Meeting Minutes
October 17, 2003
2003-2004: No. 2
Members Present: Dr. Paul Jay (Chair), Dr. Isiaah Crawford, Dr. Lydia don Carlos, Ms. Joyce Knight, Dr. Christopher Manning, Dr. Robert Mittendorf, Mr. Henry Rose.
Members Absent: Dr. Anthony Barbato, Dr. Louis Cain.
I. Review of Minutes from September 16 Meeting: The Committee reviewed the minutes from the September 16, 2003 meeting and they were unanimously approved (8-0-0). II. Review and Approval of SBA Rank & Tenure / Faculty Review Committee
Proposal
Prior to discussion of the SBA proposal the overall status of the Committee's attempts to universalize the process were discussed. Concerns were raised regarding the SSOM and whether they would adopt policies that follow the policy changes approved by Fr. Garanzini. The Chair said he would continue to communicate with the SSOM on this matter to get it resolved. Turning to the SBA proposal, the Committee addressed concerns regarding the eligibility of associate professors to vote. The Committee wanted to be sure that SBA insured a sufficient number of full professors would be on the committee to deal with promotions to that rank. Further, it was brought to light that there are differences in appointment policies between the SBA and the rest of the University that could raise equity issues. The Chair agreed to continue to work with the SBA to insure there will be an adequate number of full professors on the committee. The Committee then unanimously approved the proposal (8-0-0).
III. Review and Approval of SSW Rank & Tenure / Faculty Review Committee Proposal
The SSW proposal was discussed by the Committee, including some reviews which had been emailed to the Chair prior to the meeting. The SSW proposed to rename a standing committee as the Rank & Tenure / Faculty Review Committee as opposed to forming a new committee. The Committee also discussed the desire for the SSW to "flesh out" some of the guidelines in the proposal, as some issues are vague. Specifically, clarification was desired to assure that there would always be at least three full professors on the committee. However, it was decided that due to circumstances surrounding the proposal, including the small size of the school, that the dean will be stepping down, and that it needs the committees to operate, a vote was proposed on the current document. The Committee approved the proposal unanimously (8-0-0).
IV. Faculty Salary Study Update
The Chair requested that the Committee deal with this item prior to moving to a discussion of the Faculty Titles and Contracts document because the Provost needed input before meeting in November with the Board of Trustees.. The Provost updated the Committee on the status of the study, announcing that the first information gathering stage (internal) is completed He raised a number of policy considerations for the Committee to discuss prior to moving to stage two (external peer comparisons). The Committee discussed at length the results from the SPSS study of the variances in salaries at Loyola lakeside. In terms of the gender equity portion of the study, there did not appear to be a statistically significant variance in salaries based on gender or ethnicity. It was agreed that the Committee should report to the faculty as soon as possible on the data regarding gender equity. The Committee then reviewed documents comparing Loyola salaries to other colleges and universities along with the Memorandum by the Provost regarding considerations for the next stage in the salary equity process. The Committee discussed the criteria for determining peer institutions (private urban peers) and agreed to work on drawing up an appropriate list in consultation with the Deans. There was discussion of the importance of identifying where there was inequity in salaries within departments or schools, with the recognition that some individual faculty members might fall well above, or well below whatever benchmark the committee might ultimately come up with. It was agreed that differences in salary due to merit ought not to be erased by equity increases.
V. Faculty Titles and Contracts Document
The Committee discussed the revisions suggested from the 9/16 meeting regarding the new Faculty Titles and Contracts document. The Provost responded to the Committee's concern regarding redefining the base-line part time load as 3-3 by pointing out that part-time faculty are not required to do research or serve on departmental or university committees. An ethical issue was raised regarding the service which they perform for the University and that it warrants benefits and job security. A recommended solution was to offer Academic Year contracts to these professors to ensure their status throughout the year.
The meeting was adjourned unanimously (8-0-0) at 4:15 pm, however also quite suddenly due to a fire alarm and the need to evacuate the building.
Respectfully submitted by: Mr. Steve Eck