MINUTES of August 19, 2004
Marshall University Graduate College, South Charleston, WV
ATTENDANCE
Members in attendance:
Members excused:
Guests:
PREVIOUS MINUTES
The minutes of the July 25-27, 2004 planning meeting were approved as submitted.
DISCUSSIONS WITH VICE CHANCELLOR TAYLOR
Dennis Taylor, Vice Chancellor for Administration, joined the Council for a question and answer session. Vice Chancellor Taylor has a background in employment law and has considerable experience with classification systems and grievances from the state side. In this position, his responsibility will include overseeing Human Resources, Financial Aid, and WVNET.
Mr. Martinelli raised the question of state funding for higher education and the direction by the Budget Office to submit budget proposals 5.5% lower than the current budget and the dangers of having a greater proportion of higher education’s budget come from lottery funds while an ever decreasing percentage is coming from the state’s general revenue funds. Mr. Taylor suggested that this puts higher education on thinner ice but it is not a huge issue at this point. He noted that the recent legalization of video lottery machines in Pennsylvania could have a negative impact on video lottery revenues in West Virginia, but should not affect regular lottery income. He noted that institutions could also submit improvement proposals.
Mr. Taylor indicated that he has seen no indication at this point that there would need to be a mid-year budget cut, but advised that it is best to budget for a cut just in case it does happen. He noted that both general revenue funds and lottery funds are coming in higher than has been projected.
Mrs. Shriver posed a question concerning the pros and cons of a statewide classification and compensation system verses institution based systems. Mr. Taylor noted that the Mercer system was developed in a time of relative prosperity but since then revenues have been declining. He suggested that one approach could be for the state to set a floor and allow the institutions to go above it.
Mrs. Neal asked the Vice Chancellor how he envisioned moving ahead on the revisions of Series 8 (the Personnel Rule). Mr. Taylor stated that his goal was to have a very inclusive process where everyone would have input. He would like those who choose to respond to the letter of intent to revise Series 8 to respond with suggestions and ideas. He recognized the problems with the requirement for new hires to be paid at the zero step on the salary schedule while older employees are still below the zero step and the resulting loss of equity. He expressed his view that "If you say you require something, you should require it."
Mrs. Pitzer asked if it was reasonable to expect to have the revisions of Series 8 ready for the next legislative session. He indicated that it would be possible but expressed concerns about rushing it if it is not right, noting that the time lines would be very tight. Mrs. Pitzer noted that several issues are absent from Series 8 such as training and development for staff and how grant funded employees should be addressed. Mr. Taylor suggested that CEOs and CFOs or their representative would need to be at the table, noting that inclusion produces buy-in.
It was noted that, as the system currently operates, there is no accountability and no repercussions regarding the funding of the zero step, compliance with HEPC directives, or the development of policies by the local governing boards. Mr. Taylor concurred that the Boards of Governors have responsibility and the HEPC and the CC&TCE do not have tools for enforcement.
Mrs. Shafer raised the issue of transfer and bumping rights between the component community and technical colleges and their host institutions. She reported that many C&TC employees feel as though they were "hung out to dry" by the loss of bumping rights in HB2224.
When asked about the review of job families, Mr. Taylor indicated that none were currently being planned. He indicated that, ideally, all job families should be reviewed on a rotating cycle, possibly every five to ten years, but the challenge is a lack of personnel. Mrs. Neal pointed out that the two job families which have been reviewed were male dominated (Information Technology & Physical Plant) while the review of the Office Support job family, which is primarily populated by females, has been repeatedly postponed. She noted that without a goal there would be no progress.
Mr. Britton addressed the issue of funding for WVNET and the dilemma of being restricted from raising the price for their services while they have no tuition income as the colleges and universities do. WVNET is being told to "act like a business" and at the same time are told they cannot raise their rates. Mr. Taylor suggested that some flexibility could be gained in looking at which services WVNET should be moving away from and releasing to the open market, and which services they could provide more effectively and economically than the market. He added that services to clients other than Higher Education should be billed at cost.
LIAISON REPORT
Mrs. Buttrick reported that compliance audits have been completed at Marshall University and Shepherd University. West Virginia State University’s reports have been released. The MU and SU reports may be on the October HEPC agenda.
Mrs. Buttrick noted that since 9-11, the Department of Justice is placing increased emphasis on tracking alien students so I-9s (immigration forms) need to be properly maintained. She noted that there is wide inconsistency regarding performance appraisals across the state and this is an issue of concern. She also noted that, although it is not in code, best practices would be to document with a memo to the employee and to the employee’s file whenever a change is made to his or her job duties or status.
Mrs. Buttrick indicated that she does look at benefits documentation but does not specifically look for part-time employees. The file sample selected for review are randomly picked by the central office computer.
She reported that there is nothing currently pending before the Job Evaluation Committee. She indicated that there is not enough staff to conduct job family reviews without contracting out which would require approval from the Chancellor. Mrs. Neal noted that regular review of job families are important to maintain the integrity of the system.
Concerning the revisions to Series 8, Mrs. Buttrick questioned whether the policy should be opened just to change the date for funding the zero equity step. It was agreed that we need to take the time to sit down and get it right, but also noted that if we do not address the personnel issues, they may be legislated without our input. Vice Chancellor Taylor has oversight responsibility for revisions of rules and reports to the HEPC but works with both Chancellors.
Mrs. Buttrick noted that the proposed rule revisions submitted by the Grievance Board states that a "ruling at level III will stand" which mean that the institutional president will not have the authority to overturn a level III decision.
She also noted that the new federal overtime legislation goes into effect this month. She indicated that she would prepare a summary of it’s impact for higher education for the next meeting.
PERSONNEL RULES
The two Chancellors have submitted a letter of intent to modify Series 8 (copies have been e-mailed to the Council members). Following a discussion, it was agreed to fold into Series 8, Series 14 (Holidays), Series 31 (Ethics), Series 38 (Leave), Series 39 (Classified Employees), Series 40 (EEOC/Affirmative Action), Series 37 (Layoffs and Reassignments - drafted but never adopted) and old Series 56 (Social Justice). Also included should be language addressing the funding of the equity step and the salary schedule.
Motion by Mrs Pitzer, seconded by Mr. Martinelli:
The chair will communicate to the Chancellors that it is the intent of the ACCE that the revisions of
the Personnel Rule (Series 8) should include Series 14, 31, 38, 39, 40, old 56, and the proposed 37.
Also to be included should be sections covering sick and annual leave reports; evaluations; transfer
between institutions; internal job postings; clarifications of rights between C&TC employees and
host institution employees; part-time, temporary, and grant funded employees; accountability
measures; the JEC; the Compensation Review Committee; staff training and development; merit
pay; and red lined employees. The revised rule should be ready by October 2005 for submission to
the 2006 legislative session.
Motion carried without opposition.
PRESENTATION TO HEPC and CC&TCE
Mrs. Neal reported that she has had conversations with Chancellors Mullen and Skidmore, and that she expects to be on their October agendas for the ACCE’s annual presentation to the Commission and the Council. It was suggested that the approach this year should be "the face of classified staff" using pictures and possibly video clips of staff at work serving students - putting faces with the issues.
COMMUNICATION COMMITTEE
Mr. Britton presented the current ACCE website (via projector) for discussion purposes. The following comments and suggestions were received from the group:
NEW BUSINESS
The ACCE lost a quorum at this point and was unable to continue official business.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
The following announcements were made by Chair Neal:
Mrs. Beane expressed thanks to Chair Neal for the nice ACCE carry-alls. Ms. Neal stated that she was sorry that they didn’t arrive in time for the annual planning meeting.
NEXT MEETING
September 16, 2004, Thursday, 10:00 a.m., at the location of the CC&TCE.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mrs. Pitzer made a motion to adjourn.
Respectfully Submitted:
Robert A. "Zac" Wycherley, Secretary
and Amy Pitzer, Vice Chair
APPROVED: