Approved by FS 3/23/10                                             FS032310 2.k

Delegate Assembly Resolutions Committee

March 3, 2010

In attendance: Michael Connaughton, Gary Whitford, Tracy Ore

Unable to attend: Michael Tripp, Anthony Akubue

The committee continued discussion begun at previous meetings of resolutions solicited from the membership. After finalizing the resolutions, the following motion was passed:

Motion to forward the following resolutions to Senate for consideration and approval (Connaughton/ Whitford) Passed

1. Changes to Language-Sabbatical Leave: 

Resolved: Changes to language regarding Article 19, Section C – Sabbatical Leave

Subd. 2      Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, in order to be eligible for sabbatical leave, a faculty member must have completed at least seven (7) years of service at the university, or have at least six (6) years of service since the conclusion of such faculty member’s previous sabbatical leave. Service at Akita counts towards satisfaction of years of service in this subdivision. Should more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the faculty on an FTE basic of any particular department or program be eligible for and request such a leave, the sabbatical(s) shall be granted in accordance with the following priorities: (1) faculty who have not yet received a sabbatical; (2) faculty whose sabbatical was postponed by this provision; (3) faculty with the longest service since their last sabbatical.  In such circumstances, the President/designee shall grant such leave to twenty-five percent (25%) of the faculty within the department or program on an FTE basis. (moved from end of paragraph) The granting of sabbatical leave shall be contingent upon the President’s determination that funds are available for this purpose and that staffing requirements of the university can be met.  Where sabbatical leave is denied, reasons therefore shall be communicated to the faculty member in writing.  However, the faculty member shall be granted a sabbatical, upon request, after either, a year of service following the conclusion of the faculty member’s last sabbatical leave.  Such eligibility is subject to presentation of a satisfactory plan in accordance with Subd. 3 below.

Rationale:

This would place emphasis on the need to utilize agreed-upon priorities for granting sabbatical leaves.

2. Health Club Membership:

Resolved:  That the IFO negotiate the inclusion of health club dues in Art. 14 [Insurance], Sect. F [Basic Coverages].

Rationale:

Given the high cost of medical problems such as cardio-vascular events, conditions related to being over-weight, and joint and bone conditions, increasing the general fitness level of those covered by insurance is cost effective.  In addition, a faculty with a higher general health level will use fewer sick days and will generally perform duties with greater enthusiasm and a higher energy level. Businesses and universities [e.g., MIT] currently offer this benefit to employees.   There is substantial research which supports the notion that physical fitness results in lower healthcare costs, especially for older faculty.

3. Responsibilities of the Chair:

Resolved: Responsibilities of the Chair (Art. 20, Sect. B, subd. 2).

Negotiate language which specifies that the department chair must communicate to the department in a timely manner all information provided by the president/designee.

Add an item to Appendix E Position Description for Department Chair:

Reports promptly to the department any information provided by the dean or other supervisor relative to departmental functions.

Rationale:

The Agreement currently addresses only the department's communication to administration passed through the chair. There is concern that deans attempt to use chairs as surrogate administrators by asking them to withhold information from departments, or by using chairs as the sole point of contact with departments instead of, as the contract defines them, conduits of information between the department and the dean.  This seriously undermines faculty prerogatives vested in the department as a whole.  Also, experience suggests that the Agreement needs to be as specific as possible in Article 20 (most aspects of which have been refined over the years) so that department members including the chair fully understand the chair's function as a coordinator rather than a supervisor.

4. Union Dues:

Resolved: Union dues should not be increased by the 2010 delegate assembly.

Rationale: Due to the poor state of the economy and members’ voluntary freezing of salaries, it would be unreasonable to raise dues at this time. 

5. Domestic Partner Benefits:

Resolved: as a top priority, negotiate a contract provision recognizing committed domestic partnerships (as evidenced by documentation), regardless of sexual orientation, as equivalent to spousal partnerships and eligible for all benefits.  [org. DA 92] 

Rationale: This is a slight change from continuing resolution 14.2000.1. We do not ask legally married employees to produce documentation, thus we should not ask it of domestic partners. Currently, there is no “legal” documentation available in the state of Minnesota. Furthermore, current benefits available to employees in legally recognized marriages amount to significant monetary benefits. The availability of benefits to one population of employees but not to another is in violation with state law as well as University non-discrimination policies regarding discrimination based on sexual orientation. Essentially, this is a matter of pay equity.

6. Public Relations:

Resolved: The office of the Inter Faculty Organization will produce accurate and timely information regarding faculty salaries and tenure in order to counter false images perpetuated by local media and legislators.

Rationale: In times of economic difficulty and hiring freezes, mis-information on faculty salaries and tenure can negatively impact public perceptions of higher education. In order to maintain public support for our important service to the state of Minnesota, it is imperative that accurate information be available.

7. Union Support of Faculty in Times of Restructuring:

Resolved: The IFO support faculty that are reassigned and/or restructured as a result of any administratively driven reorganization processes.

Rationale: Those in danger of losing their current assignments experience stress and anxiety. The IFO needs to find a mechanism for supporting faculty with the power granted it by the contract.

8. IFOSA Employees:

Resolved: The IFO pay all IFOSA employees at the state office and the local campuses from the same budget that does not come from the campus allocations. The campus allocation will be recalculated by a task force that will look at a fair and equitable way of allocating local funds.

Rationale: Local employees are paid out of the campus allocation and not every campus has the same staffing needs. For example Mankato has one employee at 75% (30 hours per week) who is entitled to all the full time benefits. Only the 30 hours of hourly pay and taxes are deducted from the allocation. St. Cloud State has two employees at 50% (20 hours per week) who are not entitled to health and other full time benefits. Yet 40 hours of hourly pay and taxes are deducted from the allocation even though the true cost of two 20-hour employees is less. This would allow for other campuses to hire employees if needed in the future (with Board approval). This will also eliminate some of the negotiation roadblocks that both sides face.