2010-11 Faculty CouncilRegular Meeting

The University of Texas at AustinMain Building, Room 212

Monday, October 25, 20102:15 p.m.

I. Report of the Secretary.

II. Approval of the Minutes.

A. Minutes of the regular meeting of September 20, 2010.

III. Communication with the President.

B. Comments.C. Questions.

Agenda

IV. Report of the Chair cont.

A. Sampling of Standing Committee priorities1) A-5 Faculty Welfare Committee (Rayan Bagchi, chair)

potential changes in UT benefits for employees and retirees increased teaching load for faculty monitoring the rights of lecturers and other non-tenure track faculty

2) C-5 Faculty Building Advisory Committee (Sam Wilson, chair) undertake a new Campus Master Plan: technical assessment of

campus infrastructure (power, data, chilled water, sewers, storm drains); need to assess existing inventory of buildings to consider if replacement is viable

increase inventory of general purpose classrooms; struggle to make sure that projects include >15 percent classrooms

academic units involved in building projects have powerful incentive to keep costs down, little incentive to invest in things that have significant impact on cost of operating building for its life-cycle (since campus pays the operating costs, not the units themselves)

3) C-11 Research Policy Committee (Paula Poindexter, chair) potential conflicts of interest in sponsored research with respect to

publishing and doctoral dissertations identify ways to provide support to the University’s undergraduate

research initiative address need for increased fellowships for graduate students

IV. Report of the Chair cont.

4) College/School Educational Policy Formulation will use survey to tool to gauge faculty’s

knowledge of, and satisfaction with, published college/school governance plans

5) Faculty Activity Reports (FARs): electronic system need to establish what document “of record”

constitutes annual report for purposes of promotion, tenure, and PTR

please provide comments about your experiences with the attempt to go “on line” last summer

V. Report of the Chair Elect.

VI. Unfinished Business.

Faculty Council Executive Committee Resolution on University Budget Issues (D 8432).

1) Believing that a financial crisis should not be addressed by doing harm to those who are most vulnerable, the Faculty Council opposes categorical firings and wage reductions of low-paid faculty, staff, and graduate students. We also support providing a living wage with health benefits for all UT employees.

2) We endorse the principle of slowing or postponing new construction and increases in administrative positions that inevitably result in reductions of departmental operating budgets, staff positions, and faculty support.

Resolution on Budget Issues cont.

3) We support a serious effort to eliminate wasteful or duplicative programs.

4) We support the practice of retirement incentives for faculty.

5) We support a serious study of the financial relationship between the University and its Intercollegiate Athletics Program to insure that the academic enterprise does not subsidize, either directly or indirectly, the Intercollegiate Athletics Program.

VII. Reports of the General Faculty, Colleges, Schools, and Committees—None.

VIII. New Business.

A. Election of Faculty Council Representatives on the Undergraduate Studies Advisory Committee (D 8423-8424).

B. Annual Report of the University Faculty Ombudsperson for 2009-2010 (D 8422).

Office of the University Faculty Ombudsperson

Office of the University Faculty Ombudsperson established Sept. 2004

Purpose:The Faculty Ombuds is intended to provide “visitors” with a prompt and professional way to resolve concerns, conflicts, and complaints beyond turning to their supervisors.

Visitors:The Faculty Ombuds is available to all members of the University with faculty and post-doctoral appointments.

Office of the University Faculty Ombudsperson Operating Principles

Confidentiality: The Faculty Ombuds will not disclose the name of any individual who has visited the office or issues that were discussed with anyone unless permission to do so has been given by the individual. The only exception to the promise of confidentiality is when the Ombuds has a reasonable concern about possible violence or physical harm.

Neutrality: The Faculty Ombuds provides impartial and objective assessments of any concern brought to the office. As a neutral third-party, the Ombuds is an advocate for equity, fair process, and the fair administration of process, but does not take sides on behalf of any individual or cause.

The office operations are consistent with the Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice of the International Ombudsman Association.

Office of the University Faculty Ombudsperson Operating Principles

Informality: All conversations with the Faculty Ombuds are considered informal and off-the-record. The Ombuds maintains no records (other than statistical data) and does not participate in formal grievances or complaints. Use of the office is strictly voluntary.

Independence: The Ombuds exercises autonomy regarding responsibilities. The Office is independent and is situated outside of the University’s normal administrative structure to better ensure impartiality. The Ombuds neither compels other offices to take specific action nor receives compulsory orders from other offices about how to approach a particular issue. The Ombuds Office reports directly to the Provost of the University (faculty) and Vice-President for Research (post-docs).

How Can the Faculty Ombuds Help You?

Listen to you in a nonjudgmental and objective way Answer your questions or refer you to someone who can Explain how University policies or procedures work Help you identify options to resolving a problem Help you evaluate your options and possible next steps Assist you in informally resolving a dispute or conflict by facilitating

communication, coaching on conflict resolution, or mediating between willing parties

Refer you to the appropriate office should you wish to file a formal complaint Look into perceived procedural irregularities in grievance proceedings Recommend changes to policies/procedures that appear outdated or

problematic Inform University officials about significant trends and patterns of complaints or

problems that appear to be systemic

The Ombuds can:

How Can the Faculty Ombuds Help You?

Take slides or serve as an advocate for any party Maintain official records Unilaterally change rules or policies Set aside a decision or supersede the authority of another University

official Provide legal advice Provide psychological counseling or therapy Participate in any formal grievance process Conduct formal investigations Provide testimony in any court initiated proceeding

The Ombuds cannot:

Consultations During 2009-10 Academic Year

Total of 58 visitors from 12 colleges14 Asst Prof, 15 Assoc Prof, 19 Prof, 9 Lecturers, 1 Post-doc

28 Female, 30 Male

7 additional requests for information Faculty Ombuds worked 7-10 hrs/wk fall and spring

semesters; 4-5 hrs/wk summer Most cases resolved without initiating grievance

process Extraordinary cooperation from Deans, Chairs, and

other Administrative Officials

Consultations Thus Far 2010-11 Academic Year

Total of 17 visitors16 faculty from 5 colleges

1 post-doctoral fellow Of these (8 cases closed, 9 cases still open) Faculty Ombuds continues to work 7-10 hrs/wk Extraordinary cooperation from Deans, Chairs,

and other Administrative Officials

Examples and Case Scenarios of Concerns Commonly Brought to the Faculty Ombuds

Have a question or a complaint about an office, service, or decision at the University

Need a mediator or help facilitating communication Perceived inequities in work or pay; treated unfairly Believe a University policy or practice is unfair or confusing Perceived unethical or inappropriate behavior Interpersonal conflicts and problems with workplace climate Concerns about career advancement & job satisfaction or security Advice on having a difficult conversation Problems of institutional non-responsiveness and red-tape Need an impartial and confidential sounding board Are not sure where else to turn for help

Generalizations and Recommendations

Choose actions that best demonstrate fairness and respect, and, where appropriate, advocacy for rewards.

…nonetheless, conflicts will arise (well-meaning bright people sometimes disagree), and most can be resolved amicably.

HONOR CODE

Under the Honor Code, each member of the University community is responsible for treating other members of the community, as well as visitors to campus, fairly, honestly, and respectfully as each of us conducts his or her function at the University.

How Do Faculty and Post-docs Contact the Ombuds?

Phone: 471-5866 e-mail: facombud@uts.cc.utexas.edu  Office: WMB 2.102 Web:

http://www.utexas.edu/faculty/council/ombuds/index.html

Note: An initial phone or e-mail contact typically results in a same-day response or a rapid arrangement of a mutually convenient time for a longer meeting or phone conversation with the Faculty Ombuds.

VIII. New Business cont.

C. Discussion on the budget and faculty involvement in budget planning and prioritization.

the “DPAC planning process”: Dean/Provost Academic Core, formerly Compact Process

the compact process “… results in a written agreement between the Provost's Office and the individual colleges and schools (Compact) that defines the issues, goals and objectives, plans and strategies, resources available, and specific activities to be undertaken for the coming year.” http://www.utexas.edu/provost/planning/compact/definition.html

VIII. Unfinished Business.

Discussion on the budget and faculty involvement in budget planning and prioritization

1)

2)

http://www.utexas.edu/provost/planning/naaw/ppt/10a-Armstrong-AcadAcct.pdf 

VIII. New Business cont.

Discussion on the budget and faculty involvement in budget planning and prioritization.

Possible questions to deans:1. Do you have a standing faculty consultative committee

on budget planning and prioritization? If yes, are the members appointed or elected? By whom? If yes, does this committee provide input before the DPAC

process is complete?2. Do you consult with departmental chairs on budget

planning and prioritization issues? If yes, does this group provide input before the DPAC

process is complete?3. Do you formally discuss budget planning and

prioritization issues with departmental budget or executive committees at their scheduled meetings? If yes, does this committee provide input before the DPAC

process is complete?

http://www.utexas.edu/provost/planning/naaw/ppt/10a-Armstrong-AcadAcct.pdf 

VIII. New Business cont.

Discussion on the budget and faculty involvement in budget planning and prioritization.

Possible questions to department chairs/ECs:1. Are you consulted by your dean on budget planning and

prioritization issues? If yes, do you provide input before the DPAC process is complete?

2. Do you have a standing departmental faculty consultative committee on budget planning and prioritization? If yes, are the members appointed or elected? By whom? If yes, does this committee provide input before the DPAC

process is complete?3. Do you formally meet and consult with departmental budget

committees on budget planning and prioritization issues? If yes, does this committee provide input before the DPAC

process is complete?4. Do you formally discuss budget planning and prioritization

issues at scheduled departmental faculty meetings? If yes, does this group provide input before the DPAC process is

complete?

http://www.utexas.edu/provost/planning/naaw/ppt/10a-Armstrong-AcadAcct.pdf 

IX. Announcements and Comments.

A. The annual Faculty Council photograph has been postponed. We will notify you once it has been rescheduled.

B. The annual meeting of the General Faculty has been postponed. We will notify you once it has been rescheduled.

C. The inaugural annual meeting of the School of Undergraduate has been postponed. We will notify you once it has been rescheduled.

X. Questions to the Chair.

XI. Adjournment.

The End