|
University Archives of Virginia Tech |
Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes ArchiveJanuary 18, 1993
Minutes University Council Meeting January 18, 1993 Dr. McComas called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. Present: J. McComas, C. Morton, E.F. Carlisle, M. E. Ridenour, E.R. Stout, R.D. Smoot, L. Cross (for T.G. Goodale), E.L. Blythe, G.E. Russell, L.A. Swiger, R.E. Sorensen, T. Hunt (for J. J. Buffer), G.N. Brown, S.J. Ritchey, J.E. Eustis, C.A. Stott, D.A. DeWolf, M.J. Sporakowski, J.F. Robinson, A. McNabb, P.P. Feret, R.W. Daniel, G.I. Holtzman, J.R. Ficenec, J.A. Snoke, L. Geyer, D.W. Smith, R. Bambach (for D.A. Hewitt), K.W. Kubin, R.A. Heller, L.B. Richardson, K.H. Martin, C.A. Pinder, F.E. Phillips, C.B. Cox, T. Higgins, B. Tatarka, K. Kahn, C. Daniels, J. Darnell, T. Snead Guests: P. Hyer, Office of the Provost; B. Burleson, Spectrum Absent: P.E. Torgersen, C.W. Steger, H.K. Doswald, G.W. Clough, P. Eyre, J.S. Tlou, J. Rothschild, E.E. Bunce, T.R. Rakes, R.F. Olin, P.A. Miller, N.R. Dodl, F.W. Thye, J.L. Robertson, X.D. Jackson, M.B. Murray, K. Mottley, M. Belsley, M. Jackson 1. Adoption of Agenda A motion was made and seconded to approve the agenda as submitted. The motion passed. 2. Approval of Council Minutes of December 7, 1992 The University Council minutes from the meeting of December 7, 1992 were approved as submitted. 3. New Business Dr. DeWolf noted the Proposed Revision of the Faculty Grievance Procedure has been an ongoing process for several years and it is likely that more revisions will be made. Dr. Ken Martin noted that it appeared as if a minimum of one year would be required to resolve a case under the proposed guidelines. He expressed concern over possible problems that Virginia Cooperative Extension Service (VCES) employees could face as a result of their location away from campus. He noted that a committee will be formed, at a later date, to draft grievance procedures for professional and administrative personnel which will replace the current procedure and asked that anyone who serves on that committee be alert to the problems which distance could pose on individuals such as the VCES employees. Dr. Richard Bambach responded that he does not believe the procedures will move more quickly with new procedures for professional and administrative personnel than with the current guidelines. He explained that grievances normally do not go all the way to the presidential level and are often resolved in much less than a year. Dr. McComas suggested that ways of reducing this time frame should continue to be researched. The resolution carried forward for a second reading. 4. In successive motions, and after brief discussions, Council approved the minutes of the following meetings: a. Commission on Classified Staff Affairs, November 11, 1992 Mr. Stott spoke on several issues of importance. The Commission is looking for ways to show both appreciation and recognition for the contributions of staff employees, both as individuals and through their collective actions. They are also working on recognizing participation of staff employees in the governance structure -- possibly as part of their performance evaluation. This is a plan to provide incentive for people to take part in the governance system. The Commission is also working toward the possibility of a forum on communications within the University. More information will be shared at a later date. b. Commission on Faculty Affairs, November 20, 1992 c. Commission on Graduate Studies and Policies, October 21, 1992 d. Commission on Undergraduate Studies, October 12, and October 26, 1992 5. For Information Dr. McComas updated the group on what has transpired with SCHEV's proposed restructuring of higher education and discussed at length the implications and history of the SCHEV proposal. He observed that Virginia universities have already gone through a great deal of restructuring during the last few years with the budget reductions -- the operating budget for the instructional program is now $14 million less than it was three years ago. While Virginia Tech has added back most of the lost faculty positions, there are fewer secretaries and custodians and fewer dollars to provide money for copying, hand-outs, instructional materials, and field trips. Thus, there is a significant reduction in support for the instructional program. Dr. McComas recounted numbers of positions lost and other reductions in areas across the campus. He stressed that the problem was not the refinement of the proposal, but the underlying assumptions that Virginia universities could absorb 10,000 new students in the next biennium, plus another 55,000 students after that, with essentially no new faculty. Doctoral institutions would be expected to absorb about 4,000 of the 10,000 new students in the next biennium (about 1,000 to 1,200 at Virginia Tech) with no new faculty or support staff. Dr. McComas stressed that this is not just an issue affecting the three research universities, but it will also have a significant impact on the community colleges and regional universities. The Council of Presidents are even more concerned about absorbing the other 55,000 students over the following few years. He stated that it will put Virginia at a disadvantage with peer institutions around the country as Virginia is already 43rd in the nation in the amount spent per student. Dr. McComas noted that at an early January meeting, Dr. Davies did agree with most of the changes recommended by the Council of Presidents, but did not change the philosophy that there would be essentially no new faculty in the foreseeable future. The meeting adjourned at 3:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cornel N. Morton Executive Assistant to the President CNM/bjl
VT History | Digital Library and Archives | Special Collections | University Archives
Send questions or comments to:
Tamara Kennelly, University Archivist
University Libraries
Virginia Tech
P.O. Box 90001
Blacksburg, VA, 24062-9001URL: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/minutes/ucm/1993/January+18++1993.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:50 EDT