Faculty Governance and

the Budget Process

Announcement

The faculty was not included in the recommendation process for either the 2005-2006 or the 2006-2007 budgets.  As a result, the following resolution of the Executive Committee was brought to the floor and approved by the Senate at its March 3 meeting:

Whereas the Faculty Guide, 12.2.g, states that faculty “shall have primary responsibility for recommending academic policy to the Board of Regents, through the provost and the president” and including “Consultation in the preparation of the University's budgets,”

And whereas the Senate is the duly elected body representing the interests of the faculty,

And whereas the faculty acting through its Senate officers has not been invited or present at consultations during the budget process for either FY 2005-2006 and FY 2006-2007,

Therefore, be it resolved that the Senate chair is to be included in all future budget deliberations and is to be placed on relevant email lists for all future communications regarding deliberations of the budget.

Be it also resolved that the Senate asks that Provost Travis and Sr. Paula Buley articulate the faculty’s role in the budget process for FY 2007-2008 and that this be sent in writing to the Senate chair by May 1, 2006. 

The Faculty Senate represents the South Orange faculty in maters of faculty compensation with the university administration.  As such the Senate has a responsibility to inform the Faculty on matters of compensation.  On that account the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, upon direction of the Faculty Senate, provides the following statement on current position matters:

The University embarked on a comparative study of Seton Hall South Orange faculty and peer and aspirant institutions of its choosing.  A study was conducted by the Sibson Consulting Company.  Median peer salaries by college/department, rank, and years in rank were collected by Sibson and were compared to SHU faculty data.  The University administration earmarked $650,000 in AY 2005-2006 in order to begin to bring Seton Hall faculty compensation levels in line with designated peer and aspirant schools.  (To learn more about the CUPA median see the “Faculty Salary Study” on the Faculty Senate homepage.) 

The Faculty Senate urged the university administration to distribute the $650,000 as follows:

1)      Using data obtain by the Sibson study, determine those faculty whose salaries are $6,000 or more below the CUPA median for their respective disciplines, ranks, and total years of service. Apply to the base salaries of each of these individuals $2,000. 

2)      Funds remaining from the $650,000 shall be allocated to the base salaries of all faculty, including those receiving the $2,000 increase in base, as a percentage of the difference between the CUPA medians and their actual salaries. All faculty members shall receive the same percentage of their difference, with no faculty member who is above the CUPA median receiving an increase in base salary from this allocation. The percentage of funding allocated shall be determined after the initial increase in base is paid and will reflect the residual funding. 

At the invitation of Provost Travis, the executive committee met with the deans and presented the rationale for the Senate’s distribution plan.  At that time it became clear that a number of deans were advocating for a distribution of the $650K based on performance/merit.  The Provost stated that he would weigh both options and make his decision by the end of February.

 At the Faculty Senate of March 3, 2006, the Provost announced that the additional compensation beyond the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for faculty who are beneath the CUPA median will be distributed according to the Senate's proposal, but that some faculty, approximately 1% - 2%, would not receive this additional compensation. 

According to the Provost, faculty who have not meet minimal performance requirements in the areas of teaching, service, and scholarship for the past three years, and for which their dean was able to provide documentation, will not receive the additional compensation from the $650K. 

These faculty members will still receive their 3% COLA.

 The Faculty Senate is pleased to be moving forward with the distribution of the $650,000 in compensation  monies.  However, the Senate argued strenuously against a plan that leaves some faculty out, especially without a process for those decisions that has faculty input or is supported by the Faculty Guide. 

In short, the Faculty Senate respectfully disagrees with the Provost’s decision to withhold funds for some faculty.  The Senate has long held the position that concepts such as merit pay and external review cannot be implemented until all faculty salaries are at the agreed-upon median.  In the interests of the faculty, the Faculty Senate will continue to work with the Provost on future compensation distributions. 

The Faculty Senate approved the following changes to Article 5.4b of the Faculty Guide, which changes the composition and size of the University Rank and Tenure Committee from 9 to 11 members and would now include representatives from all undergraduate schools and colleges.

"The University Rank and Tenure Committee shall consist of nine (9) eleven (11) tenured faculty members holding the rank of professor.  Each of the constituent schools of the university must be represented on the committee and at least three of its members shall hold tenured rank in the College of Arts and Sciences, two (2) of its members shall hold tenured rank in the School of Business, and two (2) of its members shall hold tenured rank in the College of Education and Human Services.

. 

Report from Ad Hoc Committee on

Ombuds Office

The ad hoc committee investigating the possible creation of an Office of the Ombudsman at Seton Hall recommended that a representative (preferably the Chair of the Ad Hoc Committee) be sent to the inaugural conference of the International Ombudsman Association, formed in 2005.  It is “the largest international association of professional organizational Ombuds practitioners in the world, representing over 500 members from the United States and across the globe.”  (Source: http://www.ombuds-toa.org.)   The representative would then report back to the ad hoc committee, which would make formal recommendations to the Senate at its June, 2006 meeting.

The Provost has since approved this request and will fund travel to and participation in the conference for the chair of the ad hoc committee.

Images: The Frick Collection - http://collections.frick.org

"The Arts and Sciences" - Francois Boucher

.