Academic Staff Executive Committee Minutes 12-22-16
Approved 1-5-16
Members Present: Bruno Browning; Aaron Crandall; Jenny Dahlberg; Sarah Kuba; Robert Newsom; Kevin Niemi, Chair
Guests: Michael Bernard-Donals, Dan Uhlrich, Brian Vaughan
The meeting was called to order at 2:02 p.m.
The minutes of December 8, 2016, were approved.
General Reports
Chair Kevin Niemi reported that the group writing the white paper on the results of the Academic Staff Work Life survey regarding compensation are compiling a draft and hope to have something finished by the end of January. Kevin and Heather met with someone from the TAA regarding the graduate student assistant handbook/employment policy that would replace the old TAA contract.
Secretary of the Academic Staff Heather Daniels reported that there have been preliminary conversations about storing district numbers in HRS. The numbers were previously stored in 3270, but not HRS. The numbers are currently stored at the College of Engineering by a member of the Districting and Representation Committee.
Heather met with Catharine DeRubeis and Mary Luther from the Office of Human Resources compensation area. They will be conducting the annual promotional review this spring. This review will differ from previous years. Schools/Colleges/Divisions will not have to report back on each individual. Instead, a report will be run several months following the exercise to see what progress has been made. Also compensation consultants will be directed to work with the schools/colleges/divisions assigned to them on this exercise. OHR will also look to see whether they can provide data looking at a year in the future to schools/colleges/divisions. They also discussed the Faculty Assistant salary issue. Adjustments to minimum salaries would be effective July 1. There are some other salary minimums that may be adjusted as well due to equity issues. Any change in the minimum would have to be funded by the units responsible for hiring. OHR will also be reaching out to the departments hiring the most Faculty Assistants to find out more specifically about job duties in relation to those done by Teaching Assistants.
Heather reported that over 2,000 academic staff started and/or completed the performance management survey. The ballot regarding changes to district sizes has over 1100 votes and will close on Dec. 23 at 4:30.
Guests: Dan Uhlrich, Professor of Neuroscience, and Brian Vaughan, Office of Legal Affairs
UW-Madison currently has a policy on research misconduct, but has been asked to re-write the policy by the federal government. The current policy is very confusing and is not compliant with federal guidelines or other institutions. Policy changes will need to be approved by the Faculty Senate because the policy is currently in Faculty Legislation.
A committee was charged with crafting the new policy. The new policy is a blend of federal requirements and the governance requirements that were found in the old policy.
Here is a summary of the proposed policy. When an allegation is reported, the Research Integrity Officer and relevant Associate Dean for Research make the initial call about whether the allegation fits within research misconduct. Research misconduct is fabrication, falsification and plagiarism. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgements of data.
If the Research Integrity Officer and Associate Dean for Research decide the allegation fits within research misconduct, then there is an inquiry committee that determines whether a further investigation is needed. If further investigation is needed, an investigation committee will be convened. This committee presents the results to Provost, and the Provost makes the final decision. The respondent can appeal the decision for substantive or procedural reasons. The appeal goes to the relevant appeal body. For academic staff, this would be the Academic Staff Appeals Committee.
ASEC will look at bringing this policy to the Academic Staff Assembly for an endorsement in February.
Guest: Michael Bernard-Donals, Vice Provost for Faculty and Staff
Michael reported that the Family Leave Committee has been constituted. They are scheduling a charge meeting for January.
There is a list of recommendations regarding the implementation of the Hostile and Intimidating Behavior (HIB) policies made by the Ad Hoc Committee on Hostile and Intimidating Behavior. Michael has put together a work group to push forward three recommendations including: new website, HIB liaisons and an educational campaign. The content of the website is nearly finished. He hopes to have it up in Jan. or Feb. There will be a test market for the site before it is announced broadly. In addition, he is working on setting up 12 liaisons across campus for those who have experienced HIB. The liaisons will provide confidential counsel and direct people to the appropriate resources. Educational campaign will mirror campaign for sexual harassment policy. There will be a small group trained to do workshops on HIB. He hopes to finish these three recommendations by August.
There is a current tool for bias reporting through the Dean of Students office. There is a bias reporting team that takes the reports and deals with them by a set of protocols. Faculty and staff can make reports of bias through this portal, and some do. In order to accommodate reports from faculty and staff, there may need to be some additional people added to the bias reporting team who are familiar with faculty and staff issues and the charge for this team may need to be tweaked.
The Retirement Issues Committee in Faculty Policies and Procedures (FPP) plans to work on the following issues during the current year and possibly into next year: revise volunteer policy, place retirement representatives on some FPP Chapter 6 committees, develop retirement incentives, develop peer mentoring system for those considering retiring, and streamline retirement process itself.
Lastly, Michael provided an update on the workplace flexibilities. OHR has a toolbox of flexibilities on its website. The next step is to ask units to look at what is available and decide what works for their unit. OHR plans to begin this step in the spring.
Business
• Liaisons for Hostile and Intimidating Behavior Reports
ASEC brainstormed names of additional academic staff who could serve as possible hostile and intimidating behavior liaisons.
• Nominating Committee Slate
ASEC asked Heather to send a survey to those who had expressed interest in this committee. They also would like to know of any names the Nominating Committee has to suggest.
• Concealed Carry Petition
Heather will draft an email that could be sent along with the link to the petition to all academic staff. ASEC will review this email at their meeting on January 5.
• Topics for the Provost
Updates on titling and compensation study; status of facilities committee, and performance evaluation tracking in SMPH.
Meeting adjourned at 3:50 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Heather Daniels, Secretary of the Academic Staff
ASEC Minutes
2:00 – 4:00 p.m. Thursday, December 22, 2016
53 Bascom Hall
2:00 – 4:00 p.m. Thursday, December 22, 2016
53 Bascom Hall
Members Present: Bruno Browning; Aaron Crandall; Jenny Dahlberg; Sarah Kuba; Robert Newsom; Kevin Niemi, Chair
Guests: Michael Bernard-Donals, Dan Uhlrich, Brian Vaughan
The meeting was called to order at 2:02 p.m.
The minutes of December 8, 2016, were approved.
General Reports
Chair Kevin Niemi reported that the group writing the white paper on the results of the Academic Staff Work Life survey regarding compensation are compiling a draft and hope to have something finished by the end of January. Kevin and Heather met with someone from the TAA regarding the graduate student assistant handbook/employment policy that would replace the old TAA contract.
Secretary of the Academic Staff Heather Daniels reported that there have been preliminary conversations about storing district numbers in HRS. The numbers were previously stored in 3270, but not HRS. The numbers are currently stored at the College of Engineering by a member of the Districting and Representation Committee.
Heather met with Catharine DeRubeis and Mary Luther from the Office of Human Resources compensation area. They will be conducting the annual promotional review this spring. This review will differ from previous years. Schools/Colleges/Divisions will not have to report back on each individual. Instead, a report will be run several months following the exercise to see what progress has been made. Also compensation consultants will be directed to work with the schools/colleges/divisions assigned to them on this exercise. OHR will also look to see whether they can provide data looking at a year in the future to schools/colleges/divisions. They also discussed the Faculty Assistant salary issue. Adjustments to minimum salaries would be effective July 1. There are some other salary minimums that may be adjusted as well due to equity issues. Any change in the minimum would have to be funded by the units responsible for hiring. OHR will also be reaching out to the departments hiring the most Faculty Assistants to find out more specifically about job duties in relation to those done by Teaching Assistants.
Heather reported that over 2,000 academic staff started and/or completed the performance management survey. The ballot regarding changes to district sizes has over 1100 votes and will close on Dec. 23 at 4:30.
Guests: Dan Uhlrich, Professor of Neuroscience, and Brian Vaughan, Office of Legal Affairs
UW-Madison currently has a policy on research misconduct, but has been asked to re-write the policy by the federal government. The current policy is very confusing and is not compliant with federal guidelines or other institutions. Policy changes will need to be approved by the Faculty Senate because the policy is currently in Faculty Legislation.
A committee was charged with crafting the new policy. The new policy is a blend of federal requirements and the governance requirements that were found in the old policy.
Here is a summary of the proposed policy. When an allegation is reported, the Research Integrity Officer and relevant Associate Dean for Research make the initial call about whether the allegation fits within research misconduct. Research misconduct is fabrication, falsification and plagiarism. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgements of data.
If the Research Integrity Officer and Associate Dean for Research decide the allegation fits within research misconduct, then there is an inquiry committee that determines whether a further investigation is needed. If further investigation is needed, an investigation committee will be convened. This committee presents the results to Provost, and the Provost makes the final decision. The respondent can appeal the decision for substantive or procedural reasons. The appeal goes to the relevant appeal body. For academic staff, this would be the Academic Staff Appeals Committee.
ASEC will look at bringing this policy to the Academic Staff Assembly for an endorsement in February.
Guest: Michael Bernard-Donals, Vice Provost for Faculty and Staff
Michael reported that the Family Leave Committee has been constituted. They are scheduling a charge meeting for January.
There is a list of recommendations regarding the implementation of the Hostile and Intimidating Behavior (HIB) policies made by the Ad Hoc Committee on Hostile and Intimidating Behavior. Michael has put together a work group to push forward three recommendations including: new website, HIB liaisons and an educational campaign. The content of the website is nearly finished. He hopes to have it up in Jan. or Feb. There will be a test market for the site before it is announced broadly. In addition, he is working on setting up 12 liaisons across campus for those who have experienced HIB. The liaisons will provide confidential counsel and direct people to the appropriate resources. Educational campaign will mirror campaign for sexual harassment policy. There will be a small group trained to do workshops on HIB. He hopes to finish these three recommendations by August.
There is a current tool for bias reporting through the Dean of Students office. There is a bias reporting team that takes the reports and deals with them by a set of protocols. Faculty and staff can make reports of bias through this portal, and some do. In order to accommodate reports from faculty and staff, there may need to be some additional people added to the bias reporting team who are familiar with faculty and staff issues and the charge for this team may need to be tweaked.
The Retirement Issues Committee in Faculty Policies and Procedures (FPP) plans to work on the following issues during the current year and possibly into next year: revise volunteer policy, place retirement representatives on some FPP Chapter 6 committees, develop retirement incentives, develop peer mentoring system for those considering retiring, and streamline retirement process itself.
Lastly, Michael provided an update on the workplace flexibilities. OHR has a toolbox of flexibilities on its website. The next step is to ask units to look at what is available and decide what works for their unit. OHR plans to begin this step in the spring.
Business
• Liaisons for Hostile and Intimidating Behavior Reports
ASEC brainstormed names of additional academic staff who could serve as possible hostile and intimidating behavior liaisons.
• Nominating Committee Slate
ASEC asked Heather to send a survey to those who had expressed interest in this committee. They also would like to know of any names the Nominating Committee has to suggest.
• Concealed Carry Petition
Heather will draft an email that could be sent along with the link to the petition to all academic staff. ASEC will review this email at their meeting on January 5.
• Topics for the Provost
Updates on titling and compensation study; status of facilities committee, and performance evaluation tracking in SMPH.
Meeting adjourned at 3:50 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Heather Daniels, Secretary of the Academic Staff