UNH Faculty Senate

Summary Minutes from 18 October 1999



              	       UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
                     	     FACULTY SENATE

OCTOBER 18, 1999                                       MINUTES SUMMARY
                                                       
                                                       
                                                       
I.  Roll - The following Faculty Senate members were absent:  de la Torre,
Draper, Macieski, McConnell and VonDamm.  Absent as work to rule were
Barretto, Carr, Christie, Echt, Garland, Givan, Planalp, Reardon, Roh, Stine and
Turner.  Excused were Nordgren and Williams.

II.  Communications with the President - The president said that UNH is
delivering high-quality experiences to students in its study abroad program
and that she will visit two of those programs in Budapest soon.  She discussed
an essay entitled "Where is New Hampshire", which states that the town is
central in the values of New Hampshire.  She corresponded with the author
regarding this issue; and he replied that there may be some movement at the
grass roots level towards increasing state-wide support for the university, but
that it may take a long time. 
                                                   
           
The president said that, at the last board meeting, the trustees agreed that "a
collective bargaining agreement can best be fashioned at the bargaining table
(as opposed to being presented in toto by one of the parties or by making a
public counterproposal to a previous proposal)."  The trustees gave new
instructions to their negotiator to "take a more open, flexible approach,
negotiating solutions within a small number of principles.  Those principles
include the desire for competitive salaries for faculty, a commitment not to
seek greater than budgeted tuition hikes, a recognition that there are costs in
addition to salaries that must increase (e.g. technology).  The trustees added
that "because a presumption of retroactivity is harmful to the process,
proposals should include incentives to resolve the impasse sooner rather than
later."

A professor responded that there is already financial incentive for faculty to
want the bargaining process speeded up since, even if there is retroactivity,
faculty will not receive any interest on the monies held by the system for well
over a year.  Another faculty member asked why so many months must elapse
for mediation and fact finding and suggested we should propose an explicit
process and time table for this.  The president agreed.  Another professor
recalled that the AAUP chief negotiator pointed out the many times that he has
met deadlines and the system office has not, but the system office gave the
trustees a list which highlighted each time the AAUP slowed down the
process.  The president will give to the senate a transcript of comments made
by the chair of the Board of Trustees during the last open session of the board. 
The president said that the trustees have spoken with the deans, who
emphasized the problems faced by the campus due to the lack of a contract. 
Among other things, the bad publicity causes a loss of revenue and
enrollments.

A professor expressed concern that trustees often do not seem to understand
the difference between the university and the other institutions in the system,
and he asked if the trustees have the data on the amount of money UNH brings
in through research grants.  The president said that such data has been sent
and that future changes in system administration may make a difference in this
problem.  A faculty member asked the president to speak out frequently on the
problems caused by the lack of a contract.  Another professor pointed out that,
although Keene usually gets an early collective bargaining agreement, when
the contract agreement at UNH is finally made, the same package is then given
to all employees in the system.  It was noted that, in comparison with salaries
at UNH, teachers at the other institutions are better paid now than they were
ten years ago.

III.  Communications from the Chair - The Faculty Senate chair said that three
faculty senators have recently been honored for excellence in their profession. 
These professors are Peggy Lamb who was recognized as the outstanding
associate professor, Marc Hiller who was honored for excellence in public
service, and Robert Macieski who received the Roland O'Neal professorship.
                                                   
      
IV.  Responsibility-Centered Management - The senate chair has distributed
information on responsibility-centered management; and he explained that two
recent modifications are that the VPAA will receive thirty percent rather than
sixty percent of the state appropriation and secondly that all the tuition dollars
for courses, rather than eighty-five percent, will go to the units.  Ken Appel
said that we must decide what questions about RCM are appropriate for the
senate to address.  He proposes that the senate look at how power will be
distributed and decisions made under RCM and compare that with the current
structure.  Under RCM, the colleges will be able to make their own decisions
about carry over of funds, but there are other issues which have not been
clarified.  Professor Appel suggested that the senate should not address the
matter of how much each college will receive.  What safeguards will there be
to prevent one college from making decisions which would be detrimental to
other colleges or to the university as a whole?  There will be a University
Curriculum and Academic Policies Committee which will work on such issues,
as well as possibly reviewing the funding for general education and the writing
requirement.  Will there be sufficient balances to the new powers of the deans? 
Those powers and safeguards need to be clearly delineated.  In November the
vice president for financial affairs and the provost will come to the senate to
discuss all aspects of RCM.  Senators are asked to review the information on
the RCM web site.

How will the provost be able to prop up areas which are deemed essential to
the academic mission of the university but which may not bring in sufficient
revenues to support themselves?  The RCM plan includes a review after three
years in some areas and after five years in all areas.  Final decisions will
continue to remain with the president.  All of graduate student tuition will go
to the academic units.  Professors are concerned that RCM will cause pressure
to increase the number of students in what were small tutorials and that this
would affect academic quality.  Also, some departments such as languages
encourage their students to go abroad, and this would not be in the
departments' interest under RCM.  What would happen in a small department
if its faculty mature and student numbers remain the same?  How would
interdisciplinary courses be affected?  The senate chair said that he will try to
get answers to such questions.

V.  Minutes - The minutes of the last meeting were approved unanimously
when modified so that the reference to Veterans' Day is removed, Professors
Grenier and Pugh are not listed as absent, and if the third sentence on RCM
is verified or deleted.
      
VI.  Motion on No Confidence and Motion on Moratorium - Jim Farrell
presented two motions as substitutes for the previous motion which the
senate chair ruled was out of order due to the senate constitution's ban on
voting on collective bargaining issues.  The motion labeled Faculty Senate
Motion of September 27, 1999, was presented to the senate for the first time
at the October 18 meeting and calls for a vote of no confidence.  The second
motion calls for a one-day moratorium on teaching on Friday, November 12.

Jim Farrell moved and Steve Bornstein seconded that it is the view of the
University of New Hampshire Faculty Senate that the actions of the
University System Board of Trustees and the Chancellor of the University
System of New Hampshire, in failing to accept the recommendations of
an independent fact finder and thereby failing to reach agreement on a
contract with the University of New Hampshire faculty, are undermining
the academic quality of the university, acting contrary to the academic
mission of the university, and damaging the academic reputation of the
university.  Therefore, the University of New Hampshire Faculty Senate,
consistent with its constitutionally mandated responsibility to ensure the
academic quality and integrity of the university, hereby asserts its lack of
confidence in the Chancellor of the University System of New Hampshire
and the University System of New Hampshire Board of Trustees.

Some faculty members stated that this motion is not consistent with item
nine of the Faculty Senate Constitution which says that "Collective
bargaining issues may be discussed, but no official action may be taken." 
Although Jim Farrell asserted that the motion only discusses academic
quality which is a purview of the senate, other senators pointed out that the
motion specifically refers to both the contract and the fact finder.  One
faculty member said that it is sufficient that there is a link to academic
quality.  Another professor said that the test is whether the senators and the
AAUP would feel that the motion would be in accordance with the senate's
constitution if the motion's meaning were reversed.  Another professor
agreed and added that the rationale should refer to the average faculty
salaries at similar universities in the region.  A faculty member pointed out
that he and many others have been careful not to compromise academic
standards and so we should not say that academic quality has been
damaged but only that there is the potential for damage.

Don Chandler proposed a friendly amendment to delete the clauses about
the fact finder and the contract.  Another professor said that, although she
wants to do something,  the original motion is guaranteed to be
misconstrued and also that part of it is unnecessary since the chancellor will
be leaving shortly anyway.  Jim Farrell said that, according to the senate
constitution, "decisions by the Faculty Senate which envision fundamental
changes to current practice must be ratified by the tenure-track faculty as a
whole.  If one third of the senators or the majority of the tenure-track faculty
of any college or school votes that a decision is of such fundamental
importance, a faculty meeting to ratify the decision will be called by the
Faculty Senate chair."  A faculty member suggested adding, to the clause on
undermining the academic quality of the university, the phrase "and
consistent with the statements of Bruce Keough".  The senate chair read part
of those statements to the senate.

Jim Farrell said that he does not accept either of the friendly amendments. 
Guy Petty proposed that "academic" be deleted from the phrase
"undermining the academic quality of the university", and Jim Farrell
agreed with that friendly amendment.  After much discussion, a professor
moved to table the motion until the next senate meeting, so that these
matters can be shared with constituents.  The issue will be near the
beginning of the next agenda, and the motions will be sent to the senators
on email.

VII.  Adjournment - The meeting was adjourned.
                                                         

to the main Minutes page.