SURVEY OF UO SENATOR'S PRIORITIES FOR AGENDA TOPICS 1999-2000

Below is a summary listing of results of the informal survey of UO senators on their priorities for senate agenda items. Responses were received from 10 departments/units; many reflected consultation with faculty and staff colleagues. The results are summarized in order of how often that topic was mentioned, with the number of senators mentioning the topic in parentheses, followed by a short descriptive summary of the issue(s) identified as important ones for senate consideration.

(7) FACULTY SALARIES

a. There does not appear to be a rationalized promotion/salary structure for officers of administration.
b. Attention needs to be given to equity issues in how raises are determined, especially in the new post-tenure review process. This includes the issue of departments having to cover a substantial amount of raises out of their own budgets.
c. Some attention needs to be given to the issue of raises tied to years of service.
d. Salary compression is a critical issue that needs to be addressed.
e. The raise system is too geared to those who seek outside offers, versus those who devote their loyalty to the UO; this is bad policy.
f. Attention needs to be given to the relationship between "merit" and "cost of living" (COLA) raises. Too often the COLA part of raises does not equal the real rise in the cost of living since the last raise. In such situations, some (or all) salary money distributed as "merit" raises is, in effect, a redistribution of salary from faculty who take a pay cut (i.e. whose base salary does not keep up with inflation) to faculty who receive a "merit" increase.

The principle that might be adopted to bring more equity into salary determination: Funds available for salary raises should be distributed as COLA raises first, i.e. covering the acutal cost of living increase since the last round of raises. Only funds *above* this amount should be distributed as "merit" raises. This would create a situation where merit raises are real enhancements to the faculty salary base reflecting faculty achievements, rather than one where they represent a redistribution of faculty salaries in the form of pay cuts for those who do not receive an increase that keeps up with the cost of living index.

(5) DIVERSITY

a. there needs to be a quality diversity training/education program available for departments of units that request this.
b. there needs to be renewed efforts to create more diversity among faculty, administration, staff, and student body.
c. there has been no response to the CAS Dean's Advisory Committee report of 1999 that indicated lower rates of tenure and promotion for non-white, non-heterosexual, and non-U.S. trained candidates.

(4) WORKLOAD

a. with the relatively low salaries at UO, the workload should be more realistic and flexible.
b. there has been a significant increase of administrative workload at the departmental level (some of it performed by faculty), without increase in staffing or rewards. Additionally, the position of Department Head has become increasingly onerous.
c. there has been a proliferation of make-work committees that sap valuable faculty time

(3) FACULTY GOVERNANCE

a. Several key administrative positions have been renewed without an open process; can Senate ask for institutional oversight?
b. there should be more faculty on the educational technology committee; this has important implications for teaching/research on campus.
c. there has been an increase in the number of positions labeled "faculty" for people who do not teach and are not hired/evaluated by regular academic means. What is the impact on decision-making? on committees and classroom staffing? How many persons are in this category?
d. any University committees central to the budget or curriculum process should report to the Senate.

(2) FACULTY 'MORALE'

a. There should be more recognition for committee and university service. There should be more recognition for service to the community.
b. A number of people mentioned morale implications related to items in categories above.

(2) PHYSICAL CONDITIONS OF CAMPUS, CLASSROOMS

a. Many of the general use classrooms are in poor condition. Technology and equipment in some classrooms are in poor condition; custodial services are inadequate.

(2) CORPORATE CODE OF CONDUCT

a. The Senate should keep the issue on the agenda; the UO should be in the forefront of nationwide efforts to ensure product licensees respect human rights and worker rights in their sourcing of products.

ADDITIONAL ITEMS MENTIONED:

-- Are there enough formal opportunities for oral skills development on campus? Especially viz. the purpose statement for General Education Requirements recently passed
-- We should examine UO student relations with the Eugene Police Department, OPS
-- Attention needs to be focused on greater enrollment and recruitment efforts of students
-- We need to look at the issues of intellectual property and copyright, including ownership of course materials
-- Need to push for faculty and staff dependents taking classes at staff rates.
-- An independend insurance accountant should be hired to examine the new PEEB insurance packages; it appears many are paying more for less benefits in the new system, some families as much as $150/month more--for less coverage.
-- Many of the campus opportunities for funding faculty projects/ initiatives require far too much faculty time for implementation and follow-up

Survey conducted by Senator Greg McLauchlan gmclauch@OREGON.UOREGON.EDU and presented to the November meeting of the UO Senate

Web page spun on 30 November 1999 by Peter B Gilkey 202 Deady Hall, Department of Mathematics at the University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403-1222, U.S.A. Phone 1-541-346-4717 Email:peter.gilkey.cc.67@aya.yale.edu of Deady Spider Enterprises