|
Administrative Staff Council 2004 – 2005
Minutes: October 7, 2004
207 BTSU
Call to Order: Joe Luthman called the meeting to order at 1:34 pm
Members present: Wendy Buchanan, Jill Carr, Nora Cassidy, Rob Cramer, Michael Ginsburg, Tim Hoepf, Sheila Irving, Ann Jenks,
Steve Kendall, Naomi Lee, Paul Lopez, Susan Macias, Debra McLean, Teresa McLove, Connie Molnar, Emily Monago, Jeff Nelson,
Rich Peper, Rachael Schaffer, Larry Spencer, Sally Raymont, Diane Regan, Celeste Robertson, Robin Veitch, Mary Beth Zachary
Member Substitutes: Steve Lashaway for Judy Amend
Members Absent: Dave Crooks, Greg Dickerson, Kim Fleshman, Lawrence Holland, Deborah Rice
Guests: Jaqui Nathan, Amy Colvin, Jeff Nelson
Approval of Minutes:
Larry Spencer moved to approve minutes. Diane Regan seconded. Discussion ensued concerning certain parts of the minutes. The
minutes were approved with modifications that applied to the discussion with Human Resources.
Chairs Report:
Joe Luthman highlighted chairs report, particularly BG @ 100. Discussion about proposed change in how vacation days are shown
will be under New Business.
ASC Chair’s Report for October 2004
Several developments have occurred since last month. One is an agreement in principle to use a peer group to validate merit
pay criteria. Another is a possibility of a minor change in vacation accrual that would enable somewhat easier planning for
using our vacation time.
Merit pay criteria validation.
The basic argument is that in order to protect both BGSU, and its employees, we need to have peer participation in merit pay
criteria validation, similar to the JAQ practice in that both HR and peers work on JAQ re-evaluations.
There would need to be several assumptions in such a validation process.
VP can override decisions.
HR participates in merit pay criteria validation.
Assuming ASC is interested in taking on the work, the first order of business is to evolve a review policy. Examples could
include something such as:
1) Criteria need to be validated every 4 years.
2) Process should include staff from the area, an ASC subcommittee, and HR.
3) Signoff by ASC, HR, and VP in charge of area.
SUMMARY: this is probably a multi-year initiative.
Year one: evolve a policy and rotation practice recommendation.
Year two: begin to review.
Vacation Accrual.
When major administrative conversions take place, a fit gap analysis is one of the first long studies undertaken. With PeopleSoft
Human Resources (the BG@100 project) one of the shortages noticed is that there is no job such as we have in the AMS HR system
to narrow down our accumulated vacation days to 44 days, each July.
One compromise that may help in the conversion is for us to use 66 days as a ‘rolling’ upper limit for any month (not just
in July). If ASC proposes, and the administration accepts it, we could make our own vacation planning a bit easier, and enable
the conversion team to avoid writing a job. One catch is that we need to agree to maintain the upper limit of 44 days at retirement
time. We’ve tried several times last year to get the retirement vacation accrual raised from 44 days to 60, with no success.
Respectfully submitted by
Joe Luthman
Chair Elect Report: The fall reception was a huge success with standing room only. There was a true feeling of commitment,
with good coverage in the Monitor. Congratulations to JoAnn Kroll for winning the Ferrari Award. The ASC website is up and
running: http://www.bgsu.edu/organizations/asc. The website has information about all the activities concerning ASC. Each
committee and Administrative Staff member needs to look at the website. Lona gave an assignment for all the committees; when
you have a chance look over your particular web-site. Look at the site through the eyes of people outside the committee; see
if they could understand your mission and how you are helping administrative staff. Also if you have any ideas for outside
organizations that should link into your area or other places on campus, or you have applications that you need for scholarships
or whatever else your committee is doing and you think it’s relevant, let us know. There is also an article in the Monitor
featuring the physician and nurse practitioner at the Health Center, in the article it was mentioned that they had been the
recipient of the ASC Spirit Award.
Chair Luthman praised the awards committee for all they did to make the fall reception the success it was. He particularly
praised the making of the CD-Rom featuring all the past Ferrari Award winners.
Secretary:
We have a new representative, Gerry Davis from NWOET. Gerry is the new representative in the Technology area. We are still
looking to fill some seats on the ASC, if you know anyone who is interested please contact someone on the Exec Council. Remember
that representatives do not necessarily have to be from that specific area.
Committee Reports:
External Affairs: Celeste Robertson requested that the members meet after the ASC Council meeting. The Holiday parade is coming
up in November and a separate meeting is needed.
Internal Affairs:
There was a quick meeting earlier today to discuss the goals for this year. Internal affairs have so far identified five goals
for this year. First, to work with Lona monitoring the website, asking for opinions. Second, to look at the whole voting process
to see if it is possible to do it online; online nominating, online voting instead of all the paper and counting. Third, making
sure we have orientation packets for new Administrative Staff members. Looking at Robert’s Rules of Order and one other yet
to be named resource; a procedure to welcome spouses who are hired by a letter of appointment.
Scholarship
Rob Cramer will be the spokesperson for scholarship as 2/3 of the members are not on ASC. The committee met, and this year
is a good year with a large committee. Presently we are asking for donations for the Spring Raffle.
Professional Development:
Met early on but haven’t touched base lately. They would like to talk to Lona about tying the Spring Reception together with
a ½ day of professional development. Last year Dr. Ribeau ‘threw out’ the idea that we could have a ½ day just devoted to
contract staff. So the possibility of tying the two programs together is something that needs to be looked into.
Faculty Senate:
Robin Veitch reported that the Faculty Senate is looking at three (3) main issues and tasks for the year. They include 1)
President Ribeau’s engagement initiative, 2) the fifth year evaluation of Provost/VPAA Folkins, and 3) moving from the report
stage of the Ad Hoc Committee on Domestic Partners to implementation of domestic partner benefits. There was also discussion
on two (2) Ad Hoc Committees: 1) concerning the Frank C. Ogg Science Library and 2) the Domestic Partners committee.
Personnel Welfare Committee:
The goals this year are to look at 1) Vacation days, 2) Health care for part-time employees. At the University of Iowa there
is a model program that is being looked at, 3) Salary ranges, and 4) additional vacation days at retirement, to be aligned
more with Classified Staff
Classified Staff Council:
Steve Lashaway for Judy Amend. Steve talked about having a tent for the Classified Staff at the first football game. He spoke
briefly about Bill Knight talking to Classified Staff Council and the filling out of his questionnaire. The main subject of
the CS was about the exceptional pay raises for the members of CS in the President’s office. They are still clarifying the
pay and policy process with Dr. Ribeau. The CSC is having a special council meeting to discuss this issue. We as Administrative
Staff need to work together with CSC, it is important that the three groups work together but particularly CSC and ASC. Discussion
ensued concerning the three groups as well as Student Government and the Graduate Student Senate getting together on a regular
basis. The three groups used to get together and have an agenda; the ASC invited a Faculty Senate rep to meetings as did the
CSC. The faculty senate voted down full representation for CSC and ASC reps. But this does not mean that we shouldn’t still
invite them as full ex officio members of our organization.
Old Business: No Old Business
New Business:
The People Soft conversion is going on in the name of BG@100. They are currently doing a fit-gap analysis where they look
for things that the software provides and then compares it to what we do in our business processes now, the differences between
those two is the fit-gap. One thing that the new system doesn’t have is a job that goes in the middle of July; this is a problem
with our vacation leave accrual, reducing our vacation accrual to forty-four (44) days. It was brought to HR to allow an accrual
of sixty (60) days but that was vetoed because of the buying of days at retirement. If it is left at only 44 days a month
you would be losing a little bit every month instead of at the end of the year. But with 66 days on the books you will have
more flexibility. It was noted that in the past it had been a monthly maximum, changed to yearly and now we are going back
to monthly. Discussion ensued concerning the rolling sixty-six (66) day limit; this number is three years worth of time. If
the sixty-six (66) day limit is allowed, it has to be made known that this is just for monthly accounting; it is NOT for retirement
purposes. PWC suggested that in December the system should show what you will accrue through July so that during the mid-year
evaluation a discussion between the supervisor and supervisee would include scheduling vacation time. By doing this an administrative
staff member would not have to worry about losing time. HR said ‘no’ to this because then it would require two changes to
the system. The discussion continued on having HR run totals in January so that supervisors can see how many hours/days their
supervisees have. It is important to take vacation for mental health; this proposal can actually protect the university. PWC
was given the task to draft a procedure to amending the People Soft system to allow running a sixty-six (66) day total. An
interesting comment was made: Shouldn’t software fulfill our needs, not that we should change things to help the software?
And if this is happening maybe we need to look at something that is more user friendly?
Amy Colvin is the Chair of the Dance Marathon. She gave us a handout with some nine (9) ideas they have come up with to help
faculty/staff involvement. Amy would like input from anyone so that there can be more involvement. Go to http://www.bgsu.edu/studentlife/dancemarathon
for more information. The theme of the Dance Marathon this year is: “Decade of Miracle, Lifetime of Hope”
Jeff Nelson, Director of the Bookstore came to talk about what has been happening since the move to the BTSU. He discussed
the success in retaining ownership of the bookstore. It was a turning point in the Bookstore’s history; Buckenmeyer only the
2nd director in the Bookstores history was retiring, but before he left he was instrumental in the design and relocation to
the BTSU. The University made the decision to explore the possibility of leasing its operation to one of the national lease
operators, they received two bids. The staff went to Chris Dalton and Dr. Ribeau and lobbied to continue with the current
management structure of self-operation. Dr. Ribeau supported the staff, and the operation of the store as an institutionally
owned bookstore continued. Jeff was hired as the new director in 2002. The bookstore has done well, it has grown and business
has increased. They are serving students and departments better and are always looking for new ways to improve. This past
year was the most financially successful yet. There is now a new store; BG on Main, it is downtown and doing well. It will
allow us to have more of a connection to the local community and make it easer for people off campus to shop. The bookstore
also gives money to scholarships, they are going to give $135,000.00 to Graduate Student Scholarships.
Next was Jacqui Nathan from the Faculty Senate. Nathan was here because she is on the ad hoc committee for domestic partner
benefits, a committee that has been meeting since April 2000. She said that there was a survey being sent out to ascertain
the number of people who would be utilizing the domestic partner benefits. She presented the faculty senate and graduate senate
resolutions, saying that this resolution needed the support of faculty and staff. She also stated it needed to be done before
the end of fall semester. Discussion ensued concerning how to draft our own resolution and still meet the time line. Paul
Lopez made a motion to “study and endorse the two resolutions, because of time constraints, and then submit our own resolution,
which will be done by the Exec Committee.” Ann Jenks seconded, motion passed.
Merit Pay Policies was the next area to be discussed. Several years ago an attempt was made to have a ‘one size fits all’
policy, it was tossed out. Each individual unit then evolved their own. So now the question: ‘Is the process working?’ Complaints
have arisen concerning super merit and from those complaints a proposal was put forth to see if we could, in the same ways
as we did JAQ, evolve something that validates the merit pay policies. In other words, this process would have to be written
but the idea would be if the unit wished the merit pay policy to be evaluated then the combination of peer system, HR and
the vice president of the area could validate it. When the proposal was put before HR they seemed receptive. We are talking
about the implementation of the University wide policy that we agree to as administrative staff. The policy is 3% or less
across the board. Most of ASC knew the policy of merit, but have no idea what the criteria is for ‘super merit’. It was brought
up that if an ASC member’s supervisor is a faculty member there is no pressure brought to bear on them for not following the
merit procedure. HR is not comfortable doing that. For the record it was noted that the Finance Administration and the Library
have very good working merit pay policies and their criteria are well understood. More time is needed to look at the merit
pay policies. A motion was made to table this discussion until next month by Rich Peper, seconded by Susan Macias. Motion
passed to have the merit pay policies to be looked at under Old Business next month.
Good of the Order: As it was getting late the Good of the Order was forgone.
Next meeting will be November 4th at 1:30 p.m. in 207 BTU
Adjournment: Connie Molnar motioned to adjourn the meeting Larry Spenser seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at exactly
3:00 p.m.
Submitted by: Penny Nemitz ASC Secretary
|
