PaceUniversityJointFacultyCouncilMeetingMinutes
Friday, October 14,2011
MultipurposeRoomNYCand Kessel Gottesman Room PLV
Videoconferencemeeting
ThemeetingwascalledtoorderbyVinceBarrella,theChairofthepresidingNYFCat12:30pm. TheminutesfortheFriday,05-06-2011JFCmeetingwereapproved.
ReportfromPresidentStephenFriedman.ThePresident provided an abbreviated report due to the necessity of the Faculty Handbook discussion later. He noted that in every respect the University appeared to be doing well, with operating surplus of more than $17 million, better than any year since 2000. The annual report to be delivered to the Board would also be made available to the faculty.
Although there was an enrollment shortfall of ~160 students, the University remained on budget due to increased retention. Further admissions goals included reducing the offered discount rate, and coping with the demographic shift of fewer high school students in the Northeast; strategies to cope with these issues will be presented at later meetings. He noted that approximately half of the shortfall emerged from a smaller CAP program, while the average SAT scores appeared to be up by 16 points.
Introductions and Announcements:
Robina Schepp announced that the new Executive Director of Career Services was Phyllis Mooney.
Mark Brown, the new Director of Athletics, asked for support for athletics programs.
Reportfrom Robina Schepp, VP of Enrollment Management. Robina suggested waiting until after the census to provide an updated report at the next meeting. She noted that the University was successful at enrolling out-of-area students and international students, providing good geographic diversity.
NewBusiness
Ad-hoc committee for University Grievance Procedure Review: Vince Barrella reported on a meeting between Lisa Myles (the Affirmative Action Officer) and the Executive committees of both location councils. The meeting focused on mechanisms to reconcile the different grievance procedures with the faculty grievance procedure. The decision was made to establish an ad-hoc committee composed of faculty experienced in the Grievance procedures to discuss these issues with Lisa and reach a proposal. Four faculty volunteered to serve on this committee: NYC: Anne Bynoe, Dan Greenberg; PLV: Joe Ryan, Maryellen Martirano.
Faculty Satisfaction Survey: Barbara Pennipede discussed that the established a local Faculty Satisfaction Survey, facilitated by Barbara's office. On November 1st, the Faculty Satisfaction Survey will be started.
Faculty Handbook: Vince Barrella noted that both Steve Friedman and Harriet Feldman would make brief remarks. Following their remarks, they would be asked to leave as the meeting would be expected to be brought into Executive Session.
Steve Friedman noted that the faculty and staff discussing the handbook issues chose the difficult path of trying to reconcile views. The document presented represents a compromise on both sides. Some issues were set aside to be worked on after November 1st. When there is a vote, there will be a vote on the full faculty handbook. Many people looking at this document, including Board members and faculty, have expressed concerns about various issues; these will be included in the future discussions. He thanked the members of the negotiation committee for their hard work.
Harriet Feldman noted that the Handbook negotiation committee consisted of 8 faculty and 6 staff; in addition, Sondra Seiter from the Provost's office was recruited as a secretary to the committee. The President and other staff members were asked to appear before the committee at various times. Harriet and Dan Strahs served as the co-chairs of the committee, jointly setting the agenda for each meeting. Overall, there were 17 meetings of the joint committee, and many meetings of the faculty, staff and sub-groups separately. Negotiations are not over, and we will continue after the November 1st date.
Nancy Reagin asked for clarification of what would be on the table next spring. She noted that the handbook is divided into “blacked-in” and “grayed-out” sections, and that the current approval process was focusing on the “blacked-in” sections. She asked if the “blacked-in” sections would be on the negotiating table after November 1st. Vince and Dan noted that their understanding is that the entire document would remain under negotiation, and be submitted for re-approval next year. Steve Friedman noted the objective was to approve as much of the handbook as was reasonably possible. Issues raised at individual faculty discussions will be added to the negotiations after November 1st. He noted that he didn't think it realistic to renegotiate the entire handbook between November 1st and spring break; however, individual issues could be brought to the negotiation table. Dan noted that after the handbook was approved by both the faculty and the Board, then that jointly-agreed upon Handbook would become the operational handbook of the University. Vince noted that the entire Handbook would appear before both the Board and the faculty for re-approval after the close of negotiations, and that provided an opportunity for a rejection of the handbook. Vince further noted that this process was required due to the Middle States progress report. Demos Athanasopoulos noted that this process shouldn't weaken our negotiations for the remainder of the handbook.
Harold Brown moved that the remainder of the discussion move into executive session; this was seconded, and passed unanimously. [Secretary's note: the remainder of the JFC meeting until adjournment was conducted in executive session]
Executive session to discuss Faculty Handbook:
Initial comments were offered about the process, and about the negotiations and the imperfections in the current proposed version of the faculty handbook.
A report was delivered by the faculty negotiation committee presenting the significant points reached in the handbook. It was expected that the negotiations would continue in good faith on both sides. Any amendments offered on any section of the handbook, including any portions jointly approved by the Board and the faculty, could still be negotiated during the post-November 1st negotiations. When the handbook returned for approval in Spring 2012, it was expected that there might be additional amendments, and that this would again be an opportunity to negotiate.
The contractual nature of the handbook was discussed. Governance, salary, and benefits terms presented in the handbook were also presented.
A motion was made to approve the proposed handbook, and seconded.
Initial discussions focused on the inadvisability of approving a partially-negotiated handbook, based on concerns that an approval would remove any pressure placed on the administration to compromise. Other discussions noted that the handbook was overdue for approval, and that the negotiations required compromise. It was reported that the Board seemed to be enthusiastic about the administration-faculty negotiations
Questions were raised about the importance of voting now, since another vote was expected in a few months; the rationale for this vote based on the Middle States reporting requirement and the potential for sanctions based on failures in faculty governance. A failure to approve the handbook and the sanctions in consequence would be a disservice to the students. It was reported that the probable initial sanction leveraged against the University from a failure to report on the approved handbook would be a warning against the University published on the Middle States website.
It was reported that many sections of the proposed handbook differed from the version proposed by the Joint Faculty Affairs committee.
A motion was made to call the question and seconded. The vote to call the question was 49 in favor, 22 opposed and no abstentions. [Secretary's note: the vote was split by campus: Westchester: 41/0/0, NYC 8/22/0]
The vote to approve the handbook was 57 in favor, 18 opposed, and 4 abstentions [Westchester: 43/0/0; NYC: 14/18/4]. 18 faculty in NYC opposed the motion; however, 36 faculty voted in NYC so the opposition is only 50% and thus a single-campus veto is not exercised. Thus, the proposed faculty handbook is approved by the Joint Faculty Council.
Following the vote, it was noted that the negotiation committee would received any proposed amendments. While amendments appearing before the Location or Joint Faculty Councils could receive bi-campus support, any amendment could be brought to the negotiation committee.
Themeetingisadjournedat1:27pm
Respectfully submitted,
Daniel Strahs, Secretary JFC
Attendance: NYFC
NYFC Faculty: / Administration:Antognini, Walter / Brown, Mark
Athanasopoulos, Demosthenes / Feldman, Harriet
Barrella, Vincent / Friedman, Stephen
Bolton, Matthew / Pennipede, Barbara
Brown, Harold / Schepp, Robina
Bynoe, Anne
Byrne, John C.
Chiagouris, Larry
Coggins, Andrew
Colley, Kabba
Dai, Zhaohua
Driver, Martha
Dupont, Ida
Dwyer, Cathy
Evans, Brian
Farber, Lisa
Fernandez, Madeline
Foerster, Amy
Garcia-Rodriguez, Antonia
Goldleaf, Steven
Gopalakrishna, Pradeep
Henthorne, Tom
Herman, Susan
Hsu, Stephanie
Jay, Karla
Johnston, Ruth
Lassman, Kelley A
Long, Demosthenes
Miller III, Eddis
Morris, Barry
Nankin, Conrad
Rahman, Noushi
Raskin, Sherman
Reagin, Nancy
Strahs, Daniel
Taiani, Geraldine
Upmacis, Rita
Vambery, Robert
Villagra, Andres
Wiener, Robert
Zimmer, Catherine
Zuzga, David