35th Faculty Senate
Vol. 35, No. 5
November 16, 2000
I. Roll Call.
Present: Bange, Barmore, Barnd, Brooks, Cravins, Gendreau, Heim, Hench, Hollenback, S. Kelly, S. Krajewski, R. LeDocq, Majak, Marx, Monte, Senger, Stroud, R. Sullivan, Zellmer.
Excused: Claflin, Odulana, Tyser, VanVoorhis.
M/S/P to amend the 10-26-00 minutes in two places on pg 2. under Update on the Search & Screen for the Director of General Education: the last sentence in the first paragraph should read "Furthermore, in the list of qualifications, the committee is requesting permission to change the word "associate" to "assistant." Motion at bottom of page should read the senate endorses changing the word from associate to assistant in the list of minimum qualifications for the …
M/S/P to approve the minutes, as amended.
There was no chancellor or provost/vice-chancellor's report.
Discussion at the recent Faculty Representatives meeting centered on the
Marder Case at UW-Superior. UW-Oshkosh has made a motion to have system
toss out the case. Chair Bange indicated to the Senate that his opinion is
that without knowing all the facts of the case, we should stay out of the
matter. TAUWP is making an issue of tenure rights. It may well be
that procedures have been violated, but that will be up to the Board and/or the
courts to decide.
The Senate will meet on November 30th to continue discussion of budget issues. The agenda will also include a report from the Academic Program Review Committee regarding a schedule for reviewing programs.
Linda Host, the UWL representative to the UW-System Compensation Advisory Committee reported on recent meetings. The committee, composed of one faculty member and one academic staff member from each institution, meets bi-annually with President Lyall to advise her in the initial stages of developing the pay plan requests. They consider various financial projections and how our salaries compare with peer groups to determine how much to ask for realistically. They also look at drafting guidelines used for distributing the pay plan on each campus. From their discussions, it appears that a reasonable range for what will be asked for in each year of the next biennium seems to be between 3.8% and 4.7%.
Linda provided the Senators with two handouts. The first showed the percentage shortfall for the average faculty salary at Madison, Milwaukee, the comprehensives, the colleges and extension since 1997-98. While it appears that several of these groups have made significant headway, the comprehensives still lag behind. The second handout showed the average salary at each rank at each UW school compared to our peer group. Based on AAUP data, the handout shows that at UW-La Crosse, Professors are $4400 behind their peer group, Associate Professor are $1800 behind and Assistant Professors are $900 ahead.
Historically, guidelines for distributing the pay plan have been 1/3 cost of living, 1/3 merit, and 1/3 left to the discretion of the campus. Last year ½ of 1 percent of this final 1/3 was given to the Chancellor to address compression needs. This amounted to approximately 10% of the pay plan increase. This year they will likely use language to indicate that 10% out of last 1/3 can be used to address salary compression. This seems a more reasonable wording since we do not yet know what type of raise we will get. Using 10% of a 5.2% raise in this manner is quite different from using 10% of a 3% raise.
It appears that Katherine Lyall will likely recommend to the Board something closer to the high end of the range indicated as reasonable (4.7%) rather than the low end (3.8%).
It was noted that the Madison Initiative has helped to close the gap between the average salaries at Madison as compared to their peer group. It has also skewed the figures for the average salary across the UW-System.
Related to this discussion, Chair Bange indicated that a motion from the SEC had been distributed to the Senators. If approved, this would be sent to Katherine Lyall and the Board of Regents with a cover letter explaining the rationale behind the motion.
M/S/P that the faculty of the University of Wisconsin – La Crosse urge that the Board of Regents recommend faculty salary increases of not less than 6% and 8% for the first and second years, respectively, of the 2001-03 biennium, and that the Regents develop a plan by which the faculty of all UW System institutions will reach the median salary of their national peer group, as measured by AAUP or CUPA, no later than 2004. (voice vote)
IV. Report from Jodie Wagner (Chair of the Academic Staff Council) on the UWS Working Group on Instructional Academic Staff.
Jodie Wagner, Chair of the Academic Staff Council, is the UW-La Crosse representative on the UWS Working Group on Instructional Academic Staff. Jodie filled the Senate in on the background of this committee. It is a System committee charged with looking at better integrating instructional academic staff into campus community and to consider the issue of titling for instructional academic staff. Wisconsin is the only state that uses the term "academic staff" for people involved in instruction.
Wagner is a member of the working group that will recommend suitable revisions to the UW System on titling options to reflect national norms and trends. The working group has learned that the use of the lecturer term nationally usually refers to someone employed on a part-time basis or someone who only has a bachelor’s degree. Indeed, there are cases where the title has impacted negatively on persons seeking grant opportunities and job advancements. The issue is what to call other people working on campuses with terminal degrees. Preliminary results of the working group meetings indicate the titles teaching professor or research professor are popular alternatives for full-time instructional academic staff. And, depending on experience and other qualifications, these titles could then be broken down within each category: teaching assistant professor, teaching associate professor, and lastly teaching professor. Jodie will continue to keep the senate informed of any changes adopted by UW-System.
V. Recommendations from the University Budget & Planning Committee.
Assistant Chancellor Ron Lostetter explained the changes in the annual budgeting process and the composition of the Budget and Planning Committee. The Committee was charged to gather initiatives, review the proposals, and place them into categories for funding consideration. Lostetter reported that the proposals were placed into six different groups with Group 1-4 reflecting the highest priority. “Group 5 represents proposals that have potential funding from specific funds, mainly technology allocations to campus.” He indicated the Committee reviewed and grouped proposals independent of the amount of the proposals. He also reported that people submitting proposals do not know how much money is available for distribution at the time of their request.
01-01-01 Computer Replacement
Discussion on whether or not it is necessary to upgrade computers every three years across campus. The cost is $447,000, which is more than the total estimated salary savings pool. Senators suggested that perhaps the replacement cycle could be extended to five years for certain disciplines.
Staffing and Salary Compression
Lostetter explained that most of the money that would fund the proposals would come from salary savings, which until recently was money allocated by the Deans. It was apparent from the discussion that some senators were leaning toward keeping salary savings in salaries and not putting them into equipment, however there is a recognition of the need to strike a balance.
Chair Bange reminded the senators that we will meet again in two weeks to continue discussion of the budget and planning initiatives.
The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
Rebecca Lewin LeDocq
SEC At-Large Member