STAFF ADVISORY COUNCIL
March 19, 1998
LaFortune Student Center - Notre Dame Room
1:15 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
Present: Rhonda Barkley, Amy Belke, Debra Bennett, Jan Blazi, Rachel Boyd, Dan Brazo, Phyllis Campbell, Emily Cassidy, Tammy Chapman, Victoria Cotton, Gina DeLaruelle, Janet Dillon, Debbie Fox, Toby Green, Rita Grontkowski, Linda Hansen, Mary Anne Hoebeke, Pam Jobin, Chuck Klein, Mike Manijak, Norma Mezykowski, Don Newsom, Sue Penrod, Diane Schlatterbeck, Doris Smuda, Fred Sonneborn, and Scott Uekert..
Absent: Jeff Korros, Michael Purnell, and Deanna Zukowski.
HR Liaisons: Paul Henry, Roger Mullins, Rich Nugent, Rita Winsor, and Pam Zarazee.
Dan Brazo, Chair called the meeting to order at 1:23 p.m. Dan shared with the Council that Roger Mullins requested to be first on the agenda due to a business flight he needed to catch early evening.
I. Compensation Review Project Update: Roger reviewed with the Council the philosophy of the Compensation Review Project. This included a discussion on the matrix approach which was developed to accelerate those non- exempt staff with longer years of service and at the lower end of a range to move closer to the market. The matrix does take flexibility away from departments. The numbers in the matrix will change every year because the market moves up or down. Roger also explained that the length of time the matrix will be in existence is uncertain. In all likelihood it will be utilized for the fiscal year 1999/2000, but no final decision has been made. Depending on how much progress is made towards the market, utilizing the matrix this fiscal year, will determine if the matrix will be used in the future.
Roger discussed with the Council the positive and negative issues involved in going to a performance based pay system. He shared with the Council that there are some non-exempt staff that are not in the matrix because they are at or above 110 percent of the market. These non-exempt staff above the 110 percent of the range, as well as exempt staff will be rewarded based on performance. A pay for performance system would allow management to make performance assessments which will move the University away from the matrix and go to strictly performance based pay. Ideally, the process to review staff based on performance should be in the following way: complete the performance review process and then make budget decisions. Practically, budget constraints will always be a factor. Also, Roger discussed with the Council that a performance based pay system means an increase could be zero if the performance is documented as overall unsatisfactory or needs improvement. There is no guarantee in a pay for performance based system of a guaranteed floor increase. Roger explained that years of service will become less important as the University progresses into a pay for performance system.
Rich Nugent explained to the Council that the performance review form is a tool that was developed with input from various focus groups across campus which included the Council. This year the University wanted to give all areas the broadest amount of time to do a thorough performance review on staff. Also, the academic calendar was considered so all performance reviews are expected to be turned in to Human Resources no later than May 15, 1998. The University realizes that for this first year it is not as smooth of a process as it eventually will be. In the years to come the process will become clearer. Rich also added that the Department of Human Resources will be monitoring the quality and quantity of performance reviews and look at how the process is developing.
A Council member asked Roger about what standards will be in place for the performance reviews in relation to raises. Roger explained to the Council that the University is not there yet, however, achieving a standard is something Human Resources would like to see and certainly can provide some guidance and structure on how to get there.
Roger shared with the Council that the University did another salary survey within the local market. Seventy five employers were invited to participate in the michiana area and 36 responded.
Roger reviewed some overheads with the Council which included the matrices for 1998/1999 fiscal year. Also, Roger discussed the strides that have been made in getting the average salary across the campus to 110 percent of the market. For fiscal year 1996/1997 overall the University was at 96 percent on average, 1997/1998 overall the University is at 99.5 percent on average and looking to 1998/1999 overall the University could be close to 101.5 percent on average. Roger stressed that it will take multiple years to get to 110 percent of the market on average for staff. Roger shared with the Council that the matrix has been sent to all the budget administrators and is likely to be communicated with staff closer to the July 1, 1998 increase date. The reason for this is that staff will be reviewing the information pertaining to the matrix at that time from their supervisors.. Also, this will allow supervisors to communicate with both non-exempt staff who are not in the matrix at the same time they communicate with the non-exempt staff in the matrix that will have a specific increase amount assigned.
At this time, Dan Brazo informed the Council that time was running out for the meeting. Dan explained to the Council that the Executive Committee will be discussing whether a special meeting would be necessary to finish answering the questions the Council members have about the Compensation Review Project.
II. Women's Committee: Update Rita Grontkowski asked the Council to review the proposed letter handed out to Joe Cassidy, Director, Student Activities that was developed by the Ad Hoc Committee on Women's Issues with regard to supporting the Women's Resource Center in getting their own permanent space in the LaFortune Student Center. The Council reviewed the letter and Gina DeLaruelle made a motion to accept the letter as is. Phyllis Campbell seconded the motion. A vote was taken and all Council members present were in favor of the motion.
Dan explained that due to the Grievance Procedure proposal on the agenda for the April 9, 1998 meeting, Scott Malpass will be giving his presentation on the investments of the Staff Pension Plan at the May 14, 1998 regular Council meeting.
Dan told the Council that the Executive Committee will be meeting and will send an agenda for the April 9, 1998 meeting to each member in the next week.
Pam Jobin made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 3:10 p.m. Gina DeLaruelle seconded the motion. A vote was taken and all members present were in favor of this motion.