FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES

MARCH 4, 2004

Faculty Council met at the Faculty Club at 3:30 – 5:30 p.m. on March 4, 2004.

1.         Review of Secretary of the Faculty Position:  Professor Sally Rudmann, Secretary of the Faculty, announced that she would be resigning from the position at the end of the school year.  She encouraged those who were interested in the position to submit their names to the Secretary of the Senate.

Dr. Rudmann reviewed how she had experienced the position, which by Faculty Rule 3335-5-21 is a 50 percent position.  She noted that the position is still evolving.  The Secretary of the Faculty attends many meetings and is a regular non-voting member of the Senate, Senate Steering Committee, Faculty Council, and Faculty Cabinet. The Secretary of the Faculty not only meets on a regular basis with the President and Provost, but also with the Associate Vice President for Human Resources and the Vice Provost for Academic Policy and Faculty Resources.  Other committees that affect faculty development are attended by the Secretary of the Faculty as well. The Secretary of the Faculty spends a lot of time in the counseling and advising of faculty as well.  There is an incredible variety in the types of issues that such counseling and advising cover, and investigating these issues takes up more time.  Dr. Rudmann noted that many of the problems brought forth by faculty concern a unit not following its own rules, or the Patterns of Administration are so vaguely written, that there is too much room for interpretation.  Salary issues are the second most-important problem dealt with.  The Secretary of the Faculty can give input to Academic Affairs as to what hasn’t been working concerning salary issues, one of which is the salary appeal process.

Promotion and Tenure issues that do not have to go forward to the Committee on Academic Freedom and Responsibility are dealt with by the Secretary of the Faculty.  Some of the issues are more process-related and include health care benefits for faculty, workload policies, and salary recovery for release time. 

There appears to be a significant non-uniform application of rules and policies across the various colleges and units.   The Secretary of the Faculty does not serve as a mediator, and this became frustrating in trying to carry out the position.  Dr. Rudmann explained her role in the development of a mediation process which will be put in place over the next eighteen months.

Faculty Development, Faculty Work Life, and faculty health care and retirement are other important issues that Dr. Rudmann has been concerned with. 

Dr. Rudmann noted that this position has no clerical support, which prevented her from being more proactive.  There is overlap between this position and that of the Secretary of the Senate.  Dr. Rudmann next answered questions from the members of Faculty Council.

Faculty Council Minutes

March 4, 2004

Page 2

Dr. Gunther raised a question concerning consultative committees that were supposed to be established in the various colleges to oversee budget restructuring.  This is important to have in place because of the enormous discretion the deans now have over control of the budget.  Dr. Rudmann said this will need to be followed up on.

2.         Dr. Chism encouraged members to submit their names for chair-elect of Faculty Council.

3.         Extension Faculty Proposal:  Professor Mike Boehm presented the proposal to change Faculty Rule 3335-17-04 to include extension faculty under the umbrella of faculty governance.   He noted that there are 144 extension faculty who are regular tenure-track faculty.  The rule as now written disenfranchises these people because they are not in close proximity to the main campus.  The proposed rule change will correct this.  He asked for Faculty Council to co-sponsor the proposal.

Dr. Karen Bruns noted that the tenuring track unit is through the Department of Extension, which is through the College of Food, Agriculture, and Environmental Sciences.  Some faculty may have affiliation with other colleges, but the only department that has regular tenure-track faculty located in counties is the Extension Department.  It was noted that adding these faculty would not affect apportionment in the College of Agriculture, which is already at the maximum number of seven senators, but changing the rule will allow these tenure-track faculty to participate in faculty governance.

It was moved and seconded for Faculty Council to endorse the proposal.  In the discussion that followed, Dr. Boehm noted that some of the extension people do not follow the tenure-track path but are considered to be staff members.  Dr. Zimmerman, of the ATI campus, added his strong support for approval of this proposal.   Dr. Boehm thought that politics may have been the reason behind the rule as it was originally written. 

The question was called, and the proposal was passed with one abstention. 

4.         Provost Search Committee:  Professor Steve Pinsky, who was on the nineteen-member Provost Search Committee, reviewed the process and said that the names would be released the next day.

5.         Report on Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics (COIA):  Professor Dave Stetson explained that the COIA is an ad hoc committee from a number of institutions, institutions which spend a lot of money trying to keep the profile of their athletic enterprise high.  The members on the ad hoc committee are frustrated by what they see as inappropriate use of university funds.

Faculty Council Minutes

March 4, 2004

Page 3

There are legitimate concerns about the nature of student athletes, commercialism, and how athletic programs are run.  Their report supports the students.  The committee recommends that each institution have a faculty oversight committee of the Athletic Department, and Ohio State has such a committee in the Athletic Council.  There are parts of the framework that Ohio State feels it cannot accept, for example the anti-commercialism clause.  The Athletic Department does not receive money from the general budget, but, rather, gives the University about $15 million in various fees and in grants and aid.  This is possible because of the agreements the Athletic Department has with companies like Nike, who supplies uniforms and other equipment to the various teams. 

If the University does not support the report of the COIA, Ohio State will be conspicuous by its absence.  The Athletic Council has put together a statement showing support for the framework of the report except for the commercialism issue.  What the COIA prefers is that the Faculty Senates of the institutions endorse the framework.  Dr. Stetson asked if Faculty Council would endorse the statement of support prepared by the Athletic Council. 

Faculty members discussed aspects of commercialism and how it has affected the University.  One member suggested there could be faculty oversight on contracts over a certain amount of money. 

It was moved and seconded that Faculty Council adopt the statement of support for the COIA framework as prepared by the Athletic Council.  Dr. T.K. Daniel summarized that the statement is really an anti-trust issue.  It has to do with University prerogative as regards athletics and the student athlete.   The motion was passed with four abstentions and two nays.

6.         Fiscal Committee Update:  Dr. Richard Gunther said that Fiscal Committee was asked in September by the Provost and the Vice President of Finance to undertake a rigorous overview of budget restructuring after one year.  An ad hoc committee has been working on this and will report back to the Fiscal Committee on March 16.  He will report to Faculty Council on April 1, and then the report will go to an open forum of the Senate on April 8. 

7.         Research Faculty:  Dr. Chism reported that there will be an open forum on March 10 at the Wexner Center, co-sponsored by Faculty Council and AAUP.  He encouraged all members of Faculty Council to attend. 

8.         Issues still outstanding:  It was pointed out that Faculty Council still has some items on its plate, such as College POAs, annual review of Deans, guidelines for reappointment of Deans whereby faculty would be able to vote on the issue of the dean’s reappointment, response to President Holbrook’s federation proposal for the arts and sciences.

At this point, the meeting was brought to an end.