June 3, 1998
June 3, 1998
|Delegates Present||Betty Averette||Martha Barbour||Jeffery Beam|
|Linwood Blalock||Connie Boyce||Mary Braxton||Tommy Brickhouse|
|Lucille Brooks||Gwen Burston||Jean Coble||Mitch Copeland|
|Martha Davidson||Linda Drake||Elizabeth Evans||Linwood Futrelle|
|Betty Geer||Sherry Graham||Phil Hearne||Jennifer Henderson|
|Al Jeter||Bettye Jones||Steve Jones||LaEula Joyner|
|Ken Litowsky||Dee Dee Massey||Anne Montgomery||Jackie Overton|
|Frances Rountree||Bob Schreiner||Jane Stine||Cheryl Stout|
|Nancy Tannenbaum||Terry Teer||Dail White||Carol Worrell|
|Ted Wright||Laurie Charest“||“ = Ex-Officio||Delegates Absent|
|Pat Bigelow||Denise Childress||Joyce Dalgleish||William Grice|
|Eileen McGrath||Lesa McPherson||Barbara Prear||Stephanie Stadler|
|Queen Tutt||Alternates Present||Jim Barnes||Guests|
|Andrew Barron||Sylvia Buckner||Elson Floyd||Jeanne Fugate|
|Bennie Griffin||Scott Ragland||LaBron Reid||Nora Robbins|
Call to Order, Welcome to Guests
Chair Linwood Futrelle called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. The Chair asked members to sign in and to examine the routing file as it was passed around the room. He remarked on WCHL reporter Mitch Kokai’s absence and noted that Kokai had recently taken a position with the University. The Chair praised Kokai’s work in covering the University and the Chapel Hill community.
The Chair recognized Andy Baron, the new manager editor of the University Gazette. He also recognized former Forum Secretary LaBron Reid and Forum charter member Sylvia Buckner.
The Chair introduced Executive Vice Chancellor Elson Floyd. Floyd said that it was a delight to address the Forum and noted that Forum representatives Linwood Futrelle and Jeffery Beam had given an excellent presentation at the May 28 Board of Trustees meeting. Floyd thought that the concerns mentioned received a sympathetic hearing from the Board.
Floyd also praised the Employee Appreciation Fair as an enormous success. He thanked the University Managers’ Association and its chair, Gwen Burston, for all that they had done to make the Fair a success. Floyd commented that the Fair seemed to have had more exhibits than ever before.
Concerning the process governing the proposed revision of the master plan for central campus, Floyd noted that a similar process has been underway over the past two years which has focused on the campus’ outlying areas. Three important committees will oversee the process for the central campus; the Forum Chair has been appointed to the campus steering committee. (The other two committees will deal with operational and linkage issues.)
Floyd said that the examination of the master plan would be an exciting process lasting between 18-24 months. The University plans to use the food facility in the Hanes parking lot to exhibit storyboards with proposed changes to the University and Chapel Hill communities. It will be very important for the University to solicit and receive feedback about the variety of ideas under consideration, in order that the greater community can come to embrace the revised master plan. Floyd said that the process would need to account for the location of buildings and infrastructure as well as the protection of existing land.
Floyd noted that an enrollment task force would soon be commissioned to deal with a range of demographic issues related to an expected increase in the number of students attending the University in the next millennium. Some proposed plans have the University absorbing between 30-50,000 students in the coming years. Provost Dick Richardson will chair the task force which will examine the role of UNC-Chapel Hill as the UNC System’s flagship institution in dealing with this increase in students and the appropriate funding level of the University.
Finally, Floyd noted that this meeting would be the last in which he would address the Employee Forum. This reality had just hit as he walked across campus that morning. Floyd recalled his relationships with past Forum chairs Rachel Windham, Ann Hamner, Bob Schreiner and Linwood Futrelle. He felt that that the Forum was absolutely important to the University and that it was important for the University to embrace the Forum. As an example, he recalled that Windham’s request that the Forum be placed on the University organizational chart seemed a “no-brainer” given the organization’s importance.
Floyd reminded the assembly that everything done here at the University is done in order to improve the quality of learning and the educational experience here on campus. He thought that the Forum’s work advanced these goals. The University was no doubt a better institution due to the dedication and commitment of Forum Delegates.
Furthermore, Floyd asserted that there still remained a wonderful story to be told about the work of the University’s staff Employees. He thought that Vice Chair Jeffery Beam had done much to tell this story in his poem “Song of the University Worker” which he read to the Board of Trustees May 28. Beam’s poem emphasized the partnership that exists among all of its community members to fulfill the University’s mission. This partnership is a reality that governs everyone’s activities and actions. Floyd appreciated tremendously the opportunity to get to know members of the Forum, and thanked members for their work for the institution. He hoped that this effort would continue here at UNC-Chapel Hill and at other System institutions.
The Forum gave Floyd a standing ovation. Sherry Graham asked when Floyd might return in another capacity to UNC. Floyd said he had an enormous affection for the Chapel Hill campus and did not want to rule out a second tour of duty. He could not say what the future holds.
Nancy Tannenbaum asked if Floyd could discuss the changes that will affect UNC as the campus is forced to increase in population. Floyd said that UNC would be affected by a phenomenon known as the “politics of growth.” Historically, UNC-Chapel Hill has been the 2nd largest campus in the UNC System. However, proposed enrollment increases will soon make UNC the 4th largest institution following NC State (as before), UNC-Charlotte, and East Carolina. This shift in size will inevitably impact the University’s standing in the State Legislature, and it will become more important than ever to work with the General Assembly to emphasize the University contributions to the State’s quality of life. Floyd was convinced that increased numbers of students would not diminish the quality of UNC as an institution.
Elizabeth Evans asked if there were any word on possible expansion of the University’s local calling area. Floyd said that this task had been one he had been unable to accomplish during his time as Executive Vice Chancellor, and he was uncertain why this concern had been so difficult to resolve. He would take one more stab at the problem in the remaining free time he had available.
Jeffery Beam asked whether there would be increased accountability of funds spent to support parking and transit operations. Floyd said that the parking and transit task force had just completed the first phase of its work, and he anticipated that budget issues would be placed on future agendas. The University will work to carry out the many recommendations included in the report, and should be able to prepare a budget statement for the Forum’s review.
The Chair called for a motion to suspend the rules so that the Forum could consider a resolution honoring Elson S. Floyd for his service to the University and installing him as an honorary lifetime delegate of the Forum. Nancy Tannenbaum made this motion, with Anne Montgomery seconding. The motion was approved without opposition.
The Chair then asked for a motion to approve the resolution. Jeffery Beam made this motion, with Lucille Brooks seconding. The motion was approved unanimously. The Chair presented Floyd with an Employee Appreciation Fair T-shirt signed by members of the Forum for him to take to his new position as President of Western Michigan University in Kalamazoo.
The Chair welcomed Kay Straughn, the Human Resources Information System (HRIS) project manager leader, to give a brief interview of the HRIS.
Straughn thanked the Forum for asking her to come to speak about the HRIS and its prospective benefits for Employees and departments. The HRIS system has been the project of over a year and a half of work to select and implement a system on campus.
Straughn said that the current Human Resources system evolved from the payroll system. Often, information is 3-4 weeks old before it is transferred from Payroll to Human Resources. Employees do not currently have access to the data that they need to manage departments.
Around 3 years ago, Business & Finance initiated a quality project on campus, forming a team to research what must be done to implement a campus Human Resources information system. The first step of this process was to figure out the goals for this system. The selection team spoke with system users and administrators to find out the primary needs of the new system. Respondents cited a need for current accurate data in their work, noting that some data was often three and four months old. There were also questions about turnaround time and effort to ensure a transaction was being processed.
Respondents emphasized the importance of an integrated single database. Straughn recalled that an Employee trying to register their changed address must work with a number of different offices. The HRIS will centralize these records into one source of data.
Departments requested increased access to needed data on the status and number of Employees in their charge. Currently, departments must keep paper copies and tickler files to insure transactions are processed.
Human Resources hopes to have this information distributed across campus and to improve the quality of the information available. Respondents asked that the information be placed in a format that they could use as a source for reports. Presently, much of this information is captured only on paper, delaying responses to questions.
Planners wanted better interface with other campus systems, such as the Student Information and Campus Directory systems. Also, they desired streamlined processes, which would lead to increased departmental efficiency and accountability. Finally, the system should improve communications between Human Resources and the various departments about this data.
Implementation team members selected InPower as the best system choice based on a combination of functionality, directions in technology and customer service.
The core team sought to transfer much of the processing of this information from Human Resources to the departments. Departments will be able to skip several steps if they can enter and validate relevant data themselves rather than going through Human Resources. The implementation team wants departments to gain power to manage their own position creation and funding for personnel expenditures. Human Resources hopes to improve and simplify the processes for hiring and managing Employees, giving departments a larger roles in administering these procedures.
From an Employee perspective, the new system should eventually allow self-service administration of personal benefits and personal information such as benefits. Human Resources, Payroll, and central funding offices should be available to answer questions and handle exceptions. This change should give administrators more time to help with specific problems rather than routine work.
Another request was for the new scheme to address the differences between the EPA and SPA systems. While many differences exist between the two classifications, it was felt that there should be consistent data between the two. The goal is to have one system support both EPA and SPA classifications taking into account the different rules governing the two bodies.
From these ideas, the core team developed its plan for implementing the InPower system. Straughn said that the University would enter the training phase for the program soon, focusing on Employee and position data. This foundation will soon allow departments the latitude to create management positions and to help with recording hires and terminations.
In addition, the system should provide departments more access to position funding information like grants and internal department accounts. For example, a department today creating a position must create a position description, route the description through approval channels to Human Resources and Position Management, then undergo the classification procedure for the position. A goal is to eliminate much of the paperwork associated with this process. The position description will still be required, but the new system should make parallel steps related to position management and accounting. Thus, the classification and funding processes will run simultaneously.
Another feature of the system will allow departments to do some of their own classification work, lessening dependence on Position Management. Straughn noted the amount of time now required related to position creation, and thought that the new system will save users time.
Concerning the hiring process, currently, proposed job offers must undergo an equity analysis by the Employment Department. Following this step, the recruiter must contact the applicant with an offer and await their response. Straughn observed this process is laborious and inefficient. The salary equity step is a rather large bottleneck in the current process, and the core team has automated this step to track the experience and education of all Employees on campus. This system should automate and quickly improve these salary analyses, and should easily check proposed salaries against available funding. Straughn thought that these steps would cut down tremendously on the time required to make an offer to a candidate. Human Resources will be available to work with departments in this area as before.
Human Resources facilitators will be able to enter name and address changes as well as emergency contact information. Eventually, Employees will enter this information into the system themselves. Human Resources will look to track Employee information on education, experience and skills in the future. The performance management system will also be a part of the HRIS, and faculty curriculum vitae’s will be collected also.
Finally, the system will describe how departmental funds work with personnel expenditures. Administrators cited this area as being time-consuming and difficult for to track. The system should provide real-time verification of budget balances and encumbrances of personnel expenditures. Some departments are maintaining two separate systems, one internal and one to provide information to Payroll.
The system hopefully will be able to deal with and improve the retroactive processing and management of reserves. Some departments have developed their own systems to deal with cost codes and sub-account tracking; the HRIS team is implementing its changes in conjunction with the departmental accounting system.
The core team undertook an analysis of everything associated with the current system. At this point, development of the system is almost complete. Also, Human Resources has begun system and conversion testing, and will begin converting data from payroll, campus directory, and some of the EPA ancillary systems. There will be tests done to insure balance between the old and new systems.
Many Employees will need training on the new system. The core team has conducted surveys to determine user preferences about training manuals, length of training sessions, and on-line help. In addition, the system will have a support structure for HRIS newcomers.
The most important criteria for beginning implementation is to make certain that the system’s interface with payroll is functional. Straughn said that Human Resources hopes to implement this interface soon after the Legislature approves Employee salary increases.
A goal of the system is to bring all relevant data on-line, though not necessarily all departments. The HRIS team will work with larger departments first while Human Resources helps smaller departments input their data.
Straughn said that this process will continue to take new technologies into account. For example, the HRIS will include leave tracking in its next system version. The system also will automate applicant tracking which should reduce a great amount of paperwork. Other projects under consideration are the submission of TOP applications on-line and registration for Human Resources training.
The system will also address managerial needs associated with administrative access to this data, especially for line managers, and interface with Training & Development.
Straughn offered to take questions from the Forum. Bettye Averette asked if the HRIS will eventually show sick and vacation leave balances on Employee pay slips. Straughn said that this request was one of the most common in user surveys. Plans are underway to implement this feature, but Straughn emphasized that Employees must understand that the balance depicted will be current only for the payroll cutoff date.
Sherry Graham asked if there is a target date for implementation. Straughn said that an exact date did not exist, although stages of the project should go on line of September and October of this year. However, much depends on testing and training results as well as decisions of the General Assembly.
The Chair thanked Straughn for her remarks and wished her well in implementation of the HRIS. Straughn recognized Forum delegate Connie Boyce as a member of the HRIS core team.
Jeffery Beam noted that the Employee Presentations Committee had organized a series of Forum presentations on Employee experiences increasing their educational background. He introduced Sylvia Buckner to give the first of these presentations. Buckner is the Davis Library’s backlog unit supervisor. She served as a charter member of the Forum, and recently completed her masters’ degree in library science.
Buckner enrolled as an undergraduate at the age of 42 in 1976. As a mother of two, she had participated in all of the University’s orientation sessions for undergraduates and brought a considerable different perspective to class discussions. Buckner also noted that enrollees would need to file paperwork associated with their enrollment such as vaccination records.
Buckner received her bachelor’s degree in 1980. She moved on to take a job in technical services at the Wilson Library, and moved on to acquisitions after receiving training to deal with new technologies in the library. Thereafter, Buckner was installed in the cataloguing department and organized the Backlog Reduction Force, or BARF, learning cataloguing as she went along. The Force was asked to deal with a backlog of 90,000 books. Buckner said she was fortunate to work with a number of committed students who have become leaders in their communities.
Buckner enrolled in Saturday classes at North Carolina Central towards attaining her masters’ degree in library science. After taking all the courses Central had to offer on the weekends, Buckner overcame bureaucratic hurdles to finish her coursework in courses at NCCU and UNC-Chapel Hill.
While writing her masters’ thesis, Buckner moved from a judgmental to a critical approach to the problem of cataloguing the thousands of books given to UNC Libraries. Through her research and cooperation with the BARF team, Buckner was able to devise a system which reduced the processing of backlogs, saving time and money. She asked the head of the Library to be her advisor and was able to gain feedback from other faculty members in completing her project.
Beam thanked Buckner for her presentation.
Human Resources Update
The Chair welcomed Associate Vice-Chancellor for Human Resources Laurie Charest to provide the Forum’s Human Resources update. Charest echoed Floyd’s earlier comments praising Futrelle and Beam for their presentation to the Board of Trustees.
Employees should have received a mailing about the State long-term health care plan. Those desiring more information can attend a series of meeting with representatives of the different health care plan. This option is very complex, and there are many different choices for Employees to make. Human Resources staff have little information about the plan so Employees are best advised to attend one of these meetings occurring June 24 at 10 a.m., 1 p.m., 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. in the Friday Center with representatives of the company offering the plan. There will be a notice of these meetings in the University Gazette. The plan is open to family members, parents, parents of in-laws, and grandparents, among others.
The University Blood Drive still needs donors and volunteers to work the event, which will occur Wednesday, July 29 in the Dean Smith Center. Interested parties can contact 96-BLOOD or access http://www.sph.unc.edu/blood. This will be the Blood Drive’s 10th year.
Approval of the Minutes
The Chair asked for a motion to approve the minutes of the May 6, 1998 minutes. Jeffery Beam noted that on the last paragraph of page 9 the minutes should indicate that Sylvia Buckner works in Davis Library. In addition, David DeVries is the director of the State Health Plan. Finally, Bettye Jones’ name was misspelled on page 7 of the minutes.
Joyce Dalgleish made a motion to approve the minutes seconded by Beam. The minutes were approved as amended.
Lucille Brooks rose for a point of personal privilege to praise Chair Linwood Futrelle and Vice Chair Jeffery Beam for their fine work in representing the Forum at the May 28 Board of Trustees meeting. She said that Futrelle had done a superb and professional job of presenting a difficult amount of material, setting Beam up for the kill with his fine poem, “Song of the University Worker.” The Forum gave the pair a standing ovation. The Chair hoped that the Forum could make the presentation an annual event and recalled that he had received a nice message from Board Chair Richard Stevens.
The Forum took a moment to stretch.
The Forum considered a proposal from Martha Barbour, Ken Litowsky of the Personnel Policies Committee to urging departments hold regular staff meetings. Litowsky noted a concern expressed to the committee that line Employees often do not feel they know what is going on in their department. The committee was asked to arrive at some language to encourage departments to schedule some sort of regular meeting for all the staff employed there.
Litowsky referred members to the proposal itself captured in boldface in the May 26 committee minutes. The Chair asked the committee to recommend a way to disseminate this proposal throughout the University. Litowsky was uncertain how the Forum had distributed proposals in the past. Laurie Charest suggested the Forum forward the proposal to the Chancellor as a recommendation for action. The Chair was amenable to this course.
Jeffery Beam said that a motion to accept the proposal was first necessary. Litowsky said that the Personnel Policies Committee was not married to the language in the proposal, and was willing to accept changes. Sherry Graham praised the proposal for specifically mentioning the duties of Human Resources Facilitators. In addition, Graham thought that departments with Forum representatives might benefit from hearing a special Forum report. She thought that some departments might not be aware of the impact of Forum activities on their departments. Litowsky asked if departments could invite Forum members to make presentations, and Graham thought this was a good idea.
Beam asked how Forum members felt about this idea. Graham said that attending staff meetings might provide a more direct recognition of the work of Forum Delegates among staff. Litowsky said that providing departments with a list of current Forum Delegates could aid them in planning staff meetings of this kind. He did not think that the list of ideas in the proposal was all-inclusive.
Beam moved that the Forum recommend the proposal to the Chancellor for his advice and implementation. Lucille Brooks seconded this motion. Anne Montgomery asked that the letter request that the Chancellor disseminate to department heads, directors and deans and others as he deems appropriate.
Graham thought that some department chairs might not know how to find out who serves on the Forum and thus would need information accessible to them. Martha Davidson thought that the proposal should reflect the fact that some departments have staff meetings for managers, administrators and Human Resources personnel. In these cases, she felt the information provided in these meetings was not passed down to line Employees. She thought it best for the Forum to emphasize “all-hands” meeting in its correspondence. Litowsky said that the staff meetings the committee had in mind were “all-hands” meetings of all staff. He agreed with Davidson’s point.
Martha Barbour said that the Dental Ecology holds regularly scheduled general staff meetings, but the entire School of Dentistry does not. The Chair said that Information Technology Services also holds these meetings with personnel from ATN and AIS. Beam said that the Libraries have held general staff meetings for over 20 years now.
Litowsky noted that the word “departmental” is very difficult to define globally within the University environment. Nevertheless, the committee sought to promote communications from the highest manager to the lowest grade Employee in the unit.
In the absence of further discussion, the Chair called the question. The Forum approved the motion. The Chair asked that Litowsky work with the Forum Office to create a final draft of the letter for his signature. He thanked Barbour and the Personnel Policies Committee for their work.
The Forum had already dealt with the resolution honoring Executive Vice Chancellor Elson Floyd.
The Chair noted that the Faculty Council had approved a resolution supporting the University to continue to offer courses as a staff benefit and encouraging supervisors to adjust work schedules to allow staff to attend University courses through flex-time options or other arrangements. He noted that the Executive Committee had recommended the passage of a resolution thanking the Faculty Council for its support.
Sherry Graham asked how this resolution differs from what is already in place for staff. Laurie Charest noted that staff in some departments face difficulties in obtaining flexibility in their working hours from their supervisors. The Faculty Council’s resolution places greater emphasis on this need. Supervisors are already encouraged to approve flextime for this use in current policy. Graham summed up that the resolution does not do anything different; Charest agreed, saying that the resolution merely reinforces current policy.
Bob Schreiner added that the Career Development Committee has a liaison from the Faculty Council, Ron Strauss, who has been very active. He said that the committee has already begun laying groundwork for a joint resolution, which may be approved in the fall. Schreiner did not think that the resolution in question would close the book on this subject by any means.
Betty Averette asked if the policy read that Employees wanting to take courses must use their vacation time for this purpose. The Chair said that if one’s supervisor will allow it, the Employee can arrange flextime around their coursework. Averette said that she had taken classes and been forced to use vacation time. Elizabeth Evans said that only class sessions related directly to one’s job could be considered work time. An Employee needing an hour and half lunch for a class can arrange to come in earlier or stay later by a half-hour with the assent of their supervisor. The Chair thought that the Council’s resolution asked that supervisors be aware of this need among their staff.
The Forum resolved to vote on this proposal in July. Elizabeth Evans confirmed that the resolution had originated with the Executive Committee.
The Chair said that the Executive Committee minutes from April and May would be included in the July Forum agenda packet.
The Executive Committee provided feedback to Jerry Howerton on the proposal for supervisory training for faculty and other high-level administrators. This letter was included in the meeting’s routing file.
Bob Schreiner said that the minutes of the previous Career Development Committee meeting had been distributed detailing a meeting with University Career Counselor Erika Phillips. The committee will try to follow up on training and computer literacy issues from last year.
The Career Development Committee wrote a letter of support for the staff components of the Carolina Computer Initiative, as a means to support assurances that staff concerns will be reflected in the Initiative. Bob Schreiner said that the letter emphasizes follow-through on the Forum’s computer literacy resolution, staff access to electronic mail and technical resources, support for staff technical training and career enhancement, and appropriate resources for staff requiring in their daily work lives.
Schreiner moved that the letter indicating support of the Carolina Computing Initiative be sent to the Chancellor by the Forum. Elizabeth Evans seconded the motion. In the absence of further discussion, the Chair called the question. The motion was approved with one dissenting vote.
Connie Boyce reported that the New Careers Training Board has made great strides in encouraging advancement among Employees in salary grades 50-54. Boyce described a range of activities which were depicted in that month’s packet including a career fair August 1, creation of an Employee computer lab, and implementation of additional advanced skills training programs. Sherry Graham asked how the Board had done in publicizing the career fair. Boyce replied that the Board would sent a memo to relevant supervisors but would need their support in reaching the broad range of Employees.
Jennifer Henderson, Co-Chair of the Communications Committee, distributed copies of a Forum brochure created for the Employee Appreciation Fair.
Tommy Brickhouse, Chair of the Compensation & Benefits Committee, welcomed new members Michael Brady and Betty Meehan-Black. Brickhouse had been very active distributing legislative letter guidelines to Employees at the recent Appreciation Fair. The Chair thanked Brickhouse for his work in getting these letters prepared and distributed. The Committee had also placed an article in the University Gazette concerning lobbying guidelines. The sample letters in question are located on the Forum web page at http://www.unc.edu.
The committee will meet again June 11 with Nora Robbins to discuss the comprehensive major medical plan claims analysis. The group hopes to boil down the analysis into some meaning information before the new enrollment period.
Jeffery Beam, Chair of the Employee Presentations Committee, said that the spring community meeting on childcare issues would take place June 9 in the Hanes Art Center Auditorium. Delegates assisting with the meeting should be present around 9-9:15 a.m.
Lucille Brooks, Chair of the Nominating Committee, said the group had produced the solicitation for nominations letter to go out to Employees around July 15. Matt Banks will work with Printing & Duplicating to distribute the letters.
Nancy Tannenbaum, Chair of the Orientation Committee, noted that Delegates had been seated next to their Forum buddies. The committee will meet again in July.
Martha Barbour, Chair of the Personnel Policies Committee, said that Peter Schledorn was scheduled to produce a draft on SPA exempt Employees compensatory time policy that week. She thanked Ken Litowsky for his work on the staff meetings proposal.
There was no report from the Recognition & Awards Committee. The group’s minutes were included in the June packet.
Anne Montgomery, Chair of the University Committee Assignments Committee, said that openings still exist for Employees to serve on the Women’s Issues Advisory Board and the CCI implementation teams. Interested Employees should contact Montgomery at firstname.lastname@example.org or 962-3119 for more information about these opportunities.
Task Force Reports
The Chair reported that the Board of Trustees Presentation Task Force had completed its work. Similarly, the Employee Appreciation Fair Booth Task Force had finished its work. The Chair thanked all those concerned for their assistance with these two important projects. He asked Linda Drake to come forward to draw names of the two grand prize-winners. Drake drew Susan Haseldean’s of the Office of Development as the winner of the soccer ball signed by UNC women’s coach Anson Dorrance, and Marjorie Strickland of Undergraduate Admissions was selected to win the basketball signed by the UNC women’s basketball team. The Chair thanked Tommy Brickhouse and Mail Services for their help in delivering the other Fair prizes.
Bob Schreiner reported that the Grievance Procedure Review Task Force will hold three meetings on June 8, June 12, and June 24, the last in 235 Rosenau. Notice of the meeting has been disseminated to Human Resources Facilitators. The June 12 meeting has been designated worktime if one checks with one’s supervisor. Brickhouse confirmed that the June 8 and 24 meetings are focus groups sessions. Schreiner said this would be the case, meaning that there would be no formal presentations from the task force.
There was no report from the Intellectual Climate Response Task Force.
Bennie Griffin of the University Outsourcing Steering Team reported the group had held a brief meeting June 1. In the second year of the study, the team felt it advisable to first consult with the accounting principles team before beginning the main body of work. He noted that the outsourcing process was meant to upgrade the competitiveness of University services.
In the second year of the outsourcing study, the team will examine housekeeping services in Housing, and Printing Services. Both of these services have requested a consultant to help them with the study. The team will also study records storage which the University does not presently have.
The team’s semi-annual report is due to General Administration by the end of June. The report will reflect the status of the campus study to this point. Griffin recalled that the study is a three-year plan, and that the University had just finished the first year of this plan. Of fifty-one functions designated for study by General Administration, seventeen functions have already been outsourced. A larger portion of these services will be studied in the third year of the plan.
There was no report from the School Volunteerism Task Force.
Gwen Burston reported that the Transit and Parking Task Force’s report has been written and the group’s work was complete. Burston would work with the Forum Office to provide copies to Forum Delegates desiring one. The report includes a slew of recommendations including items for study in 1998-99. Elizabeth Evans understood that the Board of Trustees had approved recommendations for the 1998-99 year only. The Chair thanked Burston and Evans for their work.
There was no report from the UNC System Staff Assembly.
The University Priorities and Budget Committee has moved its weekly meetings from 7 a.m. to 8 a.m. Thursdays. The committee is moving into the nitty-gritty details of how funds will be reallocated throughout the University. The Chair anticipated that final decisions would come about soon.
There was no report from Faculty Council liaisons.
Questions and Announcements
The Chair introduced Jeffery Beam to read his poem “Song of the University Worker.” Beam thanked Lucille Brooks, Elizabeth Evans, Ann Hamner, and Rachel Windham for their contributions to the content of the poem, and felt that the poem was a covenant depicting the delicate ecology that binds the University together.
Copies of the poem are available from the Forum Office. The Chair asked members to sign a T-shirt which would be presented to Elson Floyd upon his departure.
In the absence of further discussion, the meeting adjourned by acclamation at 11:28 a.m.
Matt Banks, Recording Secretary