FA-NEWSLETTER: Credit Hour Equivalency Update, yet again

February 19, 2013

Dear Colleagues,

As Provost meetings on Credit Hour Equivalencies progress, I am writing with an update on the process. One issue that Faculty members have asked about repeatedly is including ranges of credit hour equivalency for particular duties, rather than specific equivalencies. While the details will vary from department to department, Addendum B in our contract clearly states that amendments should contain “complete and specific criteria for credit hour equivalencies for contact hours and/or for indirect teaching.” (Addendum B., section A). Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as a specific “range of equivalencies.” We have also received several requests for approved CHE models. If you would like to see a copy of an amendment approved at the Provost’s level, or have questions about issues raised in your meeting with the Provost, please contact our Credit Hour Equivalency point-person Ryan Netzley, at ranetzley@gmail.com.
Dear Colleagues,

As Provost meetings on Credit Hour Equivalencies progress, I am writing with an update on the process. One issue that Faculty members have asked about repeatedly is including ranges of credit hour equivalency for particular duties, rather than specific equivalencies. While the details will vary from department to department, Addendum B in our contract clearly states that amendments should contain “complete and specific criteria for credit hour equivalencies for contact hours and/or for indirect teaching.” (Addendum B., section A). Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as a specific “range of equivalencies.” We have also received several requests for approved CHE models. If you would like to see a copy of an amendment approved at the Provost’s level, or have questions about issues raised in your meeting with the Provost, please contact our Credit Hour Equivalency point-person Ryan Netzley, at ranetzley@gmail.com.

To clarify the next steps in the process: If your department doesn’t reach an agreement with the Provost on a modified amendment, your department’s amendment will be negotiated by 5-person bargaining teams from the Faculty Association and the University, beginning in March. A Faculty representative from the department will be able to attend the bargaining session(s) concerning their amendment as a consultant to the Association team. Any amendments that are not agreed upon in the bargaining process will then go to an arbitration panel made up of three people from outside the University (one appointed by the FA, one appointed by the Administration, and an arbitrator from the American Arbitration Association). The decision of that panel will be final.

The Faculty Association is committed to ensuring Faculty participation in the bargaining process, and our goal is to complete that phase before summer break (although at this point, since we do not know how many amendments will be negotiated, we can’t predict the full length of the process). We are also committed to supporting departments in the decisions they make as part of this process because it is the Faculty members who have the expertise and qualifications necessary to evaluate these matters.

Thank you for all your work on this,

Rachel Stocking

SIUC Faculty Association President

Filed under Older Posts Tagged with

The First Faculty Association TGIF party of 2013!

February 4, 2013

Eat, drink, and compare notes with colleagues about what’s happening on campus. Meet people you don’t know!

Date: Friday, February 8, 2013

Time: 5 to 7 p.m.

Place: The Newell House downstairs (“The Grotto,”) at 201 E. Main Street, corner of Washington and Main.
Free appetizers and one free drink ticket.

Filed under Older Posts Tagged with

FA-NEWSLETTER-1/24/2013: Credit Hour Equivalency Update

January 25, 2013

Dear Colleagues
Welcome back! In addition to wishing you a productive semester, I’m writing to give you a brief update on the status of the Credit Hour Equivalency operating paper amendment process.  Between now and February 28 the Provost should be holding meetings with Faculty in departments whose amendments he did not approve last semester.  If your department hasn’t received a request for a meeting to be scheduled, you can contact his office to make arrangements.  These meetings should not be scheduled by your chair or interim chair.The next step after meeting with the provost is as follows: if your meeting with the Provost results in an agreement on a modified amendment, the tenured and tenure-track Faculty should hold a vote on accepting that modified amendment and inform the Provost of the results.  If there is no agreement, or if the modified amendment is not approved by the department Faculty, then the Provost will notify the Faculty Association that bargaining committees should be formed to try to reach agreement on the amendment. At that point, the FA will contact your department to discuss the bargaining process. In the interim, the FA will assist in department planning for meetings with the provost and responses thereto. Please contact Ryan Netzley (ranetzley@gmail.com) with any questions on this issue.  You might also consult the CHE wiki for department and campus-wide updates on the process: http://siuche.wikidot.com/.

The deadlines for the Faculty vote, and the Provost’s notification to the Association have not been reset since the extension of the deadline for the Provost meetings.  The Association Executive Committee has scheduled a meeting next week to discuss the new deadlines with the Provost’s office, and I will send out a new message then to let you know what they are.

Thank you for your time and work on this,
Rachel Stocking
Faculty Association President

Filed under Older Posts Tagged with

FA newsletter 12/2/2012: Next Steps on CHE Amendments

December 2, 2012

Dear Colleagues,

As you may already know, Provost Nicklow has approved only a very small proportion of the Credit Hour Equivalency amendments to departmental Operating Papers at SIUC.  Some departments have received messages indicating that he is offering to communicate “in writing about suggested modifications,” rather than holding a meeting, or that he is designating another individual to meet with Faculty–in other words,  sidestepping the contractual process. Addendum B  clearly indicates that the next step after a Provost non-approval is for the Provost (himself) to meet with the department Faculty. We urge you to follow the contractually mandated sequence and proceed with these meetings, whether or not the provost has offered a different option. Please let us know if you encounter problems in achieving this. We know that you have worked hard on these amendments, and they deserve the administrative attention mandated in Addendum B.

The meeting with the Provost is not the last step in this process.  According to new deadlines agreed upon this past summer, the meetings with the Provost should occur by December 14. The next steps are:

  •  If the meeting with the Provost results in a “proposed modified amendment,” then that modified amendment will be voted on by department tenured and tenure-track Faculty (excluding chairs). A simple majority of those voting is enough to pass the modified amendment at this point, even if your operating paper procedure is different. According to the new deadlines, these votes must be held by February 2, 2013.
  • If there is no agreed-upon modified amendment, or if the modified amendment does not pass the vote, then by February 8, 2013, the Provost must notify the Faculty Association President and request that a Bargaining Committee be formed to try to reach agreement. The Bargaining Committee will have five members appointed by the Association and five members appointed by the University.  Bargaining must begin within 30 days of the date that the Association received the Provost’s notification. If the Bargaining Committee can’t reach agreement, then they must ask for mediation.
  • If mediation doesn’t produce an agreement, then an external panel will be formed with three members from outside SIUC, including an arbitrator with experience in higher education.  The decision of this panel will be final and binding.  Please see Addendum B for more details on this process.

This is a complex procedure, but it is designed to maximize Faculty participation and ensure that these amendments reflect the work that we do. In order to make it work, it is vital to adhere to the contract. If you have questions or wish to report difficulties in following the mandated procedures, please contact Ryan Netzley at ranetzley@gmail.com.

For the SIUCFA Executive Committee,

Rachel Stocking

Association President

Filed under Older Posts Tagged with ,

Newer posts →