FacEx - Faculty Senate Executive Committee11/11/14
FROM: Jim Carothers, Chair
SUBJECT: Working meeting Tuesday, November 11, 3:00-4:50
I should like to have a special working meeting of FacEx to draft additional material for the proposed Faculty Code, which we have discussed on a number of occasions. To this end, I ask you to make efforts to attend the meeting on Tuesday, November 11, from 3:00-4:50 p.m. in the Olympian Room at the Burge Union.
As you know, we had no meeting scheduled on this date, so it seems a good time to make progress on our response to the administration’s version (9/2/14) and the proposed additional changes by the Committee on Faculty Rights, Privileges, and Responsibilities (10/30/14).
At this meeting we should expect to devise wording to cover the remaining issues not agreed on by last year’s FacEx and now part of the ongoing draft document. It will help a good deal if we are ready with new draft language consistent with that which has served us so far. As this will be a “working meeting,” rather than a business meeting, we will forego various reports, and will take no formal action. I hope that we will be able to achieve consensus, and, in any event, I will not accept either motions or amendments at this meeting. This is not in any sense a ”secret meeting”; it will be announced in the usual venues, and we should be prepared for visitors.
FacEx has worked successfully this way on previous issues, and I am optimistic that we can make some real progress with this approach. I realize several of you have other responsibilities on Tuesday afternoons, and I thank you in advance for joining in our work to the extent that you are able on November 11. With luck, we may develop some recommendations for action at our next regular meeting on November 18.
Faculty Senate Executive Committee – FacEx
November 11, 2014 – 3:00 p.m.
Olympian Room, Burge Union
Approved November 18, 2014
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Carothers, Tom Beisecker, Mike Williams, Katherine Clark, Lisa Friis, Jonathan Mayhew
EXCUSED: Jeremy Martin
ALSO PRESENT: Kathy Reed, University Governance
DISCUSSION OF FACULTY CODE – Carothers noted that this meeting was called to discuss and draft possible suggested changes to the Faculty Code to vote on at next week’s FacEx meeting. Carothers also mentioned the possibility of asking FRPR Chair Jan Sheldon to attend a FacEx meeting to discuss FRPR’s suggested revisions to the administration’s September 2, 2014, version of the Faculty Code. Carothers reminded FacEx members that FRPR was charged with reviewing administration’s latest version and making comments for consideration by FacEx. FacEx considers these recommendations and may make additional changes. FacEx forwards its recommendation to Faculty Senate for discussion and vote. Carothers reminded members that the version that FRPR submitted to FacEx in spring 2012 was amended by FacEx and Faculty Senate prior to final approval by Faculty Senate.
Beisecker clarified that currently FacEx is in the process of reviewing administration’s latest version of the Faculty Code (September 2, 2014) and the comments on this version that FRPR submitted to FacEx. He reminded members that FRPR is an appointed committee charged with making recommendations to FacEx, and FacEx has the right and the responsibility to evaluate and respond to FRPR’s recommendations. After FacEx has had an opportunity to review FRPR’s recommendations, it may be helpful for FacEx to meet with members of FRPR.
FacEx members discussed FRPR’s comments and concerns about administration’s September 2 version.
Regarding comment SJ1, FacEx members reached consensus that the FSRR must include anchoring language that ties to the Faculty Code. The Faculty Code would also need to reference the FSRR. A model for anchoring the Faculty Code in the FSRR exists with regard to Post Tenure Review and Faculty Evaluation. Beisecker will review the current wording in the FSRR dealing with Post Tenure Review, and will provide possible amendments for the FSRR and the Faculty Code for next week’s meeting.
FRPR also expressed concern about administration including “University policy” in the second sentence in Article I. FRPR feels that the Code should not be subordinate to University policies that may be implemented unilaterally by the Provost. Mayhew suggested that rather than striking out “University policy,” the word “other” could be added before University Policy. It was not clear whether adding the word “other” addresses FRPR’s concern.
FacEx members then reviewed Martin’s concerns. Martin was unable to attend the meeting but sent his comments and concerns to Carothers who shared them with FacEx. FacEx discussed the portion of
Martin’s memo to Carothers regarding Article V. After discussion, FacEx reached consensus that the third edit (see below) was preferable.
JM: EDIT #3: This version would be my preference. It spells out the particular circumstances under which leave without pay may be imposed. The administration seems most concerned with absence from classes (which I think is eminently reasonable), so I have moved that language to a separate paragraph and added a pointer to the relevant earlier material. If administration has in mind other circumstances in which leave without pay could be imposed, then they should be negotiated with FRPR and spelled out specifically in Article V.
Article V. Administrative Leave
Faculty who fail to fulfill the responsibilities specified in Article IV of this code may be subject to placement on administrative leave
without pay and/or the imposition of the sanctions specified in Article VI of this code. The operation of the University requires professional and reliable performance of faculty responsibilities. Failure to meet these responsibilities, including cancelling or not meeting classes without prior approval can have serious consequences for students and colleagues. Therefore, prompt and immediate action must be taken by the University in such cases and may result in placement on administratively determined leave without pay by the Provost. While on administrative leave, the faculty member is entitled to his or her full pay and benefits except as provided below.
Leave Without Pay administrative leave is imposed, the Provost shall notify the faculty member of the action and provide the reasons for the administrative action. In addition, the notice shall advise the faculty member that the Leave Without Pay shall administrative leave shall cease, and the faculty member shall resume pay status, upon notification to the Provost by the chair or dean that the faculty member has resumed his/her attendance or academic responsibilities or otherwise made satisfactory arrangements. Finally, the notice shall advise the faculty member that if he/she believes the Leave Without Pay administrative leave to have been improperly imposed, review may be sought by requesting a hearing before the Faculty Senate Faculty Rights Board as outlined in the University Senate Code. However, such a request shall not delay the imposition of the administrative leave without pay.
Administrative leave without pay may be imposed only when a faculty member has failed to meet his/her teaching responsibilities as described in Article IV.l.e above. The operation of the University requires professional and reliable performance of faculty responsibilities. Failure to meet these responsibilities, including cancelling or not meeting classes without prior approval, can have serious consequences for students and colleagues. Therefore, prompt and immediate action must be taken by the University in such cases and may result in placement on administrative leave without pay by the Provost. In this case, the notice of administrative leave provided to the faculty member by the Provost shall advise the faculty member that the leave without pay shall cease, and the faculty member shall resume pay status, upon notification to the Provost by the chair or dean that the faculty member has resumed his/her attendance or academic responsibilities or otherwise made satisfactory arrangements.
FacEx asked for clarification of the distinctions between “Administrative Leave With/out Pay” and “Suspension” with regard to receipt of benefits. FacEx asked for clarification by the FacEx meeting on November 18, 2014. At the next meeting, FacEx will also consider adding “Administrative Leave Without Pay” as a separate sanction, depending on the answer to the benefits question.
FacEx also discussed some of the other points included in Martin’s memo.