Indianapolis Faculty Council (IFC)

Minutes

April 15, 2008 ~ IH 100 ~ 3:00 – 5:00 p.m.

 

 

Faculty and Guests Present:  Hasan Akay, Deborah Allen, Simon Atkinson, Sarah Baker, James Baldwin, Trudy Banta, Charles Bantz, Wan Ning Bao, Margaret Bauer, Terry Baumer, Anne Belcher, Teri Belecky-Adams, Ed Berbari, Joseph Bidwell, Jacqueline Blackwell, Polly Boruff-Jones, Ben Boukai, John Butterworth, James Clack, Janice Cox, Andre De Tienne, Marsha Ellett, Scott Evenbeck, Mary L. Fisher, David Ford, Linda Adele Goodine, Sharon Hamilton, John Hassell, Jay Howard, Marilyn Irwin, Henry Karlson, P. Nicholas Kellum, Chris Long, Joyce MacKinnon, Anna McDaniel, Mahesh Merchant, Henry Merrill, Sharee Myricks, Hari Nakshatri, Bart Ng, C. Subah Packer, Rebecca Porter, William Potter, Fred Rees, William Schneider, Joe Scodro, Jodi Smith, Armando Soto, Uday Sukhatme, Terri Tarr, Mark Urtel, Rosalie Vermette, Suosheng Wang, Richard Ward, Amy Conrad Warner, Jeff Watt, Karen West, David Westhuis, Corinne Wheeler, Robert White, Kim White-Mills, Jack Windsor, Frank Witzmann, Nancy Young, Weiming Yu

 

Agenda Item I:  Welcome and Call to Order

IUPUI Faculty Vice President Pro Tempore Mary Fisher called the meeting to order at 3:04 p.m. 

 

Agenda Item II:  Adoption of the Agenda as the Order of Business for the Day

The agenda was changed for Discussion Item IX and was moved to Item IV.  The Agenda was adopted as the Order for the Business of the Day. 

 

Agenda Item III:  [ACTION ITEM] Approval of IFC April 1, 2008, Minutes

Hearing no objections, the IFC April 1, 2008, minutes stood as written and were entered into record.

(http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/minutes/Minutes_IFC_4-1-08.htm)   

 

Agenda Item IV:  Announcement of Slate for the Positions of President of the Faculty, Vice President of the Faculty, IFC Executive Committee, and the Undergraduate Curriculum Advisory Committee (Jacqueline Blackwell, Chair, IFC Nominating Committee)

Blackwell read the slate for the offices.  She asked to enter into the record that Martin Spechler was not present today (and this was his first missed IFC meeting) as his grandson is being named today in a ceremony.  (http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/Slate for Spring Elections.htm)

 

Agenda Item V:  Updates/Remarks from the Chancellor

Chancellor Bantz gave the following report:

·        Search Updates:  Bantz introduced Dr. Kenneth Durgans as the Assistant Chancellor for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.  Sukhatme updated the IFC on dean searches.  Liberal Arts is in the finalist stage for second interviews.  The Assistant Vice Chancellor for Life Long Learning is in the finalist stage as well.  Both finalists (Khaula Murtada and Terri Talbert-Hatch) are IUPUI faculty.  The Chancellor is working on the final stages of the SPEA search as well as the Optometry search. 

·        Purdue University inaugurated President France Cordova.  This was the first inauguration Purdue University has held. 

·        Addressing the Affirmative Action Office report from the last meeting, he updated his figures to a 132 case average over the last three years.  The EEOC and Office of Civil Rights are the offices mostly used for cases that go outside IUPUI purview.  The week of April 28, an external reviewer will be present to interview staff of the AAO as well as the IFC Executive Committee and have meetings with the Affinity Councils.

 

Agenda Item VI:  Updates/Remarks from the IFC President

IUPUI Faculty President Pro Tempore Rosalie Vermette gave the following report:

·        The Core School committee has submitted no report at this time.  The UFC will request a report from either the committee co-chairs or the President at next Tuesday’s UFC meeting.

·        Family Leave Policy:  At this time, the policy will be raised again with the President at the UFC meeting next week.  There has been no word from the President.  The old policy is about to expire.  The President wants to meet with each Chancellor before presenting the policy to the Board of Trustees.  He will inform them of the policy as his decision; then gather information in three years of its success/failure.  There are two remaining Trustees meeting this academic year.

·        The co-secretaries of the UFC have brought concerns to the President about the process of Affirmative Action across the university.  There will be a faculty committee across the university to talk about issues of affirmative action and if there should be specific modification on campuses.  The President would like to have one policy across the university.  He will appoint the committee to begin meeting in the fall.

·        Intellectual Property Policy:  The document devised by the UFC will stand as written with the added distributions.  The policy will need to be approved by the Board of Trustees. 

 

Agenda Item VII:  [Action Item]:  Resolution for Review of the Affirmative Action Office

Resolution: (http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/Resolutions 2008/Alternate AAO Resolution IFC.htm)    

Supporting Documentation:

(http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/documents/AA Guidelines IUPUI and IUB0001.pdf)    

Vermette has spoken with the President of the Black Faculty and Staff Council (Kim White-Mills) who has concerns about the timing of the resolution, the harshness of it, and the “immediacy” of the resolution.  White-Mills said the BFSC believes the resolution is in retaliation to the office in response to the employee’s case against a student/employee who chose a book to read which she found offensive.  The BFSC believes that case was a mistake and will tarnish the reputation of Lillian Charleston, Affirmative Action Officer.  They believe the resolution is redundant from what the Chancellor has said in his report today.  Since the university is taking on a review, it may negatively affect the good work of the office.

 

Baldwin said, in light of White-Mills’ remarks, that the motion should be tabled until next fall to give the university time to review the office as previously indicated.  Karlson said federal law permits to review the office.  Karlson said there will be a Board of Review called today or tomorrow as a result of a case brought about by a faculty member who has no idea why she is being charged with unfairness.

 

Fisher called the question regarding the motion by Baldwin (seconded by Blackwell).  The motion carried to table the resolution until the fall.

 

Agenda Item VIII:  [Discussion Item] Campus Planning Committee Report (Jack Windsor, Chair, IFC Campus Planning Committee)

 

Vermette introduced the reports of the Campus Planning Committee as well as the Budgetary Affairs Committee as well as letters received by the Schools of Science and Liberal Arts.  The two reports will address the items noted in the letters.

 

Report:  http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/documents/Campus Planning Report 2008.pdf. 

Windsor outlined the report noted in the linked PowerPoint.  In regard to slide 5, Windsor noted that the IFC passed a resolution that the tenure-track faculty ratio was never to fall below 60%.  At this time, it is just a little above 59.3%. 

 

The Campus Planning Committee attended each of the budget hearings and will have a formal report later.  Questions will be addressed following the Budgetary Affairs Report.

 

Agenda Item IX:  [Discussion Item] Budgetary Affairs Committee Report (Benzion Boukai, Chair, IFC Budgetary Affairs Committee)

 

Report:  http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/documents/BAC_Presentation_Final.pdf

Boukai outlined the report noted in the linked PowerPoint.  He iterated that each unit should “share in the wealth or share in the reduction” (illustrated in slide called “Admin/Support Cost to Appropriation.”)  Boukai said budget cuts have assisted the budget within the last year, but is it enough?  What do we need to do to meet all of the campus missions?

 

Agenda Item X:  Question and Answer Period

Packer asked Windsor if the committee has looked as gender as a trend for retention.  Windsor said the data varied among the ranks.  Packer suggested there may be salary inequities for women.

 

Ng asked about linkage between appropriation and cost (to Boukai).  How is appropriation distributed?  Boukai said he needs to defer the question as the way the cost is assigned to units, he is not knowledgeable how the appropriation is being allocated although there is some notion of “hold harmless.”   

 

Schneider asked if that was Boukai’s revelation of the campus formula allocation vs. state appropriations.  He asked about the increase of funds during the past five years has tuition rises.  What percentage of those funds went to faculty hiring and TTF hiring?  Boukai said the Chancellor gave a presentation on CTE allocation.  Part of that report has been given to the Budgetary Affairs Committee for their review.  The information can be made available by the Office of the Chancellor.  Bloomington has been hiring more tenure-track and non-tenure track faculty than IUPUI.  For the first question asked, RCM is supposed to promote exchange.  There are two RCM units (those who are dependent on tax generation and those who receive appropriation). 

 

The Chancellor thanked both faculty members for their reports.  He said that Bloomington did invest three times more in faculty than IUPUI as they had more money to spend.  IUPUI spent some of our funds on the Bepko Scholars and Sam Jones Scholars.  We do not have enough faculty of color on campus as well as not enough faculty period.  We focus on the state appropriation which is low growth.  Some of our greatest successes in transforming have been stimulated by philanthropy (i.e., named chairs).  Each of those new chairs leveraged up the number of faculty. 

 

Ng asked how our budgetary process links to our academic success.  As we discuss the budget, this should be at the top of our minds.  He urged everyone to look at our budget.  It is unusual in a university where RCM is supposed to be a system, you would expect more stability.  Some schools continue to run into trouble with no hope of recovery. 

 

Agenda Item XI:  Additional discussion regarding the AAO resolution

As Parliamentarian, Karlson addressed tabling of the motion on the Affirmative Action Office.  He cited Roberts Rule of Order.  The vote should be 2/3 and there was not a 2/3 majority.  Debate can still take place, and it will take 2/3 vote to close debate.  However, it is the ruling of the chair of the body of how to proceed, per the Chancellor and Bill Schneider.  Applegate (Rachel) said the intent of the original motion was to defer until more information was received.  Karlson said waiting until the next meeting will kill the motion.  Watt said the discussion was only one-sided during the original motion and the vote was to close.  He urged the chair to re-open discussion.  Irwin said there are some people who may have left as the agenda item was closed.  Vermette responded that Karlson wanted to interrupt the two reports, but Vermette chose not to do this. 

 

Fisher reopened discussion.

 

Packer continued her discussion that was interrupted to table the motion earlier.  She said if we allow the AAO to continue to operate the way it is currently operating, people will continue to be hurt.  The track record has not been good.  One goal was to curtail the operations the way they are to protect others to receive due process.  The Council would like to have involvement in the review of the AAO.  If a review happens before we are able to have input, then we won’t be able to have input.  It was reiterated that there is more than one case showing that someone has been hurt.

 

Schneider suggested an amendment.  He amended the resolution as follows: 

 

The IUPUI Faculty Council requests 1) that the Chancellor -- in collaboration with the Vice Chancellor for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and the IFC Faculty Affairs Committee --  immediately conduct a review of the procedures of the IUPUI Office of Affirmative Action relating to the handling of allegations of discrimination, and 2) that the Chancellor immediately suspend  (EXAMINE) all current procedures in use by the Affirmative Action Office for the review of allegations of discrimination until  (TO ENSURE) appropriate procedures are put in place that assure due process and fairness to all parties involved in a complaint.  The adoption of interim procedures assuring due process and fairness should occur before the end of April 2008, and permanent policies and procedures should be in place by the beginning of the next academic year.

 

The motion was seconded.  The vote was too close to determine.

 

Discussion was reopened. 

 

DeTienne is concerned by not suspending and not examining, cases will not be heard fairly.  Ward said we don’t have enough information to know what the cases are that are not being heard fairly.  That is due to confidentiality.  Boukai wonders if someone can say why the Bloomington procedures can’t be put in place during the interim while reviews are being conducted.  Schneider agreed with Ward that we don’t have enough information to suspend a motion.  He believes his proposed changes are as much as we can do.  Hassell spoke previously in correspondence about implementing a set a processes and procedures that we hadn’t had a chance to look at first.  Vermette said we did not say we would adopt the Bloomington procedures but have something comparable.  A faculty member said in review of the current procedures, he didn’t see anything wrong, but perhaps it is the officer that is using the procedures.  Fisher said there are questions about the procedures.  Ng said that in some sense we do have enough evidence of procedure.  The IFC-EC has responsibility to keep confidentiality and they know in fact that there is a problem and urges the Council to react. 

 

Fisher called again for the vote regarding Schneider’s changes.  The motion was made and seconded to approve the amended changes. 

 

Discussion opened.

 

DeTienne asked if the first part of the resolution is relatively the same as the second part.  Fisher said the resolution says that there should be a review and the sentence regarding adopting interim procedures was removed.

 

The vote was taken for approval of the resolution.  The motion passed and the resolution stands as follows:

 

The IUPUI Faculty Council requests 1) that the Chancellor -- in collaboration with the Assistant Chancellor for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and the IFC Faculty Affairs Committee --  immediately conduct a review of the procedures of the IUPUI Office of Affirmative Action relating to the handling of allegations of discrimination, and 2) that the Chancellor immediately examine all current procedures in use by the Affirmative Action Office for the review of allegations of discrimination to ensure appropriate procedures are in place that assure due process and fairness to all parties involved in a complaint. 

 

Agenda Item XII:  Question and Answers Reopened

 

Ward asked what will happen with CTE funds.  The Chancellor reiterated the usage of CTE funds.  Utility funding has been cut due to the changes the faculty and staff have implemented to conserve energy.  The President has allocated funding to need-based funding which will be cut out of administrative costs.  We won’t notice the allocation much as it will come from administrative services, but by the fifth year of the cut, we will notice the cuts. 

 

Sukhatme showed the Academic Plan booklet which was distributed to the IFC.  There will be a large distribution to the faculty and staff. 

 

Atkinson asked if there are any kind of commitments or need to address the issue of “hold harmless” and how we deal with it historically.  The Chancellor said in 1989, it was based on differential costs within the schools.  What happens when the function of the school changes throughout the years and/or new schools (such as Informatics and University College) are developed?  How do we not simply transfer money from one school to the other?  Emory bought out every faculty member and student and closed down their dental school.  Where do we find a revenue stream?  This is where Dean Sukhatme’s enrollment shaping initiative comes into play.  The lack of non-resident tuition is how Bloomington is able to afford more faculty than we can.  The revenue for that level is so much higher than resident rates.  If medicine were not paying with medical savings profits, the School of Medicine would not be able to function.  They have another revenue source as well as philanthropy.

 

Agenda Item XIII:  Call for any IFC or UFC Standing Committee Reports.

No reports.

 

Agenda Item XIV:  Unfinished Business

No business.

 

Agenda Item XV:  New Business

No business.

 

Agenda Item XVI:  Adjournment

A motion to adjourn was made and seconded.  The motion carried.  Vice President Pro Tempore Fisher adjourned the meeting.

 

 

Karen Eckert

IUPUI Faculty Council Coordinator