. Timothy O’Connell will bring an estimate of projected costs to the next FA-UPC meeting.
A concern was raised as to whether this policy should apply to staff. It was decided that staff should be removed from this policy and a parallel policy should be recommended for staff.
There was a brief discussion regarding the time requirement of full-time employment before becoming eligible for parental leave.
It was decided that this proposal will be revisited at the next FA-UPC meeting when the estimate of projected costs will be distributed.
-
Adoption Financial Assistance
A motion to approve proposal as written was unanimously approved. -
Commission on Family Leave Policies
There was a general discussion on Family Leave Policy issues being handled by existing committees.It was noted that there is a need for a task force to act on a specific charge, but the task force should not be developed as a standing committee.
A motion to recommend that the President appoint a Commission on Family Workplace Policies with representation from faculty, staff, and administrators was approved unanimously.
Sabbatical Proposal
It was noted that this proposal has gone to the budget committee.
There was a discussion about the effect sabbatical leaves will have on research leaves.
There was a discussion on the terms competitive and non-competitive leaves. When it was noted that in the past two years every requested research leave deemed worthy has been funded, a question was raised as to what the difference in criteria will be between the sabbatical leave and the research leave.
There was a discussion regarding how LUCs “Areas of Excellence” may or may not negatively impact the probability of some faculty members’ receiving research leaves.
A question was raised as to whether faculty will be able to take both sabbatical and paid university research leaves.
The general discussion on the Sabbatical Proposal will be continued at the next FA-UPC meeting.
Future Meetings:
The next meetings are tentatively scheduled for April 18, 2008 at 8:30 am and May 15, 2008 at 8:30am.
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:30 am.
Respectfully submitted,
Francesca Pirovano