Minutes of the Faculty Senate
for April 11, 1995
PSF 32/94-95

The University of Wisconsin-Parkside Faculty Senate met on April 11, 1995 in Molinaro Hall D132. Voting members present included Beyer, Carr, Cloutier, Deutsch (APC), Feldt, Greenfield, Gurnack, Hudson, Kinchen, Lindner, Mayer, Mayer (alt.), Moy, Murphy, New, Richards, Riese (Academic Staff Committee), Rovelstad, Schleiter (alt.), Snyder, Stephens, Wa Mwachofi, Wood. Non-voting members present included Canary, Cohen, Greenebaum, and Shade. The meeting was called to order at 3:39 p.m. by Professor Greenfield (History) as chair.

The minutes of the meeting of March 21, 1995, were approved as distributed with the correction of the adjournment time to 5:07 p.m.

COMMITTEE REPORT

Honors Program Proposal (Academic Policies Committee) The senate received a proposal to re-establish the honors program. The chair explained that it did not require Faculty Senate action, since existing policies and procedures authorized the program and proscribed its structure. Professor Beyer (Psychology), noting the recent controversy over freshman seminar courses, wondered about the section of the proposal calling for honors courses to be taught as overloads. Professor Duetsch (Economics), speaking as chair of the Academic Policies Committee, said that it was certainly not the intent of the committee that anyone be forced to "volunteer" to teach such courses.

OLD BUSINESS

CONSENSUAL RELATIONSHIPS

Professor Snyder (Philosophy) had submitted a resolution as follows:

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate withdraws its endorsement from the UW-Parkside Statement on Consensual Relations.

Speaking to the resolution, Professor Snyder began by deploring the agenda's discussion note that the resolution would have "no practical effect" (because the policy is an administrative one). He felt that this was unduly cynical about adminstrative response to faculty action and that it was possible that courts might take faculty action into account in determining a policy's effect. The chair said that the University Committee agreed and had meant to have the offending phrase eliminated from the draft agenda before distribution.

Professor Snyder said that he agreed that there are valid grounds for concern about relationships which might compromise one's professional obligations but that the existing statement did not deal well with this issue. He was particularly bothered by the lack of clarity in items 2b and 2c under "Abuse of Power Differential":

(b) even in a seemingly consensual relationship, where power differentials exist there are limited after-the- fact defenses against charges of sexual harassment; and

(c) the individual with the power in the relationship will bear the burden of accountability;

Professor Snyder thought the lack of clarity of these words (particularly the phrase "burden of accountability") particularly troublesome, since they seemed to be the key items in the statement, the rest of the document being largely window dressing. The document seemed mainly concerned with extending sexual harassment policy into consensual sexual relationships.

Professor Snyder said that any close friendship, sexual or non- sexual, may raise concern about conflict of interest, but the document did not deal with most such cases. He would not conclude, in any case, that one should bar all close friendships, though one might well want to have guidelines addressing the problems such relationships could lead to.

Professor Snyder said that it seemed to him that it was mere pretence to say this was only a statement. It was clearly a warning, and one which could well be used as a basis for adverse personnel decisions. It was a bad policy motivated largely by the university's deside to avoid legal liability--and it probably would not achieve even that aim.

Professor Kinchen asked if there were some action by the senate, short of withdrawing approval of the statement, which might meet Professor Snyder's concerns.

There was no further discussion. The MOTION was DEFEATED on a vote of 5 yes, 11 no, with 4 abstentions.

Professor Rovelstad (Administrative Science) then MOVED, SECONDED by Professor Hudson (Adminstrative Science) that the Faculty Senate recommend to the administration that items 2b through 2d of the existing statement be dropped, with 2a being incorporated in the previous paragraph. Professor Rovelstad said he believed these items were very good advice but did not belong in a policy statement.

Professor Snyder then MOVED, SECONDED by Professor Kinchen, to substitute the following:

     
     RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate recommends to the administration that the existing statement on consensual
     relationships be replaced by a "Statement on Personal Relationships" among members of the university community, to
     read as follows:

          (1)  UW-Parkside urges its members, in their personal relationships as otherwise, to avoid
          actions which may compromise their professional obligations by promoting either actual conflicts of 
          interest or even the appearance thereof.

          (2)  In those consensual relationships involving both a sexual element and a clear disparity of power 
          between the parties, it may be difficult to defend against a later charge of harassment by the less powerful
          party.

Professor Mayer (Biological Sciences) objected that the substitute motion, like the Rovelstad motion, retained 
the original statements lack of clarity about what constituted a power differential and its suggestion that the burden of proof might lie on the accused.  

Professor Snyder's substitute M0TION was DEFEATED on a vote of 8 yes, 9 no, and 2 abstentions.

Professor Mayer then asked why the Rovelstad motion eliminated 2d ("Such a relationship, whether in a class or work situation, may affect the educational or employment environment for others by creating an appearance of improper, unprofessional, or possibly discriminatory conduct"), when (b) and (c) seemed to be the focus of discontent. Professor Rovelstad and Professor Hudson accepted as a friendly amendment the restriction to (2b) and (2c). The motion now read as follows:

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate recommends to the adminsitration, that its (2b) and (2c) be eliminated from the current Statement on Consensual Relations.

MOTION PASSED on a vote of 10 yes, 5 no, 4 abstentions.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

PSGA

Arian Rana Adair-Nichols, Vice-President of the Parkside Student Government Association, presented a resolution which the PSGA had passed on March 31:

Whereas, one of the possible proposals in the budget cuts will effect the Office of Multicultural Student Affairs; and

Whereas, UW-Parkside's Administration's possible plans include closing and dismembering the Office of Multicultural Student Affairs; and

Whereas, UW-Parkside's Administration's possible plans also include dispersing the staff and programs of the Office of Multicultural Student Affairs to other offices; and

Whereas, without an Office of Multicultural Student Affairs there will be insufficient resources devoted to students of color programming;

Be it hereby resolved that the UW-Parkside Student Government Association is opposed to these drastic changes; and

Be it further resolved that the UW-Parkside Student Government Association is committed to the Design for Diversity policy; and

Be it also resolved that the UW-Parkside Student Government Association represent the students in a stand against any of the above possible plans.

Ms. Adair-Nichols said that the students recognized the need to make cuts but hoped that faculty and staff would agree with them on the importance of maintaining a commitment to diversity. Interim Vice Chancellor Cohen noted that the current plan did not propose to dismantle the office or move its director. Ms. Adair- Nichols said that the current plan was only a draft and that more budget cuts might well be ahead; PSGA wanted its views on record.

NEW BUSINESS

PROPOSED CHANGES TO UWPF

The University Committee presented a package of proposed changes to UW-Parkside Faculty Policies and Procedures. Secretary of the Faculty Canary (English) explained that the bulk of the changes were intended to reduce school representation requirements so as to ease the burden on faculty in the smaller schools. Other changes included making the Information Resources Committee appointive (to provide a spread of expertise) as of next year and eliminating automatic senate membership for deans and the chairs of APC and PRC. There being no discussion, it was MOVED by Professor Feldt (Computer Science and Engineering) and SECONDED by Professor Rovelstad that the package be approved as on the agenda. MOTION APPROVED on a voice vote. [see appended changes to UWPF]

REPORTS

CHANCELLOR'S REPORT

Speaking in the Chancellor's absence, Interim Vice Chancellor Cohen noted that the Chancellor had a necessary medical appointment but wished to convey her thanks to all who had helped with her inauguration. The campus should be very happy with the Building Commission approval of the full Residence Halls project and of Phase I of the Physical Education Building project. Professor Stephens (Physical Education) said that it was to be hoped that this time the second phase would not take 25 years. Professor Meyer (History) said that copies of the budget plan draft from the Administrative Council should have been distributed to the Faculty Senate and departmental executive committees, which are also part of the campus governance system. The interim vice chancellor said that the administration was following a process agreed to last fall. Professor Kinchen (Music) said that the conversations that were being held with affected people gave some the impression that this was not a draft but a done deal. The interim vice chancellor said that the administration had wanted people to hear directly that their jobs were in jeopardy, rather than hear about it in hallway gossip; individuals were being told that no final decisions had been taken, but were naturally concerned. Professor Wa Mwachofi (Communication) observed that short deadlines breed cynicism. Professor Meyer asked whether copies would now be sent to the senate, and the chair said that the secretary of the faculty's office would make copies. Professor Lindner inquired about the fate of the salary of a faculty member who retired in mid-year; the interim vice chancellor said that all salaries were part of the salary pool that was worked with over the year to pay for required salary savings and fund new positions. Professor Feldt asked if there was anything new on the TAP provisions in the budget, and Professor Greenfield (History) asked how they had been left out in the first place; the interim vice chancellor said that who had made the mistake was unclear but there was still hope of rectifying it.

UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE CHAIR

Professor Feldt addressed the draft budget plan just circulated by the administration. He said that the University Committee was concerned over the lack of opportunity for faculty in general to have input into the budget process at this key point and was very disturbed by the severity of the cuts in instruction as compared to those recommended by the Budget Advisory Committee. He noted that there would be a chair's meeting in a week or so and touched on some other issues being dealt with by the University Committee.

Respectfully submitted,

Robert H. Canary
Secretary of the Faculty