Faculty Association Minutes Sept 2005

CALL TO ORDER

President Judy Solano called the meeting to order at 12:19 PM.
Dr. Solano emphasized the importance of being a “good citizen” of the University. This includes caring about others, staying informed on issues and voicing your opinions, and sharing your time and skills with the community to make it better.

II.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES

The minutes of the July 2005 meeting were approved as published on the web.

III.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

1.		The Graduate Faculty, at its spring meeting endorsed the change of the Office of Graduate Studies into a Graduate School. The proposal is now with Mr. Delaney, and will be transmitted to the Board of Trustees.
2.		Faculty are encouraged to complete (on-line) the evaluation of academic administrators. The online version of the evaluation will be available until Monday, September 12, 2005. If any questions, please contact Judy Solano or Cindy Chin.
3.		Kathy Cohen (Library) reports that construction continues in the new library. Remodeling of existing spaces will impact availability of library materials during September and October. Dates of closure(s) will be announced. Contact Kathy Cohen or Joe Noll (Facilities ext 1083) for further information.
4.		A site, Faculty Forum, has been set up in Blackboard to facilitate discourse among faculty re: topics of interest such as Academic Freedom and Tenure. This is a tool for faculty to facilitate communication among faculty.
5.		The wrong schedule for the meetings of the Faculty Association was distributed with the packet for this meeting; a corrected version has been posted on the web, and hard copies distributed.

IV.

STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS

Academic Programs Committee -

Bettie Adams reported for Lisa Jamba: Janet Bosnick and Bettie Adams will serve as co-chairs. One item on today’s agenda. Next meeting will be on October 6, 2005.

Academic Standards Committee - John Cummings

Diane Tanner reported for John Cummings. Plagiarism will continue to be discussed at the next meeting. Committee will also address the issue of “F” grades issued to students who have not attended class. Federal regulations require reporting of absences.

Adjunct Affairs Committee - Catherine Hough

Kathy Robinson reported for Cathy Hough that committee members have not responded to a request for electronic meeting. Cathy Hough will seek advice of Judy Solano.

Budget Advisory Committee - Paul Mason

Paul Mason reported that a meeting has been scheduled for Next Wednesday: Will elect Chair at that time.

Campus Technology Committee - Katharine Brown

Katharine Brown described the function/responsibilities of the Campus Technology Committee. Dianne Tanner, new chair, commented that minutes for CT are posted on the web-site. In the minutes, faculty will find a summary of what OFE and UTC are doing, and discussion re: Banner issues. Information items in today’s packet: 2 re: Banner, and 1 describing quick links to documents re: specific classroom technology information. Next meeting: 9/12/05 CCOB; 10 am Room 2004.

Faculty Affairs Committee - Ellie Sheirer

Ellie Sheirer reported first meting will be held next Thursday. A chair will be elected at that time.

Faculty Enhancement Committee - Russell Mays

Russell Mays reported Faculty Enhancement met this week. Joann Nolin (COH) will serve as chair. Faculty are encouraged to apply for summer research and environmental grants. Check the OFE website for scheduled meetings and activities.

Nominations and Elections Committee - Barbara Olinzock

Judy Solano addressed the future of the P and T committee. No committee was elected by Faculty Association last year, as the Promotion and Tenure function was to become a function of the Union, according to the proposed contract. Since contract ratification has not occurred, Dr. Solano and Dr. Frohlich (UFF) decided that the Faculty Association will assume the Promotion and Tenure function for this year (2005-2006). A special election for a Promotion and Tenure committee will be held next month. Cindy Scott commented that their might be some concern among P and T candidates re: the stability of the process. Dr. Solano commented that the process is stable and will be conducted according to the current Promotion and Tenure policies and procedures, as described in the Faculty Handbook. Barbara Olinzock reported there are 5 (COAS, CCOB; COEHS) and 2 at large vacancies on the P and T committee. Nominations will be sought both via email and during the October meeting. The special election will be conducted DURING the Faculty Association meeting; absentee ballots will be accepted. There will be no election after the Faculty Association. Cynthia Jordan will be assuming chair position of the Nomination and Elections Committee in January.

Promotion and Tenure Committee - Kathaleen Bloom

No report

Research Committee - David Lambert

No report

Strategic Planning Committee - Doreen Radjenovic

Doreen Radjenovic reported that a meeting to select the new chair is being scheduled.

Support Services Committee - Rama Rao

Rama Rao reported the committee met in July, new chair was elected. Next meeting: 9/8/2005; will continue same type of activities as last year.

Executive Committee - Steve Shapiro

The committee met in September to set agenda, next meeting on September 20 th: both new and existing chairs are invited. Luncheon will be served at 12:15 p.m.

SPECIAL REPORTS

President - John Delaney

Tom Serwatka reported for Mr. Delaney; (Mr. Delaney is at a United Way Function, and sends his regrets). The text of the report is as follows:

Statement on Current Union Negotiations John Delaney September 1, 2005
The Administration and UFF have been at impasse in negotiations since late May. Although discussions between the parties since then have narrowed the issues, 4 major issues remain in dispute:
1.	Faculty Performance Evaluations : Although the parties have agreed to most of the language in this article, at least three significant issues remain in disagreement.
		whether the annual evaluation will include research performed or credited outside the period of the annual evaluation.
		the service credit to be given for performing in a Union leadership role
		Whether "proficiency in spoken English" will be governed by the Florida Statutes and rules promulgated thereunder, or pursuant to language provided in the old BOR agreement.
	The Administration presented its last best offer on this subject on August 26. The UFF is considering the Administration's proposal.
2.	Assignment of Responsibilities : Although the parties have agreed to most of the language in this article, at least 2 significant issues remain in disagreement. Those issues are:
		the Administration's proposal that faculty be available to attend a limited number of necessary meetings after the ending of classes each semester, and also be available during the 5 days prior to the commencement of fall classes.
		The Administration's proposal that, in order to accommodate reasonable student needs, faculty members must normally maintain 5 office hours per week, and also be available by appointment.
	The Administration presented its last best offer on this subject on August 26. The UFF is considering the Administration's proposal.
3.	UFF Rights : Although the parties have agreed to most of the language in this article, at least 1 significant issue remains in disagreement:
		The UFF has requested 9 course releases in the Fall and Spring, and 8 course releases in the Summer. The releases would be used by faculty in Union leadership roles.
		The Administration has offered 3 course releases in the Fall and Spring, and 2 course releases in the Summer. However, the Administration has stated that it will consider granting an additional course release during the Spring and Summer - when the parties are engaged in contract negotiations.
	The Administration presented its last best offer on this subject on August 26. The UFF is considering the Administration's proposal.
4.	Salaries : The parties have agreed upon the total pay increase to be granted over 3 academic years (2003-04; 2004-05; and 2005-06). The total pay package (including the 12/1/03 legislative across the board increase) would total 12.3%. We believe this to be one of the highest pay increases granted to faculty throughout the entire university system. However, the parties remain in disagreement over the component parts of that proposed pay increase.

	The Administration has proposed the following over 3 years:
		5.6% Across the Board 2.85% Departmental Merit 1.85% Market Equity (to address C/I) --------- 10.30% +2.00% 12/1/03 Legislative Across the Board --------- 12.30% =====
	The UFF has proposed the following over 3 years:
		3.70% Market Equity (Broken down into several categories) 3.60% Across the Board 3.00% Departmental Merit --------- 10.30% +2.00% 12/1/03 Legislative Across the Board --------- 12.30% =====
	The Administration believes that its proposal is well balanced, satisfies the Board's desire for merit compensation, significantly addresses compression/inversion, and assures that each eligible faculty member will receive a pay increase. The Administration estimates that pay increases under its proposal will average 9.72% over 3 years (excluding the 2% 12/1/03 legislative ATB, and excluding the $1,000 legislative bonus, previously granted).
	The Administration believes that the primary thrust of the UFF proposal is to maximize C/I adjustments. The Administration also believes that the UFF's proposed larger allocation to Market Equity skews the relative pay increases away from recognition for meritorious performers and toward those who, for whatever reason, are significantly below the market target.
	UFF disagrees with the Administration's assessment of the effect of the UFF proposal. Since impasse was declared in late May, the parties have been working on models of their respective pay proposals in an effort to better evaluate the impact of each proposal.
	Although both parties would prefer to avoid the impasse hearing, and would prefer to settle the contract themselves, a hearing before a special magistrate appointed by PERC is scheduled to be held not earlier than mid December.
	Within 15 days after the close of that hearing, which is expected to last several days, the magistrate will issue a recommended decision, which has no binding impact upon the parties. The parties will then have 20 days to consider the magistrate's recommendations.
	If the magistrate's recommended decision does not help the parties to resolve their disagreements, the final decision will be made by the UNF Board of Trustees, following a public hearing at which the Administration and UFF will present their respective arguments. The Board of Trustees will make the final decision on all disputed items.
	According to the Florida Statutes, the impasse procedures are intended to resolve the remainder of the first fiscal year under negotiations. Consequently, the parties anticipate that, should it be necessary to proceed to hearing, the 2003-04, 2004-05, and 2005-06 fiscal years would have to be handled seriatim, and the Board of Trustees would make separate rulings upon each year in dispute.
	If a special magistrate hearing remains necessary to resolve negotiations, these issues will not be resolved for several months.
	Steve Shapiro: Asked questions re: time frame of special master process. Dale Clifford explained process. There is a separate special master for each year of the contract. Each year is considered separately. With hard work, the process could be accomplished by February. The Administration proposal can be found at: http://www.unf.edu/acadaffairs/Bargainingpage.htm.

Legislative Liaison Report - Janet Owen

Janet Owen waived her report to allow discussion to continue on the bargaining proposals.

United Faculty of Florida - Cheryl Frohlich

Cheryl Frohlich reported three articles are still being negotiated; she emphasized the differences in the two proposals: (UFF) performance evaluation is tied into salary; administration wishes to only look at one year for performance. UFF: wishes to evaluate research over a 3 year span, to allow for writing-publication lag; Administration wishes to evaluate research on a yearly basis. UFF and Administration also disagree on availability of faculty prior to start of assignment for meetings, planning, etc. There continues to be disagreement as well on the number of course releases granted to UFF officers/bargaining team. Frolich stated that the UFF has requested additional release time to compensate for the amount of time required during the contract negotiation. Frolich shared that UFF was not allowed access to Administration spreadsheets until August 4, and is currently trying to resolve discrepancies. Both sides are working hard to assure that the data are correct. Frohlich elaborated on some of Clifford’s comments re: the special master process, Frohlich is not sure if quoted time frame was correct. Frohlich commented that neither side wishes to go to the special master process, as “nobody wins, everybody loses.” The UFF proposals can be found at: http://www.unf.edu/facstaff/uff/.

VI.

QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES

Several comments and questions followed that are addressed specifically in the two proposals. Other questions were:

Barbara Tuck: Why are UFF proposals available to the faculty on the web, and not the Administration proposals?
Answer: This is an oversight, administration proposals will be posted. [addendum: links to BOTH proposals have been included in this document.]

Ajayi Adewale: Why are negotiations continuing on areas in which agreements have been made, areas with no conflicts?
Frohlich: we are trying to negotiate on areas where there continue to be conflicts.
Clifford: Both sides have developed MOUs for issues both sides agree upon.

Steve Shapiro: Asked for clarification re: lump sum payments. Inversion lump sums are determined per school. Details are available in the proposals [see links]

Sewarta/Clifford: Asked Frohlich to address Exceptional merit—Frohlich clarified Union and UFF proposals.

Michelle DeDeo: Who came up with the 5 hours/week office hours and meetings before classes begin?
Clifford: The administration proposed 5 hours as an appropriate number for faculty office hours to enhance availability to students.
Frohlich: UFF proposed that office hours could be more individualized; union has concerns about the inflexibility of five hours.
Solano stated time was up, and reminded attendees that the Faculty Association, per se, has no role in the negotiation process.

Anonymous question: What can the faculty do? Can either party be sued for mal-practice? No answer was immediately available.

VII.

LEGISLATIVE ITEMS

Item # 1- FA 05-21 - Submitted by the Academic Programs Committee

College of Education and Human Services

New PK/Primary Ed degree program.
Item moved by APC.
Question: Rasche - why no statement re additional cost?
Dean of COEHS indicated there will be no additional cost; resources statement is in second-to-last paragraph.
Item approved.

VIII.

INFORMATION ITEMS

Item # 1 -Submitted By the Academic Programs Committee
New Online APC Forms & Resources Website
Item # 2-Submitted By the Campus Technology Committee
Quick Reference for Faculty Services in Banner Self Service
Item # 3 -Submitted By the Campus Technology Committee
Detailed Reference for Faculty Services in Banner Self Service
Item # 4 - Submitted by the Executive Committee
Faculty Association 2005-2006 Schedule
Item # 5 - Submitted by the Academic Programs Committee
Academic Programs Committee 2005-2006 Schedule
Item # 6 - Submitted by the Registrar's Office
University Matriculation Calendar for Fall 2005 to Summer 2006
Special Information Items - -Scheduled to Teach in a "Technology Equipped Classroom"? Want to know more about the room before you go to it? -Faculty Forum Discussion Board

IX.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 1:25 PM.

Respectfully submitted,

_______________________
Katherine M. Robinson, Secretary