Final Approved 8/5/10

Faculty Association

Meet and Confer

July 22, 2010

Administration: Earl Potter, Devinder Malhotra, John Palmer, Frank Harrold, Larry Chambers, Judith Siminoe, Lisa Foss, Kristi Tornquist, Loren Boone (guest)  

Faculty: Tom Hergert, Mark Jaede, Balsy Kasi, Judy Kilborn, Michael Connaughton, Bill Hudson, David Switzer, Susan Motin, Michael Tripp, Polly Chappell (note-taker)

Approval of Minutes

1. May 20, 2010 and July 8, 2010

FA: I believe that we have the May 20^th minutes approved, but not the ones from our last meeting on July 8^th.  

Admin: Greta and I were talking about that. Yesterday, I reviewed a set of minutes. The set I reviewed, I thought, were from May 20^th.

FA: They were. We’re still waiting for May 20^th. You and I still need to do the July 8^th. I started, but haven’t finished.

Admin: You haven’t finished?

FA: No.

Admin: Okay. You and I will talk about it on Monday.

Unfinished Business

1. FY12 Budget and Retrenchment Process (FA)

Admin: Since we’ll be sharing personnel information I thought that it would be a good idea that we have a shared understanding as to what will go into the minutes, what will be confidential, and what will be publicly shared. Obviously, I think the minutes should reflect our action, but the list of names should not be there in the minutes.

FA: Now, in terms of after the meeting, what information are we considering public and what shouldn’t we be talking about?

Admin: We agreed with respect to the press we can share numbers by college, not numbers by departments because there are departments where there’s only one and that would result in indentifying the person. We’ll give out the total numbers by college.

Guest: Yes, that’s what we agreed to.

FA: Everyone knows Loren Boone? Loren is here because he’s going to be dealing with the press on these issues, so he’s sitting in today.

Admin: Okay?

FA: Okay.

Admin: So, with that understanding, that the names will not be part of the minutes, let me pass out the list.

FA: There are several faculty still coming.

Admin: Make sure they know this is confidential. This is to share with members of your Executive Committee but because of the names them only.

FA: Yes.

Admin: As you look at the list, this is really an outgrowth of our conversation that we had on July 8^th, and our subsequent work in this area. Essentially, at that point, we had provided you with some of our best estimates. Looking at that information, these are the 29 names on the list that we think is prudent to notice at this point in time…

There was a moment of silence while the faculty read the list.

FA: There are obviously several departments which have several names listed. Including some where this is something close to 50% of the total faculty of the department. What’s the relationship between these decisions and the programmatic decisions about restructuring, the still incomplete process of the program appraisal?

Admin: I think this is really one piece of the broader puzzle. Obviously, as we move forward with this conversation we’ll have implications for these decisions also. So, as we constructed this list we wanted to embed in it sufficient flexibility so as we do undertake those conversations and as new information emerges with regard to which is pertinent to the overall picture, then we have the ability to come in and look at this again. After August 1^st we have the ability to take stuff off the table but we don’t have the ability to put stuff on the table.

FA: I understand.

Admin: Let me answer that as well. So, that’s true. If a program or department in initial analysis appears to be a candidate for closure or elimination or etc., then folks are noticed here. If, and this is the important understanding, there are probationary faculty in that department. So, the fact that a department doesn’t appear here, doesn’t mean none of the programs are being consider for… it’s… I have to be careful about my language here… We still have some uncertainty around notice by program or department, so a department where faculty teach across all departments is one situation. That’s a different kind of situation. If a program has no probationary faculty, they still might be a candidate for elimination. Factor that into a potential list from this. But if a department is a candidate, is being considered, then it was prudent to notice probationary faculty of that department to keep the door open. It does not signal that we have made up our minds about the actions that will be taken. It’s honestly and truly open. It will not occur until after our special meeting on campus. But, Devinder will put on the table a proposal to initiate that discussion. And the departments that will be included in that proposal are where it is necessary to notice probationary faculty. It’s a complicated picture. There are decisions to be made and we can’t back into the list of candidates from this list.

FA: I think I get what you’re saying, and I appreciate the difficulty of constructing the list of negative negatives, but I think I got what you’re saying. It would appear in a number of cases I don’t have the rosters in front of me, it would appear in a number of cases, the entirety of all of the probationary faculty in a particular department have been noticed.

Admin: That’s true. Other than one instance, we noticed all of the probationary faculty of a department.

FA: In the majority of cases that’s true. There’s at least one instance where that is not true.

Admin: One instance.

FA: Okay, one instance where that is not true.

Admin: LR&TS.

Admin: Some folks came in late. So, if you could inform them of the ground rules.

FA: This is confidential information. The only thing to be released from here is the number of individuals by college, not by department. Loren Boone here is managing the handling of the information. This is for us only. Stamped confidential.

Admin: And the names should not go beyond the members of the Executive Committee.

FA: That’s right.

FA: If the individual faculty contacts you…?

FA: If the individuals contact you, you may answer their questions obviously, but you can’t share the names.

Admin: If they initiate.

FA: Yes.

FA: I have had several contact me.

FA: I have another question related to this, but it is a separate issue about who was chosen. What arrangements have been made or are being made with regard to out-placement services, and when will such services be available?

Admin: I think that’s going to be stated in the letter, and it tells them who to contact.

FA: And is this someone who has been retained on this campus, or is it a MnSCU person?

Admin: This is a MnSCU agreement.

FA: Can you identify the consultant?

Admin: It’s a firm. I don’t have the information with me; I didn’t bring it with.

Admin: Monday, when we meet, I can get you that information.

Admin: I don’t see any reason why we couldn’t give the Executive Committee a sanitized example of the letter.

FA: I think that would be helpful.

FA: Then if we have questions, we know what they have.

Admin: By tomorrow afternoon I will send you a copy.

FA: Thank you.

FA: If someone asks me what’s the timeframe, are there any consultations, and that type of thing…

Admin: Let me take a shot at that. The contract requires that they be given notice so the language in the letter is very definite: your job is going to be eliminated. But as we noted before, the actual program eliminations, department reductions, those decisions are going to be made after a period of conversations with the campus community. So, it’s in those conversations about that timeline that people will have the opportunity to say, not so much “don’t let me go,” but the program will have an opportunity to participate in the conversations. The timeline for final decision, I think we shared that date with you.

Admin: We had some conversation at the Strategic Planning Committee yesterday about adjusting the timeline for Program Appraisal, but it will be the third week of September roughly.

FA: Wasn’t the third week in which we would have the forms?

Admin: So it would be the week after that; the end of September.

Admin: The fourth week of September is when the decisions are made. So, the time for… this can be taken as a signal that the program that these folks are in are under consideration for reduction or elimination. So, the period for discussion of the proposal to reduce or eliminate these programs will be the third week of September. And then the decisions will be made. So, if an individual wonders am I going to have the opportunity… it’s not so much the individual but the department has the opportunity to discuss the information on the program.

FA: Just to follow up. These positions are final? You weren’t going to consider them for discussion?

Admin: Essentially, after September, the decisions are final.

Admin: Provost, you referenced the document that was handed out on July 8. I do believe it is important to keep in mind that the piece we bring today is part of the model you described that has three dimensions to it. The dimension presented today is retrenchment of probationary faculty. There are two other ways in which we are hopeful for reduction in the budget, and therefore reduction in faculty lines. The one that is ongoing and changing is attrition. We will have attritions occurring all the way up to the start of the fall semester, and perhaps some additional attrition might occur during the year. In fact, there have been three resignations since July 8 that have occurred that would have added to that pool dealing with attrition. So, that one doesn’t have a timeframe in making a final decision. It’s the only one that doesn’t have a timeframe. BESI is playing a role here. That does have a timeframe because we do need to know for certain what the outcome of that may be. In my conversation with you, it’s still your hope that there are 80 reductions in faculty lines, hard reductions, is still a hope for you.

Admin: That’s true.

Admin: In a combination of the three?

Admin: That’s true. Given our best understanding of the information; that information hasn’t changed since July 8^th.

FA: You mentioned that BESI had a hard timeline. Could you talk a little bit about how that’s going to play out, and what kind of schedule you’re thinking about for that?

Admin: Actually as we… we want to roll out BESI in a fairly soon timeline so that as the conversations occur in other arenas that we get a better sense as to what the responses are likely to be. We are in conversation now to sort of finalize all the details. And, as soon as we’re done, we will definitely keep you informed when we roll that out.

Admin: A finer point on that. We will offer BESI to a targeted number of faculty, identified through the work which is described, on the first day when faculty return for fall semester. The people who will be offered BESI are in those programs that have been identified as candidates for reduction or elimination. And it will be offered to a much larger number than we need to get. My experience from Mankato, Mankato said they offered 80 and got 40. Our plan we shared with you on the 8^th suggests we hope to get 30. Whether we go two times 30 or three times 30 of the initial offer it is not clear yet. There are many more people who by their age and employment circumstances would be eligible. We’re not going to do BESI across the whole university. It will be a subset.

FA: Do you expect to target numbers within those programs for BESI?

Admin: That is one of the things we need to determine; where a program is targeted for elimination everybody will want it. In a case where there is excess capacity and we need to reduce it by certain percentage of faculty then the numbers will be lower.

FA: Do you know how you’re going to determine that?

Admin: No. The capacity study—has that been shared with Strategic Planning?

Admin: No. We’re still refining it. We talked about it yesterday, but there’s work that needs to be done. It’s still a draft at this point.

Admin: When the capacity study is finalized it can be shared with everybody. We can see which departments that are identified as having excess capacity. As it is I noted as we began to think about this number of departments with excess capacity it is smaller than what we thought it might be. In fact, we have more departments who are teaching credit-hour loads that are above the national average than who are teaching credit-hour loads below, which should be something reassuring because it conforms to the experience of the faculty that we’re working our tails off. That is generally true. There are departments where there is excess capacity. I’ll be even more specific. Some of the things that we are looking at are moving targets. So, for example, Philosophy, if you look at the numbers, its capacity, they have… they are fully utilized teaching in credit hours, but the faculty just approved, and the system has accepted, a change to our General Education model, which no longer requires that every student who graduates from here take a specific Philosophy course. We don’t know the impact of that option and what it may do to the distribution of courses that students choose. So, that’s a question mark in the capacity column. We will share that as soon as it is finalized and Strategic Planning has a chance to review it, so you can see what the numbers are. There are some areas where the departments have excess capacity; all of the programs that we have targeted for elimination. In another case, none of its programs could be targeted for elimination. That’s one of the inputs.

FA: So, one thing I’m hearing you say is that once you have a better sense of capacity you may offer to programs, say, we would like two or three early retirements using BESI? And then that selection would be based on if there are more people who want that, you’ll have some process at that time that will be used to determine how that happens, correct?

Admin: Right. So, in a large department where 10 people are eligible, our numbers suggest we need to reduce the number of faculty by two, there will be two positions available for BESI. At least 10 people are eligible. An announcement will describe the process. The options that are being discussed, and I am perfectly happy to hear from you what you think about the options first-come-first-serve, seniority, and lottery. If 10 people say I want it and all respond at the same moment…

Admin: Also, when we think of capacity it is both current and potential that the President mentioned, and I think that is important because as we go through our conversation with regard to programmatic cohesiveness and programmatic  consolidation; rethinking of some of the curricular basis of our programmatic offerings, our organizational structures; that itself will also have an impact on what the staffing would be in the newly configured, or yet to be configured, programmatic and organizational structures. That also may have an impact as to where we want to go with BESI.

FA: In some of these cases the large number of people who are on the notice list raises a question for me whether it would be possible to teach out the existing students if all of those faculty were asked to go. Have you gotten as far as thinking through that kind of thing, or is that something that still has to be worked through?

Admin: No, actually we have a little bit of experience in that area now because last year as you remember as part of our first phase of Strategic Program Appraisal we eliminated some of the programs, so we did set up some teaching arrangements, but that consideration is important, and it would be applicable in cases where we decide to eliminate the discipline and all the programs. But our commitment is firm that the students who are currently here, we will provide them with reasonable ways in which they can complete their educational objectives and their degrees.

Admin: So, yes, we have talked. Actually until we get closer to a decision, it’s going to be hard. That’s a very important consideration.

FA: I have a concern and I’m wondering if you thought of a plan or not. You have 10 tenured faculty in a department, no probationary faculty or you’ve already notified all the probationary faculty, and you tell them that you need two people you think for BESI and those people don’t want to take BESI. Then you’re retrenching tenured faculty?

Admin: If there are no probationary, no adjuncts, you’re stepping off this ladder and there are no lower steps. You’ve only got 10 tenured-track faculty left. The judgment has been made that we need to reduce two and nobody takes a BESI. Then retrenchment of two faculty is the option left.

FA: Is it your plan then to wrap up BESI hopefully before the deadline of notifying?

Admin: The response: we will give the eligible faculty notice on the day the faculty return. They have 21 days to consider whether they will accept BESI or not. We’ll have to wait the full 21 days. In most cases if we’re to come to agreement with them, and in some cases where there is only one position in a department and that person says I want to go after two days, we can actually come to agreement. But in other cases if two people decide and two people are still thinking, we have to wait for those two. So, somewhere between the day after the initial notice and 21 days we will have answers. The faculty have seven days then after they sign the letter to change their mind. So at 28 days the door closes. And we know what we’ve got and we have to take the next steps to balance the budget, which could then lead to letters of termination. We’re hoping that the initial step we take will get us to a point where we don’t have to lay off tenured faculty. That is at this point just a hope. But it is possible that can happen.

FA: My question has to do tuition benefit. For the faculty retrenched, once they are terminated, does that go away?

Admin: Yes. The benefit goes away. But remember their termination date is at the end of academic year ’11.

FA: Are you saying that there might be more tuition benefits beyond the standard…?

Admin: There could be. I’d have to take a look at the contract. There could be. I’ll go back and check that for sure, but it is also in the letters.

FA: Is that 28 days that you just described a requirement of BESI?

Admin: It is part of the BESI policy.

FA: That pushes pretty hard against the 20 days of classes.

Admin: I think just right now we are making decisions with not all of the information at hand as we proceed further depending on how and what sets of information we have. We still have to meet those contractual deadlines as we move forward. But then there is always an opportunity to come back and look at it once all the information is here.

FA: Are those 21 days, and the seven days after signing, are those duty days or calendar days?

Admin: Calendar days.

FA: Please be clear. If they took it as contract days…

Admin: In fact I think we have scheduled a conversation next week with the experts at the system level and we will clarify and reaffirm our own thinkings and our own interpretations so that when we roll it out we are giving you as accurate information as we possibly can.

FA: We went through SPA I, SPA II, then retrenchment. I’m not saying these are all connections, what is the effect on the cost? I can’t give the answer but I’m not sure. Going back to the three resignations and the part about attrition?

Admin: The number associated with attrition changes and I used that as an example that from last Meet and Confer until today I’m aware of three faculty who have resigned, which created three vacant lines. And the planning was if the line was vacant we were going to be consistent with the bargaining agreement and make it wherever possible using attrition as a way to avoid lay off. Knowing that attrition is an imprecise means of reducing the force as it happens not based on strategic planning but based on a happenstance of each individual’s choice. So, if you go back to the July 8^th document you’ll see an estimate of the number of faculty lines that would be lost as a result of the category of attrition. Some we know are certain. Some we know are faculty that we know their date of retirement because they entered phased retirement. So, some of that is the natural outcome of phased retirement. Some of those are positions that the Deans have held vacant for some time and used the salary savings for a variety of things. Some are fixed-term faculty that have been funded with those lines that are not permanently filled. Then some end up being the kinds of developments that occur over the course of an academic year where faculty member’s status changes. So, that number is going to move up and down. There are going to have to be choices made if it’s in the best interest of the university to not use those positions. That’s a variable that will change over a longer period of time than the variable of retrenchment of probationary and the potential retrenchment of tenured that are driven by a date certain, and with what the President has mentioned once we enter into offering BESI there’s a calendar that naturally unfolds. Now if in our planning the 30, which is a place holder, we do not attain that number it means that if that number is not attained before the notice of lay off for tenured, we may end up deferring lay off of tenured faculty in the year ’13 and spend the money because we have it. Which means we should communicate clearly BESI is going to be a one-year phenomena at St. Cloud State. We may have waves of BESI in this year. But once we spend the BESI money there is no more money.

FA: If there is a demand for the program can you be open…?

Admin: Let me answer that. We can’t segment our priorities program by program.

FA: I understand.

Admin: We have to look at the overall picture, and particularly in the current budgetary context. And, so, what happens is that as soon as a line falls vacant my tendency is to first look at the overall picture and have things in motion and then make a decision because if I make a decision as soon as a line is vacant I’m reducing all the flexibility that this institution needs. So, it’s a much broader conversation whether a particular program has demand at that point or not.

Admin: There is another part of your question I think should be clear. It does not mean because we’re doing all these reductions that we won’t hire anyone this year. It might be the case that we hire to address a critical need. If we do that the Provost will take a picture of how that lays in the whole university.

FA: Thanks for the clarification.

FA: I was under the impression at the last Meet and Confer that that was not just an estimate, and that it was an actual at that point how many jobs...

Admin: That’s true.

FA: … and that there might be strategic hiring.

Admin: These 30 will definitely be vacant at the end of this academic year.

FA: So, now its 33?

Admin: Actually, now potentially it could be 33. We’re still working on that.

Admin: The numbers you get are the best estimate at that point. Everything is moving.

FA: I just want to make sure I heard this because I’m aware of two vacancies in different places where I know there will probably have to be a need to rehire because of the need of faculty to teach the courses in larger programs.

Admin: Sure.

FA: And that you’re going to look at that. We will proceed with searches.

Admin: Sure. That’s true. At present set we’ve approved a line over the last month and a half in a program.

FA: Right.

Admin: What I’m saying is that under previous circumstances that there were not all these budgetary compulsions, all these conversation were not going on, there was a historical pattern where you bring in and the kind of information needed to make hiring decisions was much more limited. What I’m saying is that now that process itself needs a lot more information and needs a lot more thinking and it’s a lot more complex.

Admin: One of the linkages here you need to remember is that every position that comes out of a vacancy is a contribution to savings and goes into another column. It is either BESI or we need to fire someone else.

FA: I don’t know whether any of the people listed here and I don’t recognize any of them as NTTs. Have any notices been given to NTTs of not being rehired?

Admin: No. On this list, there are no NTTs.

FA: Now, does that mean that the decision has been made not to lay off any NTTs or does that mean that you just haven’t made that decision yet?

Admin: At the current time we have no plans to notice the NTTs.

FA: Are you still working on this?

Admin: Again what I’m saying, I’m telling you what the current thinking is. We’ve looked at the programs where some of the NTTs are and at the current point we are not planning on a reduction in forces there.

Admin: Does that mean that there will not be…

FA: On August 1^st we will know for sure whether or not an NTT gets noticed.

Admin: Well, we don’t have to give notice for NTTs by August 1^st.

FA: Yes, you do.

Admin: Okay. Right, right. That’s true.

Admin: I believe the answer, as I understand it, is that going through the process to prepare to meet the August 1^st deadline of notification that all positions were taken into consideration by the Deans.

Admin: Yes.

Admin: One of the requirements is that if a probationary faculty member is notified it does mean that we would have had to notify the NTTs. It’s my understanding that of the 12 departments who we’re notifying probationary faculty, none of those departments have NTTs. The President has reserved the possibility that between now and August 1^st there might be an NTT that is identified. I would be surprised based on what I know about the planning process if that were to happen.

Admin: The probability is very low.

Admin: As I said earlier we have no plans to notify NTTs.

FA: The Strategic Program Appraisal process is still ongoing. We noted that one step that at least for the most part did not occur for the second round, it did occur for the first round, the chance for departments to respond the Deans recommendations before those recommendations went to the Provost. And then of course there is your review, and there is the open hearings Strategic Planning will make, and President ultimately makes the decisions. Now I’ve heard you saying that that process is going to go on and that you reserve the possibility of deciding that some program that is currently a candidate for elimination might not ultimately be eliminated. Okay so far. However, by the point where such decisions will be made, even if you were to come to a decision that a department in which right now there are several faculty members who have been given notice, was not in fact going to be a candidate for elimination. You’d still have to come up with the savings, an equivalent amount of savings some how. I’m wondering how in a practical sense that could work. I’m looking at this and thinking that I believe that you’re telling the truth about your intention to carry forward with a good faith review and complete the process but by the time we get there, as a practical matter, we can only change our mind if there is another source of savings available. Isn’t that an accurate statement?

Admin: Yes. But what you don’t know is how much bigger than what we need is the list of candidates. So, the list of candidates is not… if you sum up the value of reductions in the list of candidates, it does not equal the target. The list of candidates is target plus some margin.

FA: So, the decision might be made to choose a program or department that has no probationary faculty members and therefore did not require notice at this point?

Admin: That’s correct.

FA: To be eliminated in September; and that could be an alternate source of savings if the decision were made not to eliminate one of the departments or programs that has probationary faculty?

Admin: That’s correct.

Admin: Just to add to that, you know, that is part of the problem when we’re trying to meet contractual deadlines and so we are forced to go piece by piece. So we try to retain as much flexibility as we possibly can.

THIS PART OF THE CONVERSATION WAS NOT TRANSCRIBED DUE TO PERSONNEL SPECIFICS

FA: I appreciate the explanation but I’m concerned that we’re now descending into mentioning departments, which I thought weren’t going to be in the minutes, and I’m wondering if that part can be expunged from the minutes?

Admin: Yes. Thank you.

Admin: I have a copy of the letter you were wondering about.

Admin: I can share that electronically. But just tell them about the question that they had about the credits which…?

Admin: 24 credits after the termination year for probationary faculty as well as tenured faculty.

FA: For them only, or their families as well?

Admin: Them and their families.

FA: Okay.

FA: 24 credits in the following year.

Admin: You can have a copy of this.

FA: Thank you.

FA: Year ’11-’12.

Admin: This is just the policy. I’ll send you a copy of the letter.

FA: This is a MnSCU policy?

Admin: Yes.

FA: So, it is online some place?

Admin: I think it may be online or it might be in the contract.

FA: In our contract?

Admin: Yes.

FA: Oh, okay.

Admin: That’s what they are entitled to.

FA: I wanted to go back to a piece of an earlier comment about the timeline for SPA. I don’t know if Lisa’s had a chance to talk to the Provost about Strategic Planning’s recommendation…?

Admin: This morning.

FA: You have had? I just wanted to speak to that. As a member of the FA, we recommended that that timeline be extended a little bit with the final timeline being… to give time to the departments to interact with the Deans. I think that is especially important since some of the programs recommended by Deans apparently haven’t had a chance to have a conversation. I think it would be a much cleaner process if we were able to have that little bit of time before that round of consultation.

Admin: It does need further conversation. We agreed.

FA: I noticed that the Dean’s recommendation for SPA II in June… it is very difficult to navigate through that share point. Not all the faculty are aware. In my college I have asked for that information, but not all the chairs can share this information.

FA: The FA can send out the link to faculty, certainly.

FA: One of the questions we’re going to get asked is: when do we know that we continue to be or not continue to be in danger of being selected for further retention announcements? Some stuff we can piece together out of the contract. That is, we understand that if no notice has been given to any probationary faculty by August 1, then no notice will be given to any tenured faculty within the same roster within the same year.

Admin: If they have probationary faculty.

FA: If they have probationary faculty. Right. If notice has been given to all probationary faculty in a department, then tenured faculty within that department know that they may possibly be in line for notice of retrenchment through the 20^th class day, which is September 20^th. There are some departments that have no probationary faculty members and barring any other information they would have to consider themselves as still subject to receiving notification of retrenchment until the 20^th. You have said that retrenchment notices would be limited to those departments and programs that were candidates for possible eliminated. I’m not trying to get you to say anything that is beyond what is true. I don’t want to give anyone false hopes or false reassurances; I’m trying to piece together whether there is a moment prior to September 20^th when some people can draw a breath of relief?

Admin: The date for my final decision is in the fourth week.

Admin: We originally set the date for your final decision as September 20^th very purposely. I believe the 20^th day is a Monday…

FA: If you’re doing BESI it’s the 21^st, right? You’re going to notify people the 17^th of August. September 15^th is the 21^st day. And then you said they have a seven-day window…?

Admin: No, no, no. It’s calendar days.

FA: I’m counting work days, not calendar. Sorry.

Admin: It ends up being the 7^th of September, which makes the 14^th of September the last day for the person who was offered BESI and accepted to decline.

Admin: But the person who was offered and accepted on the last day will finish the window.

FA: Right, because it is seven days after they accept.  

Admin: So if they accepted on the 7^th of September they could withdraw that acceptance on the 14^th. Which would in fact give information about the status of BESIs that have been extended and accepted on the 20^th. I have been complimented by the other side for being a truth speaker. I will be truthful. What I heard the President say about the 17^th is to my recollection the first time I’ve heard that date spoken with regard to BESI offers. I don’t dislike that date. It’s just a reflection of the fact that we, the Administration, are moving systematically through a series of tasks that are interrelated in making judgments in a priority sense. Today’s Meet and Confer was the last opportunity before August 1^st that is scheduled for us to share with you what we plan to do with probationary faculty. We’re extending our discussion now to talk about what we might or might not do with regard to tenured faculty. And that affects not only notice of lay off, but it affects perhaps tenured faculty that are going to be given a BESI offer. So, we’re extending beyond some of the thinking that is there because of today’s target.

FA: What I’m hearing is that it sounds as though the answer I was fishing for is, no, there is no date prior to September 20^th at which a department would know that it did not face potential lay off of tenured faculty unless it has probationary faculty and they were not noticed in August?

Admin: Yes. But let me qualify that picture. Just as in the first round, there were instances where the department said we want to eliminate this program. And we said, so do we. So, we very early agreed. There have been things in our conversation that emerge as shared decisions. So, it won’t be nobody knows anything until the 20^th. There will be a sort of merging understanding through out this conversation period. Having said that, your answer is still correct.

FA: And if I’m hearing correctly, you may find yourself making a decision about whether or not you’re willing to give notice on September 20^th about some tenured faculty member in programs on which a final decision about the program has not yet been made?

Admin: That is true. But I think, at this point the number we need is here (hand motion), and the number we’re noticing is out here (hand motion). By that point, the number we need is here (hand motion) and if we notice anybody that we’re not clear about yet, it’s like this (hand motion), not like that (hand motion).

FA: It will be interesting how the minutes capture that. (Laughter)

Admin: The discussion of anxiety raises another question with me, and that is there are 29 people on this list. There are by my count 80-some other probationary faculty who are not on this list.

Admin: Yes.

FA: Not sending them notification to them indicating that?

Admin: There is total of 117 probationary faculty.

FA: Right. Since notification is in fact going out in the mail tomorrow, have you thought about sending something out early next week to those other people indicating that, in two sentences, their name is not on that list? And the implication of that?

Admin: How’d you like to get that letter?

FA: I’d like to read it.

Admin: You got to open it.

FA: It is just a thought. I’ve actually been in this situation and for whatever it is worth I left before; I found another job. I realize it is just a matter of a week or two. This is not something that comes up but once in a career probably.

Admin: Yes.

FA: As I understand the contractual implications of that that means that their probationary appointment barring mal or misfeasance is valid at least until the end of the year.

Admin: There are events that I think will achieve the purpose you desire that. The President and the Provost are probably not aware of. And that is I’ve been interacting with the HR office that handles the processing of the appointment letters for the academic year 2011. So, every faculty member that is returning will be getting an appointment letter. Now, that provides the need to correspond with those folks with their appointment letter. And at the point of that correspondence, it could reaffirm that the August 1^st date is passed and they were not notified. The question becomes timing and as a routine practice that’s the case that that is happening.

Admin: At this point we’re going to have to take that concern under advisement as I make sure that anything we might say is appropriate and allowed.

Admin: I did want to add something, too. We can’t come out and directly say what we will do a time certain in the future because we don’t know at that point and we have to reserve the right to make those decisions in the intervening time. But I think you’re all skilled at listening to the sequence of events we’ve laid out. The President said that BESI is going to be used in a strategic way to reduce excess capacity and from a programmatic view. The President said that the faculty invited to do BESI are going to be told, and don’t hold him to the date of the 17^th as absolute, but on or about the 17^th of August. So, if you look at the list of 12 departments that are currently identified and you add to that list the departments which BESIs are being offered, you have a pretty good idea which departments and which programs we’re looking at for reduction in force within as the President described a window. Now whatever that window is, but we would be ill-advised and exercising poor judgment if we didn’t tell you that things might change and we may have to do something that is our right to do. So, will the department get a letter that says you got a do not pass go, do not collect $200. Some may get the card to collect $200 immediately. We’re not playing that game. I don’t think we’re going to write a letter to departments that says you got a free pass, you’re not going to be affected by this because what we do know is the entire university is going to be affected by the next item which is consideration of academic reorganization. So, you are very skilled at piecing things together and the President’s list of BESI is known on the 17^th of August, you have the list of probationary notices, and you put the two lists together and you’re not in either of those two lists, you’re probably pretty safe.

Admin: Probably.

FA: I don’t know if I want to open up this can of worms. However if probationary faculty come to me this year and say okay this is what happened this year, and we’re supposed to be going off the cliff in 2012, what do I say to them? Are we going to have to be thinking about this again next year? Because they’re going to ask that. They’re going to say to us, if we did it this year, are we going to have to go and take more cuts next year? I know that’s way out there, and there are lots of variants.

Admin: Well, let’s say a couple things. Obviously the state works with a biennium budget. So, the reduction figures that we have are for the next biennium and so it is probably safe to say that if reductions were taken for ’12 cover our budget requirements for ’13. However, a drastic change in the state’s budget picture could affect that. And the degree of uncertainty in the global economy has changed within this last decade. Part of what we’re going through is the change from a world when academic employment was guaranteed security to a world where that is not as true anymore. Most of professionals employed in this country live in a very different world than what we live in. Our world is getting closer to theirs particularly in this middle tier of AASCU institutions. They’re rare. The institutions that teach most of the students in the United States are hardest pressed by tuition and state funding. So, will this round of uncertainty and pain guarantee we won’t have to go through it again? No. Is it likely we’re going to have to go through this in ’13? No, it is not. How certain am I that we won’t have to go through it again in the following biennium? Um, it’s unlikely that we’ll have to do what we did this year. Is it possible? Anything is possible.

FA: So the BESI notices will be across the university, not just certain colleges, based on impact including the Strategic Program Appraisal?

Admin: BESIs will be offered in every college. But not to every person who is eligible across the university. It will be by program or department. There aren’t any colleges where you won’t see BESI.

FA: You mentioned that once you know these departments and once you know who is eligible for BESI, that will give you an idea. Are the departments that BESI is offered to, is that going to be public to the college?

Admin: This list is never going to be public to the college. Unless every single person on this list stands together and says “we are the people.”

FA: So, how are we supposed to know?

Admin: Likewise you will know. But it’s to the degree where it is a personnel action. We will be as circumscriptive of that information as we are with this. That X numbers are going to be offered to X colleges. I’m not sure what we’ll have to say to department level information because I don’t know what the numbers are. It will probably be a little more information than this because you’re going to be dealing with 80 or 90 people across the university who will be offered. So, we will share that information.

Admin: We could probably say how many are offered by college without giving names who they are.

FA:  How will faculty who are on phased retirement fit into this frame of reductions?

FA: Can you use BESI to shorten phased?

Admin: No.

FA: We discussed at Pre Meet and Confer about contacting the faculty…

Admin: I think the Deans are trying very hard because this is fast unfolding. They didn’t have much lead time because of the confidentiality and firming up the decisions. So, they are trying to, and where they can get a hold of a person they’re trying to contact them at home informally where they can. If they are unsuccessful in both, I have advised the Deans that then they should send an informal email to them explaining that they tried to contact them, they tried on the phone, and they might give them heads up as to what they can expect.

Admin: It’s most of the people who are out of the country. It’s a small number that we have not yet reached.

FA: Trivial question. Is the letter from you or the President?

Admin: The President. It’s not trivial. In order to be official it has to be signed by the President.

FA: Another BESI question. We have two numbers. We have the number of dollars available to use BESI and we have the target of 30. Which of those trumps? If you can afford more than 30, are you going to go for more than 30? Or if you can’t afford 30, will you go to 28, or do we know?

Admin: Yes. Bear with me. That’s a good question. As late as early June we were talking about having a million dollars available. As the Provost and Steve Ludwig nailed down what numbers we’re going to be required to achieve reductions, looking at reductions in the organization, looking at Athletics, looking at the non-classroom related structures, we began to get figures for that. And we began to get faculty numbers. And it was clear that we needed more money than we had available in our savings account, a million dollars. So I directed VP for Administration to go to the carry over funds and get the rest. If you look at the carry over funds, carry over is a very broad term in Minnesota’s language. Minnesota carry over includes the university reserves, which is about seven million, which have to be protected and there are contractual commitments to the faculty development fund which are firewalled. So, there’s about six million dollars of discretionary money from my point of view available in carry over funds that can fund BESI commitments. The pain that is going to result by my taking the four million dollars to fund BESI figures, the 30ish, if I have to take half of the remaining carry over, half of that is six-ish million to fund BESI that means I’m going to be damaging planning, damaging programs by reductions way passed any figure they ever imagined to achieve that BESI number. There may be more pain associated with that step then some other steps below the surface. We’ll be scooping money that’s been saved for a purpose, we’ll be scooping the money that people were planning on using for programs that they have already scheduled, and that money will support BESI. So, in understanding that we’re going to take the number of BESIs we need to solve our problem. We’re not going to say we got 30 to 40 there, let’s take another 10 just to be safe. Because the only way we can get that money is by doing damage to the university. That gives you some sense.

Admin: Please keep in mind, there is severance with BESI, it is not just full salary. That’s a part of that.

FA: So, you’re considering the 30 a relatively hard target?

Admin: Yes, relatively given the caution about the other… this is a four or five figure according and each other position in the equation there is movement potential there.

Admin: A faculty member of the top professor rank that notifies in a timely way gets a two step increase in their last year of employment. That then gets multiplied as their severance package. And we have not set those dollars aside so we would need to fund that. Extraordinary funding is a cost associated with BESI and then if BESI ends up being 100% of their increased salary that we were eyeballing when we said 30. Will 30 cost us four million? What I heard the President say is we’ll get what we need to get to make sure that our budget in 2012 is balanced. That does mean that there are going to be people at this table that are not going to be very happy because they thought they earned that money, it was their money to spend. And now the President said, no there isn’t; I’m the boss and I’m going to take that away from you if I can take it from you as discretion.

FA: We’re already unhappy. (Laughter)

Admin: The unhappiness spreads beyond the IFO members. It starts to affect all of the bargaining groups including excluded managers. I’ve sat through many a budget meeting where we talked about carry forward. People have a sense of entitlement to what it is they think they earned. And I heard the President say there is a priority here. And that priority is to bring the budget in 2012 into balance in a way that is in the best interest of the institution and that does include BESI.

FA: So, if I was granted discretionary funds… programs are not damaged per say and use that money to balance the budget?

Admin: Essentially yes and no. The simple answer is yes, but so we don’t draw any inappropriate conclusions we’re looking at sustainable budget. And if you remove all the discretionary money from a program that’s not a sustainable situation. The carry over is what we’re talking about. And that is not renewable discretionary money. That is balanced. It is carry forward. It is one-time money. Therefore it is the least worst, the least bad, of the available choices: to meet a one-time need taken from a one-time source.

Admin: In a way, the carry forward is really from fiscal year ’10. And it will still be carried forward but it will be carried forward for purposes of funding BESI, which will then impact FY12. So it relates the FY10 budget to ’11 and ’12.

FA: So, assuming we have a certain amount of carry forward and we decide to fund BESIs at a certain level that that doesn’t take all of that, will there be some prioritizing about what carry over stays with departments for what they originally planned to use that carry forward for?

Admin: Yes. There will be prioritizing. And the first priority will be to make sure that where the impact directly affects classroom activity.

Admin: At this point Steve Ludwig has three weeks to tell me where he’s getting this money.

Admin: I was with AASCU Presidents over the last weekend. One of the things I learned was the Oregon University system has currently written two-hundred-and-fifty pages of legislation to the intent of taking the system private. The state funding has declined to such a point that they feel it is no longer valuable to be part of the state funding.

FA: You mentioned about sustainable budget. In Chicago there was restructuring during the budget crisis in the 70s how to balance the budget and at the same time that’s very crucial. If we want to…

Admin: That is the reason for eliminating the programs and not just squeezing tighter across the array of programs we currently have. We’re at a point where in order to have a sustainable budget we need to make some tough choices. In the Athletics, that is really clear we have an unsustainable budget identified by the shape of our program.

FA: Anybody else?

Admin: I want to say one closing thing. I understand how hard this work is but I want to express my great appreciation to the work of the Strategic Planning Committee and all of the committed faculty who attended the workshops over the course of the summer. I’m impressed by the work. I’m grateful to direct the people who were there. The quality of the thinking is very solid and I’ve told lots of people. The Chancellor knows how proud I am of our faculty on this campus and doing this work together. Thank you.

New Business

Progress Reports on Long-term Concerns

1. Strategic Planning Committee Report (FA)

Admin: Let me tell you how this ended up as a progress report. It was consistently on unfinished business. It will be unfinished for a long time. So, Tom and I decided to put it under progress reports. If the co-chairs have anything to report they will report, otherwise we move on.

FA: I guess we could say a few things. Dovetailing what the President said we’ve had three retreats this summer. Very well attended. Pretty close to 140 faculty. I think very serious and hard work and people came up with a lot of creative ideas. At this point we’re looking at analyzing the ideas and coming up with the kinds of scenarios or models we might bring forward to the Provost to recommend, and let him see what he thinks. He would bring them forward at Convocation. We’re also starting to talk about, well, doing the planning for Phase II. Open forums. Including opportunities for students.

Admin: We met all day yesterday. The steering group in morning, and we met in the afternoon. We developed a process by which we’re going to get to those recommendations. The steering group is meeting all day on Tuesday of next week to work in small groups, and come together. We scheduled additional planning committee meetings the first week of August to review that body’s recommendations and the small steering groups that will be through the planning committee to get back to the Provost in time for him to review and prepare his final recommendation and present them during Convocation week. During Convocation week there will be two open forums scheduled. One on Wednesday, and one on Friday, which will be essentially round tables. They are open, the campus community can come and provide feedback on the different structures, what they like, what they don’t like, what they want to build upon. An initial opportunity for input. The planning committee will be posting those.

FA: The other element that we dealt with yesterday was responding to the request for the steering committee to look at the administrative and academic support units. We’ve asked for bargaining unit representation to come forward with names for that steering committee. We’ve come up with a set of suggestions about modifying questions. The steering committee is supposed to be looking at the questions that will be asked for those reports, and the list is very long. We’ve made suggestions that it be refined, shortened, and separated out, duplications gotten rid of, and so on. But we’re looking forward to that moving forward because there’s been a lot of interest in talking about the academic and administrative support.

Admin: We’ve asked for those names by next Wednesday. So, we should have those by next week.

Admin: I got an opportunity to interact with the faculty who were at the planning retreats. And I for one was very glad for the opportunity. I know we had a very active and vibrant question/answer session. I must say that I hope I gave as much information as I learned from that discussion. I was very, very impressed and very touched by the level of engagement and by the depth of engagement and by the recognition of these faculty members and their ability to understand the scope of the work which needed to be done. In that context, you are absolutely right, as we move forward the next challenge will be as part of the reorganization work that puts the two strategic program appraisals strength together so that a complete picture starts emerging. That will then help us understand the organizational frames which are associated with the new programmatic structures. So this is hard work, it’s hard for the faculty also because we’re asking them to get out of their comfort zones and engage in work where they have to question certain activities which were what they were asked to do. They have done a tremendous job. Now in this reconfiguring they have to refashion their own work and their own approaches as to how they will achieve their professional goals. I’m extremely happy and grateful for the level of engagement, and I look forward to our continued partnership.

FA: As you can probably tell from the questions, I think there is a fair amount of concern that we not separate out those two parts of the process from a concern that we are really behind in looking at the support elements. I think there’s still skepticism about the process and I think your presence there for such a long time each session and answering the questions really helped to make people feel more comfortable with the process.

Admin: We voted yesterday to meet weekly this fall. I think that can comment on the committee’s commitment to this work, well. That’s two hours every week.

FA: Is there meeting minutes available on the website?

Admin: The notes from the meetings are being posted on the share point site. They are raw notes. We talked about making that very clear because there are lots of ideas in the notes, and just because they are in those notes doesn’t necessarily mean they are going to be adopted. These were brainstorming information. So we want to be clear that they are unfiltered.

FA: We were really clear with the retreat participants. If you look through the documents you’ll see that there are various versions, possibilities that would conflict with one another. It’s not like one is the right version and one is not. It’s just brainstorming. We’re hopeful that the scenarios, the models that come forward, really indicate some clear choices, that they’re not just different versions of the same thing; that they indicate arranged possible ways that we could go.

Admin: The meeting minutes are on the website as well. The retreat information, and the planning committee, and the steering committee minutes are available.

2. Strategic Program Appraisal (FA)

FA: I don’t know if there is anything to say about this?  

Admin: We can take this opportunity if someone has a question.

FA: All those documents are up in the share point site and they are public to those of us who work here.

3. Report on Budget (ADM) (10/18/07)

Admin: Let me just comment on a couple things that I heard over the weekend. Some of them national issues. There are no new developments. The mood in congress right now is such that folks watching congress doubt that the Medicare funding that existed last year is going to be funded. The State budget there’s some four million dollars, I think that was the figure, that was in question about whether it was available to Minnesota from that fund. Governor Pawlenty elected not to allow the legislature to use that projection in any of the budget planning. Some states actually have; some 27 states that actually built their budget with the assumption that they will get the money. If it doesn’t come true, they have a really big problem. Back to the question, can we expect that this is going to be okay for awhile? For those states it is not going to be okay if congress doesn’t pass that. So, if you see in the news discussion about that, you know that that is not a risk to Minnesota. It appears that Minnesota understands its situation fairly well. You will hear to date about the gubernatorial candidates whether the hold for fiscal ’12-’13 is five, six million or ten million. MnSCU folks are still figuring it based on their report or projections and consultations with Commissioner Hanson that we were playing it correctly at around five to six. Commissioner Hanson had a recent conversation with the Board and the Chancellor about the state’s cash flow situation. The state is using MnSCU reserves as part of their cash flow solution. It is not impacting the cash available to our campuses. The commitment from the state is that the use of our reserves will profit. That’s an issue you’ll also see in the news, and that does not pose a threat to our operations. We still think the numbers we’re using so far are accurate and we don’t see anything rising to change that.

4. Status of Administrative Searches

FA: The Provost and I agreed that there really isn’t change on this. It’s just an artifact from previous agendas.

Admin: I will make a footnote. Dick Davenport told me that he now has 11 interims in his senior Administrative ranks.  

FA: So, when are we going to catch up? (Laughter)

Admin: We already caught up. About five, six years ago we had about 11 interims.

FA: Sadly, I remember. (Laughter)

Admin: Thank you.

Adjourned at 2:44 p.m.