• Home
• AAUP Through the Year
• Steering Committee
• AAUP at Adelphi
• Benefits to Members
• Newsletters
  • April 2008
  • January 2008
• Documents
• Links
• Contact

AAUP Newsletter
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS
ADELPHI UNIVERSITY CHAPTER
April, 2008 • Volume 30. Issue 2

In This Issue:
Best Practices
A Yahoo Group for Adelphi Faculty
Bargaining Survey



Best Practices
We recently sent out a document to the faculty which outlined “best practices” in regard to personnel decisions and curriculum. We have attached it again here and we hope you will refer to it when necessary.

We sent out this document because it was becoming increasingly apparent that faculty responsibilities on matters such as: faculty searches, establishing tenure and promotion guidelines, developing academic policies and developing/changing curricula of the university are being usurped by administrators. This has been happening to varying degrees across the university. In some instances, administrators are serving—sometimes chairing—faculty search committees. In others committees are established to deal with university policies but the faculty members who are appointed are almost exclusively department chairs—who are administrators in that capacity. We have even heard that new programs are being established without faculty involvement. All the while, faculty on campus are being asked to do more and more administrative paper work and/or tasks of a clerical nature that could and most times should be done by administrators. The end result is that administrators are making important faculty decisions while faculty are left overburdened with extra work, with less time to do research, and little or no input into important matters in their units or at the university.

All of this is a serious blow to shared governance with potentially dangerous long term consequences. After all, administrators may come and go—possibly not sticking around long enough to deal with the costs of their mistakes. Faculty, on the other hand, often dedicate large portions of their professional careers to one institution and therefore have a greater stake in its future. It is a recognition of this that forms one of the important principles upon which shared governance is built—mutual respect. Add to this the fact that there are an ever-increasing number of administrators at the university and we think it is cause for concern. It is as if the administration is setting up the kind of structure they would like to have where administrators make all the decisions. Where is the respect for faculty as professionals? We have established procedures for most of the activities we are talking about and there is no reason to ignore them. Please also remember that expediency is no excuse to ignore these established procedures and remove faculty from the process.

At the same time, for those of you being given administrative work to do, we want to remind you that no faculty member is required to take on administrative work. Should you wish to do administrative work, the CBA states that “Eight hours of administrative work per week equals three teaching credits.” That means that if you are regularly doing administrative work that takes you approximately eight hours a week to perform you should be getting a one course reduction in workload (or the pro-rated equivalent). If your administrative work takes far more time than this, perhaps this would indicate that it is not work that should be done by a faculty member but rather a full-time administrator. Also, no faculty member is required to do administrative work in the summer.

We know that it is difficult to resist these administrative demands because we want our programs to be successful and we do not want to anger those who we work with and those who have control over our future, or workloads, or compensation. Untenured faculty may feel particularly vulnerable because ultimately decisions on their continued employment are in the hands of administrators. We do not dismiss these issues but the principles that we are dealing with are hard fought and important to maintain. They are a vital part of what separates the academic world from the business world. Faculty members need to assert that they want to do the work of the faculty and demand that administrators do the administrative work. Sometimes the line between what is faculty work and what is administrative work is unclear. If you have any questions, please contact the AAUP.



Best Practices for Faculty in the Areas of Personnel Decisions and Curriculum

Personnel decisions
From the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), “The responsibility for the evaluation of the credentials, performance and professional activities of all faculty members rests principally with their academic peers.”

This means that the faculty has primary responsibility for evaluating faculty for hiring, retention, promotion, and awarding of tenure.

Hiring - (See Article VIII, Section 3 of the CBA). The faculty of a unit through its Unit Peer Review Committee (UPRC) initiates hiring and makes recommendations to the Dean, Chief Academic Officer, and President as to who is to be hired. The UPRC is a faculty committee. The UPRC can designate a search committee, if that best meets the needs of the unit. Administrators should not sit on unit peer review committees or departmental search committees. All positions should be advertised and the applicants reviewed by the faculty designated to do so.

Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment - (See Article XII, Section 4 of the CBA). Similarly, reappointment and tenure decisions are primarily the purview of the faculty. The UPRC recommends faculty for tenure, promotion and reappointment. The Faculty Committee on Retention Tenure and Promotion (FCRTP) is the university-wide committee made up of faculty from each unit that recommends faculty for tenure and promotion.

• Standards and procedures for tenure, promotion, and reappointment should be clear. The standards should include all the criteria being used and should include all the major factors that are considered. Faculty should be made aware of all pertinent deadlines in a timely fashion.

• Promotion and tenure decisions should be consistent over time and, to the extent possible, between units.

• Tenure track faculty should be reviewed with candor. Therefore, pre-tenure evaluations should be taken seriously. Following a reappointment review, the faculty member should receive an evaluation that gives clear advice about their progress in meeting tenure requirements. A negative tenure decision should not come as a surprise.

• Since the institution adheres to the principles of peer review, in those instances where there is disagreement on a recommendation between the FCRTP and the Chief Academic Officer or President, the FCRTP is entitled to an explanation of the reasons for the Chief Academic Officer or President’s decision. In addition, the FCRTP has the right to appear before the board to present the case for its recommendation. See Article XII, Section 4c of the CBA.

• Faculty and administrators should treat an unsuccessful tenure or reappointment candidate with professionalism, decency, and compassion. It is best if the provost meets with the unsuccessful tenure candidate as soon as possible after a negative decision is made to convey the news and explain the reason(s) for the decision. In the case of a decision not to reappoint, the Dean should meet with the candidate.

Curriculum
The university’s curriculum is the responsibility of the faculty. As it relates to curriculum, the faculty, acting through its designated bodies and representatives elected by the faculty has primary responsibility for (a) standards of admission and retention of students (b) requirements for granting degrees offered by the University (c) curricula of the university (d) entrance requirements and curriculum for each degree offered (e) instructional and research standards and policies throughout the university.

Changes to the curriculum, including new course offerings and new programs may be suggested by the administration but development and approval of these courses and/or programs is a faculty responsibility.

________________________________________________________________________

A Yahoo Group for Adelphi Faculty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aaup
We have started a group for Adelphi faculty at Yahoo Groups. Some people suggested that it might be nice to have a site where the faculty could exchange ideas. The list is moderated so that only Adelphi faculty can belong to the group. We don’t know if this will be an effective way to exchange ideas but we thought it was worth a try.

If you have a Yahoo ID then all you have to do is access the group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aaup-adelphi
And sign in.

If you don’t have a Yahoo ID you will have to establish one:
1. Access the group at the address above
2. On the right hand side there is an option to establish a Yahoo ID
3. Click on it and follow the directions.

Please let us know if you have any comments.

________________________________________________________________________

Bargaining Survey
We were pleased with the 50 percent response rate we received on our first Collective Bargaining Questionnaire. We will be sending out one more reminder for those who did not yet respond and then we will do a final tally. Some of the answers were predictable—almost everyone would like to have some kind of dental plan—and some were not so predictable. All of the responses will help as we begin to develop our initial bargaining proposal.

Since this was our first attempt at on-line questionnaires we would very much like to get any feedback you have for us. If you have any content/structure suggestions for future questionnaires, we would like to hear from you so we can serve you better in the future.

________________________________________________________________________

EEOC Update
The latest “movement” in the EEOC case came last month when the University’s attorneys went before the judge in the case asking for a dismissal on the grounds that the AAUP was a necessary participant in the litigation. The judge denied the motion. This does not, however, necessarily mean the end of this strategy. It is conceivable that the University will continue its attempts to have the AAUP named as a defendant in the case.

So we are still in a waiting game. Our attorneys do not believe that there is merit to the University’s position on this but they are prepared to respond if in fact the University tries to bring the AAUP into the suit. Unfortunately, this will cost time and money and bring us no closer to a resolution of the issue.

In the meantime, the lawyers and investigators at the EEOC are continuing to compile their case. They are interested in speaking to faculty at Adelphi. Many of you have already been contacted or have contacted them. If you have not yet spoken with them but think you may have information they would be interested in, please let us know and we will tell you how to reach them.

We remain hopeful that the University will settle this matter soon rather than prolonging this process with legal maneuvers that benefit only their attorneys.

________________________________________________________________________

Got a Question?
If you have a question about your rights or your benefits, please call us. We are here to help you and we will do everything possible to resolve issues before they become serious problems. Please call Cathy Cleaver in the AAUP Office (ext. 3295) or email: aaupoffice@yahoo.com.