NYS AAUP Minutes - Spring 2008

home > library > confernece meetings > current page

NEW YORK STATE AAUP ANNUAL SPRING CONFERENCE 2008
Friday, April 19, 2008 at St. John's University
Saturday, April 20, at Hofstra Univiersity  

Present:

Fri., Apr 17 – Ellen Banks ( E.B.), Daemen; Lenore Beaky (L.B.), LGCC/CUNY; Patty Bentley (P. B.), Plattsburgh/UUP; Patrick Cihon (P. C.), Syracuse; Fred Floss (F. F.), Buffalo/SUNY; Estelle Gellman (E. G.), Hofstra; Stephen Goldberg (S. G.),Adlephi; Jeanette Jeneault (J. J.), Adj/Syracuse; Martin Kaplan (M. K.), Q/CUNY; Jeffrey Kraus (J. K.), Wagner; David Linton (D. L.), Marymount; Cecelia McCall (C. M.), Baruch/CUNY; John Marino (J. M.), SUNY; Thomas Policano (T. P.), RIT; Kathleen Maurer Smith (K. S.), Molloy; Irwin Yellowitz (I. Y.), CCNY/CUNY.

Additional Conference Guests Fri., 3:00-5:00PM: St. Johns University Faculty: Franklin Carmen, William DiFazio, Joyce Furfero, Thomas Giordano, David Gregory, Ganville Gunter, Alison Hyslop, Carlo Muzo, Frank LeVeness. 

Additional Conference Guests Sat., Apr 18 –St. Johns Faculty: J. Furfero, T. Giordano, C. Muzo; Hofstra: Catherine Adams, Mahesh Chandra, Victor Copel, Kathryn Eskew, E. Christa Farmer, Dennis Mazzoco.

Proceedings

1. Professor Stephen Z. Goldberg convened the meeting at 1:35, April 17, 2008.
   
   
2. The Minutes of October 2007 were moved (Beaky/Linton) and approved.
   
   
3. President’s Report, S. Goldberg (S. G.)
   President Goldberg reported: Advised and referred to Jeanette Jeneault an adjunct faculty at NYU Dental School and the dissolution of the Faculty Senate of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute by the President as a result of revisions in the handbook. He asked if the pre-approval of the Minutes was satisfactory. S.G.’s concern is that they may be published with errors. The Executive Director explained that it could not happen. S. G. finished by saying that he writes his president’s column based on timely issues.
   
   Executive Director Tom Policano (T. P.) raised two issues – honorarium for the speaker and dinner payment for guests though it has not been the practice to stipend speakers; the Conference only provides expenses.
   Motion to provide a $100 stipend to Joe Berry carried. (Linton)
   Kaplan/Beaky asked for a reconsideration of the vote. T.P. read a statement from the invited speaker explaining his reason for requesting an honorarium.
   Motion as stated above carried a second time.           
   In the future a policy will be developed on honoraria.
   Motion to pay for dinner expenses of Conference guests carried. (Linton/Mauer)
    
4. Vice President’s Report, Kathleen Smith K. S.)*
   V.P. Smith reported conference membership: She received figures from the national office of 5,015 which represents a 1.3% decline from the fall. 4,687 members are in chapters at forty-six institutions, 216 members at ninety-nine institutions with fewer than seven members, 112 members without affiliation, 11 chapters are collective bargaining chapters with a total of 3,592 members. Membership has grown at D’Youville (30%), LIU Schwartz (36%) NYU (18%), St. Johns (45%). Membership has decreased at Pace ( 28%), Syracuse (15%), Wells (38%). There has been a 70% increase in non-affiliated members.
   Discussion
   E.G. suggested the change in non-affiliated members may be due to a membership application sent to non-members with an offer for reduced dues (experiment); a number of people did join.
   T.P. reported that there are 49 new members in NY State as a result of the membership drive. E.G. explained the data base has been improved as well and membership lists are accurate lists.
   I.Y. reiterated that CUNY City College Non-CBC Chapter should not exist.
   K.S. will check with national about that chapter as well as others and inform appropriate people of the results of her inquiry. 5. Report of Treasurer, Pat Cihon (P. C.)*
   
   
5. Report of Treasurer, Pat Cihon (P. C.)*
   
   Treasurer Cihon reported a deficit in the 2007 budget due to additional costs incurred by producing and distributing Academe.
   2008 Budget: P. C. expects that the dues increase will offset possible losses; the national office has yet to remit dues. UUP and PSC have remitted the first installments directly and Niagara will pay in June. Thus far, the Conference is running a deficit of $3,000.
   Discussion
   P.B. - How much has been received from National?
   P.C. - It varies from year to year. He uses a ball park figure of 36,000.
   I. Y. - Is the deficit real.
   P.C. - The Conference doesn’t usually run a deficit.
   E.G. - Postage looks like it may go higher.
   P. C. - It would be related to Academe’s expenses.
   F.F.  - Is there a contingency  in the event that expected funds don’t materialize?
   P.C. - There is leeway, especially in the committee budgets.
   P. B. - Is National aware of the issue?
   P. C. - Ernie is working on it.
    S.G. - I file a financial statement for another organization and receive a check almost immediately after filing. It is standard practice.

   Other:
   P. C. said that Jeanine Plottel’s gift has not yet been purchased.
   S.G. reported that she was unable to attend this meeting due to other commitments. She will be invited to the upstate meeting. He suggested inviting her as a speaker since she is a trustee of Barnard.
   P.B. - The gift committee is thinking of giving her an American Express gift card.
   
   S. G.’s motion to wish Frank Higman well carried.

6. Reports and Plans of Standing Committees
   

   a. Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure Report (I. Yellowitz)*
   Prof. Yellowitz reported that there a few cases. His written report explains the way that the state committee operates. Since National does little counseling, the state committee can play that role well. He proposed four steps to raise the visibility of Committee A – articles in Academe, annual survey, use of the Conference website, and programs on academic freedom that are s reported in Academe. He suggested that Greg Scholz from the National Committee A be invited to speak at the fall meeting.
   
   b. Committee on Chapter Members and Dues (K. Smith)* Reported above.
   
   c. Committee on Minorities in the Profession (Grace Vernon) - not in attendance
   
   S. G. remarked that Grace Vernon has not responded to inquiries. E.G. suggested that Sandy Stacki  might be an appropriate person to lead this committee.
   
   P. B  suggested that the Committee on the Economic Status of the Profession  subsume some of the other committees that have not been active.
   
   d. Committee on Contingent Faculty and the Profession (J. Jeneault)
   J. J. is negotiating a contract; on April 22, there will be a fifth meeting with a federal mediator. She is trying to form a NYS COCAL, is looking into group health insurance for her own unit. Adjuncts who teach two courses a year will receive dental and health benefits. Post-probationary tenure is being negotiated. Part-timers were ignored in the State’s Higher Education Report.   
   
   S. G. suggested that there be a contingent faculty discussion page on the web.
   
   T. P. referred her to the web for survey data. 
   
   e. Committee on Government Relations, P. Bentley (P. B.)
   State Issues - P. B. mentioned the interest in Paterson’s governorship. Bundy aid has been approved; the higher education endowment was passed but not funded; it is largely for the public colleges. National Issues- AAUP’s Government Relations Committee newsletter has been circulated. The Higher Education Reauthorization is focusing on assessment and accountability. Elected representatives should be asked to defend the purposes of higher education as opposed to the overemphasis on accountability.  The recent tenure fight of the K-12 sector is a model of a good campaign.  The Conference should use Capitol Hill day to lobby for our issues. She is an elected delegate to the Democratic National Convention and will lobby for higher education.
   Discussion:
   E.G. - There may be opportunities to work with the regional and or disciplinary accrediting associations on reaccreditation standards that
   we haven't taken advantage of.; AAUP should get control of the issue and take the lead.
   F.F. Other associations are cooperating with the assessment move. R. Mills is talking about a standardized test for higher education. Perhaps, AAUP needs a committee on this. He is a member of NYSUT’s testing committee and has been examining standardized tests.
   L. B. mentioned the use of the CLA at some CUNY campuses
   
   f. Committee on College and University Governance (Frank Higman) - not in attendance



Open Meeting: 3:05

• The St. Johns faculty introduced themselves as did Conference attendees. President Goldberg thanked the St. Johns’ members for hosting the meeting and offered the Conference’s assistance as needed.    
• W. DiFazio explained governance at the university: The Faculty Association and the AAUP Chapter are part of a joint structure that was agreed upon many years ago; they are certified as one union with a Faculty Association and AAUP; a change would mean recertification. He feels that some in the Faculty Association are trying to take over AAUP. Adjuncts and full-timers make up the association and dues cover needs. The AAUP chair is the current negotiator. There is a lot of animosity between the two groups.
  Discussion:
  
• E.G – What is the split?
• W. DiFazio- They’re trying to take over the long-term leadership of AAUP.
• S.G. - We can’t take a position; we want strong representation through AAUP.
• W. DiFazio -Negotiators from AAUP and FA bargain together as a team.
• E.G – When you bargain is there a joint steering committee as well?
• W. DiFazio – Yes.
• C. Muzo - We want to talk about governance and principles. The constitution is not being followed; the opposition slate is disgruntled; members think they are paying AAUP dues.
• S.G. - If you are a member of AAUP, you must be a member of National as well.
• D. Gregory – This is a weird situation. Can anyone explain the bi-forcated system?
• T. Giordano – When elections were run, two organizations got the same number of votes; there was a dispute over eligibility; the parties agreed to jointly represent. In the early days, they signed a memorandum of agreement on procedures, but have acted ad hoc since then.
• W. DiFazio - When Cahill became president of university, he fired tenured faculty; there was a strike; a new college was created as St. Vincents; the fired faculty were replaced by FA which was a company union.
• I.Y. – 1967 strike was lost; the United Federation of College Teachers represented the faculty when they were striking. We don’t see a union here. How did you get from a union strike to a division into two groups.
• F. LeVeness - The two groups came out on top and were certified in 1970.
• E.G. - This is an unusual situation- usually two agree on the same dues; memoranda of agreement are not usually time limited.
• T. Giordano – It was time limited; a second was agreed to.
• S.G – One bargaining agent that negotiates with administration; the memoranda of agreement can have a life independent of collective bargaining or expire with it.
• T. Giordano – It looks as if that is what happened.
• E.G. - Is the problem the relationship between the two groups or within the AAUP chapter?
• W. DiFazio – AAUP and FA work well together; the sitting leadership of both groups work well together. We need help to convince the faculty to join the AAUP.   
• D. L - Does the FA have national affiliation? When the contract is signed, what does it say?
• C. Muzo- AAUP/FA.
• D.L. – What election is coming up? Can you have dual membership?
• F. Carmen – Yes, there has been a response to the call to have one union – 42 yes – 2 no; faculty are willing to support it. There was one vote that settled the election. Faculty are not happy with the leadership.
• D. L – Everybody could be a member of both and an election could dissolve one of the entities.
• F. Carmen- We don’t know how to do this without being decertified.
• J. Furfero- Faculty can be members of both, one, or neither.
• W. DiFazio – People only pay $50 and did not want to pay the extra $150 for National.
• S. G. – It is about the money; you can negotiate in a contract that those who do not pay union dues, pay the equivalent to some other entity. People might rather pay to the faculty representation than the administration.
• C. Muzo – A majority of local members can’t vote for officers because they don’t pay  national dues.
• E.G. - You’re not allowed to have local only dues; if you negotiate, what dues will they pay? The two units have to decide on policies; it would be better to get all to agree to join both; if you fool with certification, you put it at risk.
• J. Furfero- There is a clause in the contract that recognizes that there may be a merger.
• E.G. - People who are members of AAUP have to pay full dues. How about check-off?
• W. DiFazio – There is a split between the Arts and Sciences and the School of Professional Studies.
• P. B. – Mentioned a State University example – UUP was challenged by the faculty senate association when it first organized; the faculty senate was deemed management and could not represent the faculty. Everyone wants to represent the faculty; find a way to mediate; there is a risk of decertification.
• G. Ganter – Can we insert a clause into the new contract saying the faculty would have to write a check for $200 – union or other entity.
• E.G. – If they could get the administration to agree to payroll deduction, they should try to get the Faculty Association to
  agree to a common charge.
• F.F. - What percentage of the faculty does not belong to either?   
• F. LeVeness – We don’t know – maybe 50%.
• F.F. – 50% are inactive, adjunct population – it may be an organizing issue – come together and get the inactive people to join. That’s something that the Conference could help with.
• S.G. – The Conference would have to be invited to help.
• J.J. – How are part-timers represented?
• C. Muzo – The contract covers both.
• W. DiFazio – They get the same percentage increase.
• D. L. – There’s a need for mediation, but there is a conflict of interest. If the administration could be persuaded to grant agency fee, you can give it also to another entity. I would think that it is in the best interest of the administration to have you at one another’s throats. What is the administration’s position on this fight?
• W. DiFazio – People do not want to pay $150.
• F. LeVeness- We use each other against management, and it works well.
• E. G. – I wouldn’t use agency fee. It is supposed to be the cost of representation.
  Try to get some kind of payroll deduction; agree first to payroll deduction, and then the chapter can determine how much is deducted from each.
• J. Furfero (paraphrase) – If there is a merger or consolidation, irrespective of the name, the university shall, upon appropriate written authorization of 100 or so faculty members, deduct an amount and remit it to the consolidated entity.
• S.G – I hope that the AAUP could organize the membership for the union to win. This is an organizational issue when either side cannot get more than 50 people to vote.
• W. DiFazio – We would organize and lose.
• D. Gregory – Yeshiva was invoked years ago and could be again.
• E.G. - For dues check off, it does not have to be the greater amount; talk to the administration now about it while you have good relations with them. The other issue is chapter building. We can help with this. How many members do you have?
• T. P. – 211 members
• E. G. – You need a structure and a dues statement that does not give the members the option of paying either local or national.
• I. Y. – Your contract is a good one; the bargaining situation is good; leave it alone; however, decertification is hanging over this; the administration is not decertifying for a reason. In the election, this is a key factor. No matter who wins, if there is a contested election, the administration can use the election to decertify if the faculty is in disarray.
• F. Carmen- This is one issue out of many; if you want to hear more, go to my web page; there are many issues that make the faculty unhappy, such as lack of meetings, accountability, and the grievance procedure.
• S.G – This is a disengaged faculty; we can’t address those issues; you haven’t made the case that the faculty is upset, and you can get elected on the issues you raised (Carmen); one has to win overwhelmingly, or you must arrive internally on a consensus.
• E.G. – How can we help you?
• W. DiFazio – We don’t lose grievances.
• M. K. - The greatest danger is decertification; the longer it takes to solve the problems, the tougher it will be come together.
•  S. G. - I cannot understand how the faculty get such good contracts.
• C. Muzo- There are give-backs. The issue is that there is no governance. The administration was making changes unilaterally. Grievances are never settled. There is a reign of terror here. Faculty are being fired. It’s a weak chapter because there is no transparency or outreach to faculty.  
• T. Giordano – I agree with him (Muzo); I’ve been a grievance officer for years; the contract was favorable because there was a big election coming up. There are terms in the contracts that have hurt the faculty.
• S.G. – The union isn’t obligated to go to arbitration; there may be a variety of reasons not to go to arbitration. There is a political issue with this. You can use it in an election. Contracts may be ratified with bad governance procedures when there is a good financial settlement.    
• E.G. - Does the contract enforce the handbook?
• C. Muzo – There is no handbook. There are statutes.
• E.G. - Does the contract enforce the statutes?
• T. Giordano – Yes, violations are grievable.
• E.G. - It has to be enforced.
• F.F. – What has happened with accreditation?
• W. DiFazio – The Faculty Senate is joint faculty and administration.
• E. B. – We have zero clout with Middle States. The report supported the administration.
• E.G. - It sounds like a good contract. There has to be enforcement.
• C. Muzo- The administration is hurting the educational process; they’re harming the degrees.
• J. Furfero – In the governing documents, decision making flows up; the administration can quash anything at any stage of the process.
• F.F. – Is there anything that upsets the faculty?
• J. Furfero – Came close to that last year; the Dean was usurping the power of the faculty; AAUP and FA did nothing about it.
• W. DiFazio – I’ve tried to organize on issues and get no where. 250,000 books are being taken out of the library.
• S.G. – What leadership role can the AAUP/FA do to get the faculty excited about an issue.
• W. DiFazio – Nothing, people tell me that their membership is being paid.
• F. Carmen- About the books, two of the Executive Committee were on the book committee and didn’t tell anyone else what was happening.
• P. B. – Has the election been held?
• W. DiFazio – The Department of Labor found eight violations when the election was challenged. There was a second election and then the regularly scheduled election is coming up.
• T. Giordano – 60 were eligible to vote; half voted. There are now 150 eligible to vote.
• P. B. I hear personal recriminations. Are there slates? Get out as many votes as possible. Is the election being monitored?
• C. Muzo – It is an unsupervised mail ballot.
• S.G. –National can help with the election.
• P. B. – It is imperative that the AAUP chapter here conduct the elections with the help of the Conference.
• S.G. – All parties to the dispute have a common interest in assuring that the results of the election cannot be challenged. You have to assure that everyone understands that the election was conducted fairly regardless of outcome.
• F. Carmen- AAA ran the elections before that were not challenged; the paper ballot procedure of the last time was challenged. The chapter controls the election.
• P. B. – The election has to be fair.
• C. Muzo – We will adhere to the constitution. The execution is wrong.
• I.Y. – Use the AAA for the election. Their procedures have been tested, and the election will not be challenged. They’ll establish the voting list. The votes are private; you can be present when the votes are counted. 
•  L. B. – With AAA, you’ll solve at least one problem.
• E.G. - Do not have an in-house election. We use True Ballot.
• W. DiFazio – I’ll look into this immediately and do it. We don’t want the Department of Labor here again.
• F. Carmen - The Faculty Association used AAA, and we were satisfied. Establishing eligibility to vote is the big problem.  
• T. P. - We seem to have an agreement to do this the right way.
• M. K. - The two sides must agree to this procedure.
• E.G. - Whoever is on the Executive Committee must establish a firm date that is not violated.
• S.G. - Attorneys at the national office can give you advice.
• E.G. - Do you have a lawyer?
• T. Giordano – We need another attorney. He agreed to the ballot box.
• S.G. - We allotted two hours for this. You are welcome to stay for what is left of our meeting and are invited to dinner this evening on AAUP.
• T. Giordano – I have an old issue that I brought up in the fall – the two faculty who were terminated: the hearings are going on now and then the matter will go to the Trustees. They are not being represented by either FA or AAUP.
• E. G. - If the procedures are no good, the union can’t do anything.
• S. G. - If the statute is conditional, there can be a debate and adjudication. We can’t comment without seeing the statutes. You have to find a hook to hang the case on.
• T. Giordano – There has to be something.
• E. G. - If you’re the grievance officer, who signs off?
• T. Giordano – The President signs off.
• E. G. - We keep a log of grievances, and it is the grievance officer’s obligation to state whether or a violation of the contract has occurred.
• T. Giordano – I can’t do anything without the President signing off.
• I. Y. – The procedure you’re describing does not follow the Red Book. The AAUP has a clear policy on this. Its Red Book supersedes local procedures. Why haven’t the two people contacted national?
• J. Furfero – They have. A letter was written to the President by Bob Kreiser. He kept asking for more information.
• E. G. - It sounds like your statutes allow it.
• D. L. – The two have a case against the employer and the union.
• J. Furfero – Mentioned problems with Bob Kreiser.
• S. G. – The ultimate question is did they get fair representation?
• D. L. - It has to be reexamined. If they’re unsatisfied, they have to resurrect the issue.
• E.G. - Maybe, our Committee A can help?
• S. G. – The structure of the grievance procedures has to be reexamined.
  All mechanisms have to be used to pursue it.
• T. Giordano – Each group has its own grievance officers and both presidents must sign off on a formal grievance.
• D. L. – A unitary process has to be worked out.
• F.F. - We’ve done all sorts of things to ensure that people are represented fairly. We can try to come and help individuals if it is necessary.
• E. B. - The AAUP is charged with protecting all faculty – tenure and non-tenure.
• S. G. - Do we have a commitment regarding a fair election through a professional mechanism?
• C. Muzo – What redress does a member have with an organization/administration that is not following its own constitution?
• E. G. - An individual member has the right to bring a violation of the duty of fair representation against the union, risking decertification.
• C. Muzo – What can AAUP do?
• E. G. Nothing, neither can national.
• S. G.  Use the ballot box.

Break: 5:15 – 5:35

President Goldberg reconvened the meeting and called for a continuation of committee reports

h. Committee on the Status of Women in the Profession (P. Bentley)
P. B. reported that there has been little progress in salary increase for women. For a variety of reasons, women are leaving the profession before tenure. There are still issues about family leave and people going off the tenure track. There is some evidence that women are staying in the ranks of the contingent faculty before entering the tenure track. Both female and male faculty want child-care opportunities.  

i. Committee on Retirement (M. Kaplan)
M.K. commented that the national retirement committee is inoperative. He spoke to a resolution on inflation protection for retirees in the Optional Retirement Programs. The resolution had been passed by NYSUT at its recent convention. He asked AAUP to support the resolution (Kaplan/Linton):

Resolved, that NYSUT study the issue of inflation protection Protection Equity in Optional Retirement Programs, including TIA/CREF, and develop such specific legislative proposals as may be appropriate. (Kaplan)



Discussion


• I. Y. - There are complications between the two systems. In TIAA/CREF retirees can take the full accumulation. However, they take annuities and are in the same situation with TRS.
• E.G. – substitute motion ( See New Business.)

Motion that the resolution be passed in principle as amended carried. (Kaplan/Bentley)



j. Committee on the Economic Status of the Profession (D. Dolan) - none

D. L. said that at his campus, salaries will be held at the 80th percentile of salaries of the Carnegie Category B schools. It is a hefty increase.

7. Report of the Councils
   a. The Independent Council (No chair)
   
   b. The CUNY Council (C. McCall/L. Beaky)
   C. McCall reported on activities related to contract negotiations that have been on-going for two years; as yet, there has not been a salary offer from management; there is a campaign underway with the City Council for restoration of funds to its budget.
   
   c. The SUNY Council (Fred Floss, Prior to open session)
   F. F. announced that Phil Smith has been elected president of UUP. Their contract has been settled; the state tried to attack tenure and wants to move to three and five year appointments; 4-4-4-5 settlement; the 1% reduction in payments to the optional retirement program will kick in this year. The governor may institute another 10% cut in the SUNY –CUNY budgets. 
   
   d. National Council (P. Bentley, L. Beaky)
   The budget has been balanced and revised; restructuring is still on-going.
   L. B.  - Two candidates for General Secretary will be presented to the National Council for a vote in June.
   
   e. The Collective Bargaining Council (E. Gellman)
   There have been personnel changes in DOS replacements will not be hired in the near future. There will be elections in June. Petition candidates will be accepted until May 1. The annual meeting will vote on the AAUP Constitution while CBC will vote on its new constitution. Money issues need to be resolved.
   
   The private colleges had a meeting in NYC. Their issues sometime get lost in the larger venue. (S. G. - It could be the reconstituting of a Regional Council.)
   
   f. The Regional Councils (none)
   
   
8. The Report of the Executive Director (T. Policano)*
   E.D. T. Policano reported as follows: NYS conference has worked with the national office on membership development. Half and quarter dues are being offered depending upon salary. The conference agreed to accept a lesser stipend for new members who come in under this offer. (T. P. will ask if other conferences have been asked to do the same.) RIT refused the membership deal because the offer opted in (as opposed to opt out) everyone receiving email from AAUP. It is advertising for AAUP. Vassar College seems to be a new chapter. E. Banks will no longer be attending; her chapter has been moribund for several years. Capitol Hill Day – five appointments have been confirmed, including Yvette Clarke, Randy Kuhl, Tim Bishop, Charles Rangel and Nita Lowey. 
   There are openings for two officers-at-large and Chair of the Government Relations Committee.
   
   J. Kraus volunteered to serve as an officer-at-large for the one-year term
   
   S. G. congratulated members who were re-elected to national office- Estelle Gellerman and Ellen Shrecker.
   
   
9. Report of the Editor of New York Academe (J. Krauss)
   Two issues have been published; two more are planned. The May issue will include a report of NYS Conference meeting and the state budget. The September issue will report the annual meeting. 

Recess: 7:25

[At dinner, attendees were addressed by Joe Berry on the topic of Contingent Faculty Issues]

Reconvened: Saturday, April 18, 2008 at 9:25
President Goldberg reconvened the meeting and thanked the Hofstra Chapter for hosting the State Conference.  

10. Old Business - none
11. New Business
    a. Politics
    D. L. – encouraged the conference to speak to candidates about their views on Yeshiva and the NLRB.
    P. B. responded that there had not been a discussion at the Council. AFT did interview the democratic candidates. She urged attendees to check-out the candidates’ websites. C. M. mentioned that the 501©3 status of AAUP limits its ability to lobby; restructuring will enable it to be more of a lobbying organization. P. B. reminded the assembly that there are NYS elections as well. L. B. - the candidates’ webs indicate their priorities.  
               
    b. Amendment to the Kaplan resolution (Gellman) carried.
    Resolved, that the New York State Conference of the AAUP endorse NYSUT’s initiative in studying the issue of inflation protection in the Optional Retirement Programs, including TIAA/CREF, and developing specific legislative proposals as appropriate.

    It is further resolved, that a copy of this resolution be sent to the National AAUP, as well as NYSUT, AFT, and NEA and, furthermore, the New York State Conference of the AAUP hereby request that the national AAUP engage in a similar study on inflation protection for participants in TIAA/CREF or other defined contribution retirement plans.

    c. Fall Meeting proposed sites: Plattsburgh, Rochester, Syracuse, Hilbert
    The organizing committee will select from the sites the most feasible.

    d. Elections (T. P.)

    Elected:
    President – S. Goldberg
    Vice President – Kathy Smith

    Nominees for officer-at-large (2 yr. term) – David Linton, Tom Giordano, Jeanette Jeneault.
    Elected for two-year officer at large - David Linton (16), Jeanette Jeneault (11)

    Nominees for officer at-large (1 yr. term) – Jeff Krauss, Tom Giordano
    Elected for a one year term – Tom Giordano (12)

    e. Guest Speaker - James Berger (Hofstra) on the topic, Challenges We Face with the Increasing Emphasis on Outcomes Assessment. His thesis is that outcomes assessment is inappropriateness for higher education, particularly the Humanities. His remarks included that the models are flawed and the movement is ideologically driven by business. The Humanities must defend themselves against this trend. 2006 Spellings’ Report refers to education as an industry in decline. It recommends cost-cutting and efficiencies. This is not new in the field of education. It harkens back to the Taylor movement earlier in the century – measurable results. Schools were linked to business. A reformer in 1915 would ask about the return on the investment in schools.
    
    Accorfding to Berger, the pressure for accountability is based on dubious methodology. The American Council on Education (college presidents, CEOs, foundations, etc.) published an article stating that accountability should be measured according to the needs of business and produce a flexible, re-trainable, diverse workforce. An external judgment about spending priorities is imposed. The focus is on measurable goals, quantifiable outcomes and customer service. The report represents the community of interest between the corporation and the university; and transforms education into a commodity. Corporations will invest for this model.
    
    Outcomes assessment is valid for some programs in vocational fields, but not the Humanities. Prof. Berger used Skidmore as an example of a college that is conforming to the outcomes assessment model even in the Humanities. However, he said that the interpretation of literary texts does not lend itself to quantifiable assessment.
    
    The Radical Caucus of the MLA calls for resistance and non-collaboration, but it is going to happen. He recommends that we look to our disciplines for appropriate models of assessment. Must remain responsible to the disciplines’ methods – self evaluation and peer review.        
      
    There are conflicts between the values and goals of the Humanities and the corporate model. The Humanities are fields of dissent. So why should the corporation fund programs opposed to its values? That is the question. We must  be persuasive about the value of our disciplines.
    
    Conclusion: Accountability by quantifiable assessment can’t be done. Freud mentions three impossible fields - psychoanalysis, politics and teaching. We may know we’re succeeding when there is no war and no poverty. Blake – “Everything that is was once only imagined.”
    
    Discussion ensued.

    f. Restructuring Discussion (P.Bentley/L. Beaky/E. Gellman)
    P. B., L. B., and E. G. serve on the AAUP National Council and reported on restructuring. The three entities - association, union and foundation - will be voted upon at the annual June meeting.
    
    C. M. asked for the Council Members’ opinions:
    E.G. – Restructuring began behind closed doors with much secrecy. It began when the legal department questioned the AAUP’s legal status. IRS categorizes AAUP as a charitable organization which limits the scope of its activities. The majority of members are in collective bargaining, but few resources that can be used legally for collective bargaining. The AAUP’s lawyers thought that there could be problems with the IRS. A tripartite structure was recommended. C3 will become a C6 professional organization. CBC will be the labor organization and have a separate constitution. The AAUP Foundation will be the public charity and the fund raising arm. Everyone is a member of the professional association. The CBC membership will consist of chapters, not individual members. if they could get the administration to agree to payroll deduction, they should try to get the Faculty Association to agree to a common charge.
    Discussion
    

    • I. Y. – Three related but separate is contradictory. There have always been issues between CBC and the rest of the organization. Does the CBC constitution allow greater separateness?
    • E. G. - The CBC will be the AAUP CBC. The constitution specifies that the CBC cannot take positions in violation of AAUP positions and principles.
    • L. B. – 501©3 status was problematic in terms of its limitations, particularly for receiving tax deductible donations.
    • T. Giordano – Will it simplify the dues issue?
    • P. B. - Not likely, but where one pays one’s dues will be clearer. AAUP was audited by the Department of Labor and AAUP’s attorneys expressed concern. The restructuring process has been costly. There is not enough detail on the dues structure, and she (P. B.) will inform her chapter that she has reservations.
    • E. G. - Dues will be paid to ©6; CBC will have dues as well; there will be a memorandum of understanding that explains the flow of funds between the three entities. The membership drive is experimenting with different dues rates. The impact on the budget is not known.
    • S. G. – American Chemical Society is a 501© 3; dues are rebated from the national to the local. If I made a contribution only to the local, I would not be a member of the national.
    • E.B. – Being a member of AAUP is not like being a member of a professional association. I think many people will join if there are lower dues.
    • J. K. – Reducing dues impacts the budget, but we need to do it. There has to be a value to being a member of AAUP. The organization mentions principles, not the needs of members.
    • E. G. – The CBC members get services from their chapters, but non-CB members do not. 
    • J. M. – Will there be a co-mingling of dues?
    • E. G. – Dues will go to the professional association; the memo of understanding describes the way that CBC receives its funding.
    • J. M. – AAUP has had a problem dealing with lists; when there are three lists. . .?
    • E. G. – Only the association will have individual members; only a chapter can be a member of the CBC.
    • J. Furfero – The issue is not the amount of dues, but what you get for the dues.
    • P. B. – UUP pays 1,000 memberships; we’re a chapter of CBC; our intent was to support the good work of AAUP. There has been wrangling over our AFT status. I have not seen any of the constitutions yet. For a vote of this magnitude, the Association should use its resources to get people to the meeting and make sure they are well informed
    • S. G. – If the documents are distributed via email, it should be a direct link.
    • P. B. – Academe should direct members to the documents. Thus far she is concerned that she had not seen the final documents, only drafts. The restructuring has to happen but the process has been slipshod.
    • E. G. - There will be final documents distributed before the meeting. She urged a positive vote on the substance. The documents are not slipshod, have been reviewed extensively and by the different constituencies. They are presently under review by the IRS and the Department of Labor.

    g. The NYS Conference election process
    

    • E. G. – Expressed concern about the Conference’s election process. The procedures are specified in the Constitution. There needs to be a sub-committee to look into our procedures. They put us at risk now.
    • S. G. – Took exception.
    • E. G. – We need a set of election by-laws.
    • I. Y. – We did not violate the constitution. The problem was that we did not have a full slate.
    • S. G. - There were two sets of candidates. It was fair.
    • E. G. – We need by-laws.

    h. T.P. asked that there be Conference representation at the St. John’s forthcoming meeting.
    
    Motion: That the Conference make an offer to St. Johns to have an officer of the Conference sit in on their meeting. (Policano/Furfero)
    

    • S. G.- I oppose the motion. The leadership of the Conference is available upon request of a chapter. The request would have to come from the President of the chapter. 
    • E. G. - Make the offer.
    • S. G. - I will call the President next week.

    No vote was taken on the motion.

Adjourned:  12:23

*Written reports are linked.

Respectfully submitted by Cecelia McCall Secretary 4/25/08, additions/corrections completed 4/26/08

Top

home > library > confernece meetings >current page