MARSHALL UNIVERSITY CLASSIFIED STAFF COUNCIL
MINUTES
Thursday November 16, 2000
MUGC 319
President
Nina Barrett opened the meeting at 1:00 p.m.
Jill
Chapman made a motion, seconded by LuAnn South that the October minutes be
accepted as written. Council
unanimously agreed.
BRUCE
WALKER:
Mr. Walker
spoke extensively about SB653 and it’s impact on the colleges and
universities. He spoke about how
the system used to run under the Board of Trustees and Board of Directors and
how it will run under the new system. He
explained how, for example, Marshall University, would run.
The Board of Advisors is in charge of the University.
They have the duty to set up the mission for MU and draw up a compact for
the next six years. If we meet the
goals in our compact, we will get more appropriated money, to be used for
raises, infrastructure, or whatever. This
compact is due in February 2001, and will be adopted in May 2001. There was discussion about the Policy Commission and some
issues they will be dealing with such as the salary schedule and the Mercer
system.
Tanya
Bobo asked about the compact since she is a Board of Advisors member and has not
seen the first draft.
There
were many questions about how this would work and how this is supposed to give
more power to the institutions. In
theory, MU should receive a higher appropriation because we are so under funded
next to our peers. The Policy
Commission will have to decide over the next few months if we will have a
personnel rule for all institutions or if each institution can draw up it’s
own rules. Some institutions want
to make their own rules; some feel we should all have the same rules.
Margaret
Buttrick: Margaret spoke about the job classification
situation. She understands that, by
in large, people do not want to get rid of the classification system; but we
must remember that salaries will be based on peer information.
She feels that we will maintain the classification system, but pay size
will be different. The
committee has decided not to use job specifications or generic job descriptions
in the system. They have some old
ones written by Mercer that is recommended if you want to read about a
particular position. PIQ’s are
sent out from our office to every single campus sometimes weekly depending on
changes. Each office is to maintain an up-to-date file.
For this uniform classification that
tied to it salaries but with new legislation it puts the salaries over here.
I think you are going to see a maintenance of the classifications with
something different in the pay size.
(A)
Retain the current classification program.
Some feel they will move one step in 2001. Margaret felt that we will only move that step if
monies are appropriated for salary increases.
The committee will probably be taking their recommendations on salary
guidelines for faculty, staff and administrators to the Higher Education Policy
Commission in July 2001. If there
is no money appropriated, that Commission will not be responsible for moving a
person a step on the salary schedule. This is step one of our current salary
schedule with a 9% increase over the current dollar. This will take $13.4
million and the campuses will have to come up with the additional $9 million.
Everyone thought that every year you would automatically move but you do
not automatically move if there is no money.
(B)
Bifurcate the classification
program. It will work this way:
we will maintain a state-wide job evaluation committee who will review
PIQ’s, and decide on pay raises based on years of methodically.
Bifurcation occurs when paying these positions.
Examples were given with flexibility and merit. It will take $36 million
in funds and $24.8 State funds making a 25% increase over current payroll. The
9% over payroll which we discussed under (A), your institution will have to add
in 12% to 15% for benefits.
(C)
Statewide classification
with a minimum salary schedule by which we are being paid.
The salary schedule in the State Code would be a minimum salary schedule
for all positions, not based on years of service but what your campus could pay
or want to pay. So far, attachment
B has retained the most support. Attachment
C is what we currently use with the equity step.
What
they will do about the salary schedule is unknown.
Persons who are red-lined (meaning those that have met the maximum number
of years on the pay schedule) are being looked at so that they can receive some
kind of an increase. According to
market and inflation if it should rise 3%, then those people may get 1½%.
The Chancellor may set policy to standardize as much as possible
personnel policies across higher education.
Institutions need more flexibility.
I think you will see the elimination of Series 31, 52, 26 – all
personnel policies would be wiped out. One
policy would be written that would cover leave we
believe will be standardized by the Higher Education Policy Commission.
We do not think that WVU will get more leave than Marshall gets.
However, this is my opinion. I
believe you will see some things with Statewide policy like leave and other
things. Mrs. Buttrick
continued speaking about Federal laws, state laws, holidays which are in state
law.
Q: Martha Pierson – On the salary schedule does the Commission not
need to act on something to get something to take to the legislative?
A: Margaret Buttrick – I do not think they will act at this time on a
separate issue related to classification. I
think the issues will be folded into the items Bruce Walker spoke to and rolled
into one package. Most presidents
do not want to be tied to a funding situation over a period of years.
Since the compacts go over a period of 6 years, it is possible that the
funding will be 6 years too. No
answers will be available until the end of the legislation period.
Everything at this time is speculation.
Q: Ken Reffeitt – To make the best of peer groups, do they get a range or do them
together and divide by 10 and get an average for the ten?
A: Margaret Buttrick - What
they did on the peer groups was show a percentage that that institution was from
funding that they received per student. That’s
all they have done to this point. If they say that Marshall
is 90% of their peer institutions means that the money they get from the
state is 90% of what that peer gets per student.
Q: Nina Barrett – Do you feel that the president’s are leaning toward “B”?
A: Margaret Buttrick – I am not going to speak for the presidents.
I will state that I think option “B” is more popular across the board
at this point.
Thanks
were given Mrs. Buttrick for coming with her explanations of what lies ahead in
relation to SB653 and our new governance structure.
Nina
Barrett, president, and council discussed the information they had just
received. Nina stated that we did
not know what was going to happen with the legislature.
At this point in time, we don’t know how to elect our ACCE and Advisory
Board representatives. For
the last 5 months we have had speakers to advise us regarding SB653 but we still
do not know how we stand. We have
gained a tremendous amount of knowledge from them, but most campus personnel do not know what SB653 represents.
It was suggested that we find a way to inform more of the classified
staff what SB653 means to us. We
have tried to get our minutes published in “We are Marshall” but were told
they take up too much space.
INSTITUTIONAL BOARD:
Tanya Bobo stated the Board met on November 9th.
Dr. Angel had made a trip to Washington, DC with a whole bus loaded with
people to talk with the legislature. He
talked about changing the status by having more doctoral programs adding extra
dollars, the budget, B653, peer institutions, NCHEMS report on how under funded
Marshall is compared to other institutions and the transition to the Board of
Advisors into the governing board. Tanya
made sure the salary issue was addressed.
President
Barrett brought up a proposed Resolution from the Personnel Committee regarding
the Follett College Bookstore. This
resolution asked that a discount to staff, faculty and retiring alumni be
reinstated. The bookstore is
willing to give a discount but, we were told that the Ethics Commission believes
that faculty and staff discounts are an impropriety.
The Stadium Bookstore is a private bookstore and they do not have to
abide by the State guidelines. Marshall
University is a public institution and are responsible to the federal and state
regulations. Jill Burcham stated
the contract was sent to Charleston with the
discount but they sent it back for the discount to be removed.
Ken Reffeitt made a motion that the Resolution be tabled.
Motion seconded by Charles Harless and approved by Council.
LEGISLATIVE
AFFAIRS
– Ken Reffeitt reported the committee met yesterday. After much discussion
it was suggested that we prepare a list of items to bring before the
committee.
MEMBERSHIP/ELECTION
– No report with the exception of a list of all Classified Staff has been
prepared by Jim Stephens, Human Resources, for Mary Black to check and advise
him of any changes that need to be made. Jim
stated other changes could be made to help place every classified person at MU
on the proper list for elections and mailings.
Douglas Franklin stated it had been brought to his attention that 10-year
personnel should be recognized for their service.
Joe Wortham stated this will be brought to President Angel’s attention
and it is his discretion to change the rules to include 10-year employees.
President Barrett mentioned that the cost of this affair is already
between $10,000 and $15,000 for meals and awards.
PHYSICAL
ENVIRONMENT –
The committee did not meet. President
Barrett read the letter sent to Linda Bowen and Mike Bianchin about the
“trashed condition“ of the Henderson Center after a cheerleading event.
She has been assured it will never happen again.
SERVICE
COMMITTEE –
President Barrett reported that last month 3 get well cards were sent, 2 get
well flower arrangements, 2 sympathy cards and 1 sympathy flower arrangement.
OLD
BUSINESS
– Motion made by Jill Chapman and seconded by Charles Harless that the motion
for changing of the office term limits be removed from the table.
Council agreed. President
Barrett made it clear that she is in favor of term limits as she feels a
rotation of officers is desirable. However,
to accommodate MUGC, President Barrett was for changing the limits from 2
one-year terms to 3 one-year terms. Charles Harless made a motion that the language in our
Constitution be changed from 2
one-year terms to 3 on-year terms. Motion
seconded by LuAnn South and unanimously approved by Council.
Jill
Chapman is retiring from MU December 2000.
She has been an employee for 35 years and is a charter member of Council;
therefore, a new Parliamentarian will be elected next month.
Congratulations were extended to Jill.
NEW BUSINESS:
President Barrett announced Wednesday, November 22, 2000 is our designated extra
holiday granted by Governor Underwood per the vote by all classified staff.
No
further business, the meeting was adjourned.