Approved Minutes For Meeting On June 20, 2012 | Administrative Professional Staff Council | SIU

Date: June 20, 2012

Program:

1. The meeting was called to order at 1:04 p.m. by the Chair, Kathy Jones. Visitors and guests were welcomed and introduced.

2. Roll Call

Members Present: Natalie Branca, Steve Buhman, Don Castle, Pat Eckert, Jon Geiger, Kathy Jones, Charlotte Sarao, Rod Sievers, Lori Stettler, Valerie Brooks Wallin, Keri Young.

Members Absent: Meredith Thomas.

Proxies: JP Dunn for Faye Joyner-Keene; Leah Bahr for Jill Gobert.

Visitors and Guests: Tracy Bennett, Tuesday Ashner.

3. Minutes

The minutes of the 2011-2012 Council meeting on May 16, 2012, were approved as presented. The minutes of the 2012-2013 Council meeting were corrected under 6.1 to show that Valerie Brooks Wallin opened the floor for nominations for Vice Chair. The minutes were approved as corrected.

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

5. Reports

5.1 Chair 
K. Jones reported that the constituency heads have not met. She also reported that when the Executive Committee met last week, she had discussed with them her goals for the upcoming year. Primarily, she would like the Council to make its work as transparent as possible to the campus community. She would also like to reach out to the A/P constituency and familiarize them with what it is the Council does. There are staff who have no idea of the Council's role in terms of representation and in addressing issues that are of importance to the constituency. K. Jones explained that one idea she had in mind as a way to reach out to the constituency is to set up a series of town hall meetings at different locations on campus. She believes this would be a good way to invite constituency input and get a better idea of what the concerns are for A/P staff. Members of the Executive Committee, as well as [Council members whose units may be represented] could set an agenda for the meeting and give people an opportunity to express their concerns. However, she would like to keep the meetings from turning into grouse sessions and would like them to end on a positive note.

K. Jones reported that another goal she has is to do more research into issues that affect the constituency. One issue that comes to mind relates to a comment the Chancellor made when she attended a previous Council meeting. The Chancellor had commented that the number of A/P staff has stayed constant, while enrollment has declined. K. Jones sensed that this was not how those around the table felt. S. Buhman pointed out that it would depend on whether she is counting the person or the number of hats that person is wearing. K. Jones believes [the Chancellor] was talking about currently filled positions. However, that may be another issue the Council should address, i.e., to determine whether there are indeed fewer or more A/P staff members per student than there has been previously (because there were more students) or whether it is in fact more unit-specific. Some units are growing while others are shrinking; she suggested that instead of not trusting the data, maybe it would be better for the Council to attempt to determine what is behind the data. If some units are shrinking and some are growing, then the other question would be, does that affect the service? If the Chancellor is only dealing with the raw numbers, the Council may be able to give her some more detailed information that could be helpful.

K. Jones asked Council members if they had any other ideas/projects the body could undertake. P. Eckert commented that whether it is an academic or non-academic unit that is losing staff, A/P are being asked to take on job responsibilities for other people, including civil service positions. She believes that is something that needs to be addressed. R. Sievers added that an overall look might be beneficial because he has heard that there are more student workers now than ever before. If this is true, how many more are there compared to two or three years ago. C. Sarao agreed that student workers are now the front office. She is unsure whether that is a safe thing to do because student workers cannot provide the services that are sometimes needed. R. Sievers also believes it is not a good idea to tie the number of A/P to the number of students; no matter how many students there are, the University will still need staff to [oversee] the Student Center and other services, as those things are fairly constant. K. Jones indicated that another comment the Chancellor had made related to the changes that were taking place in each unit. The Chancellor had explained that, instead of not filling a position and splitting up all the work, [the unit] would re-analyze what it was going to do and eliminate those things that were unnecessary. K. Jones believes that if this is happening, then it is not transparent to the people working in the unit. It is hard to have an impact on how things turn out when A/P feel like it is happening to them instead of having a role in the process. She believes [the Council] needs to turn around in its thinking in order to help propose solutions. She suggested possibly asking for more position reviews of Human Resources because staff may have had so much work added to their duties that they are no longer doing what they were hired to do. K. Jones believes the challenge for the Council will be to consider and discuss those issues in ways that feel constructive. She noted that the Council needs to have concrete data to back up its position.

K. Jones reported that another issue discussed by the Executive Committee was retirement. It seems like there are a lot of people who are very concerned about this issue. She would like to have some experts on this topic speak with the constituency and provide information about the retirement issues that are coming. Even knowing what the alternative scenarios are would be helpful. She suggested inviting someone from both the Annuitants Association and the State Universities Retirement System (SURS) [to a Council meeting]. Another issue discussed by the Executive Committee was the hiring freeze. K. Jones pointed out that some units are hiring, but it is unclear who is making those decisions. She is aware there is a committee in the Provost's office, but she is unsure whether A/P staff are represented. She indicated she will be looking into how those hiring decisions are being made. C. Sarao commented that she was under the impression that the Provost's committee was only for faculty positions, but agreed it is worth a look. T. Bennett mentioned that she is not aware of A/P and civil service positions going through a committee [format]. There had been some discussion about applying that format to all positions, but she does not believe that has occurred at this time.

Finally, K. Jones reported that the only other issue she wanted to mention was her idea to invite the previous Council chairs from the last 10 years to meet with the Executive Committee. She would like to pick their brains and ask if there are any ideas or issues that were not addressed [during their terms] that might need to be addressed or strategies that the current Council is not thinking about that have been effective in the past. K. Jones believes the former chairs can provide an institutional memory and culture that should not be lost. She would like to call on them this summer for an informal conversation. Then, if something comes out of their meeting that she feels might be of benefit to the Council as a whole, she will bring it back to them. K. Jones noted she is looking at it more as an orientation session, in some respects, to help the Council get started for the year. She hopes to schedule the meeting before the start of the semester.

5.2 Board of Trustees 
K. Jones reported the Board did not meet in June. The next meeting will be July 12 in Springfield. There was brief discussion among Council members about the 1% salary increase and whether it would be an item on the Board agenda for July. It was noted that when salary increases were approved last year, they were only for FY12. Therefore, the Board will have to approve the increase for FY13. T. Bennett commented that it may not happen until September.

5.3 Human Resources (HR) - None.

5.4 Representatives to University Committees

5.4a Recreational Sports and Services Advisory - Rod Sievers 
R. Sievers presented his report (included as appendix 1 to the minutes).

5.4b UWPA - To be rescheduled. 

5.4c Chancellor's Planning and Budget Advisory - Tuesday Ashner 
T. Ashner noted that the search for Vice Chancellor for Development is ongoing. She then presented her report (included as appendix 2 to the minutes).

5.5 Standing Committees

5.5a Approval of Standing Committee Assignments 
Standing committee assignments were presented for approval. K. Jones reported the Executive Committee attempted to give everyone their first or second preference. D. Castle noted that they believe the Operating Paper Committee will have a lighter load this year after the drastic re-model from last year. K. Jones called for a motion to approve the standing committee assignments as presented. R. Sievers so moved; seconded by V. Brooks Wallin. Motion to approve standing committee assignments carried.

5.5b Recess to Elect Standing Committee Chairs 
K. Jones called for a short recess and asked committees to meet briefly to elect their chairs. After re-convening, the standing committee chairs were announced as follows: L. Stettler, Committee on Committees; V. Brooks Wallin, Constituency Relations; P. Eckert, Operating Paper; and D. Castle, Staff Benefits and Welfare. K. Jones indicated that she would like to go with an expanded Executive Committee this year, wherein standing committee chairs would be included in Executive Committee meetings.

5.5c Executive Committee 
J. Geiger reported the committee met with K. Jones via teleconference. Aside from those issues raised in K. Jones' s report, they also discussed: i) the report rotation for representatives to University committees and if any adjustments were needed based on how often those committees met; ii) inviting Chancellor Cheng to attend a Council meeting once a semester so members can ask her questions or raise concerns. It was mentioned that she could also be given two or three talking points as well. K. Jones will invite the Chancellor to attend either the September 19 or October 17 meeting. Additionally, Provost Nicklow will be invited to meet with the Council in November or December; iii) the composition of the Position Request Committee and should there or will there be any A/P representation on that committee. The Executive Committee would also like to do some fact-finding on how positions are being approved; iv) Springfield's representation on the Council. Attempts to contact the chair of the Springfield A/P Council have been unsuccessful at this time. There had been the thought that Maureen Doran from the Carbondale campus would return to the Council, but as Springfield's representative; however, the Executive Committee questioned whether that representative should actually be from Springfield rather than Carbondale so that the person is technically representing that group. It was agreed that the decision ultimately belongs to the Springfield Council.

5.5d Committee on Committees - No report. 

5.5e Constituency Relations - No report. 

5.5f Operating Paper - No report. 

5.5g Staff Benefits and Welfare - No report. 

6. Old Business

K. Jones presented JP Dunn with a plaque for his service as chair of the Council from 2010-2012 and expressed appreciation to him for the work he did on behalf of the Council.

7. New Business - None.

8. Announcements

K. Jones commented that she will attempt to keep the meetings as close to an hour as possible; however, she does not want Council members to feel like there cannot be discussion.

9. Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 2:09 p.m.