Faculty Executive Council Meeting Minutes

I. General

A. Call to Order

Rosemary Kesler called the meeting to order at 2:30 p.m.

Members Present: Jeff Andelora, Carmela Arnoldt, Joanna Chamberlain, Hazel Davis, Amy Goff, Alan Haffa, Karen Hardin, Rosemary Kesler, Rosemary Leary, Ann Lindner, Jane Marks, Larry Miller, John Nelson, Larry Williams for Joe Ortiz, Jim Reed, Janice Reilly, Mark Richard, Laura Ruiz-Scott, Dennis Shaw, Gail Shay, Denny Sheehan, Linda Smith, Vernon Smith, and Sandra Stuebner.

Minutes were taken by Carrie Taylor.

B. Approval of Agenda

Carmela Arnoldt added Peerpoint as Item 3 under Committee Reports, Rosemary Kesler added Legislative as Item 4 under Committee Reports, Sandra Stuebner added Dual Enrollment Ad Hoc Committee as Item 5 under Committee Reports.  Janice Reilly added Use of Attorney as Item A and California Academic Senate as Item B. under Old Business. Rosemary Kesler added 2001-2002 Meet & Confer Nominations as Item A. and 2001-2002 President-Elect Nominations as Item B. under Information.  Laura Ruiz-Scott added Drug Testing as Item C. under Information.  Jim Reed added an Executive Session to the agenda.  The agenda was approved as amended.

C. Approval of the March 27, 2001, Minutes

A change was made in the League of Innovation Support Statement section of the minutes.  The March 27, 2001, minutes were approved as amended.

D. Treasurer’s Reports

1.  March 2001 and Year-To-Date

Mark Richard reviewed the March 2001 and Year-To-Date reports.

2.  Proposed 2001-2002 Budget

Mark Richard reviewed the proposed budget for Council.  Council discussed various lines in the budget and funding for the budget.  A motion was made and seconded to reclassify the secretarial position.  A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously.  A motion was made to accept the proposed 2001-2001budget.  A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously.

E. Committee Reports

1. EBAC

Rosemary Kesler stated that a representative was needed to replace Oscar Hardin on EBAC (Employee Benefits Advisory Committee).  Regi Munro will replace Rosemary.  Rosemary told Council that at the last EBAC meeting, health care was discussed.  EBAC felt they had not been given adequate direction from the Governing Board as to what to do about the cost.  Council discussed concerns of what different employee groups get for health benefits.  It was suggested that Council contact Don Campbell and ask him to serve on EBAC as a Governing Board representative.  Council was reminded of Dr. Campbell’s inaugural address in which he stated that taking care of Maricopa employees was a priority.

2. Professional Growth

Rosemary Kesler announced that she had received in writing from Dr. Glasper an agreement to allow all Professional Growth funds to be fungible among all accounts.  She stated also that any unused money would be rolled over to the next year.  Council discussed concerns about Professional Growth travel monies.  It was suggested that conference registration money and travel money be combined to allow for more professional growth opportunities.  Rosemary Kesler stated that the Professional Growth MOU Team requested that the new process for next year be a pilot project and also requested that it be a “hold harmless” year since there would be many new changes in the process.  Rosemary Kesler stated that the Professional Growth Committee was looking at the sabbatical replacement funding issue and the need for policy language to address concerns of the cost of funding sabbatical replacements.  Council was informed that Reinhold Kiermayr stated that he would stay for one more year teaching full-time and could stay with the Professional Growth Committee.

3. Peerpoint!

Carmela Arnoldt reviewed what articles will be in the next Peerpoint which will be published and distributed in early May.  Carmela informed Council that she had a request from a faculty member asking that a response to the faculty member’s article in the Arizona Republic be published in Peerpoint.  Council discussed the request and the topic of the article.  The faculty member’s article was published in the Arizona Republic, as well as the response to that article.  Therefore, Council agreed not to publish the article in Peerpoint.

4. Legislative

Council discussed the need to see what the Arizona State Legislature does with the Dual Enrollment issue this year.  Rosemary Kesler informed Council of a bill, S2050, in the legislature that would allow faculty who retire to return to teaching full-time after twelve months of retirement and not lose their retirement money.  Rosemary was told that this bill is likely to pass.  Council discussed concerns of the 49% program being eliminated if this bill passed.

5. Dual Enrollment Ad Hoc Committee

Sandra Stuebner stated that she had many volunteers for the Dual Enrollment Ad Hoc Committee whose charge is to write dual enrollment language for the RFP.  She stated that she would like to have representatives from all of the colleges on the committee.  Sandra said that the committee would try to meet before the semester ends.

II. Work Study Discussion on Hiring Processes with Guests Dr. Phil Randolph and
Dr. Christine Hall

Council invited Dr. Phil Randolph and Dr. Christine Hall to the meeting to discuss the questions
and concerns of Council members about the current process of hiring faculty.  Christine Hall distributed copies of the step-by-step process to be used by screening committees when hiring.  She stated that the Deans of Instruction had been given copies and that Human Resources was working to put the process on the Web.

The first topic of discussion was why the faculty pools had been eliminated.  At the October retreat with the Faculty Executive Council, the Governing Board and CEC, it appeared that all parties were in agreement to eliminate the faculty pools, and it was done.  Discussion then focused on the advertising of faculty positions.  Phil Randolph and Christine Hall explained that the District does generic advertising and has placed ads in the Arizona Republic, other local newspapers, and the Chronicle for Higher Education as well as advertising on-line.  Phil and Christine said that the colleges have always been responsible for advertising specific faculty positions.  They said that the faculty pools were more generic so the District advertised the positions.  Now that the pools have been eliminated, each position open is specific and that is why the colleges are responsible for having to advertise the openings.  Phil and Christine explained that the advertising process had always been that Human Resources had money for advertising for the colleges to use, however the colleges were supposed to pay back the money and never did nor did Human Resources ask for the money.  It was discussed that many colleges did not budget for advertising.  Phil Randolph and Christine Hall were asked if the colleges were aware that they needed to pay for advertising specific positions now.  They responded yes.  Christine Hall acknowledged a process needed to be put in place to address this problem.  Phil and Christine discussed the current advertising with Council.

Next discussed was the screening of the applications in search for those applications that meet the certification standards or minimum qualifications for open positions.  Christine Hall was asked how Human Resources screen the applications.  Christine discussed the procedures with Council.  When asked if those who do not meet the certification standards are notified, Christine responded yes.  She continued that appeals are forwarded to the appropriate instructional council who sets the standards for the particular discipline.

The discussion returned to the advertising issue.  Phil Randolph and Christine Hall were asked what was the “red tape” in the process and how can all work together to eliminate it so that the District and colleges can advertise for faculty positions earlier.  Phil Randolph stated that the Governing Board will not commit to anything until they know what money is coming in and that is usually in late spring.  Council discussed the budget process and hiring faculty.  It was stated that a good deal of hiring is taking place earlier, however, the paperwork has “Pending Funding” placed on it.

A suggestion was given to have Human Resources hold workshops on this new process and go through the process step by step.  It was stated that all deans and department and division chairs attend the workshops.  Christine Hall stated that workshops on the process were held at the colleges last fall.  Another suggestion was made that the instructional councils should decide and then communicate to all what are the minimum qualifications for each discipline.  It was stated that Council should make the request to the instructional councils.

Discussion then focused on the applications.  Christine Hall stated that on-line applications are possible but parameters need to be set.  Council was informed that advertising needs to be posted with a posting number so that Human Resources knows to whom applications should be directed.  Christine Hall was asked if applicants are notified if their applications are complete or incomplete.  Christine responded yes.  Christine was informed that someone had been told by Human Resources that application status information could not be given out.  Christine Hall stated that she would fix that problem.  Council discussed with Christine Hall and Phil Randolph that screening committees need to have applicants’ transcripts forwarded so that they committee members can review what courses each applicant has taken.

Christine Hall informed Council of a recent project done where the information on how each college works through the hiring process was given and that this information will be put on-line soon.  Christine stated that she would like to put everything on-line to eliminate as much of the paperwork as possible.

Phil Randolph and Christine Hall were asked if the process was going to be decentralized.  Council discussed how the colleges were doing things differently.  One example was given of the Deans of Instruction secretaries making phone calls for reference checks on applicants.  Council discussed the time problem in the hiring process.  Council was informed that committees, with permission from the Dean, could call an applicant and let him or her know that he or she is the preferred candidate and that he or she will get a formal call from Human Resources.  Council was told that if an applicant calls who was not the preferred candidate for a position, the committee could only say that the preferred candidate has been called.  Otherwise, the District could be open to a lawsuit.  Council was informed that those applicants who are not offered a faculty position would get a letter from the District.  Discussion ensued on different topics such as responsibilities of the college human resource departments and the District Human Resource Department staff working with the colleges, as well as the problems with Peoplesoft that are being corrected.

III. Old Business

A. Use of Attorney

Council received copies of correspondence between Janice Reilly and Mike Napier regarding Mike Napier’s proposal for services on employment and personal matters.  Janice Reilly explained that Mike Napier outlined what services he would provide in his last correspondence to Janice.  Council discussed the proposal and its benefits as well as the costs and who would pay the costs.  Concerns were raised that the proposal was still unclear about what exact services would be provided by Mike Napier.  Discussion focused on concerns about presenting the proposal as written in the correspondence to the faculty senates at the colleges.  A motion was made and seconded to ask Mike Napier to write a contract in a bulleted format that delineated what services would be provided.  A vote was taken, and the motion passed with one nay and two abstentions.

B. California Academic Senate

Janice Reilly thanked Council for its approval to send her to the California Academic Senate conference in San Francisco.  Janice asked for a volunteer to go as Council approved two people to go to the conference.  Rosemary Kesler reviewed her experience at the California Academic Senate Conference last year.  Karen Hardin volunteered to attend the conference with Janice.

IV. Information

A. 2001-2002 Meet and Confer Team Nominations

Rosemary Kesler made a request for two volunteers to serve as the nominating committee to collect names and information on faculty who want to be on the 2001-2002 Meet and Confer Team.  Joanna Chamberlain and Dennis Shaw volunteered to be on the nominating committee.

B. 2001-2002 President-Elect Nominations

Rosemary Kesler asked Joanna Chamberlain and Dennis Shaw to collect names and information on those who wish to run for 2001-2002 President-Elect, Treasurer, Peerpoint Editor and any other position on which Council needs to hold elections.

C. Drug Testing

Laura Ruiz-Scott presented a question to Council.  She stated that the Paiute Center has a contract that requires mandatory drug testing of anyone who works at the facility.  The reason for this requirement is that the facility has childcare and after school programs where children are present.  She questioned if full-time faculty from her campus had to have the drug test and also wanted to know how other colleges would handle a similar situation.  Council discussed the reason for the faculty working at the Paiute Center.  Council agreed that if the faculty member was working at the Paiute Center as part of his or her job at SCC then he or she should not have to take the drug test as drug testing is not a job requirement at SCC.  Laura Ruiz-Scott was asked who received the results of the drug tests.  She answered that the City of Scottsdale receives the results.  It was recommended that the faculty working at the Paiute Center continue to deny participation in drug testing.

VI. Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m.

VII. Executive Session

The Executive Committee met to discuss a personnel issue.