|
Minutes of Administrative Staff Council
October 3, 2002
Call to Order
Laura Emch called the meeting to order at 1:30.
Members Present
Amelie Brogden, Nora Cassidy, John Clark, Wayne Colvin, Tina Coulter, Jim Dachik, Carl
Dettmer, Laura Emch, Brady Gaskins, Terry Herman, Sally Johnson, Sue Lau, Joe Luthman, Tom
Scavo, Karen Schwab (CSC Liaison) Phyllis Short, Ron Skulas, Robin Veitch, Nicole Voorhees,
Barbara Waddell, Robert Zhang
Member Substitutes
Karen Schwab for Ann Betts. Dawn Burks for Kim Grilliot. Mary Beth Zachary for Susan Kozal.
James Jackson for Emily Monago.
Absent
Dave Crooks, Sandra DiCarlo, Mike Fitzpatrick, Deb Fleitz, Dave Garcia, Deborah Knigga,
Sandy Miesmer, Cindy Smith
Guests
Joy Hartwell-Lein (CMAI)
Approval of Minutes
Wayne Colvin moved and John Clark seconded approval of the minutes from September 5, 2002
with no changes. The motion passed unanimously.
Welcome to CSC Liaison
Laura Emch introduced and welcomed Karen Schwab, CSC liaison, to our meetings.
Chair’s Report
The written report submitted by the chair is reproduced below.
Chair’s Report—October 3, 2002
1. On September 23rd, Robin Veitch and I met with Classified Staff Council leaders Barbara
Garay and Becky Paskvan. We will continue to meet each month with our goal being how
our councils can productively collaborate on various University issues.
2. Executive Committee met on September 3rd and 24th. Topics including travel
reimbursement and the 'Unscheduled Closing Policy" were discussed.
3. I represented ASC at the New Employee Orientation on September 25th.
4. Our fall reception on September 24th was very successful due to the efforts of several
committee members. A large "thank you" to last year's Award and Recognition committee
members, Scholarship committee members, this year's External Affairs committee
members, and our Chair-Elect. It was our largest attended fall reception in many years.
5. Robin Veitch, Ann Betts, and myself participated at the HR sponsored "Caremark"
presentation on September 24th. BGSU is changing from Advance PCS to Caremark as
our Prescription Benefit Manager (PBM) effective January 1, 2003. HR will be providing
all employees with detailed information on Caremark in December 2002.
6. In following up with John Clark's summary of last month's Faculty Senate meeting, I
contacted Dr. Benjamin N. Muego, Chair of Faculty Senate, to discuss the upcoming
proposed changes to the University's travel reimbursement policy. Per Dr. Muego, an
updated policy is being developed and will hopefully be ready to submit to the Board of
Trustees by December. Gaylyn Finn and James L Stainbrook are leading the review of the
travel reimbursement policy. Changes are being considered to increase the maximum
amount for meals, tie the mileage reimbursement rate to the rate used by IRS, add a
provision to receive some reimbursement if staying with a relative instead of in a hotel, and
to increase the permitted cost of staying at a conference hotel before VP approval is
needed.
Vice Chair’s Report
None.
Secretary’s Report
None.
Committee Reports:
Amendments:
The Amendments committee is reviewing ASC meeting minutes from the last five years to
identify policy changes that were approved and insure that said changes are reflected in the
handbook.
Awards and Special Recognition: None. Laura Emch did report that this fall’s reception
had better attendance than any in the recent past. She thanked the Awards and Special
Recognition committee for their hard work.
External Affairs:
Phyllis Short reported that the committee will be meeting to discuss the Holiday Parade and other
upcoming events.
Internal Affairs:
Dawn Burks read a prepared report from Kim Grilliot. The committee is working with Marsha
Serio to develop and implement a mentoring program for administrative staff. The committee
suggested that all new members receive some sort of welcoming letter from ASC explaining its
purpose and where various resources can be found (such as the web page).
Personnel Welfare:
Brady Gaskins reported that the non-compensation conciliation plan is still supposed to go before
the Board in October. Laura Emch questioned the fact that the council had not seen a final
version of the policy to date. Brady also reported that they would be meeting after fall break to
review this year’s goals.
Professional Development:
It was reported that the committee has been working with Becca Ferguson to determine this
year’s budget. John Clark commented that he thought the annual budget for development awards
was $4000. He also said there had been some roll over funds the year before. He thought this
amount was for the awards only and exclusive of the professional development day sponsored by
ASC.
Salary: None
Scholarship: Nora Cassidy reported that the committee has met and is beginning to solicit
raffle items. Any one with suggestions for prizes should contact the committee.
LEAVE COMMITTEE REPORT TO ASC 10/03/02 (Written report reproduced below)
The last report to ASC Executive Committee brought ASC up to date as of
July 16, 2002, when the Leave Committee met, reviewed, and suggested revisions to the draft
Civic Duty Leave Policy.
During the August 13 meeting, the Committee made final revisions to the
draft Civic Duty Leave Policy regarding authorization of payment for
employees when subpoenaed and the procedure for verifying sensitive
documentation. Additionally, the Committee reviewed and discussed the
draft Classified Staff Authorized Leave of Absence Without Pay Policy
prepared by Donna Wittwer and consulted the Ohio Revised Code regarding
leaves of absence. It was decided to compile all remaining leave policies
developed during "Phase II" (post-FMLA Policy) into a packet of policies to
be recommended to Rebecca Ferguson when the Committee's work in this phase
is completed. Donna W. agreed to keep Rebecca F. informed regarding the
Committee's progress.
On August 27, the Committee discussed at length the draft Classified Staff
Authorized Leave of Absence Without Pay Policy and suggested revisions to
the draft. The Committee initiated discussion of the draft Administrative
Staff Authorized Leave of Absence Without Pay Policy prepared by Donna
Wittwer.
On September 17, the Committee suggested final revisions to the draft
Classified Staff Authorized Leave of Absence Without Pay Policy and
suggested initial revisions to the draft Administrative Staff Authorized
Leave of Absence Without Pay Policy.
In preparation for the next meeting on October 15, the Committee is
reviewing special leaves for administrative and classified staff.
Faculty Senate Liaison:
John Clark reported that he was unable to attend the last Faculty Senate meeting but wished to
share some statistics included with the agenda for that meeting.
From 1977-1978, state subsidy covered 67.2% of the cost to the University for each student
attending BGSU. The current level of Subsidy only covers 42.4% of the University’s cost.
Almost the exact same dollar amount is spent today (adjusted for cost of living) as was spent then
by the state.
In 2000, the median income of a person with a bachelor degree was $46,200. This figure is 60%
higher than the income of someone with only a high school diploma ($28,800). The percentage
decline in Ohio of people earning a bachelor’s degree is almost exactly the same as the decline in
the state’s per capita income, relative to the national averages.
A 2002 survey by the American Council on Education shows that the public believes that
education costs more than it actually does. The belief is that institutions charge two to three times
higher than it really costs.
Classified Civil Service Liaison: Ron Skulas was unable to attend the last CSC meeting. He
said in his opinion the relationship between the two councils could not be better.
Old Business:
Laura Emch asked if representatives had received any constituent responses to Dr Ribeau’s
questions concerning collaborative teamwork efforts. Most representatives indicated that
constituents had not responded. Those representatives who received constituent feedback shared
that with the group. The following is a brief summary.
Jim Dachik received a response from the Theatre Department. The constituent indicated that they
felt the department was a model for collaborative efforts across campus. Whether it was because
the relationship to the arts lent itself to these types of efforts, or other factors, this constituent
could list several instances where the Theatre had helped other departments. Such efforts
included helping to light art work at the Library to helping to construct silhouettes for the Silent
Witness presentation on campus. The constituent stated they felt to promote collaborative efforts
there had to be communication of what individual areas do.
Nicole Voorhees received responses that indicated that training and workshops on team building
skills need to take place. There was also a need to have focus groups that would garner a wide
range to responses to Dr. Ribeau’s questions. One constituent felt that the data received by the
focus groups needed to be analyzed and communicated to staff across campus. There was a fear
that the data would be gathered but no action would really take place. There was also a general
feeling that the expected outcomes of these questions needed to be better articulated by Dr.
Ribeau.
Joe Luthman received a response that stated collaborative modeling had to take place at all levels,
including the top administrative level. This constituent felt that some personnel reassignments
and other action by top administrators did not indicate collaborative efforts on their part. He
stated that staff needed to realize that it was a privilege to work at the university. This sense of
pride would foster a better atmosphere for collaborative efforts, as staff would see their efforts in
a more global perspective, thinking more in terms of the good of the institution than the good of
the individual department.
Susan Kozal, who was unable to attend the meeting, shared the following summary of her
constituent responses.
“ Sharing knowledge, resources, effort and enthusiasm across campus and the broader community
on any number of different initiatives creates an atmosphere of unity, support and respect.
Generosity begets generosity; concern begets concern; and successful mutually beneficial
initiatives engender trust and energy for even greater achievement. The Black Swamp Arts
Festival is a good example.
Collaborative effort often requires that those involved be accorded a great deal of flexibility in
meeting the ongoing demands of their position, especially in respect to time. Setting up systems
of cooperation and schedules for collaboration, finding funding for new efforts, and executing the
project can sometimes necessitate delegation (if there is a delegatee) or possible delay of nonessential
duties. Supervisors who wish to encourage new projects that involve collaboration
across or within disciplines must be ready to accommodate and support these efforts.
A shorter-term allocated funding source would certainly be of great assistance. Both C.I.T.E.S.
and PCA require requests a year in advance of a project, and focus on very specific goals. Many
collaborative projects involve their participants in multiple pleas for funding from various small
caches around campus. The benefit of this is the awareness and ownership that results on the part
of the contributors. The drawback is that sometimes, despite best efforts and good projects, the
funds don't materialize, resulting in scaled-down or sometimes cancelled efforts . A fund for
collaborative projects, having a structure similar to ECAP's, but with different funding objectives,
would go a long way toward encouraging these goals.
Finally, I am not aware of any recognition of team projects.”
After sharing responses, it was agreed that the council would move forward with recommending
that focus groups be developed. It would be suggested that students and staff in Organization
Development be enlisted to assist in this project. It would also be suggested that this should be a
project involving all constituent groups. Jim Dachik asked if the other groups such as CSC had
been asked these questions. Laura indicated that Dr. Ribeau had stated he would be sharing these
questions with CSC but she was not aware that this had happened yet.
Nicole Voorhees said that she felt before the focus groups met that a more defined meaning of
collaboration and cooperation needed to be obtained so people could get beyond emotional
responses to the questions and begin to think logically in terms of global applications for the
University.
It was also agreed that participation in the focus groups should be based on random sampling.
Concrete examples of good practices, as well as bad, need to be obtained.
Nicole Voorhees, John Clark and Joe Luthman volunteered to prepare a response for Dr. Ribeau.
Their draft will be presented to council before sending on to Dr. Ribeau.
New Business:
Carl Dettmer shared a concern of one of his constituents about the relationship between classified
and administrative work schedules. Specifically, this constituent wondered how to respond a
question about inequities in work schedules. After discussion, it was agreed that several factors
might be influencing the work situation in question. The classified staff member may not
understand the work schedule arrangement made between the administrative staff member and
their supervisor. There may be a perception of the administrative staff member not working 40
hours a week because some of the work time is covered outside of the traditional 8 to 5 workday.
Finally, there may be a feeling that the classified staff member was being held to a more rigorous
standard than the administrative member. Carl was going to draft a response from council urging
anyone with questions to consult the appropriate handbooks or human resources for information.
The council is also encouraging communication within the work area.
Mary Beth Zachary spoke on the unscheduled closing policy. Council concerns were as follows:
· Policy does not indicate what procedures will be followed if the university must
close mid-day, on a weekend or holiday.
· Does not address how essential personnel will be identified
· Does not address how positions filled by student employees should be handled
· Concern about removal of previous language concerning Level 3 emergencies
outside of Wood County.
It was suggested that further concerns should be addressed to Mary Beth or Josh Kaplan. Both
members will attend the next executive council meeting. The attempt to have Dr. Dobb attend
will also be made.
Good of the Order
Due to lack of time, this part of the agenda was not covered.
Adjourn
A motion to adjourn was moved and seconded. It was so ordered at 3:10 pm.
Respectfully submitted:
Sue Lau
|
