Two resolutions passed by the Urbana-Champaign Senate March 17 aim to enhance benefits for university employees.
Senators unanimously supported a resolution urging university administration to work collaboratively with faculty on developing benefits “that fall within the top third of those offered by peer institutions.” The resolution said that benefits are equally as important as salaries and should increase proportionally; however, administration has focused primarily on salary issues, and the university is now “near the bottom of benefits in comparison to peer institutions.”
A second resolution passed by the Senate urged administration to provide employees with full insurance coverage for contraceptives. According to the resolution, the university’s health plans violate the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act) because they exclude contraceptive coverage. The Senate resolution urges Central Management Services to negotiate coverage with its insurance carriers.
Barclay Jones, chair of the Senate Committee on the Budget, presented a statement concerning the university’s FY04 and FY05 budgets and long-term revenue enhancements. The statement lauded the chancellor and the provost for involving all constituencies in the budgeting and administrative restructuring process but emphasized the importance of faculty involvement and long-range planning.
“The current crisis and a theme of shared sacrifice would benefit from faculty buy-in,” the statement said. “This would include improved communication and more faculty involvement in deliberative task forces. In this way we could create an optimum system configuration and structure for long-term stability and strength of the campus and the university.”
“Some of you will be involved in the committees,” Jones said. “I encourage you to give this your highest priority, and we’ll hope to be able to address in the short term the things that have to be done. But clearly we are very concerned that the actions we take today will potentially impact us dramatically in the future. We need to keep that focus in mind.”
Provost Richard Herman, who chaired the meeting in Chancellor Nancy Cantor’s absence, said, “We are moving on a very fast track to try and achieve these economies in a consensual way with considerable involvement from all segments of the community. These are not easy times. But one thing I can promise you is it is possible to come out of this better, and we will work to ensure the very values that brought us to this day and ensure the academic mission of this institution and all that makes it excellent.”
In other business:
- Senators discussed committee reports about revisions to a proposed policy on severe sanctions other than dismissal for cause and on proposed alternatives to dissection in undergraduate courses.
Janice Juraska, professor of psychology, suggested providing more detail in the Timetable so students would understand the definition of dissection as it pertains to particular courses. “Dissection sometimes implies things that are a lot worse than what they are,” Juraska said, adding that some students might be averse to certain courses if the actual dissection requirements in those courses are not defined. Thomas Anastasio, professor of molecular and integrative physiology, said that the draft policy might be misinterpreted as indicating that alternatives to dissection would be available in all curricula and suggested revisions indicating curricula in which dissection experience is an integral component, such as medicine and veterinary science. The chairs said their committees would consider senators’ input and would present the revised, final proposals at the April Senate meeting.
- Bruce Wicks, chair of the Senate Committee on the Library, presented recommendations concerning scholarly communications and electronic publishing, which included provisions encouraging faculty to “pressure” publishers to contain the costs of scholarly journals. The report indicated that certain publishers are inflating journal prices, particularly in the fields of science and engineering, beyond affordability for the library. Nick Burbules, professor of education, objected to the wording of the recommendations stating, “Saying ‘bringing pressure to bear’ sounds like to me we are going to boycott or threaten to cancel subscriptions.” The amended recommendations passed by the Senate stated that faculty and the library would “communicate concerns” to publishers and that the Senate would encourage faculty to “facilitate such communication.”
