May 1997
Staff Advisory Council Minutes
Thursday, May 8, 1997
LaFortune Student Center - Notre Dame Room
1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
Present: Rhonda Barkley, Sue Baum-Lentine, Jan Blazi, Larry Born, Rachel Boyd, Dan Brazo, Phyllis Campbell, Tammy Chapman, Ron Dokes, Julie Ferraro, Debbie Fox, Toby Green, Rita Grontkowski, Pam Jobin, Chuck Klein, JoAnn Longenecker, Don Newsom, Sue Penrod, Tracie Santicola, Jennifer Schafer, Diane Schlatterbeck, Fred Sonneborn, Amy Tremel, Pat Trost, Scott Uekert, Barbara Wiggins, and Deanna Zukowski.
Absent: Victoria Cotton, Pat Dillman, and Norma Mezykowski.
Dan Brazo, Chair called the meeting to order at 1:05 p.m.
Dan Brazo distributed an updated agenda for the meeting. Dan Brazo welcomed Rita Winsor, Assistant Director for Human Resources to the meeting to discuss Agenda item I.
I. Mini-Presentation on Classification Review Project Follow-Up Meetings Rita explained to the Council that the purpose for the follow-up meetings is to provide staff an opportunity to ask questions or to clarify any information with regard to the Classification Review Project.
Rita shared with the Council what was heard in the focus groups that were held prior to beginning the Classification Review Project. The five items that emerged at the top of what staff said they wanted with regard to pay here at the University were:
A. Compare us to the total labor market - The salary survey that Towers Perrin completed included 69 organizations from the Michiana area. The participants included manufacturing and service organizations. Towers Perrin invited 107 organizations to participate in the survey.
B. Pay competitively - The University has set a target to have the average salary for non-faculty positions be 110 percent on average of the market. To clarify, this means that not every individual will be paid at 110% of the market, it means some will be paid above 110 percent of the average market and some will be paid below 110 percent of the average market. This will take a number of years to reach this University goal.
C. Recognize length of service - Length of service has been addressed with the matrix. The matrix is anticipated to be around for approximately 2 to 3 years.
D. Recognize performance - Rich Nugent, Assistant Director for Human Resources is currently leading a task force to address the performance review process. The goal is to have individuals who have supervisory responsibilities trained by early fall on how to properly give a performance review. At some future point, a training program will be available to interested staff that are being reviewed. A rough-draft performance evaluation form to evaluate non-exempt and exempt staff has been developed and will be reviewed by various groups across campus to solicit input from. The Staff Advisory Council will be used as a focus group for the rough-draft performance evaluation form for non-exempt staff at a special meeting, requested by Rich Nugent on Thursday, May 22, 1997 from 1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. in the Notre Dame Room of LaFortune Student Center.
E. Have one system - Rita explained that rather than have an Office/Clerical group, Service/Maintenance group, Technical group, Library group, etc..., every non-faculty staff member has been placed in a position level of one through twenty.
Rita then reviewed the priorities that are currently in place for the Compensation Review Project:
1) Address individuals below the range minimum. - More than 300 individuals needed to be placed in the minimum of the job's particular level.
2) Identify individuals in the lower half of the range with longer term years of service. This is being addressed by the matrix.
Rita shared with the Council some overhead slides that showed how the $1,000,000 was distributed. It was explained that the first $500,000 was distributed to fiscal year '96-'97 and the second $500,000 will be distributed to fiscal year '97-'98. For illustration purposes groups were used as a framework for comparisons. Although the groups are no longer in existence, the distribution indicates that of the $1,000,000 allocation - 58 percent of the monies went to the Office/Clerical group; 12 percent to the Technical group; 12 percent to the Service/Maintenance group; and 18 percent to the Exempt group.
Rita explained the compa ratio with the Council. The compa ratio shows the average salary at Notre Dame divided by the Average Salary of the market. The compa ratio from February 1997 was 96 percent and effective July 1997 it will increase to 99 percent. The compa ratio is the figure the University has set as a target to reach 110 percent. Rita did state that it will take several years to get the University's compa ratio to 110 percent.
Rita also shared some overhead slides with the Council with regard to compa ratio's by gender and ethnicity. Rita added that Human Resources will continue to monitor these areas of gender and ethnicity and plan on setting additional priorities with regard to the Classification Review Project.
Rita mentioned to the Council that she is on the task force for staff/student identification cards. She informed the Council that a letter would be going out the week of May 12th to let staff know that on Monday, June 2nd Mobil Photography Units will be placed around campus for your new identification card. In order to get the i.d. each staff member will have to show a current Notre Dame i.d. card and a photo i.d. with a signature. (Upon further discussion with the i.d. task force, only a photo i.d. is needed.)
II. Approval of Minutes from the April 10, 1997 meeting Chuck Klein made a motion to accept the minutes from the April 10, 1997 meeting. Amy Tremel seconded the motion. A vote was taken and 27 members voted in favor.
III. Old Business
A. By-Law changes - Jennifer Schafer made the following proposal to the Council to be considered as the first reading for this change in the by-laws. Jennifer Schafer proposed that the current ad-hoc Communications Committee become a standing committee that would be added to the by-laws. Jennifer recommended the Communications Committee be added to the by-laws under Article VII, B., 3. Communications Committeea. Shall be composed of three to four volunteers or appointees.
b. Duties and responsibilities shall consist of:(1.) review and approve minutes from each Council meeting for distribution and publication.
(2.) and such other duties as the Chairperson or Council shall request.
A vote was taken on the this proposal to the by-laws. There were 26 Council members in favor and 1 Council member opposed.
A second reading and final vote will take place on this proposal to the by-laws at the next regularly scheduled meeting.
B. Women's Committee Proposal -
Rita Grontkowski submitted to the Council on behalf of the Ad-Hoc Women's Committee a proposal to develop a Women's Committee on campus. Rita Grontkowski stated that submitting this recommendation was an excellent opportunity to do something for staff women and that the Council should strongly endorse the development of this committee. The purpose of the Staff Committee on Women's Issues is to be a visible and effective advocate to improve opportunities for, and support the needs of, women employed by the University of Notre Dame.
Rich Nugent stated that the support for the women's committee is from Roger Mullins, Father Poorman and Father Beauchamp. The University Administration is sensitive to the fact that special needs exist on campus for staff women. The idea was to form a group of staff to discuss and explore issues so that the University is aware of these issues. The group would be a vehicle for communication to funnel back to the Administration issues particular to women.
Rich went on to say that Sarah Misener, Manager of Training & Development will be the liaison between the Staff Committee on Women's Issues and the University Administration. The Committee will serve in a capacity similar to the Staff Advisory Council in that it will provide formal input which could include recommendations, advice and assistance to the University Administration on issues that pertain to women.
Dan Brazo clarified to the Council that the ad-hoc committee was put together to see if a committee on women's issues is needed, and recommend how it should be developed.
Toby Green made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Ad-Hoc Women's Committee and to then turn it over to the Department of Human Resources to make it become a reality. Sue Baum-Lentine seconded this motion.
A discussion took place which included the following:
* A Council member asked if the committee is only for women. Rita Grontkowski stated that men or women could serve on the committee. * A Council member asked how long would someone have to serve? The Staff Committee on Women's Issues would make that decision. * Rich Nugent stated that the Ad-Hoc Women's Committee did an excellent job and their time and work is appreciated. * The Staff Committee on Women's Issues would develop their own by-laws and set their priorities and determine how the committee will work within the University. * One Council member stated that by having a Women's Committee it allows staff other than Staff Advisory Council members to get involved. * A Council member asked Rich Nugent where the recommendation for this committee will go if it is approved? Rich stated that he will review it and take it to Roger Mullins. Roger Mullins will then review it and take it to Father Poorman and Father Beauchamp.
A vote was taken on the motion and 26 Council members were in favor, one opposed.
Dan Brazo thanked the Ad-Hoc Women's Committee for their hard work and stated they all did a very nice job on the recommendation.
C. Ad-Hoc Grievance Procedure Committee Proposal
- Julie Ferraro asked the Council if anyone had anything to change on this proposal. Julie stated that this proposal is on paper to show the administration how staff would like to see things worked out and obtain reasonable results.
* A Council member stated that they would like to see some mechanism built into the form that would offer to the person who has the grievance assistance in clearly writing the grievance.
* A Council member was concerned about having the home phone number of the person filing a grievance on the grievance form.
* A Council member wanted a time limit for filing a grievance stated on the form. Another Council member disagreed with this suggestion and felt that sometimes situations occur and a reoccurrence of the situation is necessary before filing a formal complaint or grievance.
* A suggestion was made by a Council member that the Grievance Committee be informed if the grievance has been successfully resolved by talking with the supervisor or with a Human Resources Representative prior to it being reviewed by the Grievance Committee.
The last page of the Grievance proposal is a breakout of the list of important points or critical areas that staff feel are the most important in considering changes to the current problem solving procedure.
Sue Baum-Lentine made a motion to accept this Grievance Proposal as stated. It is not the final proposal as other groups need to give their input. It will be submitted to the University Administration for their review. JoAnn Longenecker seconded the motion. A vote was taken and 27 Council members were in favor, no one opposed.
Rich stated he would take the Council's Grievance Proposal to the necessary groups/individuals (i.e., Human Resources Planning Group) and will get back with the Council at some future point.
Dan Brazo stated that time was running out and asked the Council to help set the agenda for the next regular meeting scheduled for Thursday, June 12, 1997 at 1 p.m. in the Notre Dame Room of LaFortune Student Center.
The tentative agenda is as follows:
I. Approval of Minutes from the May 10, 1997 meeting
II. Night Differential Discussion
III. Second Reading of By-Law changes
IV. New Business
a. Review list of topics from 1996
If you have any items to add to the agenda, please contact Dan Brazo at 1-7081.
Dan Brazo asked the Council if they would like to have a new photo taken. The Council agreed and will have a photographer at the June 12th meeting.
Amy Tremel discussed the issues involved with District #23. Rich Nugent stated that many organizational/construction changes will be taking place with Food Services in the next year which will also include changes for District #21 and District #22. Dan Brazo stated that the Executive Council will check on the status of District #23 and report back to the Council.
Chuck Klein made a motion to request that Dave Prentkowski, Director of Food Services, give the Council a presentation on the changes that will be taking place in his areas of responsibility. Julie Ferraro seconded this motion. A vote was taken and 27 Council members were in favor, no one opposed. Rich Nugent stated he would check with Dave Prentkowski to see his availability on June 12th.
Jennifer Schafer made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 3:05 p.m. Amy Tremel seconded the motion. A vote was taken and 27 were in favor, no one opposed.
Respectfully submitted,
Communications Committee