George Mason University
Approved Minutes of the Executive Committee Meeting
June 9, 2004
Present: J. Bennett, L. Brown, R. Coffinberger, E. Elstun, D. Kuebrich. J. Sanford
Chair Jim Bennett opened the meeting at 9:00 am.
I. Approval of Minutes
There were two additions (in bold) to the June 2, 2004 minutes: 10
1) The last sentence under Issue #7 was amended to read: “The Executive Committee agreed that the Senate needs to have a structure and who they want for faculty representation in mind before the August BOV planning meeting.”
2) The first sentence under Issue #10 was amended to read: “Some faculty members who take on administrative positions get large pay raises, which they then retain when they return to instructional faculty ranks.”
The minutes of May 27, 2004 and the amended minutes of June 2, 2004 were approved.
There were no announcements.
III. Old Business
A. Issues to Discuss with the Provost
1. Salary issues
a. Salaries of Administrative Faculty who return to Instructional Faculty positions.
b. Pay raises that are shaved as they “trickle down” through the system.
c. Inconsistency in summer school salaries.
d. Faculty salary inequalities, especially in light of the Staff Compensation Committee currently meeting to rectify staff salary inequalities.
2. Faculty Handbook Revision
The Senate will recommend that the Faculty Handbook Revision Committee consist of three faculty members elected by the Senate and two academic, tenured administrators. The issue of release time will be addressed again.
3. Academic appeals process
4. Literacy issues
B. Issues to Discuss with the President
1. Salary Issues (same as above)
2. Faculty Handbook Revision (same as above)
3. Fundraising, the GMU Foundation, and the State Budget
4. Faculty Evaluations of Administrator
The Executive Committee would like to pose the following questions to the President: Why weren’t the administrative activities reports ever posted? How are the evaluations used in the review of the Deans? Will it help if the units report annually to the Senate? How should the FEA be used in administrative accountability?
IV. New Business
Two new issues were raised for future discussion with the Provost and President:
• “Alternative Severance Option”: The process used appears to be inconsistent and unfair, especially since participants are forced to sign confidentiality agreements. It was suggested that the Faculty Matters, Budget & Resources, or an ad hoc
committee research this issue.
• Term limits on deans and other administrators: The pros and cons of this idea were discussed. It was mentioned that procedures are in place for term limits, but the process is not working correctly. It was suggested that the FEAs should play a bigger role in the review of administrators for reappointment.
The meeting adjourned at 10:34 am.
Clerk, Faculty Senate
Return to Executive Committee Page