Faculty Affairs Committee
September 21, 2010
Present: Mary Elizabeth Bezanson, James Wojtaszek, Judy Kuechle, Athena Kildegaard, Roger Wareham, Barry McQuarrie, and Rebecca Dean
Minutes from Aug 31 and Sept 7 were approved.
The committee reviewed potential agenda items for the year, after having solicited items from the campus community. The committee had a short discussion of each item, and ranked according to Practicality (what impact can FAC have), Importance, Relevance (to faculty), and Timeliness in an effort to determine what agenda items the committee should pursue this year. The items, which by nature had some overlap, were
Faculty Salaries (compression, discipline coordinator)
Single Semester Leaves (the process of awarding SSL)
Academic Staffing Plans
Searches (who makes decision on which positions to hire)
Internal promotion (opportunities for faculty to gain administrative experience, and process by which these appointments are made)
Role and Power of Division Chairs
Workload (consistency, sabbatical/maternity leaves, summer, committees, discipline coordinators)
Pay Policy (temporary, summer timeliness, sabbatical supplement)
Speed of Decision Making
Administration Review (more involved than yearly review)
Role of Faculty on Campus (perceived diminishing role of faculty in decisions)
After discussion, the committee determined the issues to focus on this year are Faculty Salaries, and Pay Policy. Second most important issues are Internal Promotion, Role of Division Chairs, Program Review, and Workload.
Mary Elizabeth will call Sarah Matson to ask for information about Review of Administration, and the Dean to ask for an update on the Faculty Center.
Mary Elizabeth and Roger reported on a meeting they had with Jacquie Johnson (Chancellor), Cheryl Contant (Dean), Sarah Mattson (Human Resources), Nancy Helsper (Office of Institutional Research). This group would like FAC to consider
What are appropriate comparison groups?
What data sets should be used? What data sets are available?
What is our target in terms of the data sets?
What is the modeling response? One year out, three years, five years, etc.
Twenty years ago (and also in the early 2000s) there was an infusion, but without regular infusions salaries will continue to fall behind.
What happens within the institution? Including Medical School skews everything.
There are a variety of data that can be collected for comparisons (AAUP, Morris 14, COPLAC, CUPA). CUPA allows for comparison at discipline level, and Pareena Lawrence has already done some of this for Social Sciences. Michael Korth also has data on faculty salaries. The FAC strongly feels the committee should pursue collecting the data that it finds useful.
Mary Elizabeth, Roger, and Rebecca will look into data and report back to the committee. Mary Elizabeth will contact Michael Korth and Rebecca will contact Pareena Lawrence.
The goal is to make a more data driven appeal in the Campus Compact request next March. For this to happen, the committee's report needs to be completed by January. These data driven requests have not been made in recent years, although they were more common (and effective) in the 1980s. If UMM can get money for salaries from the campus compact, the campus will also need to find some funds internally (through re-organization).