Oakland University Senate
Third Meeting
November 18, 1999
Minutes
Members present: Boddy, Braunstein, Buffard-O’Shea, Carter, Chapman, Coppin, Didier, Eberly, Eberwein, Esposito, Estes, Fink, Grossman, Herman, Hildebrand, Kleckner, Long, McNair, Mili, Mitchell, D. Moore, K. Moore, Pfeiffer, Riley, Rozek, Rusek, Russell, Schwartz, Sen, Sieloff, Speer, Stamps; guest: Lebeck
Members absent: Alber, Andrews, Benson, Blanks, Brieger, Dow, Downing, Early, Gardner, Marks, Mayer, Mosby, Nakao, Olson, Otto, Polis, Shablin, Sharma, Sudol, Wood
Summary of actions.
1. Approval of the October 21 minutes. (Braunstein, Sieloff) Approved as corrected.
1a. Motion to delete from the official minutes all record of the discussion occurring after the quorum call. (Moran, Russell) Approved.
2. Motion to revise the membership of the Academic and Career Advising Committee. (Sieloff, Moran) Approved following approval of a motion to waive the second reading (Moran, K. Moore)
3. Procedural motion to staff Senate standing committees. (Riley, K. Moore) Approved.
4. Motion to adopt an amended Senate Constitution and transition rules. (Andrews, Buffard-O’Shea) Second reading. Approved as amended.
5. Motion to amend the proposed amended Senate Constitution to delete the membership change to all faculty and to return to the previously approved 53 member Senate.(Herman, D. Moore) Second reading. Approved.
6. Resolution in appreciation and support of the university’s clerical technical associates and its hope for a fair, equitable and speedy resolution to the negotiations. (Eberwein, Stamps) Approved.
After calling the third meeting of the University Senate to order, Mr. Esposito called for approval of the minutes of the October meeting. Following Mr. Braunstein's motion and Ms. Sieloff's second, Mr. Moran moved that all record of the discussion that occurred after the quorum call be deleted from the official minutes. Mr. Russell seconded the motion which was approved as were the minutes as corrected.
Ms. Lebeck reported briefly on a proposed increase in the credit requirements for the Nurse Anesthesia Program. This proposal will be on the Senate's December agenda, she explained, and then provided an overview of the rationale for the change. She encouraged anyone with questions to contact her at llebeck@beaumont.edu.
Mr. Esposito then suggested that the Senate consider the two items of new business first and recognized Ms. Sieloff who moved to change the membership of the Academic and Career Advising Committee as specified in the agenda. Mr. Moran provided the second, and with no discussion forthcoming, Mr. Moran also moved to waive the second reading. Following Ms. Moore's second, the Senate approved waiving the second reading by the requisite 3/4 majority and then approved the main motion. The second item of new business, a motion to staff Senate committees, was moved by Mr. Riley, seconded by Ms. Moore and approved by the Senate.
Returning to old business Mr. Esposito called for consideration first of the amendment to the main motion that would change the membership of the Senate from the 50 specified in the main motion to 53 as originally approved by the faculty. As an update, Mr. Esposito reported that he has had no direct discussion with the Board but that there has been some consultation with the General Counsel with regard to the proposed preamble that the Senate rejected at its last meeting. In response to Mr. Russell's query as to whether or not the Board would approve the Constitution with a different membership than they wished, Mr. Esposito said he honestly didn’t know. After the last Senate meeting the President and the General Counsel discussed the outcome of the meeting but the information forwarded to the Board dealt with the issue of the Preamble and the Senate's unanimous vote regarding its unacceptableness. It has been suggested to the Board that one way around this may be for the preamble to be part of the Board of Trustee's consent agenda when the amended constitution comes up again for Board approval. This is to be discussed further. Mr. Esposito stated that he would raise the question of membership with the Board and make sure the Board is aware that the Senate is uncomfortable with eliminating the non-faculty seats. Mr. Grossman pointed out that if we finish this today and proceed to the hearing and vote of the faculty, this would all take place before any negotiations with the Board. Mr. Esposito agreed that it is perhaps premature for the membership issue. Mr. Russell stated that if we don't act today there won't be time to get this ready for the December Board meeting. Mr. Moore argued that we should pass it the way we want it rather than doing what we think the Board wants.
The motion to amend the proposal to delete the change to a 50 member all-faculty Senate and to revert to the membership previously approved of 53 Senators, including a student, an AP and the Provost was then approved.
With the main motion now on the floor, Mr. Grossman stated that the proposal to amend the Constitution was a bad idea last spring and is a bad idea now. He argued that shared governance works best when we share with others, citing the Senate standing committees as examples of this, and added that going to a faculty-only Senate defeats the whole purpose of shared governance. Mr. Herman reported that the AP Assembly has voted to include a faculty and student member to the Assembly. Ms. Buffard-0'Shea urged a vote in favor of the amended constitution. A majority of the Senators then voted in favor of the motion to propose to the faculty an amended Senate Constitution.
As part of the good and welfare portion of the agenda, Ms. Eberwein asked if there was any news regarding the negotiations with the CT’s. Some negotiating occurred last night, responded Mr. Esposito but no agreement has been reached. Mr. Moran found it distressful that the university is unwilling to meet the demands of the clerical technical union. Would a Senate resolution have any effect, asked Mr. Dow and Mr. Russell noted that the Student Congress had passed such a resolution. Ms. Eberwein, seconded by Mr. Stamps and assisted by colleagues with a number of friendly amendments, then proposed the following:
RESOLVED that the University Senate express its appreciation for the work of our clerical technical associates at the university and express its support for them and its hope for a speedy, fair and equitable resolution to the negotiations.
The Senate approved the resolution. Mr. Mitchell asked what impact a strike might have on students. Mr. Esposito replied that the expectation is that students will be able to complete their work and that the faculty will make every effort to make that possible. However, the faculty may find their work more difficult. Concern was expressed over faculty taking over clerical responsibilities such as typing tests. Mr. Esposito commented that he could see about getting help if it comes to that but stressed that faculty should do everything possible to ensure that students' work is not impeded. He added that the issue of the C/T negotiations is serious and distressing and that allowing it to impact student progress unnecessarily wouldn't serve either the students or the university well. Mr. Russell suggested that faculty may need to consider other ways of giving tests and evaluating student performance.
Mr. Esposito also addressed a rumor concerning a soccer stadium, stating that while someone has casually expressed interest in financing a soccer stadium, no money has been forthcoming. Should this come to fruition, it might also include changing rooms and storage facilities for lower field activities, reported Mr. Riley.
With no further business at hand, the Senate adjourned with Mr. Esposito wishing everyone a happy Thanksgiving holiday.
Submitted by
Linda Hildebrand
Secretary to the University Senate
12/7/99