WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY

FACULTY SENATE MINUTES

Regular Meeting

March 8, 2004

James Loucky, Senate President, called the Senate meeting to order at 4:05 pm.  Thirty-one (31) people were present including twenty-five (25) Senators, one (1) recorder, and two (2) guests.  (See attached roster).

Approval of Senate Minutes

§       The Senate approved the minutes of February 23, 2004 with an amendment regarding “3,400 parking spaces on campus including 32^nd Street”.

 Items from the Chair

¨    President Loucky reported the development of a minor capital proposal to make some campus nooks and crannies, including some stairwells, more usable public space.  

¨    Loucky reported that Vice President Pierce is addressing parking issues for faculty and hopes to have “Faculty Only” parking spaces created in several lots. 

¨    Loucky mentioned the creation of a Fitness Facilities Access Task Force which is discussing faculty and staff access to Carver Gym and other campus facilities.

¨    Loucky announced that faculty had participated in a learning session on collective bargaining, and that concerns regarding the role of the Faculty Senate arose during the meeting.  Provost Bodman noted that the faculty handbook would have to substantially redefine what the Senate does.

¨    Loucky reported that the Senate Resolution on Civil Liberties is being published in several media including the Bellingham Herald and FAST.  Loucky reminded Senators to circulate the Resolution by accessing it on the Senate website at http://www.acadweb.wwu.edu/senate 

Items from the Administration

o      President Morse and Provost Bodman are awaiting the budget release on March 11th.

o      Provost Bodman reported contradictory data on the demographic future of the State of Washington in that the Office of Financial Management (OFM) indicates continuing growth, while the Western Intercollegiate Higher Education group indicates a peak in 2007-2008, a drop down, and a rise again to peak in 2017.

Reading of Standing Committee Minutes (The following Standing Committee minutes were accepted):

Academic Coordinating Commission, 02/17/04

Academic Technology Committee, 2/11/04

University Planning Council, 2/11/04

ACTION ITEMS:

Appointments and Elections, Kristen Parris, Officer

Loucky reminded Senators that nominating ballots for the Senate are due back in the Senate office by March 12^th, and urged Senators who have served just one term to consider serving again.

Motions from the Executive Council

Recruitment and Retention

¨     Senators considered a proposal for the distribution of retention and recruitment funds prepared by the Senate Executive Council following recommendations of the Salary & Welfare committee.  After presentation of a “Rationale”, the motion proposed the following:

“Recruitment and retention allocation for 2003-05 will be distributed in a single apportioning of half-steps.  Deans will receive a figure for what a university-wide proportionate division of funds would mean for each college.  Funds will be allocated to colleges according to each college's proportion of total university FTE for 2003-2004. Each dean will share this information with department chairs along with information for what a university-wide proportional division of funds would mean for each department. 

“Chairs will provide faculty with information about procedures for application.  Application for funds will consist of a one-page form, on which the faculty member will provide her/his name, year hired at Western, current salary step, academic rank, Department, and recent accomplishments.  These data help reveal equity/compression levels and evidence of merit, both of which bear on retention.  Faculty in a department may choose as a group to make a departmental allocation request or they may choose to have faculty members submit applications individually to the Chair.

“Chairs will forward requests, including for total department awards beyond or below an amount equivalent to a proportion based on FTE, to the appropriate college-level body dealing with such matters (e.g., FAC) where, in consultation with the Dean, allocations within the college would be determined.  Collegiate amounts would be made according to proportion of total university FTE.

“The Provost will retain 5% of funds for specific recruitment/retention cases warranting attention.”

In the discussion that ensued, Senators asked for clarification regarding the following

o      Will deans inform chairs of what a proportionate college allocation will be?  Will we be consistent in what we ask the Chairs to do, in ranking these?

o      What guidelines will be available by which a proposal will be submitted?

o      Will proposals link measured performance and salary data with compression and merit, all of which are considered to have a bearing on retention?

o      As a point of info:  If the idea is to have a single distribution of funds for the biennium can the Provost estimate when that distribution will take place?  Will it be possible to do it here in Spring Quarter?   Bodman responded:  “The idea, and the reason why I ask the Senate to act before April 1^st on this matter, is so that we can actually distribute this money within this academic year and I presume it will reach the faculty by September of this coming Fall.”

o      How much money is this (again)?  Bodman responded:  $168,000 in salary and benefits, so subtract 16% and you get 146K or 147K.”  Loucky added that the idea is for the Provost to also retain 5%, to relieve retention pressures. 

o      Regarding recruitment and retention issues, is there any data on why faculty have left in the past, was it compression, to go to a bigger name school with a much greater offer, and how significant are salary issues in loss of faculty?

o      Will the motion allow us to justify allocation in terms of legislative intent, or do we risk loss of these funds continuing in the future?  (Senators highlighted that the legislature would have given more money if its intent was to retain faculty).  However the funds are divided, one Senator emphasized that legislative intent should not be the driving force.  Other Senators urged caution, that the legislature has a clear intention here.

At the conclusion of the discussion T.J. Olney made a proposal which was formulated into a substitute motion by Tom Goetzl, seconded by Karen Rice, that “$168,000 of funds would be given to the Provost to distribute in response to retention and recruitment requests from the Colleges.”   Senators passed the substitute motion in a vote of 13 in favor, 9 opposed, with one abstention.

Policy on Consulting – Faculty Handbook Revision

Ø     Loucky commended the Ad Hoc Committee on Ethics and Professional Activity and its chair, John Purdy, for revised handbook language on the consulting policy.  Senators reviewed suggestions on language changes with

Ø     Assistant Attorney General Wendy Bohlke stressed that the Patent and Copyright policy and its predecessor before the ethics law was passed allows faculty to “uncomfortably cope” with the WAC law which does not fit here very well.

Ø     Bohlke discouraged Senators from removing sections from the policy arbitrarily which are part of the original WAC such as two sections under the topic of compensation.

Ø     Senators agreed it would be nice to have a comprehensive statement that everybody could share, but given the culture and history of Western, people are used to looking in several places to address broad processes and procedures.  Bohlke cajoled Senators to be “nimble” in the processes of responding to and adhering to changing regulations and situations.  

Ø     Bohlke added that changing the faculty handbook will not necessarily change our liability, and noted that the proposed policy is pretty good, and suggested “living with it” and amending it later if necessary.

Ø     Loucky asked for specific comments on the policy to be forwarded to the Senate office prior to the next Senate meeting.

Executive Session and Adjournment

Senators moved into Executive Session at 5:51 p.m.

Senators moved to adjourn at 6:16 p.m.

Written by Rose Marie Norton-Nader, Recorder, 3/08/04

                      _______________________________

                                                                                                                          Thomas Read, Secretary

Faculty Senate Roster 2004

Article III.  Faculty Senate

The Faculty Senate is empowered to speak and act for the Faculty in University affairs with particular responsibility in the areas of curriculum, academic programs, Faculty salary, Faculty status, scholarly activities, and all matters relating to the welfare of Faculty, the education of students, and the academic mission of the University.

The Faculty Senate is limited to 30 voting members elected by the Faculty, and the President of the University, the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs of the University, and a college dean appointed by the Provost serving as Provost's Council representative as ex officio non-voting members.    (Faculty Handbook, page 55)