Staff Senate

Full Senate Meeting

July 14, 2010

Senate Chambers

The meeting was called to order at 1:15 p.m. by President Lane. A quorum was present.

Roll Call

Guests: Doug Vinzant, Vice-President of Administration, Laura Alexander, Associate Vice President of Human Resources, Nancy Olson Manager of Human Resources

Senators Present: Aimee Appelhans, Rebecca Ashley, Ginny Becker, Beverly Bell, Amber Blough, Bonnie Botello, John Campbell, Al Emmons, Cheri Frank, Farrell Graf, Winter Hansen, Carolyn Herman, Stacy Lane, Jamie LeJambre, James Logue, Rachel Martin, Kelly McMicheal, David McCoy, Christy Nordmann,Tod Scott, Brandy Vialpando, Linda Waggener, Maureena Walker, Kathi Zubrod

Senators Absent: Christi Byers, Cyndi Cowardin, Mark Davidson, Tonya Gerharter, Thyra Page, Jauque Schuman, Tina Walrath

Proxies: Pam Mathewson for Christi Byers

Approval of Minutes and Agenda

A motion to approve the June minutes was made and seconded by Senators Martin and Logue. Motion passed. A motion to approve the July agenda was made and seconded by Senators McMicheal and Logue. Motion passed. A motion to approve the June budget report (Attachment A) was made and seconded by Senators Logue and Nordmann. Motion passed.

Administrative Reports

Vice President of Administration, Doug Vinzant, welcomed President Lane for presiding over her first meeting.

The first draft for the Emergency Response Plan, which grows from protocols by FEMA and NIMS, is available. The plan has been in the works for the last 6-8 months, spearheaded largely by Chief Lane and Mark Collins. Campus will provide training to senior/management employees. Many institutions are aware that a plan should be in place, but haven’t started, and the trainers observed that UW has made a substantial effort.

The Board retreat will begin Thursday, July 15, 2010. There are no action items. Only eight topics will be discussed, but no items will be approved or public testimony given.

Five topics to be discussed include:

- Facilities contracting: resident vs. non-resident firms we are contracting with

- Overall indebtedness: how we compare with other institutions and what capacity we have to take on further bonded indebtedness for major renovations

- Housing plan for updating the facility for resident life. In the last 6-7 years many academic buildings have upgraded. Housing is not what it should be and we are likely further farthest behind in housing compared to our competition. Renovation and new facilities will be discussed, but this also fits in with overall indebtedness due to the potential use of bonds.

- 6 year facility plan. Map out facility projects from FY11-FY16. Comprehensive statement of identify, prioritize, and funding sources needed. Conversations from late summer to early fall will be held with various campus groups on opinions for priority and preferences will go back to the Board in November for approval.

- Government and legislative supplemental budget request. There are guidelines and only a limited set of requests. There is a good chance for mid-biennium salary adjustment, second year compensation adjustment. A statement will be provided saying we are supportive of those initiatives. Additionally, there will be no operating budget requests and some things in capital, which will discussed with the Board. Possible discussion may also include a joint facility with Casper College and planning funds for renovation of the Fine Arts building. When the full biennium budget comes around we can request full funding for the renovation of the Fine Arts building. Other possible projects include housing for example, White Hall and an alternative public/private effort for replacement housing where Summit is now.

Senator Logue inquired if the Emergency Response Plan will extend to other facilities around the state. VP Vinzant was unsure and invited Senator Logue to e-mail him about the subject.

Senator McMicheal reported some concern in Physical Plant about the continuation of comp-time vs. over-time pay. VP Vinzant indicated that Associate VP Alexander has been asked to create a report of usage and that the issue will be resurfaced with President Buchanan. There will be implications on the budget, but conversations have been started.

Associate Vice President of Human Resources, Laura Alexander, began her report by distributing a handout of a June 21, 2010 memo (Attachment B) informing Members of the Executive Council, Deans and Directors, and Staff Senate that a university-wide protocol for awarding temporary base pay increases to staff employees who regularly deliver credit-bearing classes, in addition to their customary staff duties, will be established.

Academic Affairs historically has received numerous requests for staff to teach on the side (main job is not teaching, but teach to fill in). Many requests were at the last minute without communication with the immediate supervisor. The purpose of the established protocol is to formalize procedures, communicate how the salary adjustment works and that staff teaching is not a benefit or entitlement but an agreement. The employee’s supervisor must sign on page 3 of the memo (Attachment B, page 3); however, the supervisor has the right of refusal for teaching during the work day. Most of the time the supervisors are supportive, but this is a way to let them know the commitment. The salary increment for teaching is added onto base salary. For example: $2000 is added to base salary and the retirement contributions would be adjusted.

Senator LeJambre commented that many of the staff on the main campus who teach, teach outreach and/or online, and do so at night and on the weekends. She then inquired if that was a main concern of interrupting the work day. Associate VP Alexander responded that there is an expectation of office hours, general advising, and preparation time, so many times that does fall within the work day.

Senator LeJambre also inquired if teaching at another institution affected the procedure. Associate VP Alexander assured that personal work outside the institution does not affect this and it is just like having a second job anywhere else.

Senator Campbell wanted clarification for the source of funding. Associate VP Alexander confirmed that funds would come from the department who hired the staff teacher.

Senator Martin asked that if no pay is involved, must there still be a process with the supervisor. Associate VP Alexander responded yes, because there may detraction from other duties, and with any overlap the supervisor needs to know.

Senator Logue inquired if the document is final. Associate VP Alexander established that it hasn’t been to Executive Counsel, so it is a draft, but feel free to share and provide feedback.

Senator LeJambre expressed concern of equality and fairness across divisions (pay, ability and opportunity) and was wondering if this is being addressed. Associate VP Alexander recognized that some people are handpicked, or some VP’s are more flexible, but that is nature of the hiring process. She also added that the departments are very diverse, have varied busy times and division needs. However, if discrimination is the reason for not hiring or not signing off approval, then that is a different story. Senator LeJambre also expressed pay as a large concern and inquired who is responsible. Associate VP Alexander explained that each discipline has a different market value and pay practices for teachers are not under Human Resources but Academic Affairs, questions will be directed to Associate Provost Nicole Ballenger.

For further question regarding staff teaching please send an email to Senator Frank or President Lane and they will bring it forward.

Background Checks

Nancy Olson, Manager of Human Resources, brought forward changes to employment and recruitment. A demonstration for background checks has been performed by HireRight, a premier background check company, showcasing the product and capabilities. There was a large turnout to the demonstration and HR will be moving forward with the agreement; however, no timeframe has been set. Once HireRight is up and running all benefitted new hires will be required to be checked. Only current employees being promoted will be required to have the check completed, lateral transfers will not. There will be an advertisement concerning passing for a potential employee. Areas to be checked include: employee history, sex offender registry, county courthouses, education, and if required by the position the driver’s license/CDL.

Questions:

- Is there a process for the potential employee to dispute the results? Yes. The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) governs background checks. Full reporting is given back to the candidate and then there is a chance to dispute.

- Is there a cost with each job post? Yes. $70 per person will be charged to the department and can be paid from the vacant position’s line.

- Will just the selected candidate be checked? The background check will be performed only for the top candidate. If for any reason the potential employee does not move forward with employment, then the next candidate would have to go through screening.

- Is employment contingent on the results? Yes. HireRight will go through the Albany County Courthouse but turnaround time is less than 2 days. UW will send the candidate’s information to HireRight and they do the work, this will relieve burden on the process that is done now.

- Is all the necessary information for the check to be performed on the application? If the information is not, HireRight would contact the applicant.

- Will a credit report be checked? Only as needed, most positions do not require this. Possibly Business Manager Executives, Accountants, or those with heavy money responsibilities.

- If there is something on the report of a current employee, will they be fired? If the employee is applying for a promotion and there was a prohibited crime, then there would be a strong looking at the situation, particularly crimes against children, but Associate VP Alexander has never seen this happen.

- Is character a consideration? The background check will include licensure, education, and criminal aspects.

- Can people pay the $70 to perform the check just to see? No. The background check through UW is only dependent on an application. The purpose is to keep safety of University employees.

- Will the desired candidate be aware that the process is taking place? Yes. The candidate will know before HireRight contacts them.

- What is time frame included in the screen? 7 years of history.

- Where does the information stay? Electronically, in HR only.

- Is the digital format highly secure? All HR records are sensitive and confidentiality is maintained.

- Will the process apply to faculty? Yes.

- What are the steps to maintain fairness? Appointing authorities will be warned that they could be held liable for information that they may receive, supervisors do have a legal need to know if there is an education or work history discrepancy, or criminal conviction (county/federal, sexual). Only convictions (not divorce, etc.) will be discussed. A use of judgment may be necessary depending on elapsed time and relevance to position.

- If there is a privacy flag on University records can HireRight access them? HireRight can get dates. It is possible that if a degree can’t be verified and there is not a signed release of information an applicant may not be eligible for the position. Associate VP Alexander has never had HireRight come back without education information.

- Will the applicant sign a release of information? Yes.

- Will the release be a separate document? Yes. There will also be an electronic signature possible.

- If someone is arrested for possession will this affect future employment? It depends on how relevant the conviction is to the position.

- Is department picking what areas to check? No. It is a package; however if driving is required, then an add-on to check driver’s license/CDL is available.

- If you get promoted, then in 2 years promoted again, will there be screening? Yes.

- Screening results go to HR and not the department? Yes, the supervisor does not get the results. If there is an issue needed to be released, it would be in a judicial manner.

Nancy Olson, Manager of Human Resources, had end remarks on this topic that background checks are something UW has been doing for at least 5 years on a smaller scale, the scope is changing and with the new system the process will be sped up for the departments.

Minimum Qualifications

Nancy Olson, Manager of Human Resources, reported as positions become available Minimum Qualifications will be added into the position’s education/experience requirements. Minimum Qualifications used to be used, then UW went to KSA’s to help broaden the pool; however, this has caused potential liability, and going back to minimum qualification is more concrete. All positions will have a high school diploma/GED requirement. Dependent on the position, a combination of education and experience may meet the minimum requirement. Regulating pools with Minimum Qualifications will create a more qualified pool. The Minimum Qualifications change has also led to the application being longer because it is necessary to look for education and/or combination with experience, nature of duties, and length of time in a position. HR is screening applications first then only the applications meeting the Minimum Qualifications will be sent to the Department.

Questions:

- Are we going back to required and preferred? No, only required.

- What if an employee did not get a degree because of planning for KSA requirements instead of Minimum Qualification? The mainstream method is Minimum Qualification requirements.