Approved Minutes For Meeting on June 15, 2011

Date: June 15, 2011

Program:

1. The meeting was called to order by the Chair, JP Dunn. Visitors and guests were welcomed and introduced.

2. Roll Call

Members Present: Tuesday Ashner, Natalie Branca, Valerie Brooks, Steve Buhman, Janet Douglas, JP Dunn, Pat Eckert, Jon Geiger, Alfred Jackson, Kathy Jones, Layla Murphy, Amy Rose, Charlotte Sarao, Lori Stettler, Meredith Thomas, Sue Tin.

Proxies: Sue Tin for Gloria Yuncker.

Visitors and Guests: Tracy Bennett, Lori Crenshaw Bryant, Carl Ervin.

3. Minutes

The minutes of the 2010-2011 meeting on May 18, 2011, were approved as presented. The minutes of the 2011- 2012 meeting on May 18, 2011, were approved as presented.

4. Adoption of Meeting Agenda: P. Eckert moved to approve the agenda; seconded by J. Geiger. Motion carried.

5. Reports

5.1 Chair 
JP Dunn reported: i) there was no Board of Trustees meeting in June. The next meeting is scheduled for July 14 in Carbondale; ii) he met with Chancellor Cheng on June 8. Discussion centered around the budget and the structural deficit of $5.7 million. It appears the University is in better shape in FY12, so the Chancellor does not foresee layoffs or closures. At this time, is appears the budget reduction will be 1.1% of appropriations. If enrollment holds steady or increases slightly, the campus should be in fairly good shape. [The administration] is fighting for a 2% across the board reduction; iii) a task force has been created to look at graduation ceremonies. It is possible that one ceremony may be eliminated; iv) Kimberly Kempf-Leonard, former chair of the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, has been named dean for the College of Liberal Arts. John Warwick, from the Nevada System of Higher Education, has been named dean for the College of Engineering; v) a mass email was sent to the campus from Associate Provost Susan Logue about Desire2Learn, the new learning management system. Hopefully, the paperwork is at Procurement Services and should be posted to the Procurement board this week or next; vi) changes that will affect the money purchase formula will go into effect July 2, 2012. There have been so many emails going back and forth on health care, and he is unsure what is happening on that issue. T. Bennett encouraged employees to keep up with the emails and attend the group sessions where information is presented and questions are answered. She added that there has been discussion about the possibility of holding another benefits choice period for health insurance only.P. Eckert announced that John Benshoff, director of the Rehabilitation Institute, has been named interim dean of the College of Education and Human Services.

5.2 Board of Trustees - None.

5.3 Human Resources (HR) - None.

5.4 Representatives to University Committees

5.4a Ombudsman Advisory - Carl Ervin 
C. Ervin presented and discussed his report (included as appendix 1 to the minutes).

5.4b Recreational Sports and Services Advisory - Paul Bennett 
P. Bennett submitted his report (included as appendix 2 to the minutes).

5.4c University Women’s Professional Advancement - Lori Crenshaw Bryant 
L. Crenshaw Bryant presented and discussed her report (included as appendix 3 to the minutes).

5.5 Standing Committees

5.5a Approval of Standing Committee Assignments 
JP Dunn reported the Executive Committee met and determined committee assignments. They also discussed some issues that they would like the Operating Paper Committee to address this year; one is to merge the Council committees Staff Benefits and Staff Welfare. That is why the same people were assigned to both. He pointed out that in looking at the descriptions of both committees, there is not a big difference in the wording. The Operating Paper Committee will also need to address the issues of sector reorganization, committee assignments and JRB representation. JP Dunn then called for a motion to approve the standing committee assignments as presented; C. Sarao so moved; seconded by P. Eckert. C. Sarao asked if, for the time being, Staff Benefits and Staff Welfare will operate as one committee. JP Dunn responded that they will until such time as the Operating Paper is amended. Motion to approve standing committee assignments carried.

5.5b Recess to Elect Standing Committee Chairs 
JP Dunn called for a short recess and asked committees to meet briefly and elect their chairs.

5.5c Executive Committee 
L. Stettler reported the committee met on June 7 and determined standing committee assignments. The committee will plan to meet on the first Tuesday of the month, and committee chairs will be invited to attend meetings as part of an expanded Executive Committee.

5.5d Committee on Committees 
J. Geiger reported he was elected to chair the committee.

5.5e Constituency Relations 
M. Thomas reported that she was elected to chair the committee.

5.5f Operating Paper 
K. Jones reported she was elected to chair the committee.

5.5g Staff Benefits 
C. Sarao reported she was elected to chair the committee.

5.5h Staff Welfare 
C. Sarao reported she was elected to chair the committee.

6. Old Business

L. Stettler presented JP Dunn with a gavel on behalf of the 2010-2011 A/P Staff Council since he was unable to attend the final meeting of that group. She expressed their appreciation for his efforts as chair during the past year.

7. New Business

A. Jackson questioned where all the money is going that is being saved by all the administrative, title and office changes; where is it being spent? JP Dunn responded that there is some consolidation happening across campus, and there are departments being merged. He is unsure of the answer to A. Jackson's question, but speculated that the administration is attempting to eliminate duplication of services. A. Jackson indicated that many of the concerns are about the duplication. The administration is merging and purging, which [could mean] staff reductions. JP Dunn responded that [the reductions would be] in positions, not people. He noted there are vacant positions in the library and in his department that will likely remain vacant. A. Jackson indicated that many staff members are concerned and are leaving; those vacant positions carry with them certain duties, so instead of replacing the people, the ones who remain now have one and a half times the work with no salary increase. He questioned whether the Council should bring this to the Chancellor's attention or does she need to address it because it is demoralizing and that is why people are leaving. K. Jones believes the Council should at least ask that there be more transparency about what is happening and what are the intentions. People are coming to their own conclusions about what all this means. A. Jackson commented that there are things happening in Housing of which people are unaware (e.g., the director of Housing has moved to assistant provost and Lisa Marks has been named interim director). C. Sarao pointed out that [the campus] was told at the very beginning that the University College would not cost any money, but it already has. The Housing director was given a promotion and a new title, and now there will have to be a new director of Housing. That is two positions, not one. P. Eckert commented she understood A. Jackson's concerns. In Continuing Education, the credit unit was removed and is now the Office of Distance Education and Off-Campus Programs; but the credit-free unit was left. Some of the A/P staff in her office that are remaining in the non-credit unit, and who had been on state funds, are not all going to be on state funds anymore; the Provost's office made that determination. That office has also claimed the director's salary, which was an A/P position. C. Sarao commented that going from hard money to soft money changes a person's entire job. P. Eckert responded that once the allocation is lost, it usually never comes back. It does not change a person from continuing to term, but it certainly changes the dynamics quite a bit. A. Jackson agreed, reiterating that no one knows what is happening; job descriptions are being rewritten and A/P are unaware of their status. C. Sarao believes there are so many changes going on around campus that do significantly affect who A/P are and what they do and how they are paid. She is unsure how clear it has ever been made to anyone as to why these changes are being made. There are things happening that six months ago people were told would not happen. T. Ashner suggested JP Dunn ask if there is a website or someplace that can list all these new office names. C. Sarao noted that unless someone knows someone [from a reorganized area], they would not know who to call. JP Dunn believes people will likely have to wait for the dust to settle [on all the changes taking place].P. Eckert believes A. Jackson's point is well taken in that there are many [decisions] being made with a small amount of input, or no input or awareness, from a larger whole. There are service units that have had more than 2% budget of their state reallocation cut. How will those units make up those funds, and what does that do to their operations and to services they will be able provide? She does not believe those questions have been fleshed out. K. Jones asked if JP Dunn could ask the Chancellor or Provost to come and speak with the Council. She believes A/P staff will either help the change occur or will resist the change. She believes staff need to take it as an opportunity; either they are part of the solution or part of the problem; the institution is going to change whether anyone likes it or not. It is a fearful atmosphere right now. In order not to be afraid, the Chancellor has to provide some information and articulate the direction the University is going. JP Dunn believes if the Chancellor and Provost are invited, they should be provided a list of questions to address when they are here. C. Sarao believes at this point, JP Dunn needs to present to the Chancellor that the Council is concerned about transparency and with parties [campus-wide] being consulted when it comes to restructuring, rearranging and refinancing. There are decisions being made that academic units need to be in on, and she does not believe they have been. Her fear is that the correct people are not being included in these decisions, which are affecting a lot of people. JP Dunn responded that the Council does have a representative on the Chancellor's Planning and Budget Advisory Committee (Patty Cosgrove). He has commented before that that person should report at every meeting, either in person or submit something in writing. [The Council could have] input on some of these decisions, but hears about issues after the fact because there is no report. He noted that there are certain committees that have a high enough importance that twice a year reporting is not adequate. This is something the Council should look into. L. Murphy believes it is not so much, then, that the Council needs to address the lack of information with the Chancellor, but rather that should be a conversation with the Council's representative on the Chancellor's Planning and Budget Advisory Committee. JP Dunn agreed, adding that the Council needs to work at that because there are other committees with A/P representation that reporting twice a year is not enough. He indicated he will contact P. Cosgrove and ask her to begin attending Council meetings.[K. Jones] suggested that one of questions the Council could ask the Chancellor to address is the question of what it means once state dollars are removed from a position. P. Eckert noted that the four coordinator positions in Continuing Education that were 100% state funded have been moved to half. They are unsure what that means because 50% is a lot more than a 2% cut in state appropriations. The money did not go away, but was reallocated; and, they likely will not get it back. L. Stettler believes the other 50% will come from the revenue [Continuing Education] creates. It appears to her that the department is moving to a more auxiliary model rather than being state supported. K. Jones pointed out that as far as the strategic planning process, this is going to happen to more units that are not directly related to the academic mission. Some people would argue that those units (such as Athletics) should not have been receiving state support at all.A. Jackson asked if anyone knows who the A/P Staff Council representative is on the Strategic Planning Committee. L. Stettler responded that Don Castle is on the main committee. C. Sarao indicated the Strategic Planning Committee is all about all of this change. She believes it is important to hear from him every month. JP Dunn indicated he would ask D. Castle to report.J. Geiger asked T. Bennett if she has noticed an increase in job description changes based on the fact that staff are doing the work of others who have left. T. Bennett responded that she is not seeing it in job descriptions, but rather is hearing concerns of employees. J. Geiger asked if there is pressure by supervisors to not allow employees to draft a new job description. T. Bennett responded that, from her point of view, that would not be an issue. Unfortunately, doing the work of three individuals with the same title, the same kind of level of responsibility, would not equate to a salary increase. Civil service and A/P both work that way; it is the level of responsibility they look at, not volume. Everyone across campus is being required to do more with less, and it is coming to the point where the frustrations are just under the surface. She believes people are beginning to question whether the campus is moving in the right direction, and is it going to get to a place where things will be different. J. Geiger asked JP Dunn if this is an issue he should bring to the Chancellor--taking on additional responsibilities and the fact that it lowers morale, while at the same time it gets to the point where how much more can any one person take on before there should be a way to compensate her/him. Should there be some type of reward for taking on someone else's job without the automatic expectation that this is the way it is going to be? T. Bennett argued that salary is not everything. No matter how much someone is being paid, there is only so much work that can be done in a day. She believes morale in general is low; people want to know that there is a certain plan, that the campus is going in the right direction. P. Eckert added that it is not just A/P; she is hearing it from faculty and civil service, some who are long-standing and have never complained before. C. Sarao believes it has reached critical mass; the long-standing employees, whose experience and expertise will be missed, and who have put up with so much for years, are leaving because it is not worth it to them anymore. JP Dunn noted the reason for all the change is to make things better; it will take a while to fix. He asked everyone to email him questions that the Chancellor and Provost can answer. The Executive Committee can discuss them and invite the Chancellor and/or Provost to a meeting in the fall.

8. Announcements

JP Dunn reported that the [Council] will need to brainstorm on how to define the sectors in light of the recent administrative changes. P. Eckert suggested the Operating Paper Committee work on and bring some suggestions to the Council for discussion.

9. Adjournment