FACULTY COUNCIL

Minutes of Special Meeting

November08, 2012

Present: Thomas R. Baechle,Kirk W. Beisel, Karl A. Bergmann, Lisa L. Black, Charles S. Bockman, Olaf E Böhlke, Laura L. Bruce, Susan A. Calef, Lucinda R. Carroll, D. Roselyn Cerutis, Bartholomew E. Clark, Thomas F. Coffey, Cindy L. Costanzo, William M. Duckworth,Pamela A. Foral, Corey L. Guenther, William J. Hunter, Maorong Jiang,Bridget M. Keegan, Thomas L. Lenz, Sandor Lovas, Mark A. Malesker, Edward T. McGonigal,Nicholas A. Mirkay, Edward A. Morse, Michael G. Nichols, Karen A. Paschal, James E. Platz, Lori B. Rubarth, Margaret A. Scofield, Matthew T. Seevers, Sanjeev K. Sharma, Garrett A. Soukup,Patrick C. Swanson, Mike D. Weston, Tammy O. Wichman, Jos V. M. Welie, Jinmei Yuan.

Absent: Mohammed P. Akhter, Sylvanus Ayeni, Marcus W. Balters, Philip J. Meeks, Enrique Rodrigo, Dustin J. Stairs

Excused: John A. Deskins (proxy, Charles B. Braymen),Jeffrey J. Maciejewski (proxy, George W. McNary),Sonia M. Sanchez (proxy, Laura Barritt),Marlene K. Wilken (proxy, Lindsay Iverson)

Call to Order:

Dr. Thomas F. Coffey, President of the University Faculty,called the November 08, 2012 meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.

Approval of Minutes:

The minutes from September 27, 2012 will be distributed to be approved at the next meeting of the Council on November 15, 2012.

Section III(A)(12) Special Provisions Applicable to School of Medicine Faculty Employed by Alegent†Creighton Health or a Controlled Affiliate Thereof and the Phoenix Regional Campus at St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center

The Council’s discussion of this proposed amendment to the Faculty Handbook included the following.

:

  1. Definitions

1)General

Concerns were expressed regarding the following:

  • There is no definition of the faculty duties, amount of time or FTE for the following: “…faculty duties more extensive than those of Contributed Service faculty who are not Creighton University employees and are instead employees of Alegent†Creighton Health or a controlled affiliate thereof (hereinafter “Alegent†Creighton”) or the Phoenix Regional Campus at St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center (hereinafter “St. Joseph’s Hospital”). Such faculty members are eligible to be Creighton faculty as Clinician-Educator or Teaching-Research faculty on either the tenure or non-tenure track”
  • The lines of authority/reporting seem unclear
  • The faculty members on the Task Force had proposed a two-paycheck model, where Alegent†Creighton would pay for clinical activity while Creighton would pay for the teaching, research and service aspects. This model was rejected because the agreement between Creighton University and Alegent Health reportedly did not allow for this. The Task Force was not allowed to see the agreement or sections of the agreement and relied on the representation of consulted auditors.
  • Inconsistency between the VA model and Creighton-Alegent agreement seems to exist, but is not possible to determine given the confidential treatment this agreement has been given.
  • How have other universities (for example, Loyola University) dealt with similar issues when spinning off ownership of clinical facilities within their academic medical center?
  • Will this new Section A-12 really effect a change in Sections A-1 and A-2 such that there is a change in the interpretation of the definition of the word “tenure”?
  • Will a low percentage of time commitment to Creighton serve to erode the vitality of the Creighton Medical School to the point of threatening its continued existence?

2)Definition of Tenure for Alegent†Creighton and St. Joseph’s Faculty

  • How much will teaching be valued, when the University no longer provides the paycheck for the teaching, research and service functions?
  1. Eligibility for Benefits
  • There was concern raised regarding a lack of specifics
  1. Rank and Discipline(s)
  • Concern was raised that teaching, research and service would not be seen as having the same value as work in the clinics, and that ultimately clinical activity would come to usurp the time originally allocated to teaching, research and service.
  1. Initial Appointment to Faculty Category and Track
  • A very serious concern was raised that the situation as it is developing will have a strong negative impact on recruitment and retention at least over the next few years and probably well into the future
  1. Policies

1)General -- see “2”

2)Special Provisions for Creighton school of Medicine Faculty Transitioning to employment with Alegent†Creighton

  • Given that a Creighton Medical School employee could refuse transition to Alegent†Creighton while retaining tenure at Creighton, there is a concern that tenure is being eviscerated.
  • There is concern that faculty with a minimal contribution to the Creighton academic mission would be counted as voting faculty and end up serving in areas at the University that require the guarantees of full tenure, thus affecting the expectations of those outside the School of Medicine.
  • There was concern that future hires would have no hope for meaningful tenure--
  • Some may apply for tenure with little chance of success
  • Not all tenure would be equal
  • There would be a perception that there is a move toward the elimination of tenure in all areas
  • Concern was expressed that Creighton needs a healthy Medical School in the future as a cornerstone component essential to the other health professions programs on the Creighton campus and to the undergraduate programs that currently benefit from the interest of students who are looking toward medicine as an eventual career.
  • Concern was expressed regarding how “full-time” is to be defined. For example: If a Creighton Medical School faculty member is 7/8 time at the VA and 1/8time at Creighton, how would his/her position be defined?
  • Concern was raised that dialogue between Creighton Medical School faculty and Alegent†Creighton is not taking place and is needed
  • The resolution of this situation must honor contributions to Creighton by faculty
  • An interim document to guide the transition while leaving latitude for the new Medical School Dean may be needed.
  • Concern was expressed that the last sentence in this section is in need of editing to remove or edit the phrase “…only with the consent of the Dean of the School of Medicine…” This wording, in effect, reduces the effect of the transition to a level that is completely unacceptable and rendered meaningless in the broader context.

Old Business:

There was no old business.

New Business:

There was no new business.

Adjournment:

The Faculty Council adjourned at 4:17 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Bartholomew E. Clark, Ph.D.

Secretary, Faculty Council 2012 – 2013