[Approved March 5, 2008]

Minutes of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate

February 27, 2008

St. Mary’s 113 B; 12:00 PM

Present: D. Biers (presiding), T. Eggemeier, A. Fist, P. Johnson, R. Kearns, L. Laubach, J. O’Gorman, R. Penno, F. Pestello, A. Seielstad, R. Wells

J. Farrelly (Faculty Board), J. Untener

Roll Call:

Eleven members of the Committee were present.

Prayer:

The meeting opened with a prayer offered by T. Eggemeier.

Approval of Minutes:

February 20, 2008. T. Eggemeier suggested that the section of the minutes relating to the discussion of the English requirements should be condensed. Because of this discussion of the minutes was deferred to the end of the meeting and then tabled.

Announcements:

• L. Laubach announced that elections for members of the Academic Senate should begin in the next 10 days.
• P. Johnson asked that members review the draft document on Senate procedures and send her comments.

New Business:

• J. Untener reported on the implementation of the background check policy. He noted that it has been in place for about a year and about 90 criminal background checks have been run for faculty hires. He believes that this accounts for 100% of full-time and faculty administrative hires. No hires have been stopped by the process. Compliance on part-time faculty hires is uncertain. He believes that the process has gone well overall. Hires have not been delayed by the process and it is not a labor intensive process. HR has picked up the costs. Three issues have arisen in the course of executing the process. The release form has sometimes been turned in to the department instead of the Provost office. This results in one or more department members knowing what is indicated on the form. The company doing the checks was changed by HR and there was a period in which the form did not have a place for self-disclosure. This has been corrected. Compliance in regard to part-time hires is uncertain. There was discussion of these issues. In relation to the part-time hires, it was suggested that gathering the consent form could be tied to the I9 form or with other HR processes. Departmental chairpersons could also be reminded on a regular basis of the need for this. It was also suggested that demographic information on all hires should be tracked. He agreed that three issues required action. The release form should originate and be returned to the Provost Office so that department members are not privy to any information revealed on the form. Demographic profiles should be tracked and a system for doing that will be established. He will work with HR to develop processes to achieve compliance in relationship to part-time hires.
• J. Untener reported on the implementation of the maternity policy. He indicated that about twelve faculty, all or most pre-tenure, have made use of the policy. He believes that overall the implementation of the policy has gone well with some minor issues arising. Faculty using the policy have had random “due dates’ and only 1 faculty member has stopped the tenure clock. He indicated that he has met with all faculty who have used the policy. The issue of salary continuation has been the most complicating and time-consuming issue. Faculty do not understand this policy and so it makes negotiations more time-consuming. P. Johnson reported that since the minutes of the last meeting of the Academic Senate had been posted, she has received numerous e-mails related to this issue. Issues communicated include: Minute of the October 29, 2004 meeting where the policy was passed list items, such as adoption and paternity leave, that still need consideration. Concern has been expressed from women who have used the policy that there is a lack of clarity in the policy such that multiple interpretations have been used to implement the policy. There is lack of coordination between various administrative offices. Summer births have presented a problem. Stopping the tenure clock has not been implemented consistently. Johnson reported that Lisa Rismiller is willing to conduct an appropriate survey and recommended that the policy be referred to the Faculty Affairs Committee for review. ECAS referred the policy to FACAS for review and recommendations.
• The agenda for the March 7 meeting of the Academic Senate was discussed. DOC 06-11 has been moved forward by the Faculty Affairs Committee and will be placed on the agenda. Committee reports will also be on the agenda.

Old Business:

A. Fist reported for the Student Academic Policies Committee that consultations with various persons in the institution are being carried out in relation to an Honor Code. He will meet with the Provost Council in March as well as the Graduate Leadership Council. He has scheduled meetings with associate deans in the College and is contacting admissions and legal affairs. The hope is to have a document for the April meeting of the Academic Senate.

Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 1:10 PM.

Respectfully Submitted,

Patricia A. Johnson, Secretary