June 5, 2002
Agenda — June 5, 2002
9:30 a.m.—Meeting, Wilson Library Assembly Room
I. Call to Order
II. Welcome Guests, Members of the Press
III. Opening Remarks–Susan Worley, Executive Director, Volunteers for Youth
VI. Old Business
· Resolution Seeking Forum Representation on Chancellor’s Administrative Council (2nd Reading)
V. New Business
· Resolution Addressing Staff Attendance in Training Classes (1st Reading)
V. Employee Presentations or Questions
VI. Approval of Minutes of the May 1, 2002 meeting P
VII. Forum Committee Reports
· Career Development: Fred Jordan
· Communications: Linda Collins
Þ Forum Newsletter
· Employee Presentations: Gary Lloyd
· Nominating: Kay Teague
Þ Forum Elections
· Orientation: Joan Ferguson/Barbara Logue
· Personnel Issues: Mary Ann Vacheron
· Recognition and Awards: Shirley Hart/Sylvia White
· University Committee Assignments: Lee Edmark
VIII. Stretch Time 6
IX. Chair’s Report (Executive Committee): Tommy Griffin
X. Task Force/University Committee Reports
· Transportation & Parking Advisory—Joanne Kucharski/Jimmy Workman/Tommy Griffin
· Personnel Flexibility Study Committee—John Heuer
XI. Human Resources Update
· Laurie Charest, Associate Vice Chancellor for Human Resources
XII. Special Presentations
· Debbie Freed, University Transit Demand Manager, Rick Hannegan, Assistant Director of Chapel Hill Transit, and John Tallmadge and Billie Cox from Triangle Transit Authority to Discuss Mass Transit Options
P = Included in Agenda Packet
June 5, 2002
Wilson Library Assembly Room
Mary Ann Vacheron
“ = Ex-Officio
Vice Chair Gary Lloyd called the meeting to order at 9:34 a.m., noting that Chair Tommy Griffin could not be with the Forum due to the death of his fiance’s mother. Lloyd welcomed everyone to the meeting and introduced Susan Worley from Chapel Hill Volunteers for Youth.
Worley thanked the Forum for the chance to speak. She serves as the director of Volunteers for Youth, a non-profit program which provides mentors to at-risk youth. This program needs volunteers and she hoped to find people here. She had met Griffin at a center for public service meeting and he had invited her to attend.
Worley had come to Chapel Hill in 1960, and had attended UNC as an undergrad and worked at UNC Hospitals. Her husband is a member of the faculty, and she had attended the UNC school of social work.
She said that she loves her hometown and thought that Chapel Hill could not be all it could without provide help for all of its children. Volunteers for Youth changes Chapel Hill one child at a time, among all ages, races and income levels. Children are referred when others feel that they have become disconnected from the community. She noted that most children stay out of trouble when they worry about what others will think, such as grandmothers, neighbors, or teachers. She said that mentors serve to make children think of the consequences of their actions, and provide the idea that adults can be trusted. Many of these children have been let down by adults in the past.
Worley said that Volunteers for Youth had exposed children to things they would not otherwise know, such as an experience with the University’s basketball team. One little girl now hoped to attend UNC after her time at the Dean Dome. Another girl had never seen a family tip a waitress before. One woman had mentored a 12 year old girl over twenty years ago, and recently heard from her following an Oprah show on reunions. This girl had kept everything associated with their relationship in a scrapbook, and said that their relationship had inspired her to finish school and obtain work.
Worley granted that most children will not stay in contact with their mentors, but she asked Forum members to spread the word about the Volunteers for Youth program. She thanked the Forum for the chance to speak.
Lloyd said that members of the administration were unable to attend due to investment fund meetings and travel engagements.
Lloyd moved on to consideration of the chancellor’s advisory council resolution. David Collins moved that in the third paragraph, the phrase “will be” be changed to “is”. This motion met with approval by the Forum.
Collins also moved that the resolution allow representation by the Chair “or their designee.” Fred Jordan asked if it were standard procedure to allow a designee to serve on the committee, such as the Vice Chair serving in the Chair’s place. Collins thought that the committee’s rules would necessarily override the Forum’s resolution, but thought that the language should be in place for such an eventuality. Associate Vice Chancellor for Human Resources Laurie Charest thought that people do not sit in on the advisory council.
Collins reiterated his motion, and the Forum approved his motion after some misunderstanding. Collins then moved to approve the resolution with the two changes, seconded by Diane O’Connor. The motion was approved unanimously.
Lloyd moved on to first reading consideration of the resolution on staff attendance at training and development classes. He asked why the word staff was included in parentheses in the second paragraph. Jordan said that he would be glad to remove the word if the Forum felt it advisable. Lloyd thought it would be best to apply the statement to all supervisors.
Lloyd asked if there were further comments about the resolution. Tom Arnel asked how the Forum would publicize its statement. Jordan said that the Forum would probably use the Daily Tar Heel and the University Gazette as primary sources, along with the newsletter InTouch. Lloyd said that the Forum would take up the resolution again on second reading at its July meeting.
Lloyd asked for a motion to approve the minutes of the May Forum meeting. Barbara Logue made this motion, seconded by O’Connor. In the absence of further discussion, the minutes were approved unanimously.
Fred Jordan, chair of the Career Development committee, said that the group had welcomed Arlene Rainey and Stephanie Lombardo from Human Resources and Continuing Education, respectively. He noted that the deadline for registration for the second session of summer school was June 10. The committee had worked on the resolution just discussed and also continues to work on recommendations for the staff training fund allocation. The committee will next meet June 20 in Sitterson Hall room 115, at 2 p.m.
Linda Collins, chair of the Communications committee, noted that the May edition of InTouch had gone out. She invited members and Employees to submit their ideas for the June issue. Collins noted that the committee had finished its work on the University Gazette insert celebrating the Forum’s tenth anniversary. She thanked Valerie Price for her wonderful piece on 25 year Employees who had served on the Forum, and Barbara Logue for her great work on the insert’s photographs. She also thanked Forum Assistant Matt Banks for his work on logistical details, as well as the staff of the University Gazette. The committee will meet again June 6 at 10 a.m. in the Health Science Library rare books room on the second floor.
Gary Lloyd, chair of the Employee Presentations committee, said that the spring community meeting will take place on June 27 from 10:30-noon in Hamilton 100. Chancellor Moeser will provide a University update, allowing discussion on a wide range of topics. Publicity about the meeting will appear in the University Gazette, InTouch and through a hot memo to all staff Employees. Lloyd anticipates that the fall community meeting will address the personnel flexibility committee work.
Kay Teague, chair of the Nominating committee, said that group continues its work on revising the Forum attendance policy. These revisions will now go to the Executive Committee and after that to the full Forum for consideration.
Teague noted that solicitation letters for the upcoming Forum elections will go out the following week, and Employees should have received electronic nominations the previous week. She asked each delegate to find someone interested in serving as a Forum nominee. She also reminded Delagates to sign in for each meeting. Teague noted that the deadline for Forum nominations is July 13.
Barbara Logue, co-chair of the Orientation committee, noted that the committee had met with the Recognition & Awards committee to discuss the ten year anniversary event, to take place October 2. She said that Chancellor Moeser had accepted an invitation to speak at that event.
Logue said that women’s basketball coach Sylvia Hatchell had accepted an invitation to speak at the new delegate orientation, also in October. She hoped that training & development would conduct a teambuilding exercise for that group. Also, the committee plans to create a one-page guide to describe what being a Forum delegate actually means. Finally, the committee has invited former provost Dick Richardson to address the Forum at its annual retreat January 23, 2003.
Mary Ann Vacheron, chair of the Personnel Issues committee, said that group had met in the last month. One topic that arose was health insurance for people hospitalized outside of North Carolina. She had asked Linda Gregory to provide some clarification on these concerns. In addition, Vacheron said that Rex Hospitals are considered Costwise facilities under the State plan, but the emergency physicians there are not. This discrepancy means that Employees in the State plan might face additional charges at Rex Hospitals for emergency service, and she thought it wise to notify Employees to avoid the Rex Hospitals emergency room when possible.
Vacheron said that the committee had also discussed the limitations on the State plan’s preferred drug list, and noted Employee complaints about a lack of an appeal process to place other drugs on the preferred list. In at least one case, only one drug can treat a specific condition, and this drug is not on the preferred list.
Vacheron also wondered whether increased health insurance premiums and co-payments could be indexed to inflation, or if the Legislature could specify that premiums hold steady in price for a two year period.
Charest said that Linda Gregory was recovering from a broken back.
Vacheron said that her committee had requested details about raises given to certain high-level administrators which had received recent publicity. She said that her committee had experienced trouble accessing this information. The committee had decided to invite Charest and Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration Nancy Suttenfield to a meeting either in June or July.
Vacheron noted that Charest had requested that the committee review other recent surveys for duplication before publishing its own SPA salary survey. She said that the group would see what it could find.
Shirley Hart, co-chair of the Recognition & Awards committee, said that group had met June 2 to discuss the ten year reunion event. She noted that the committee had hosted a luncheon for Delegates and alternates in May, which had an attendance of around 15-20 people. She said that the committee plans to send out solicitations for the peer recognition program around July 15. Peer recognition gifts will depend on the status of the Forum budget. The committee will next meet July 8.
Lee Edmark, chair of the University Committee Assignments committee, said that group had met that morning. The committee had appointed George Ann Bissett to study University signage, and Griffin and Edmark to serve on the Excellence in Management award committee. Drake Maynard, director of Human Resources administration, had asked the committee to provide 3-4 people to interview a new director of benefits.
The committee would also work to update the list of University committee information, hoping to complete this task by July.
Lloyd noted that some Forum Delegates might have decided to take vacation on the week of July 4, and asked if Delagates would prefer meeting on July 10 rather than July 3. Gary Cocker made this motion, seconded by Clarence Peoples. The motion was approved with one vote against. [Due to a room conflict, the Executive Committee voted to move the meeting back to July 3. All Delegates unable to attend that meeting will have their absence counted as excused.]
Tom Arnel noted that some University parking lots will now become gated, leading to a charge of much greater than the 20% maximum promised. People parking in these gated lots, which include the N4 and other lots, will suffer as much as a $150 increase in parking fees. Arnel said that the transportation and parking advisory committee (TPAC) had not relayed this information to staff members affected by the change until after the fact. He said that he had personally come late to the process but had heard from Griffin that TPAC had not explicitly detailed the change in its community meetings.
Lloyd noted that he, Griffin, Teague and Banks had made a day trip to Boone for a meeting of UNC staff organizations, hosted by the Appalachian State Staff Council. He said that representatives from seven schools had heard presentations from Ron Penny and Kitty McCollum from the Office of the president, and SEANC representatives. He hoped that these discussions would continue.
John Heuer, 2001 chair of the Forum, made a report from the University personnel flexibility committee. He said that group should complete its activities that Friday. The committee had held interesting, wide-ranging discussions related to personnel issues. The committee had discussed possibly commissioning a University ombudsman to intervene in disciplinary actions and mediation. Eventually, the committee decided to include this subject in its glossary of terms used in the report, which also summarized State and federal statutes aside from the Office of State Personnel.
Heuer recalled Tom Rhyne’s theme that University faculty could apply themselves to campus and staff issues, thanking Kevin Fitzgerald, Bill Turnier and Steve Allred for their considerable help.
Assistant Provost for Finance Elmira Mangum and Charest have co-chaired the committee, which has expedited its work to make recommendations to the Office of the President, the State Personnel commission and a legislative study committee. Heuer hoped that the committee could issue a report to the chancellor in the next couple of weeks, assuming it finishes its work this Friday. He looked forward to discussions in InTouch and at the fall community meeting.
Vacheron asked if the report will be made available to the public next week. Heuer said that the document is a public one, and should be posted to the website. He noted that the Forum web page and the institutional research website each have a link to the personnel flexibility web page. He hoped that the committee could loan its conclusions to other groups further away.
Human Resources Update
Charest noted the difficult times to face the University with projected budget reductions. She did not know how large these reductions would be, and said that Human Resources was working with departments that faced the possibility of layoffs. Human Resources had assembled a packet of information for people facing layoffs, and would offer additional training, workshops and outplacement services to Employees laid off.
Charest noted that the media has reported that the Governor’s budget will not offer a raise to State employees this year. Keith Fogleman thought that some employees, such as teachers, would receive raises. He also noted the publicized raises given to high-level administrators at the University earlier this year. Charest said that teachers would receive step raises, and that the Legislature determines what the increase will be.
Charest said that the freeze on State funded positions will expire July 1, meaning departments can hire people into State funded positions after that date. The Board of Governors freeze on salary increases from State funds will continue after July 1 and would expire only after the Legislature approves a salary increase for EPA and SPA employees. This move imposes additional reporting requirements on the University, as departments an still do reclassifications but must report these actions within ten days after completion.
Jordan noted that educational assistance monies are available this year but Employees must submit forms to Human Resources by June 13. Katherine Graves asked Charest to explain the status of the educational assistance money. Charest said that Employees can obtain this money for work-related training somewhere other than the UNC System, such as at community colleges or other accredited institutions.
Charest said that supervisors should submit their performance ratings for Employees within the next couple of weeks to be entered into the Human Resources information system (HRIS).
Dana Xiao asked if departments can increase salaries after July 1. Charest said that a State funded position can receive a salary increase only with advance approval from the Board of Governors. The University can send in its requests to the Board, which only meets every other month. In effect, the University’s ability to obtain these increases will be extremely limited until the Board’s statute expires.
Diane Strong asked if departments can begin hiring again. Charest said that departments can hire for vacant positions without prior approval, but must report these hirings within ten days. Departments can make job offers if they still have money after the coming budget reductions.
Graves asked how departments will still have money in July. Charest said that this situation depends on how many vacant positions and how much money an individual department might have. Circumstances will vary across campus. Graves asked about the use of carryover money. Charest said that departments will not have use of this money, and said that departments should anticipate some kind of cut, likely between 5-10%. Graves asked if departments can still hire temporary employees. Charest said that departments can use funding sources other than State funds for this purpose.
Jordan asked if UNC would layoff workers in advance of the budget announcement, much as North Carolina State University had done. Charest said that these layoffs had already begun with State funded positions. Fogleman asked how Human Resources could deal with laid off Employees while others have received 14% salary increases. Charest said that Human Resources could not explain this situation but could do its best to help these Employees find another job. Fogleman confirmed that Human Resources does not make these decisions, and Charest said that he was correct. Fogleman asked how Charest felt about this situation, and Charest said that her office does not make decisions on layoffs or increases. All that her office could do was to help a laidoff Employee find other opportunities.
Edmark asked whether Employees laid off from the University still have first crack at open University jobs when the economy recovers. Charest said that this used to be true, but the Legislature at the urging of SEANC changing its policy two years ago. Now, laid off employees have equal standing with current State employees. However, when laid off employees apply for jobs at the University, they should generally receive preference since they know campus policies and procedures. However, the University cannot provide a policy of legal preference.
Graves said that State employees and people in the private sector now face a situation in which high-level administrators receive larger raises than the rest. She urged Employees to keep their focus and not keep these administrators apart in their minds. She noted the trouble that places like Burlington Industries have faced, and she hated anyone to lose their jobs.
Collins asked if Charest could talk about specific, targeted layoffs. Charest said that layoff situations become public information only after the Employee has received notice. She said that layoffs are occurring now for Employees funded by State dollars and contracts and grants.
O’Connor asked Charest if she could outline the criteria for layoffs, and how seniority affects layoff decisions, and asked if laid off Employees receive severance packages. Charest said that much of this information is on the web. She said that once departments determine what work will stop being done, it then moves to the classification of people doing that work. Departments then move to compare everyone in that specific category and slightly related categories.
First, temporary or probationary and time-limited Employees are chosen. Secondly, departments use an analysis of documented performance through the WPPR process. Thirdly, the length of service comes into play. The source of a position’s funds is irrelevant, as many positions receive support from federal grants. A department might have continuing money for a contracted grant for the lowest performing person in that department. Departments make determinations on an individual basis, then forward the paperwork to Human Resources for documentation and analysis on the overall impact on the workforce.
Banks asked about the discussed option to reduce hours to avoid layoffs. Charest said that this idea faces obstacles in practice. The University only can voluntarily reduce Employees’ hours, not involuntarily. Similarly, the University cannot impose furloughs on an involuntary basis.
An Employee asked about early retirement, since this tool is often used in tight budgetary times in the private sector. Charest said that the Board of Trustees had discussed this option, but the University has a limited set of tools right now and such a change would require legislative change.
Roy Caudle asked about reducing the amount of service years required for retirement. Charest said that she had been asked about a bill for 28 year full retirement. She said that such a bill is introduced every session, but the State can only save money if it does not replace the people who retire. Secondly, there is concern that such a bill would make the current teacher shortage worse.
Caudle asked how service is maintained if one is laid off and then reemployed at another position. Charest said that if an Employee returns to the State within five years, they receive full credit for accrued sick leave. All service achieved with the State counts. She had personally worked at North Carolina State University for several years and had left, returning to the State with service accured. Similarly, a laidoff Employee who leaves their retirement in the State system can continue their retirement when they return to State service. An Employee who withdraws their retirement must start over if they return to the State.
Severance pay is available to Employees who have worked a year or more. The State bases this calculation on current salary, age, and years of service. A laidoff Employee who have worked for more than a year can pay for one year of health insurance.
Jordan asked if these severance benefits are optional or guaranteed. Charest said that these benefits are subject to approval by the Office of State Budget and Management, and must show a savings to the State. However, if one is laid off because of a budget reduction, it seems impossible to argue that theaction would not result in a savings, and Charest said that the University had never had such an appeal turned down.
Lloyd introduced Debbie Freed, the University’s transit demand manager, along with Billie Cox and John Talmadge from the Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) and Rick Hannigan from Chapel Hill Transit. Freed spoke about the Commuter Alternatives program, which will offer rewards to Employees who do not seek a parking permit and do not bring a car to campus.
Cox recalled that the TTA shared ride program had begun thirteen years ago with the TriRide program, in 1985. She manages the vanpool program, which has grown from 18 vanpools in 1991 to more than 50 vanpools, each with an average ridership of 13 people. The vanpool program mainly benefits commuters who do not live on bus routes. The TTA database matches commuters and travel patterns to establish vanpool or carpool matches, which can be either informal or structured. Some commuters ride every day, while others ride 1-2 times a week. Vanpool partners must share the same work hours and travel ten or more miles to work.
Vanpool partners share the same daily commute with one monthly fee. Drivers ride free in exchange for driving. Up to eight people can start a vanpool, and TTA will subsidize the pool for the first year. The vanpool must pay for two additional seats each year. Some vanpools choose to pay for the seats rather than recruiting extra partners, for the extra room.
Vanpool expenditures are computed on average monthly mileage, operation, maintenance and upkeep. TTA charges according to cost recovery, not profit. Vanpool groups now drive to campus from Cary, Pittsboro, Hillsborough and Mebane.
Freed noted that the University had recently received an EPA certificate of recognition for its commuter choice leadership program, for partnering with TTA and Chapel Hill Transit.
Tallmadge noted that TTA runs buses to the UNC-Chapel Hill area from throughout the Triangle. He serves as senior transit planner for TTA. TTA has worked to expand service to UNC-Chapel Hill during peak hours, from 6-9 in the morning and 3:30-6:30 p.m. from Durham on the 15-501 and 54-40 corridors. TTA’s bus center has routes from Cary, Apex, Raleigh and north Raleigh connecting to UNC. Of the three routes in the corridors, the route from Woodcroft apartment complex is the strongest. TTA has one route with a number of stops at Old Chapel Hill Road and University Drive, and has added a more direct route from South Square Mall to Franklin Street with express service to downtown Chapel Hill. TTA will monitor this route to see how it compares to heavily used routes from Durham to RTP.
The TTA board of trustees has adopted an expansion of service from Hillsborough to Chapel Hill on a regular schedule. Additional services affecting the UNC community depend on additional legislative funds, which are not unlikely to happen given the budget situation. He did not anticipate a reduction in service levels.
Freed said that TTA and the University has looked at residential location patterns to see how best to serve UNC employees and students. She noted that Falconbridge, near the 54-40 corridor, has around 300 students and employees. These people needed to cross a barrier to use mass transit. TTA hopes to capture some of this audience with additional marketing and better route location.
Tallmadge said that TTA hopes to improve service for the disabled community, the TRIP itinerary planner, and to expand the TTA marketing campaign. He hoped that TTA could provide real time transit information, allowing commuters to see whether their bus is running on time or behind schedule. He hoped this service would be available later this year.
Hannigan, the assistant transit director for Chapel Hill Transit, had come over from Pittsburgh six months ago. He noted that Chapel Hill Transit ridership had increased 29% since the implementation of fare-free service in December. This fall, Chapel Hill Transit will introduce two new services, one from a parking lot at Jones Ferry and Old Fayetteville road in Carrboro, with rush hour service every ten minutes. The second route will run to the Friday Center once every five minutes.
Hannigan said that Chapel Hill Transit would like to do more but is limited by money problems. The organization has talked about better weekend and evening service. Hannigan noted that Mary Lu, the new Chapel Hill Transit director, had knocked $10/hour off the price charged the University for service due to productivity improvements such as better driver scheduling.
Freed said that the University was looking for people to join the commuter alternatives program in an effort to recognize people making an effort to commute to campus. People can preregister but cannot intend to buy a parking permit for the fall. A commuter who bikes, walks, parks and ride or vanpools is eligible to join the program, which will provide emergency rideback service to those within the city limits. A subscriber can call to get van pickup back to their vehicle. One cannot use this service for routine problems like dentist appointments, only emergencies.
In addition, subscribers receive nine daily permits a month, aside from the busy months of August, September and January. These permits allow parking in the S11 lot, which receives fairly frequent transit service. Subscribers also receive free park and ride stickers for University only park and ride lots. Finally, Freed’s office will put together a package of giveaway items from local merchants.
Freed offered to talk with departments interested in hearing a presentation on the commuter alternative program. Jordan asked about the time lag for emergency service. Freed said that subscribers should be able to call and receive van service within two minutes.
Gail Plaisance suggested that Chapel Hill Transit run more bus routes from the Durham end of highway 54 at 8 a.m. to prevent the need to stand up during rush hour. She also did not feel that the free daily permits to the S11 lot were much of an enticement, given that some Employees would need to catch two buses from this point to get to their workplace. She would prefer to receive a permit in the middle of campus or even in the visitor lot of the Health Affairs deck than to park in the S11 lot. Freed said that this year was the program’s first and that her office would iron out details after looking at this year’s data.
Vacheron asked if mopeds would require parking permits. Jordan said that mopeds can use bicycle racks around campus.
An Employee asked if the park and ride lot would be a hard surface or gravel lot, and if the lot would be operational by fall. Hannigan said that he hoped the lot would be operational. This Employee asked because several people in her department would want to park there but would worry about losing a parking place if the lot were not complete by August. Employees must request their parking permits now. She asked what Hanningan would recommend these Employees do. Hannigan said that he would rather be safe than sorry, stating that rain could delay the project. He said that buses would run every ten minutes during rush hour service, with half routes both ending at Jones Ferry road.
Lloyd thanked Freed, Cox, Tallmadge and Hannigan for their comments. He asked for other comments and questions. Jordan asked what it would take to reorder the agenda to prevent special presenters from speaking at the very end of meetings. He said he would be insulted to see the poor attendance at the very end of meetings. Lloyd said that Jordan could introduce the topic to the Executive Committee meeting later in June.
In the absence of further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 11:44 a.m.
Matt Banks, Recording Secretary