·         Ideas from floor

·         Attendance at retirement reception has been decreasing

·         Good idea for faculty and all staff; done at many institutions

·         Like idea, but if just for number of years then sort of pro forma

·         Could become more textured – not just about time but what doing

·         Could be blended

·         Things to consider in programs like this

·         Gifts need to be significant and have some value beyond just being for ten years

·         Project number of awards over course of time as can become expensive

·         ‘Company’ loyalty often celebrated by other organizations in city

·         Publish lists in paper, pins, recognition banquets

·         Published lists also project out to community

·         Texturizing awards problematic because then subjective; who makes decision

·         Could combine

·         Years of service

·         Also specific as service in governance

·         Possibility for gift would be choice of scholarly publication in field of study

·         Supports work here in individualized, meaningful way

·         At previous institution, recognized years of service at banquet and invited newly-hired faculty

·         Sense of community and camaraderie developed

·         Any discussion of growing number of retiring faculty choosing not to be honored?

·         Might there be people who do not want to be honored

·         Part of why here today, to see what can be done to make you interested in coming

·         In addition, noted gap between coming in and retiring

·         Annual alumni newsletters of alma mater has anniversary dates of staff

·         Amounts to warm fuzzies, but nice

·         If more than that, then need another committee to form and staff

·         Anything can do to get new arrivals involved also good

·         So many receptions in Tamarack room seem the same

·         One quite different was ‘Getting in the Groove’ at beginning of this year

·         Could have something at holiday time

·         Call up and introduce people and significant others

·         If focus on service people, only people there will be people being honored

·         If have something broader and use opportunity to acknowledge service, then honored by get-together rather than a pin

·         People extremely loyal to institution can have mixed feelings about celebrating their leaving

·         Receptions honoring anniversaries and celebrating loyalties and commitment make more sense

·         If too complicated, intent may be lost

9.        New Business

Motion 37-US-06:

Moved by Senator Schneider and seconded that Personnel Services consider the university’s degree of involvement with United Way and SECC campaigns

Discussion:

·         If feel motion needs discussion with colleagues, can move to postpone until next time

·         Reasoning for motion

• United Way and SECC represent a lot of very good organizations

·         Also lots of wonderful charities not represented in either conglomerate

·         Unfair

• United Way in this county includes Boy Scouts of America

·         Boy Scouts discriminate based on sexual orientation

·         Since a private organization, can do that if they want

·         But unfortunate when public institution like our university gives them money

·         Personnel Services does payroll deductions, sends out letters, appoints building captains

·         People get a second letter if don’t give through university system

·         Awkward position for tax dollars and university to fund something that discriminates

·         Purpose of motion not to oppose United Way contributions, but to discuss or evaluate pros and cons

• Asking Personnel to look at and do the agonizing
• Just make statement from Senate saying please look at this and consider

·         Friendly amendment accepted by mover and seconder that Personnel Services report to the Senate on their deliberations

·         Questions raised from floor

• Why not have Senate talk about this and if changes suggested, recommend them to chancellor?
• Why Personnel Services?
• If Senate involved in original decision to associate with United Way and SECC, would make sense Senate now look at it

·         Definitive history unknown

• Solicitations annually for at least twenty-five years
• Personnel Services Office administers campaign, but does not make decision on university participation
• Assume chancellor makes that decision

·         Friendly amendment accepted by mover and seconder that Personnel Services report to University Senate including the history of the initial decision and cost to be involved

·         May need to look at big picture of solicitation on campus

• How did United Way get in, but other groups did not

·         Associate Vice Chancellor Mitchell, on behalf of Personnel Office, will research issue

• How university came to support United Way and SECC
• Cost, primarily labor
• Have discussed issue with Kris Becker of United Way

·         Could direct attention there where change could be made in policy of who they support

·         United Way would be interested in hearing recommendations from this body or from faculty/staff

·         Other boards have changed policy to include sexual preference in nondiscrimination clauses

·         Campaign here got started before could consider that

·         Provost Satz sees three questions being discussed

1. Particular agency and policies
2. Community relations
3. Charitable giving

• United Way traditionally on most universities around country as part of community relations
• Concern with a particular agency ought to be dealt with head on and not mixed up in different issues

·         Chancellor Mash to clarify

• Idea of United Way partnering with business and large organizations in community for philanthropic work long-standing tradition
• Current issue related to an organization
• Also hearing general expression of annoyance at being bothered to be asked to do something philanthropic or otherwise

·         Second letters of solicitation are not sent to home if don’t respond at work, at least not recently

• Earlier in year began to think about letter accompanying this solicitation

·         Entreats to be part of community and help those less fortunate than us

·         Goes out with card which you can ignore or do payroll deduction

·         Payroll deduction is way for us to do a little more than if we write a check this minute

·         Numbers seem to be going down; wondered about that

·         Thinking, perhaps foolishly, that we could do better

·         Have committee getting ready to launch awareness campaign to promote and educate about United Way and SECC

·         Then Supreme Court made decision

·         New Jersey Boy Scout troop removed a gay troop leader from service

·         New Jersey court voted to reinstate that leader

·         US Supreme Court, by 5-4 decision, said scout leader did not need to be reinstated and because Boy Scouts have certain type of status they can do certain things

·         This is very difficult issue; not unanimous opinion

·         Locally is legitimate question about whether United Way should continue funding Boy Scout organization 

·         United Way looked at that issue, looked at comments, and decided for this allocation period to continue to fund Boy Scouts

·         Continued reallocation because doing good community work

·         At Executive Committee meeting, that was crystallizing issue; now probably broader

·         Interested to hear how university community feels about this role universities typically play in community and implications of continuing role in same or different manner

• Neither social issue nor philanthropic one simple

·         Chancellor unable to state university position without sense of how university community feels

·         Motion not saying we don’t personally consider giving to charities important to us

• Matter of should this be a function of our workplace
• Before Senate or any other body engages in discussion, would like data, including costs in tax dollars to do something all of us have opportunity to do on our own as good community citizens

·         Since I have been here, have wondered why, unlike others, United Way has this access

• Represents huge number of diverse groups
• But lots of other groups would like access to our mailboxes and payroll deduction
• Would like to know our policy

·         How did we choose that one, is it the best one?

·         Hoping to get some answers

·         Will be asking members of department how feel

·         Bothersome that university would ask United Way not to come here because supporting group with policies we don’t agree with

• Throwing out what going on in entire United Way because of one organization
• Have faith in board of directors of responsible citizens making those determinations
• Could personally protest

·         Let United Way know not giving this year because including or excluding this group

·         Write letter to the editor

·         Contact Boy Scouts

• If whole university turned United Way away, would hurt lots of people benefiting from this help

·         Some charitable organizations not part of United Way because certain accounting procedures, including external auditors, required for affiliation

·         Would cost charity more money than could gain from being part of United Way

·         Are also other reasons

·         Concern stated that while United Way serving lots of great organizations, doing so very inefficiently

·         Percentage of money goes to United Way’s hierarchy and management of organization

·         More efficient to give directly to organizations

·         No choice as UW-Eau Claire employee to chose to benefit organizations in another county

·         Believe strong-arm tactics have been used in past to get faculty to contribute to United Way

·         Lot of baggage left from previous campaigns

·         Don’t have faith in United Way board to make decisions for me

·         Give to charities believe in

·         Irritating to get letters every year

·         Feel like bad person if don’t sign up through payroll deduction

·         Question has come up in past whether list is kept that affects other things, such as extra merits

·         Motion allows for clarity

·         Provost Satz noted he makes personnel recommendations without ever seeing such a list

·         Don’t believe costs can be identified

·         Only relevant cost is out-of-pocket costs, or incremental costs because of campaign

·         Trying to identify labor costs impossible

Vote on Motion 37-US-06: Motion PASSED

TEXT OF MOTION as amended:

That Personnel Services consider the University’s degree of involvement with the United Way campaign and Statewide Employees Combined Campaign and report to the University Senate on its deliberations, including the history of the initial decision and cost to be involved

Motion 37-US-07:

Moved by Senator Wick and seconded to rescind motion previously passed by the University Senate regarding the faculty personnel rules not approved by the chancellor and send that issue back to the Faculty Personnel Committee

Discussion:

·         Committee attempted to write up current practice based on interviews with administrators

·         Since passage, has been lot of debate

·         People digging their heels in over this motion trying to iron out ambiguities, I guess, in the motion itself

·         Doesn’t seem this is the way to get communication to occur

·         If ambiguities exist, why not just send it back to committee

·         Can address those with administrators concerned

·         Bring forward unified approach

·         Doesn’t seem ought to be a big argument and legal battle over this

·         Support this motion

·         Everyone seems to have a different opinion of exactly what we voted on

·         What voted on is very problematic

·         Original motion cuts out levels of decision-making that have to do with personnel issues; not a good idea

·         Deliberation, ironing out, conferral, seeking legal counsel, negotiations currently occurring with Executive Committee; this motion makes that occur with different committee

·         Interesting issues have come up since motion passed

·         Best to bring it back to committee that knows origin and history

·         Can address it in a way that answers questions committee concerned with

·         Also hears voices of a larger faculty body

Vote on Motion 37-US-07: Motion PASSED by two-thirds (28-2 of 31 present) vote of University Faculty Senators

Motion 36-FP-5 rescinded

·         Stops all processing through faculty subcommittee of Executive Committee

·         Stops letter to legal counsel

·         Back in hands of Faculty Personnel Committee

·         Chancellor commented gets form of Senate actions with choice of approve, hold, not approve or acknowledge

·         When this one came forward, consulted with Senate Chair because could not approve

·         Fully intended another opportunity to revisit this, either in committee or in some other manner

·         At this point don’t see as contentious legal issue that need legal opinion on

·         Are times to seek legal clarification on an item

·         Open to getting read on some issues, don’t think this one requires that action yet

·         Share spirit conveyed by Michael Wick and will come at issue from that angle

·         Committees and others have at times asked for legal counsel in advance when making changes on personnel matters

·         Can find out if direction headed is going against legal principles

·         That way do not invest lot of time and effort creating something that will be overturned at System level on legal issues

10.     Announcements – None

Meeting adjourned at 4:39 p.m. without objection.

Respectfully submitted by,

Wanda Schulner

Secretary to the University Senate