April 28, 2020

FSU Executive Committee Meeting Minutes

April 28, 2020 (via zoom)

Ex Com Members Present: Marlene Kim; Jessica Holden; Caroline Coscia; Jeff Melnick; Monique Fuguet; Tracy Brown; Emilio Sauri; Tim Sieber; Meghan Kallman; Joe Brown;

Others Present: Lorenzo Nencioli, FSU Membership Coordinator; Katie D’Urso, MTA Field Rep

1. Approval of the agenda: Motion to approve agenda but have Caroline give her report when she comes on the call. Motion to approve as amended seconded. Motion as amended passes unanimously.
2. Approval of the minutes: Motion to approve 4/7/20 Ex Com minutes. Motion seconded. Motion passes unanimously. Motion to approve 4/21/20 Ex Com e-vote minutes. Motion seconded. Motion passes unanimously. Motion to approve 4/23/20 Ex Com e-vote minutes. Motion seconded. Motion passes unanimously.
3. Corona virus: Caroline gave report on coalition meetings. Campaign will start re no layoffs in system.
4. FSU Budget redux (contact FSU office for revised document):  Noted that proposed budget allocated $12K to NTT grievance officers, thought they had been paid $14K in previous FY. Discussion of whether to increase FY21 stipend to $14K or $15K. Decision to leave current proposed budget for FY21 as is.
5. RES Funds- Negotiating over unused funds: Noted that unexpended funds are about $80K this FY. Suggested that money be used to insulate some people from layoffs. Noted that Admin said they will not rollover money to next FY. Suggestion to apply to fund for childcare, equipment needed for remote teaching, additional costs for conferences. Suggestion to have all money given to USave program. Motion to propose allocating money for emergency Covid fund to be used for what is needed (childcare, purchases for remote teaching, additional costs for conferences, etc). Motion seconded. Motion approved unanimously.
6. Ombudsperson (see documents below): The UMB Admin has in the past been amenable to an ombudsperson and has been waiting for us to propose a model. Discussion of possibility of proposing a version of the Berkeley model to Chancellor.  Discussion that if this is a response to the Faculty of Color report, the ombudsperson should be limited in scope. Concern expressed that union would be circumvented with this position. Noted that it is crucial that ombudsperson not report directly to Admin. Discussion of idea of creating an ombudsperson position or something similar within the FSU. Suggested to have group within Ex Com review options above report back. Suggested to have FSU propose paid ombudsperson position to Admin while at same creating a position within FSU. Noted that paid ombudsperson position only for discrimination issues was already proposed and rejected. Tim, Caroline, Monique, and Marlene agree to be on committee to review ombudsperson position issues and report back for next Ex Com meeting.
7. Distance learning committee membership and charge approval (see below): Suggestion to add librarian to committee along with members below. Motion to approve members listed below plus a librarian and approve the charge. Motion seconded. Motion approved unanimously.
8. Background checks: Noted that background checks are done for new hires. Admin wants to do background checks as well on employees who move from 25% to 50% or more. GC had reviewed this a year ago and recommended allowing checks on new members at point of hire, not current unit members. Motion to propose background checks on all new hires regardless of FTE, not do any checks on current unit members. Motion seconded. Motion approved unanimously.
9. Sabbatical time: Discussion of issue and to continue discussion by email. Marlene will draft email for Ex Com on this issue to continue this discussion and get feedback.

MEGHAN LEAVES

   10.  Diversity training for ex com members: Motion to agree to have Ex Com do diversity training. Motion seconded. Motion passes (1 abstention).

    11. FSU Annual meeting: Monique and Joe B. will help with Annual Meeting. Joe and Tim will discuss how/if to present on Faculty of Color report. Monique will present on FSU FY21 proposed budget.  Meeting at 4 pm to test out the practices. 

    12. Adjournment: Motion to adjourn meeting. Motion seconded. Motion approved unanimously.

MEETING ADJOURNED

Faculty Ombudsperson at UMB (this is what It could look like if we follow a similar model to the UC Berkeley one)

The Faculty Ombudsperson is a confidential, informal, impartial alternative for the resolution of work-related problems and conflicts for faculty members.  One or more ombudspersons can be named – if more than one, with one being designate as team leader.  The University’s Faculty Council shall appoint any ombudsperson.

The Faculty Ombudsperson functions as an “organizational ombuds,” providing advice on conflicts and disputes in a confidential and informal manner, in keeping with the standards of ethical practice codified by the International Ombudsman Association (IOA), incorporating policies of the former University and College Ombuds Association (UCOA).   An ombudsperson listens, suggests, obtains information, and mediates to achieve resolution. Often they satisfy the needs of the complainant by simply acting as a sounding board and source of advice as to how that person may solve her/his own problem. Ombudspersons do not issue reports or findings. They do not keep written records or act as witnesses in possible subsequent proceedings. They subscribe to a code of conduct assuring impartiality and confidentiality.

All communications and information provided to the faculty ombuds remain confidential except

where there is an imminent risk of serious harm involving a physical threat or in cases of sexual

violence or sexual harassment.  Faculty members’ resort to using an ombudsperson to assist in resolving workplace problems or disputes does not prevent their later use of more formal complaint or grievance procedures.

The process begins with the complainant contacting the lead Faculty Ombudsperson.

Appropriate compensation in terms of stipend or CLR for the ombudsperson will be determined through agreement with the Administration.

[This ombuds model is based on the Faculty Ombuds program in place at the University of California Berkeley, under the Faculty Senate.]

Faculty Ombudsperson, UCB

The Faculty Ombudsperson is a confidential, informal, impartial alternative for the resolution of work- related problems and conflicts.

The Faculty Ombudperson functions as an “organizational ombuds,” providing advice on conflicts and disputes in a confidential and informal manner. They listen, suggest, obtain information, and mediate to achieve resolution. Often they satisfy the needs of the complainant by simply acting as a sounding board and source of advice as to how that person may solve her/his own problem. Ombudspersons do not issue reports or findings. They do not keep written records or act as witnesses in possible subsequent proceedings. They subscribe to a code of conduct assuring impartiality and confidentiality.

The Faculty Ombudspersons are appointed by the Academic Senate and are subject to the Responsible Employee requirement laid out in the UC Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Policy (http://policy.ucop.edu/doc/4000385/SVSH), meaning that they are required to notify the the Offce

 for Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination (http://ophd.berkeley.edu/) if a person affliated with the University (e.g., student, staff, faculty member) reports conduct that is prohibited under the sexual violence/sexual harassment policy. The campus does provide Confidential Resources who are not required to report to OPHD: faculty and staff may consult the PATH to Care Center (http://sa.berkeley.edu/dean/confidential-care-advocate), the Employee Assistance Program (https://uhs.berkeley.edu/bewellatwork/employee-assistance), or the Staff Ombuds offce (https://staffombuds.berkeley.edu/). (Note: Unlike the Faculty Ombuds, the Staff Ombuds Offce is not subject to the Responible Employee reporting requirement described above. In addition to staff in non-Senate academic series, the Staff Ombuds Offce works with faculty who perform management functions or faculty who have concerns involving staff members.)

All communications and information provided to the faculty ombuds remain confidential except where there is an imminent risk of serious harm involving a physical threat or in cases of sexual violence or sexual harassment described above.

The process begins with the complainant contacting the lead Faculty Ombudsperson, or the Senate Executive Director (2-7213) for a referral.

DL Committee

Joe Brown

Tracy Brown

James Soldner

Alejandro Reuss

Amy Todd

Scholars such as the faculty at UMB obviously care deeply about what we study, and want to make the years of work we put into the subjects we study available to others (through our teaching, writing, etc.). However, this knowledge and our ability to impart it to others is also the way we make our living. The model of online course development being considered asks that a scholar spill out the product of many, many years of study, research, and teaching and give it over to their employer to use as they see fit--and for less than the pay of teaching a class for a single semester. The university could just subsequently hire other people to teach the material, so the course developer will have made themselves disposable. Some kinds of courses could involve a large number of sections, with each instructor teaching from the same course curriculum--so the benefit to the university could be very large, without proportional compensation to the course developer.

We should also be thinking of other kinds of contractual guarantees and what model of education the university is going to adopt going forward. We may be very concerned, as educators, by the extensive teaching of standardized course curricula by instructors who did not develop the curriculum themselves. In some particular courses in some fields, this model may be appropriate. But extensive use of this model may be problematic for pedagogical reasons. In the course of discussing any particular course topic, many questions come up about how that topic connects with subjects not directly addressed in course materials. Because the person developing the materials may have studied all those issues very deeply for many years and thus able to answer these questions and point students to relevant materials for further study, and this capability is indispensable for effective teaching, it would be tragic to lose that (as may be the case if higher education went heavily in a standardized-curriculum direction).

These issues require extensive strategic thinking for the committee, which will be tasked with these issues and concerns and working with the FSU (executive committee and core bargaining team) to remedy these and propose solutions.