Return to Main Menu

Faculty Senate: voting, gender equity   The Faculty Senate met Sept. 11 and was called to order by Adrian Reuben, M.D. The next meeting will be held at 7:45 a.m. Tuesday, Oct. 2, in the Administration/Library Building, room 107. Senate Officers and Committees Reuben opened the meeting with a reminder that the senate will be electing new officers and reconfiguring membership on standing committees at the October meeting, when the newly-elected senators will be in attendance. He gave a brief description of the administrative structure of the senate and each committee. Official descriptions of officers and committees can be found in Articles IV and V of the MUSC Faculty Senate Constitution and Bylaws <http://www.musc.edu/facsen/senate.htm>. Reuben will send an e-mail to all senators reminding them of the upcoming elections and stressing the importance of selecting good leadership. Each electoral unit selects a senator to serve on the executive committee and officers are nominated and elected by the entire Senate from among this small group.  Issues regarding alternates were raised and briefly discussed. Reuben confirmed that alternates may vote on senate issues if there is not a full complement of senators from their electoral unit at a meeting. Nothing in the bylaws precludes alternates from standing for election to the senate. If the senate continues to have alternates, their existence, selection, and role needs to be defined in the bylaws. Voting Problems Reuben and Francine Margolius, Ed.D., chair of the Governance Committee noted that the problems which occurred during the web-based election fell into three areas: Technical problems: servers were down intermittently, preventing access to the voting site  Inaccuracies in the Faculty Database, preventing the authentication of some voters  Confusion surrounding which computer account to use for authentication.   The MUSC Network Account (MNA) is the account that is used for elections. This is the e-mail login for university mail and is used for access to network services such as PPP and library databases, but it is not the same as the GroupWise e-mail login that is used in the medical center. Faculty may apply for MNAs at the library. Election Results Margolius gave a report of election results. Voting closed at 6 p.m. on Sept. 10. Percentage of voting was low but higher than last year. College of Dental Medicine: No candidates College of Medicine, Basic Sciences: Janice Lage, Joan Olson, Eberhard Voit, Philippe Arnaud, Lucille London (Alternate) College of Medicine, Clinical Sciences: Connie Best, DeAnna Cheek, Gary Gilkeson, Paul Gold, Mark Green, Barry Hainer, Benjamin Saunders, Dean Schuyler, Thomas Elrod Steele, Susan Tate, Renan Uflacker, Stanley Hoffman (Alternate) College of Nursing: No Candidates Library Science & Informatics: Mary Mauldin, Joann Sullivan (Alternate) College of Health Professions: Gail Pashek, Anne Kilpatrick College of Pharmacy: Joli Cerveny, Katherine Chessman Reuben will send an e-mail to all sitting and newly-elected senators regarding the election of officers and service on senate committees. Reuben introduced two guests to the senate, Walker Coleman and Deborah Stier Carson. Coleman, of the President’s Office, has been working with Reuben and Margolius on the Faculty Handbook. Preliminary work has been completed and the substantive work of incorporating changes and discussing revisions can begin soon. Carson, a previous senator, gave an update on gender equity issues. Gender Equity Issues Carson provided a brief chronology of the effort to study gender equity among the faculty at MUSC.  Two unscientific “snapshots” of the faculty, from 1994 and 1998, showed that men dominated the professor and associate professor ranks and women dominated the instructor and assistant professor ranks. No major shifts occurred between 1994 and 1998. The original study committee, comprised of faculty knowledgeable in statistics and epidemiological studies, designed a longitudinal study to include faculty hired between 1985 and 1995. Information was requested from the state databanks. Although preliminary data seemed helpful, when the data was received, it was not accurate or usable.  All this has taken a couple of years. At this time, most members of the original committee have had to drop off.  This project is deemed important by both the provost and the president. But if it is to continue, faculty statisticians and others are needed to work on it. Plans call for going to Columbia to discuss the data needs with programmers there, so appropriate information can be gathered. In addition to numeric data, the committee hopes to interview or survey women who had attained the rank of associate or assistant professor and had either retired or left MUSC for another institution. Faculty willing to work on the gender equity project are asked to contact either Carson at carsonds@musc.edu or Reuben at reubena@musc.edu. Committee on Emeritus Faculty and Distinguished University Professor  Reuben introduced Subbi Mathur, Ph.D., who had served on the committee charged by the provost to develop guidelines for the awarding of emeritus faculty status and the designation of distinguished university professor. Before turning the meeting over to Mathur, Reuben noted that the question before the senate at this meeting is whether the senate can accept the documents as written by the committee or wants further discussion in a senate committee. Mathur discussed the committee’s charge and membership. Before writing the documents, they reviewed multiple policies from other academic health centers and other universities in South Carolina. The faculty senate and college representatives also sought feedback from their constituents. There was some concern that under the revised Emeritus Faculty Policy, longevity rather than quality of service seemed the primary qualifier for this award. However, after a motion to table the policy was defeated, a motion to accept it with enhancements passed.  See the text at <http://www.musc.edu/facsen/901Minutes.html> The title of distinguished university professor is more selective than the emeritus title. Also, these faculty do not need to be retired. There was some discussion regarding whether the policy, as written, excludes the awarding of this title to people who are not already on the MUSC faculty (such as a Nobel laureate who is being recruited). There was general agreement that the policy did not limit the award to current faculty. The document was accepted as written. Both policies will go forward to the provost for submission to the Board of Trustees. Visiting Faculty  Reuben noted that there is an urgent need to revise the description of visiting faculty as found in the current Faculty Handbook, Section 4.2.1. The problem is the final sentence, which reads “All foreign faculty who have not obtained permanent resident status carry this modifier.” This statement is punitive to faculty who are working with visas; ultimately, the university will suffer from the policy. For example, visiting faculty are unable to get grant funding, resulting in productive people leaving the university.  It was also suggested that an additional statement requiring that tenured faculty have permanent resident status be added to Section 6.4.2 of the Faculty Handbook, Criteria for Tenure. It was pointed out that this requirement can also be punitive, as it can take years to get citizenship. The Senate voted to approve the change to Section 4.2.1, changing the description of visiting faculty by omitting the final sentence. The change to the Criteria for Tenure section was tabled for discussion. Update on Legal Counsel Initiative Anne Spencer reported that she and Richard Hernandez were interviewing two lawyers this week. She will have a recommendation at the next faculty senate meeting. The total contribution thus far is $9,015, which will be deposited in the bank. Reuben voiced his disappointment that not all faculty senators have made a contribution to the legal counsel initiative. Total contributions from university faculty is still low. He requested that this be brought up at the next meeting and that all senators stress the importance of the legal council. Post-tenure Review Document  Reuben reported that the deans object to a sentence in Section 5.3 in the Post Tenure Review document <http://www.musc.edu/facsen/PosttenRevFINAL.html>.  The sentence concerns linking a good review to an increase in the base salary. Privitera, who headed the group which wrote the document, noted that the Best Practices Document from the state requires a link between review and reward. The original group from the faculty senate, Drs. Privitera, Mathur, and Webb, will  negotiate this with the deans. Faculty Handbook Revision Reuben noted that a summary of needed updates and revisions to the Faculty Handbook had been prepared with the help of Walker Coleman from the President’s Office. There are four categories of changes, which are color-coded: Blue—Board approved, need to be added to the Handbook Green—Need debate in the Faculty Senate Red—New initiatives, no current statement in the Handbook Yellow—Editorial clean-ups, spelling errors, minor re-wording  A working draft of the handbook will be posted to the faculty senate Web site in color as revisions are made, voted on, and approved by administration and the MUSC Board of Trustees.  As changes reach final approval along the way, an “official” version will be updated and posted. The senate also needs to discuss moving some policies to the appendix of the handbook, where they can be more quickly revised, approved, and incorporated. Work on the handbook will begin with the October meeting of the senate. Reuben reminded all senators to attend President Greenberg’s town hall meeting at 5 p.m. Wednesday, Sept. 12, in the 401 Basic Science Building.