Revised Minutes: Faculty Welfare
Committee – March 4, 2010
Meeting was called to order at
Members present:
Katrina DuBose (Chair), Charles Boklage, Archana Hegde, Linda Ingalls, Donna Lillian, Chris Locklear, Annette Perry, Susan Simpson, John Toller.
1. The
committee approved the minutes of the
2. Reported on the Faculty Serious Illness
Leave (FSIL) discussion that occurred in
Costs shared by John Givens at the Open forum may be more accurate, but even then these are estimated costs.
No matter how calculated the costs will be different on East and West campuses given West campus has doctors which are generating revenue through seeing patients and that will be lost compared to East campus that does not generate revenue in this same manner.
It was noted that we need to maximize benefits for faculty.
An idea was proposed that it would be beneficial in the future to know what arrangements Departments make for someone going on sick or maternity leave and also to better estimate the costs associated with these leaves.
Additional feedback from faculty received by members of the Faculty Welfare Committee and notes taken at the two open faculty forums were discussed. Member thought it was interesting that most of the conversation focused on maternity leave and very little discussion among the faculty regarding changes to the serious illness leave.
Appendix A has feedback from faculty members regarding the proposed FSIL changes that were received by members of the Faculty Welfare Committee (FWC).
Appendix B shows the comments that were given at the 2 open faculty forums on FSIL
After reviewing all the information a motion was made by Annette Perry and seconded by Donna Lillian to amend the motion that was passed by the FWC Feb 11th meeting.
“Based upon feedback from
individual faculty and various faculty constituencies in reference to the memo
of
MOTION CARRIED
3. Katrina DuBose reported that the recommended changes of to the Faculty Manual presented to the Faculty Senate were all approved.
This included Part V. Academic Information, Section II. Academic Facilities items A-G & Part VI. General Personnel Polices, Section III Institutional Services to Faculty items B-H, J-Q.
4. John Toller reported on behalf of himself and Melissa Nasea regarding Part VI section I subsections E, H & I. An e-mail was sent out by Melissa Nasea regarding the proposed changes to these subsections and requested a vote. During this attempt it was noted that there were many links and suggested that the links be minimized as much as possible. John Toller reported that currently all this information is not consolidated onto one page and it is scattered through out the ECU website, thus the needed for all the different links. John Toller offered that HR could create a web page that re-organized this information and have all this information on one page. Other ideas discussed included adding an item to ECU quick links, and improved index, and faculty resource page. FWC members were more comfortable with the proposed changes suggested by Melissa and John, but wanted to see what it would look like in context with current FM language. Lori Lee will send out changes to the FM for these sections and Katrina DuBose will call for an e-mail vote upon committee members reviewing these changes.
5. Annette Peery reported on behalf of herself and John Reisch that she is still looking for what other universities had for links to policies in the Faculty Manual. This item will be discussed further during the April meeting.
6. Archana Hegde and Katrina DuBose reported concerning their sections of Part VI.
J. Salary Policies – Keep; add link to Policy Manual, Human Resources and Payroll. Tentatively remove most wording in this section, but need wait in reporting to Faculty Senate as another group has been working on this as well. Katrina DuBose suggested having a joint meeting with them.
L. Travel & Expenses Allowances – Keep and revise. Delete most text and add link to parking and traffic services since they are the ones that oversee these provisions.
R. Tuition Privileges for faculty – Keep and revise. Remove outdated information and add link to financial services.
Motion was made by Donna Lillian to approve these changes to the Faculty Manual. Annette Peery 2nd the motion.
MOTION CARRIED
7. Donna Lillian and Linda Ingalls reported on behalf of themselves and Chris Locklear on their groups work regarding Part VI. Sections…:
V. Employment of Related Persons – REMOVE
VI. Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Policy – Keep and revise
Diversity, Equal Employment (Formerly Appendix
K)
East
Carolina University celebrates diversity among its faculty, staff, and
students, and promotes equal opportunities for all, regardless of race,
religion, color, creed, national origin, gender, age, sexual orientation, or
disability To that end, the Office of
Equity, Diversity and Community Relations develops policies in accordance with
federal and state laws, and with UNC and ECU policies.
VII. A Substance Abuse Policy – Removed and place in University Policy Manual
Motion was made by Charles Boklage to approve the proposed changes to the FM and Susan Simpson 2nd the motion.
MOTION CARRIED
8. There are still some sections of the faculty manual that groups were working on. Katrina DuBose will review who was working on which sections and send out an e-mail reminder. These sections will be discussed at our next meeting.
9. Quorum not present, so meeting adjourn without a motion
The next meeting will be held on
Respectfully submitted by Katrina D. DuBose
Appendix A.
Feedback from faculty regarding proposed changes to FSIL
Person 1
If I interpret the changes correctly, it sounds like the proposed changes reduces benefits. If that is the case, I’m not in favor. I’d much rather see us as be more progressive and expand coverage rather than restrict it. Being both a parent and having experienced a sibling deal with a serious illness, the reduction in serious illness leave, maternity, and paternity leave are disappointing on many levels. On an international scale, our maternity and especially paternity leave are paltry.
Person 2
A few comments about the proposed plan.
The proposal seems patently unfair to fathers.
If a mother adopts a baby she would apparently be eligible for 12 weeks paid leave.
If a father adopts a baby and there is no mother, why would he only be eligible for 3 weeks (21 days) paid leave?
I thought ECU did not discriminate on the basis of sex.
Also, if a couple decides that the father will be the main caregiver rather than the mother, it does not seem fair that the father is eligible for less leave than the mother.
I think the idea of requiring the leave to be taken in consecutive weeks is appropriate.
This appears to be a measure to save costs, but I think a policy that does not discriminate should be developed.
Person 3
Can you shed some light the decision for paternity leave to go from 15 weeks paid to 21 days (3 weeks)? I would love to see parity between the two. It seems strange that it is worded 15 weeks and the proposal is to change the wording to days. That could be so it seems like less of a difference when it is really a significant difference between 15 weeks and 3 weeks. Also, is anything offering same sex partners this protection when/if they adopt?
The Family Medical Leave Act is for 12 weeks, I think. So, going from 15-12 makes sense for fiscal reasons, but the decrease from 12 weeks to 3 weeks for paternity leave seems like a big jump in the wrong direction. Also, does serious illness cover a child and/or partner’s serious illness or just the individual? And, is mental illness under serious illness?
Person 4
The reduction of maternity leave from 15weeks paid to 12
weeks paid is a serious step in the wrong direction. The
Person 5
I think the proposed paid maternity leave is too much. Not everyone has kids, or chooses to have kids... and this is an added benefit that only applies to some people at the university, yet it costs the university a great deal of money, and colleagues are usually going to have to take the person's classes without hiring a substitute. I do know of other businesses/schools who have maternity leaves, and I don't know of any who have more than 2 months/8 weeks of paid maternity leave... if a person chooses to take more, that is their choice (but without pay). I don't know of any businesses who give paid "paternity" leave, but I think the 21 days mentioned is fair... but again, many of us will never see the benefit of these paid leaves.
As to extended sickness leave (paid), I believe that it should be 16 weeks (entire semester) - with the option of having a "sick leave bank" that employees can donate time to... many people do not realize that if there is no extended sick leave (paid) for employees, an employee (cancer-stricken, etc.) will only make 50% of their normal pay in disability. The longer the benefit time for an extended illness, the better - so if it can be more than 16 weeks - great... if not, I think that making extended sick leave at only 12 weeks (3 months) is not anywhere near what someone needs in this type of situation - especially those of us who are single, and have no other means of income. This is a benefit that ALL employees can benefit from, not just a few.
Person 6
Keep 15 weeks paid for both maternity/paternity leave and serious illness leave.
Person 7
A quick suggestion from someone in the sandwich generation taking care of my widowed mother and two girls. I came to ECU because my father was suffering from Parkinson's disease two and 1/2 years ago and I wanted to be closer to home and help out, but I commute to PA where my husband and children live.
I understand the tremendous costs involved in sustaining leave times, particularly where there are high wage earners, e.g. at the hospital. It is my belief that we should create a formula that would allow 100% pay for x amount of time for all faculty, but that then there should be a formula by which we calculate how much more time a person can take and how much they would be responsible for their salary. This would put the high-earning neuro-surgeon (who has just as much right to take care of a sick parent) on the same playing field as the assistant professor in history.
Since I do my commute and spend so much time with my mother, I have been unable to attend the forums, and I have been urged to forward my comments to the University Committee on Faculty welfare.
Person 8
I
write to you as Chair of the Faculty and Chair of the Faculty Welfare
Committee, respectively, to express my strong opposition to both the changes to
the Serious Illness/Disabilty Leave Faculty Policy
and the way the proposal has been generated by the administration. Furthermore,
I would like express my full support of the criticisms, assessment, and
suggestions contained in the memorandum of
Person 9
Thank you for forwarding this information.
Sadly, this new policy is a major step backward for ECU. Even in times of budget difficulties it is impossible to justify denying parental leave (yes, I use the word “parental” intentionally). It seems as if we have allowed isolated problems – mostly in the Health Science division, where many faculty are 12 month employees and not necessarily tied to the academic semester, to derail our entire campus. This is not a good thing. If the Health Science (or even just the medical school – or even just 12 month faculty) need a separate policy, so be it. We should not sacrifice the rest of the faculty because of their specific issues.
The Provost suggested that we save money by decreasing the “maternity leave” to 12 weeks. When asked what a 9-month employee who’s main job is teaching and research would do for the remainder of the semester in which she takes a leave, we were told that units could “make work” for that employee by “assigning other duties.” This is very disturbing.
First, they philosophy does not acknowledge the fact that as a university our core work (training students) is done on an academic calendar – not a 12-month calendar. Second, it leaves open the opportunity for misuse of the policy by unit administrators who want to keep classes on the book, hence coerce colleague of the person on leave to take overloads for partial semesters. (Yes, this has happen in the past – many times!). Finally (and importantly), it leaves the faculty member returning from leave at the mercy of her unit administrator. We have had multiple instances of unit administrators abusing employees by prescribing “assigned duties” that are in no way related to that employee’s contract. This “make work” does not to help the university and does a lot to hurt the faculty member. It in no way saves the university any money. In the case of a faculty member from the main campus who would normally be teaching on a semester schedule, returning from a paid leave a few weeks early to do unnecessary work does not save the university any money. A faculty member (and her family, the university, and our community) are much better off allowing staying off the entire semester. Why not devise a policy that is specifically tied to the academic calendar? This would not cost the university any more money and it would help reduce the risk to the faculty member returning on leave.
That said, if there must be a policy such as the one proposed by the Academic Council – one that institutionalizes “alternate assigned duties” – we need a policy that limits the types of duties that can be assigned to faculty. For example, requiring a tenured or tenure-track faculty to keep more than the required 5 offices hours a week (the number required by the Faculty Manual) should not be allowed. Neither should requiring that faculty member (who was hired to teach, do research, and do university service (service in an amount less than their teaching and research duties, as per Appendix C) to spend large amounts of time doing busy work for the unit. In my opinion, the only viable “make work” assignment for an employee returning from maternity leave in the middle of a semester is an assignment that focuses primarily on research and, secondarily, on course development (the improvement/development of one’s own courses!) and that does not require more than 5 hours per week of office hours.
Please consider proposing a policy that limits the type of assignment that can be given to our returning parents.
Also, please encourage the university to both (1) return to a policy that is BETTER than the national minimum standards set by the FMLA (our current policy is, indeed, better than the minimum required by law) and (2) award “parental leave” – not just maternity leave. To do anything else is both insulting to fathers and a disgrace for ECU (not to mention the fact that it will make recruiting good faculty even more difficult).
Finally, the FAMILY medical leave policies at other universities recognize other types of family medical situations – situations other than pregnancies. I have not completely read the new policy, but I do hope that we have not done away with family leave (for, as an example, taking care of aging parents in critical situations). This too would be a major step backward for ECU.
Thank you for the opportunity to give feedback on this new policy.
Group 1
The Department of Sociology is very concerned about the proposed changes to the "Serious Illness and Disability Leave for Faculty Policy". There are a number of issues in the proposed changes that we believe as concerned social scientists require further research and serious consideration. As ECU is becoming a more diverse community, illness, disability, and maternity leaves affect different populations differently, a fact to which our policies should be sensitive. Before accepting these changes, we urge the ECU Administration to task the Faculty Welfare Committee with determining the needs for these specific changes in policy, the impacts on all those directly affected by these changes, and the documented benefits to the ECU university community.
Group 2
At the Department of English Executive Committee meeting of February 24, the members unanimously endorsed the idea of asking faculty members to support the Feb. 9 Memorandum from the Women's Studies Executive, concerning the proposed changes to the FSIL policy. Thus, the following statement was emailed to the English department faculty and members were invited to respond "Yes" or "No" to supporting the statement, copied below. There were 45 responses, 44 of which were YES and one of which was a NO, from a fixed term faculty member who opposed it because she thought that it applied only to tenured faculty. (I have since explained to her that it applies to fixed term as well as tenure-line faculty.)
The statement:
The
members of the English department endorse and support the statement issued on
Appendix B. Minutes
from the Open Faculty Forums regarding the proposed changes to FSIL
1. Faculty Forum
Serious Illness and
Disability Leave for Faculty Policy
HSB Room 1345
Melissa
Nasea and Donna Lillian (representing Faculty Welfare Committee) – Overview and
History of FSIL Policy
·
Faculty
Senate Resolution #05-21 (Approved by BOT
·
Policy
being reviewed as part of review of Faculty Manual
·
December
2009 - Proposal for EPA policies committee recommends reduction in benefits for
maternity leave, paternity leave, from 15 weeks to 60 days paid for maternity
leave. For adoptive/foster or fathers,
decrease to 21 days paid leave
·
January
2010 - FWC and EPA Policies Committee – joint meeting in which they reviewed
and discussed the policy – Academic Council also present
·
January
2010 – Memo form Academic Council to increase maternity leave to 12 weeks paid
leave. Separate parental leave from
maternity and sick leave.
·
·
February
2010 – Faculty Welfare Counter proposal for decrease from 15 weeks to 12 weeks
paid leave for all of above (parental leave)
·
February
2010 – FWC meeting and Faculty Senate discussion
·
Feb
23, 2010 Faculty Senate, Vice Chancellor Horns reported that for East Campus,
there were 82 FSIL applications accounting for $2.5 million – concern that this
includes salary and benefits, which would be paid anyway, not in addition, with
paid leave – may need further clarification on the fiscal impact
What has
been proposed as the change from the current policy?
Jim
Mullen – EPA Personnel
Policies Committee was charged with making the policy more
fiscally responsible and recommended (60 calendar days) 8 weeks paid maternity
leave (and serious illness leave) and 21 days for paternal leave – now
compromise to increase back to 12 weeks for maternity leave and serious illness
leave (current policy is 15 weeks) – This all refers to paid leave.
Phyllis
Horns – Historically, came to 15 weeks paid leave in original policy after
scanning other schools in UNC system and ECU pulled out most attractive of
each. ECU has most generous policy
related to this currently. Most schools,
with medical schools, in the system now provide for 60 days since beyond this
qualifies for short-term disability.
Also looking at investment of the University related to this policy: In Health Sciences, for past 2 years
(2007-2009), the total cost related to this policy was $2.7 million. Academic Council is currently looking at
differences in cost for 15 weeks vs 12 weeks (cost
savings of $600,000 for past 2 years) vs 60 days
(cost savings of $1.2 million for past 2 years).
In terms of faculty member
replacement during leave, we generally do not replace those in clinical
practice during a faculty member’s leave as the cost of this hire is much
greater than the revenue that would be generated.
What’s
the logic of cutting the parental leave so much (decrease from 15 weeks paid to
21 days paid)?
Proposal
from academic council is to split maternal and parental leave from serious
illness leave – Faculty Welfare Committee supports this
Concern
re: continuity of the care – when does the leave have to be taken?
Whether
should be allowed during the 12 months
or immediately surrounding the event is being considered. All comments are being reviewed and no
decisions have been made. Maternity
leave for physical recovery of the mother must be taken at the time of the
event. Concern re: ,
for example, mothers giving birth in May, teaching 2nd session
summer school and then taking their 15 weeks leave in the fall semester. The proposed policy puts the decision for
approval of the leave with the benefits officer, not the unit administrator a it is HIPAA protected information. The University is responsible for covering
the employees work during their leave.
This is
more than just a “nice thing to do for faculty.” This is a diversity issue and way of
accommodating
and keep our faculty. Caring burdens fall mainly on women, but not
always. This impacts faculty recruitment
and retention. Agree that 12 weeks is
reasonable if a decrease must occur, but 8 weeks is not enough.
Look at
how we define “event.” “Event” may be
birth, adoption, foster care or loco parentis and may
include both parents. Adoptive or foster parents need just as much
time with the new child for bonding and assimilation of the family. Additionally, there may be faculty who are
taking the responsibility of caring for and rearing a grandchild, etc and they
also need time off to care for this new family member.
Hope
this policy will be discussed as being in the best interest of the child. The child needs care and time to bond with
parents. Example in Vanderbilt
University, have maximum number of days for birth, adoption, etc, which is
flexible in terms of if both parents work at university, mother may take 6
weeks and then father may take 6 weeks, etc.
John
Toller – overlap between various policies (Please see attached PowerPoint slide
“Faculty Leave
Options” – what if we treated this as a short
term disability for weeks 8-12 to save money?
Colonial has a supplemental short term disability policy (could be up to
2 years). FSIL would cover 100% salary
for 12 weeks, but short-term disability already covers after 8 weeks. Fathers of ill children get illness leave (12
weeks), but only get 3 weeks if child is well.
HR will put together this information to communicate all the possibilities
to faculty. We need to come up with some
real-life examples to help make the policy understandable.
May also be helpful to include
cost of the Colonial policy before sending to faculty – Becky Vaughan: purchase policy—pay beginning first day with
accident and 7th day with delivery of child.
Flexible in that you determine what amount you want to be paid while you
are out of work. Pays above and beyond
what your are paid in your salary. Payments are made directly to employee. Cost of plan is based upon what amount you
determine you will be paid.
Might help to have information to
show different situations – normal birth, sick child
Need to be sure to provide for well
children, not only sick children
Need to continue to track cost and
financial impact
What is
the process moving forward from here?
Faculty
senate to report to Academic Council in April.
A second faculty forum will be held on March 3rd in Bate 1026
from 12noon -
2. Faculty Forum
Serious Illness and
Disability Leave for Faculty Policy
Bate Room 1026
Donna
Lillian (FWC) gave overview /history as for
COMMENT:
Parental
(paternal) comment from faculty
1)
Realize
administration is preparing cost budget analyses, but this would not apply to
his situation as he did not go through the formal process/policy and he was
given leave in an alternative manner therefore “hidden data.”
2)
Recruitment
impact – dept of history – recruit internationally – not pleased to hear that
they do not get a sabbatical and often not pleased with research support
offered, etc – we need something positive to offer, such as a generous family
leave
3)
Faculty
morale for faculty with young children or in child-bearing/rearing age group –
we are looking at eliminating the one thing that is a positive for these
faculty/families
COMMENT:
Faculty
member who has taken advantage of policy twice over past few years -- Was at no cost to
her dept. Ethical and social facets of
the issue must be considered. The
raising of children is necessary work that benefits the whole community. This is not recognized in
COMME
NT:
Faculty
member – one reason took this position at ECU because of the 15 weeks of
parental leave (was offered other, better paying positions). Has benefited from this leave and if it is
taken away, faculty will leave ECU and look elsewhere for better benefits.
COMMENT:
Faculty
member with biological children, grandchildren and foster children and is a
department chair – as chair, receive no money to fund adjuncts to “substitute”
for faculty member on leave, but must ask other department members to cover
that faculty member’s workload. Was told
he must find funding from operating budget.
COMMENT:
Faculty
member – unintended consequences include annoyed faculty members who are having to take on more work for no more money as they
pick up the workload of the faculty who goes on leave for 12 weeks. He was entitled to take parental leave, but
chose not to do so, but it is an important benefit especially for recruiting
faculty.
COMMENT:
Faculty
member – Reports that some BSOM faculty not aware of proposed changes in
FSIL. This faculty reports that faculty
in BSOM say that leave in BSOM is “out of control.” Concerned that policy will be “put on top of
us (faculty outside of BSOM) because of problems with policy in BSOM.” Feels East Campus will suffer because of
problems in BSOM. It is hard for small
departments to cover workload of faculty on leave because charged for FTE of
person on leave and FTE for person hiring to cover their load.
COMMENT:
Faculty
member – leave last semester. For
biological mother, must consider breast-feeding and advantages of breast
–feeding, including healthier babies and therefore parents not having to take
leave to take care of sick children.
Propose a longer leave time.
COMMENT:
Faculty
member – Referring to Dr. Horns figures from Feb Faculty Senate – Costs and
lost revenue – academic affairs, avg $56,800 per
person in health sciences > $800,000 per person, but when compare to actual
amount spend each year of benefits. 0.78% academic affairs 3.2% Health sciences =
percent of money spent on parental leave – recommend look at campuses differently – East campus
should not be penalized for high cost rates on health sciences campus. Avg academic
affairs faculty salary is $68,000/yr – 15 weeks = $19,700 + benefits - so how do we get
$56,800 per person for leave?
COMMENT:
Marianna
Walker – Health sciences campus still are like academic affairs. BSOM is the main difference. Cannot completely separate East and West
campuses
COMMENT:
Vice-Chancellor
Phyllis Horns – There are differences in BSOM.
Glad to be present to listen and learn through these conversations. As a mother, is sensitive to this leave. Want to be as generous as is sustainable for
the University. Are
refining the figures given in the February Faculty Senate meeting.
COMMENT:
Faculty
member and member of women’s studies executive committee – 2 points in proposed
policy change causing concern – ECU 2nd to UNC-CH in what we offer
for paid leave – Proposed policy would have a restricted leave for adoption to
21 days, but adoption may actually require more time than natural birth – what
was rationale for that change?
Proposed
that leave must be taken right after the birth, but many teaching faculty on
9month contract -- peer institutions say “within 12 months of birth of child” –
flexibility is important. May need to consider separate policies for 9-month and 12-month
faculty.
From
faculty who could not attend, they wanted people to consider financial cost of
recruiting new faculty if faculty leave the University
due to this policy change – what is cost of search for a faculty member we do
not retain? If cut leave benefit, must
move forward with child care proposal
What
does it really cost us vs what are we gaining with a
paid leave?
COMMENT:
Need to
look at real data as to what this really costs the University. The figures reported seem too high. Must also consider
non-quantifiable date.
COMMENT:
Faculty
member – reiterate that figures given, while a starting point, must consider
that faculty benefits and salary would be paid whether on leave or not, so that
should not be counted in the cost – need what the additional cost is if that
faculty member is on leave – in her dept do not hire a replacement for every
person on leave, or if did, cost was ~$4,000 for that lecturer. Need to be sure policy is fair for everyone
– clinical faculty, etc