June 1997

A publication of the





Notice Academic Senate,

University of California

Vol. 21, No. 8, June 1997

NEWS FOR THE UC FACULTY



Senate’s Assembly Domestic Partner Benefits, Long Sought by

Elects Vice-Chair, Faculty, Will Be Considered by the Regents

Approves Legislation The issue of domestic partner ben- nents of the idea see it not only in eco-

efits for University of California em- nomic, but in ethical terms. Regent Con-

Meeting in Berkeley on May 13, the ployees, which has been of concern to nerly has publicly stated his support for

Academic Senate’s Universitywide As- UC faculty for years, apparently will get domestic partner benefits, but a number

sembly elected UCLA’s Aimée Dorr as a hearing before the UC Regents at their of Regents are believed to oppose them

its next vice-chair and approved all the July meeting. The issue has been sim- on grounds that they undermine the in-

legislation presented to it. The Assem- mering beneath the surface at UC stitution of marriage.

bly also heard reports from President through the current academic year, but Beyond this, though the University

Richard Atkinson and Assembly Chair was brought to the fore at the May Re- is legally free to provide domestic-part-

Duncan Mellichamp and it received the gents meeting by Duncan Mellichamp, ner benefits, it is answerable to state

names of 1997-98 statewide Senate com- chair of the Senate’s Academic Council, legislators, many of whom are fiercely

mittee chairs and vice-chairs from the who made a plea with the board to dis- opposed to state funding for such ben-

University Committee on Committees. cuss the domestic partner issue before efits. Against this, a San Francisco city

Dorr, the nominee of the Academic his term expires in August. ordinance that goes into effect next

Council for the vice-chair position, was Mellichamp’s request, which took month requires employers who do busi-

unanimously elected to the post by the most Regents and UC administrators by ness with the city (as UC does) to pro-

Assembly. She will serve next year with surprise, was immediately supported vide benefits to domestic partners.

incoming Assembly and Council Chair by Regent Ward Connerly, who said the It is thus far unclear how the board

Sandra Weiss, who announced at the board had “ducked” the issue for too will choose to frame the question of

meeting that she intends to call the As- long. President Atkinson agreed at the domestic partner benefits, since both

sembly together next year for its full meeting to provide the Regents with “benefits” and “domestic partners” can

complement of three meetings. Alden information on domestic partners prior have a number of definitions. UC’s Aca-

Mosshammer of UC San Diego will serve to the board’s discussion of it. demic Senate supports the extension of

as secretary/parliamentarian of the As- Benefits for domestic partners benefits to both same-sex and opposite-

sembly for the next two years. stands to be another volatile issue for

The legislative changes approved UC, since both supporters and oppo- (Please See: Domestic, Page 4)

by the Assembly included:

• Amendments to Senate Bylaws

(SBLs) 20 and 330. The amendment to Task Force, Working Group Propose Major

SBL 20 makes explicit that any Senate

committee may redelegate authority, but Changes in Faculty Discipline Procedures

only as authorized by the legislation Major changes may be in the works procedure would likewise undergo

that established the committee. Ques- for the University of California’s faculty modification. Meanwhile, a working

tions had arisen on several campuses as disciplinary system, which has been criti- group of faculty, administrators and UC

to whether Senate committees could cized for being inflexible, slow, and un- attorneys has come together to provide

redelegate authority to Senate subcom- responsive to persons who file charges additional recommendations on faculty

mittees or administrative panels or of- with it. discipline.

ficers. The May legislation settles this In April, the Office of the President It was UC’s General Counsel’s Of-

issue, but may have broader effects in circulated to both the Academic Senate fice that first suggested a need for modi-

addition in that it makes “challengeable” and academic vice chancellors the final fications to UC’s faculty disciplinary

any existing delegations of authority not report of a Disciplinary Procedures Task procedures. In a 1994 letter to President

explicitly authorized in statewide or di- Force, convened back in 1994 to study Peltason, General Counsel Jim Holst

visional bylaws. The change to SBL 330 the faculty discipline issue. UCOP has noted that charges against faculty mem-

is a companion-piece of legislation that also drafted a set of proposed changes to bers often take so long to adjudicate that

states that divisional Graduate Councils UC’s Faculty Code of Conduct that fol- the delay itself becomes a matter of legal

may redelegate authority only as pro- low from the report’s conclusions and exposure for the University. In addition,

vided in divisional bylaws. circulated them along with the report he noted, because of confidentiality con-

• Amendments to Senate Bylaw itself. Should the task force recommen- siderations, the “complainants” in dis-

(SBL) 90, which governs the process by dations be accepted, it’s expected that ciplinary cases often are kept in the dark

which sense-of -the-Senate “memorials” Senate Bylaws dealing with disciplinary about the progress, and even outcome,

are constructed. Henceforth, there will of the cases they initiate — a course of

be both “memorials to the regents” and events that engenders both skepticism

“memorials to the president,” with the Inside Notice: and more legal exposure.

former going to the Regents via the presi-

dent while the latter would stop with the UCSF Merger Troubles; UC attorney Melvin Beal says that

UC’s problems in this area have grown

(Please See: Assembly, Page 3) Tenure Clock-Stopping (Please See: Faculty, Page 4)

Notice

NEWS IN BRIEF Faculty Seek Facts,

‘TENURE CLOCK’ POLICY CHANGE creases for associate professors and 4.5- Legislators Open

This month, President Atkinson is

5.4 percent for full professors.

The recommendation of UCAP was Records In UCSF-

expected to issue a modification to UC’s

Academic Personnel Manual (APM) that

that the weighted scenario was prefer-

able to a flat distribution but that it did

Stanford Merger

will provide untenured faculty who are not go far enough; the committee en-

new parents with the possibility of more The proposed merger of the UC San

couraged UCOP to see whether further Francisco and Stanford medical centers

time off the “tenure clock.” Under APM weighting was possible. Myron Okada,

133.17.h, any faculty member with pri- has come under fire on two fronts in

UC’s director of academic personnel re- recent months: from a group of UCSF

mary responsibility for the care of an lations, said late in the month that a

infant or newly adopted child under age faculty who want more information on

scenario with additional weighting the merger; and from state legislators,

five may be granted “time out” from the would likely be among those presented

eight years assistant professors are al- who have now steered bills through

to UC’s academic vice chancellors at both legislative houses that would re-

lowed at UC to either achieve tenure or their next meeting. A strict limitation on

leave. Under current regulations, the quire greater public accountability for

such weighting, however, is the number the corporation the merger would bring

“tenure clock” may be stopped one time of full professors UC has; the full profes-

for a period of up to one year for about.

sor rank comprises about 58 percent of Meeting on May 5, some 350 mem-

childbearing responsibilities. Under the all UC’s ladder-rank faculty (with asso-

new regulations, expected to become bers of UCSF’s 900-member Senate divi-

ciate and assistant professors compris- sion listened to speakers and a panel

effective July 1, faculty will be able to ing 22 and 20 percent, respectively). As

stop the clock for up to one year for each presentation before voting to continue

birth or adoption, for a combined total (Please See: News, Page 6) with a series of informational meetings

of two years. In addition, faculty will on the merger. UCSF Senate Chair Wil-

need only have “substantial responsi- liam Wara said he hopes to have two

bility” for the care of an infant to qualify such meetings in upcoming weeks, one

for the clock-stopping, rather than the Letters to Notice: addressing the financial aspects of the

“primary responsibility” now specified Affirmative Action merger, the other addressing the aca-

demic issues related to it.

in the APM.

And Faculty Hiring The complaints of some UCSF fac-

SALARY INCREASE DISTRIBUTION ulty regarding the merger are that the

To the Editor: need for it has not been demonstrated

All indications are that UC’s request The University Committee on and that, in carrying out the plan, UCSF

for faculty salary increases averaging 5 Affirmative Action and Diversity may be putting business considerations

percent for 1997-98 will be granted by (UCAAD) wishes to remind all UC ahead of its teaching and research mis-

California’s governor and legislature. faculty that California’s Proposition sions. A number of faculty also feel that

The dollars that come with this increase 209, upheld by the U.S. 9th Circuit faculty have not been kept informed

could be distributed in a number of dif- Court of Appeals in April, does not about either the plans for the merger or

ferent ways across faculty ranks, how- affect the University’s faculty hir- about its effects. (On May 15, UCSF

ever. In May, UC administrators, aided ing practices. Federal guidelines are Medical School Dean Haile Debas sent

by advice from the Senate, were busy still in effect concerning the setting out a five-page letter which sought to

trying to decide what that distribution of affirmative action goals, the fol- answer a number of questions raised at

would be. lowing of search procedures de- the meeting. It is available on the Internet

One approach would be to appor- signed to secure broad pools of ap- at: http://www.som.ucsf.edu/dean/

tion a flat 5 percent across all ranks, from plicants, and the selection of pro- FACULTYL.HTM).

assistant to full professors, but this idea grams designed to remedy prob- Meanwhile, both the California Sen-

has been criticized on grounds that the lems in recruitment and retention ate and Assembly have passed bills that

greatest “lag to market” in UC faculty of groups underrepresented in UC’s would make the corporation formed

salaries occurs at the full professor level. academic units. from the merger subject to the California

UC’s assistant professors are paid 2.4 UCAAD encourages faculty to Public Records Act and state open meet-

percent less than their counterparts at ask their department chairs, school ings requirements. The resistance to such

UC’s “comparison-eight” institutions, deans, and academic administrators public scrutiny is coming from Stanford,

while the lag for associate professors is for current information about affir- which has insisted all along that the

7.2 percent, and the disparity for full mative action goals and achieve- newly formed corporation, UCSF

professors is 8.9 percent. ments with respect to faculty hir- Stanford Health Care, function as a pri-

Given this, UCOP Academic Ad- ing. Furthermore, the committee vate entity. Of four bills introduced, no

vancement administrators in May pre- urges faculty to help spread the single bill has yet to gain the approval of

sented several alternative salary distri- word that commitment to the affir- both houses; even if this occurs, it is

bution scenarios to the Senate’s Univer- mative action goals and procedures uncertain whether Gov. Wilson would

sity Committee on Academic Personnel, developed over the past decades is sign such legislation. Nevertheless, the

one of which was for a slight weighting still very much in order. threat is sufficiently great that Stanford

of the salary increases toward full pro- —Karen Leonard, Chair and UC officials have been meeting to

fessors: 4.3-4.5 percent increases for as- University Committee on determine whether Stanford would be

sistant professors, 4.3-4.7 percent in- Affirmative Action and Diversity willing to accept a greater level of public

disclosure.

2

With Color-Blind Process in Place, Minority Law Admissions Fall

The University of California’s three admissions pool for 1996, but 65.8 of the Last year his school enrolled 19.

law schools released figures in May on admissions pool this year. The UCLA’s experience with this year’s

the first cohort of UC law school proportion of Asians in the admissions admissions also supports an assertion

applicants admitted in the absence of pool rose at both Berkeley and Los that admissions officers across UC have

racial or ethnic considerations, and the Angeles, but fell at Davis, so that the been making: that there is no proxy for

outcome was pretty much what the proportion of Asian admissions across race in admissions — no set of

schools had predicted: a sizable drop in the system held steady at 17.5 percent. admissions considerations other than

admissions for black and Latino students Both Herma Hill Kay, dean of UCB’s outright racial and ethnic preferences

and a concomitant increase in white Boalt Hall, and Michael Rappaport, dean that stand to appreciably increase the

admissions. of admissions at the UCLA Law School, number of underrepresented minorities.

For the fall 1997 class, UC’s law believe their schools may see a steeper This year, UCLA asked its applicants

schools offered admission to 55 black drop in black and Latino enrollment questions about their family assets,

applicants, as opposed to 206 last year than the admissions numbers might income, parental levels of education, the

(when racial preferences were still in indicate; black and Latino students who zip codes of their residence and their

place). Black students thus dropped from were admitted to UC law schools for high schools and then assigned

7.8 percent to 2.1 percent of all UC law 1997 presumably have, on average, admissions points for “socioeconomic

school admissions. For Latino students, higher grade and standardized test deprivation” based on these factors.

the figures were 162 admissions offers scores than their counterparts of a year Instead of preserving minority

in 1997, vs. 255 offers in 1996, meaning a ago and thus are a more select group admissions, Rappaport says, what this

drop from 9.7 to 6.2 percent of all law with more law school offers. “I’d say may have done is put an unusually high

school admissions. Meanwhile, white we’ll get 3-5 black students; maybe 7 if number of recent immigrants into the

applicants comprised 58.8 percent of the we’re lucky,” says UCLA’s Rappaport. admissions pool (though this has yet to

be confirmed through systematic

Assembly: Changes in Senate Bylaws analysis). “We’re clearly not going back

to being a white, elitist, male institution,”

(Continued from Page 1) he says. “In one sense, the class is as

college or school in which the degree is diverse as ever; but there are two groups

president. Most of the bylaw change is taken. An exception that allows engi- who are left out.”

aimed at streamlining the process by neering students at Berkeley, Davis, or Looking to the future, UCB law

which memorials to the Regents are con- Los Angeles to complete senior-year students have suggested that a “character

structed and voted upon. The changes courses on another campus already was index” be used in connection with Boalt’s

also make explicit that, once a memorial part of this legislation. The amendment admission process as a means of boosting

to the Regents is passed by a single approved by the Assembly last month minority enrollments and Dean Kay says

Senate division, every other division further liberalizes the regulation to al- she intends to refer a student report on

must vote upon it, but may vote neither low students enrolled in multi-campus the subject to the school’s admissions

to support nor oppose it, but rather to programs to complete “the requisite committee. She points out that even if

“decline to act” on it. number of units in courses offered at the school could agree on changes that

• Amendments to Senate Bylaws any or all of the participating campuses.” would stand to boost minority

110 and 120. The amendment to 120 • A revision to Bylaw 140 that will admissions, the first class that could be

makes clear that any member of the As- change the name of the Senate’s Univer- affected would be the one entering in

sembly may introduce an item of new sity Committee on Affirmative Action 1999.

business for Assembly discussion. Un- to the University Committee on Affir-

der the amendment to SBL 110, any 15 mative Action and Diversity. The new

members of the Senate or four members name is intended to be more reflective of UC Law School Admissions

of the Assembly will henceforth be able the duties the committee undertakes By Race and Ethnicity

to put an item on the agenda of any under Regents’ policy.

Assembly meeting. The Academic Coun- In other business, the Assembly School 1996 1997

cil had recommended making the num- agreed to refer to its budget and educa- UCB

bers 25 Senate members or seven As- tional policy committees an issue Black 75 14

sembly members, but, on an amend- brought to it by Assembly Representa- Latino 78 39

ment from the floor, the Assembly voted tive Quirino Paris of Davis concerning Asian 126 149

for the lower threshold. student enrollment counts. White 467 538

• Recision of Senate Regulation (SR) Current UC policy is to count stu- UCD

544. This regulation set limits on simul- dents on the 15th day of instruction of Black 27 20

taneous student registration in two uni- each academic term, but Paris maintains Latino 69 50

versity colleges or in a college and a that a more accurate count could be Asian 148 107

school. The University Committee on obtained at the end of each academic White 482 488

Educational Policy said that the regula- term. Under the present system, he al- UCLA

tion served no purpose other than to leges, UC has an unused teaching capac- Black 104 21

impede intercampus cooperation. ity of about 15 percent. The Assembly Latino 108 73

• An amendment to SR 630, which decided that the issue is complex enough Asian 186 199

sets forth a requirement that bachelor’s that it wanted its committees to study it White/ 601 686

degree candidates have residency in the and report back. Other



3

Notice

Domestic Partners: Regents Will Discuss Faculty Discipline

(Continued from Page 1)

(Continued from Page 1) lent, and I would hope to be able to help

in the frank exchange of views that surely over time in step with the number of

sex couples; though its first priority is an would ensue. However, the major rea- charges filed. In the early 1980s, he says,

extension of health insurance benefits, son for urging formal consideration of “there was probably one case a year or

the Senate has called for an end to any the Senate’s recommendations now is one every 18 months.” Conversely, in

benefits disparities that exist between the people who are affected by our inac- the year beginning in December 1995,

married couples on the one hand and tion. They are loyal University employ- eight faculty disciplinary cases were

domestic partners on the other. Most ees — faculty, staff, and administrators undertaken. He estimates that 60 to 75

universities that have offered domestic — who have waited patiently for years percent of UC’s disciplinary cases in-

partner benefits have done so for same- for these vestiges of discrimination to be volve allegations of sexual harassment

sex couples only, while most private- removed.” — the charge generally being that a pro-

sector employers offering such benefits Apart from fairness, the Senate has fessor has harassed a graduate student

have done so for both same- and oppo- also based its case for domestic partner — while a fair amount of the remainder

site-sex couples. benefits on competitiveness consider- concern scientific misconduct.

The Academic Senate’s history with ations. Six of UC’s “comparison-eight” At UC, faculty discipline generally

the domestic partner issue stretches back institutions offer domestic partner ben- takes the following course: charges of

to 1991, when the Senate’s Affirmative efits, including the public institutions of misconduct are filed by an individual,

Action Committee held that disparities Michigan and SUNY-Buffalo, and there generally with an academic vice-chan-

in UC’s benefits amounted to discrimi- is a perception among faculty that UC is cellor; the administration then conducts

nation based on sexual orientation. A losing out on recruitments because of a an investigation aimed at determining

special subcommittee of the Senate’s lack of such benefits. whether formal charges should be

University Committee on Faculty Wel- The cost of extending benefits is an brought against the faculty member.

fare (UCFW) subsequently took up the important part of the issue; UC Vice- Faculty so charged (by the chancellor)

issue and in 1993 issued a report that President Wayne Kennedy said in May then have the right to request a hearing

called for extension of a full range of that he believed he could supply the before the campus Senate’s Privilege and

benefits to both same- and opposite-sex Regents with good estimates of what it Tenure (P&T) Committee. On some cam-

partners, with such partnerships requir- would cost to provide health insurance puses, P&T or the administration may

ing a contract making both parties finan- to same-sex partners, given the large name a Senate “charges committee” to

cially responsible for one another in the number of comparable institutions that determine whether a hearing should take

same way that married couples are. have done so. Such figures may be harder place. If, following its hearing, P&T

The Academic Council endorsed the to come by, however, with respect to agrees that misconduct has occurred, it

UCFW proposal in 1994; since that time, same- and opposite-sex benefits. “What can concur with the discipline the chan-

both the Council and UCFW have reaf- we will end up with, I suspect, is some cellor has recommended or recommend

firmed their earlier positions and urged ranges of possible costs,” he said. a lesser sanction. The ultimate decision

the administration to move forward on It’s unclear whether the Regents will on punishment rests with the chancel-

the issue. The closest UC ever got to a discuss any benefit apart from health lor, the president or the Regents, de-

public discussion of the question, how- insurance, but the Senate has a candi- pending on the severity of the punish-

ever, was a report issued by former Presi- date it would like to see considered: the ment recommended.

dent Peltason that merely compiled in- pension benefits provided to beneficia- The seven-member task force that

formation about the issue. ries upon the death of UC employees. To looked into UC’s disciplinary proce-

Last fall, Atkinson told Senate lead- take one example of the disparities that dures, chaired by law professor and

ers he wanted to act on the domestic currently exist in this area, the spouse of former Academic Council Chair Daniel

partners question this academic year, a UC annuitant who is not part of Social Simmons of UC Davis, found that the

possibly by scheduling a Regents item Security receives a 50-percent continua- most serious delays in this process oc-

on it. As the year wore on, however, and tion of that employee’s pension upon cur “when campus procedures result in

opinion was sampled both on the board the employee’s death without the em- a second full investigation or a re-inves-

and in Sacramento, the administration ployee having to take any reduction in tigation of a complaint after the initial

shelved its plans and a formal Regents monthly pension while alive. For a “con- formal investigation and report.” A

consideration of the issue seemed un- tingent annuitant” of an unmarried em- likely scenario for such duplicate inves-

likely — until last month when Melli- ployee to receive the same 50 percent tigations, Beal says, is when a campus

champ made his remarks. Writing to the continuation, the employee would have investigator (often a sexual harassment

President in late May about his request, to take a reduction in his or her pension “resolutions officer”) undertakes one

Mellichamp said that “it has become while alive — of about 9 percent if the investigation after which a P&T charges

clearer to me each month that there never beneficiary is roughly the same age as committee undertakes a second. The task

will be an ideal time [to take up the the employee. Disparities of much force recommended that such investi-

question]. Thus I wanted to indicate the greater magnitude exist in cases in which gations be folded into a single inquiry,

faculty’s continuing resolve to initiate an employee is eligible for retirement with investigations becoming

an open discussion of the issue. but dies before actually retiring. “professionalized” through formation

“I also want to be able to have at Mellichamp’s letter to Atkinson on of pools of trained faculty and adminis-

least the opening elements of such a domestic partner benefits and a 1996 tration members “who can be called on

discussion before I leave the Board,” he UCFW letter on the subject are available as investigators in individual cases.”

said. “My relations with individual on the world wide web at the address: With respect to charges that current

members of the Board have been excel- http://www.ucop.edu/senate. UC confidentiality requirements un-

4

(Continued from previous page)



fairly shut out complainants, the task

Notes from the Chair: Final Thoughts

force agreed that the status and outcome

of a proceeding ought to be communi- The Academic Council’s year ends in August, but the Notice year

cated to such persons, but it was con- ends in June, which makes this my “Notes from the Chair” valedictory.

cerned that such disclosure is prohib- I want to set forth here several personal observations concerning the

ited under California law. As such, it Senate’s effectiveness in representing faculty interests.

recommended that UC explore the en- First, the Senate’s loose committee organization is both a strength

actment of an exemption for just such and weakness — a strength because it inevitably brings representation

disclosure. Assuming state law obstacles from each campus, thus ensuring a diversity of viewpoints; a weakness

can be overcome, the panel recom- because committee capabilities are strictly limited to the time commit-

mended that complainants be brought

into the disciplinary process through

ments that members are willing to provide (particularly the chair).

such means as being allowed to attend at Then there is the annual turnover of membership on most committees.

least portions of the P&T hearings, and Leadership of this sort can be strong; but, viewed across all committees,

being apprised of case outcomes after it is uneven.

signing confidentiality agreements. Second, the Academic Council’s authority historically has derived

The task force found that the four from that of the Assembly. But over the last 10-15 years we have allowed

sanctions now allowed for faculty mis- the Assembly to atrophy, partly from budgetary reasons and partly

conduct — written censure, suspension, from a misunderstanding of the need for a representative body to

demotion, or dismissal — are too lim- anchor the entire enterprise. Present Senate leaders have committed

ited and inflexible. It recommended their efforts to reverse this process, or to find a better modern-day

keeping them, while adding “public cen- alternative.

sure,” “withdrawal of faculty privi- Third, the Senate’s ongoing responsibilities under the Regents

leges,” “suspension,” and “conditional Standing Orders — for the quality of academic programs and for

suspension, demotion, or dismissal.” advising in many key areas — have been coupled to substantial growth

Public censure would include a descrip- in size and complexity of the University in just a few short decades; this

tion of the conduct that brought about

combination brings with it the need for growth in budgets and staff. But

the discipline. Withdrawal of faculty

privileges might be effective in connec- while administrative staff has grown enormously in the past 20 years,

tion with emeriti faculty, the panel felt, particularly on campuses, Senate office staffs have changed little,

since many other sanctions stand to have neither in numbers nor in scope of responsibilities. We are caught in a

little effect on them. The “conditional” resource time-warp, expected to keep up with the massive amount of

sanctions could be suspended depend- paper and information currently circulating, but with staffing levels

ing on “the performance of some posi- suitable for an earlier era. The administration’s often expressed criti-

tive act” by a disciplined faculty mem- cism, that the Senate is an impediment to getting things accomplished,

ber toward a wronged party, such as is thoroughly unwarranted to the extent that inadequate funding from

monetary restitution. the administration, rather than weaknesses in our own internal struc-

The group that is following up on ture, is the source of such inertia.

the work of the disciplinary task force Fourth and finally, the manner in which our parallel Senate and

used the latter group’s report as a point administration structures traditionally have interacted is now hope-

of departure for further recommenda- lessly anachronistic. There just isn’t time for the long development and

tions — broadening, agreeing with, or writing of a formal report by one group, then a long period of consul-

disagreeing with the earlier panel’s pro-

tation, then a period of redrafting (or circulation of a counterproposal),

posals.

One of the new ideas the working etc. In the past several years, the Senate has taken the lead in assembling

group has endorsed, suggested by Gen- a series of “working groups,” meaning collections of knowledgeable

eral Counsel Holst, is to have General and interested representatives of key committees plus their administra-

Counsel’s Office have on its staff an tive counterparts, to deal briefly but intensively with a single issue.

attorney whose sole responsibility in Such groups then report back to their respective parent organizations

disciplinary cases is to counsel Senate with the outline of a developed solution that brings together the

P&T Committees. As it is, UC attorneys common interests of all parties. We have to utilize more such mecha-

serve as “prosecution” attorneys for the nisms, without necessarily having to give up any traditional authority

administration, leaving the Senate with or privilege.

no neutral, expert advice. The notion is How should we deal with these issues? The statewide Senate

that a “firewall” would be established in currently is undertaking its most thorough self-examination in more

the General Counsel’s office between than 30 years. Out of it presumably will come ideas for dealing with the

the “P& T attorney” and any other attor- issues I’ve noted above and many others. Let’s hope that the adminis-

neys connected to disciplinary cases. The tration lends an ear to notions of how we can reform our longstanding

working group thought it would be bet-

partnership. A successful Academic Senate is as important to them as

ter to have P&T attorneys be from out-

side the General Counsel’s office, but it it is to faculty.

—Duncan Mellichamp

agreed that both the General Counsel Chair, Academic Council

(Please See: Faculty, Page 6)



5

Faculty Discipline NEWS IN BRIEF

(Continued from Page 2)

(Continued from Page 5) EAP DIRECTORSHIP POSITIONS

and “outside” attorney options should such, any slight weighting of salary in- UC faculty are invited to apply for

be experimented with beginning this creases toward full professors has large directorship positions in the University’s

fall. Another Holst idea endorsed by the effects on salary increases for associate Education Abroad Program for the aca-

group was to give P&T committees the and assistant professors. demic years July 1998 through June 2000.

option of hiring “experienced Two-year appointments are planned for

factfinders,” such as professionals from RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT REPORT France (Lyon/Grenoble), Germany, Is-

the American Arbitration Association, A year ago, the Senate’s University rael, Italy, Japan (Tokyo), Mexico, Spain

to run P&T disciplinary hearings, after Committee on Research Policy (UCORP) (Madrid), and for the Directorship in

which the committee would pass judg- completed the first phase of a study on UK/Ireland (London).

ment in the usual way. Such a change the “research environment” at UC, based Appointments for one or two years

would require extensive Senate review. on the responses of some 2,400 UC fac- with residency of shorter duration will

The working group also called for ulty to a UCORP questionnaire. To the be offered in Hungary (Budapest, fall

separate “hearing” and “sanction” researchers’ surprise, 1,000 of the semester) Russia (Moscow, fall semes-

phases of disciplinary proceedings. This survey’s respondents took the time to ter), and Japan (Meiji Gakuin, in a spe-

change would mean that chancellors provide not only fill-in-the-blanks sur- cial spring semester program on global

would no longer have to state in ad- vey answers, but narrative comments as security and development). Applications

vance the maximum penalty being re- well. Those comments have now been for all these positions are due Friday,

quested, a factor that “seems to impair” analyzed and the results made available October 17, 1997. Candidates must be

the ability of P&Ts to determine guilt, in the second part of the UCORP report, tenured members of the Academic Sen-

the group said. In addition, such a change The Deteriorating Environment for Con- ate (including emeriti) or lecturers with

would allow confidentiality to be pro- ducting Research at the University of Cali- security of employment.

tected during the hearing phase, when fornia: A Qualitative Analysis of Frustra- Further information may be ob-

charged faculty members may be inno- tions and Rewards. tained by calling campus EAP offices or

cent, while opening up the sanction Prepared by Linda Mitteness of UC by contacting Kathleen Ranney, Univer-

phase to public scrutiny — a change that San Francisco and Henry Becker of UC sitywide Office, Education Abroad Pro-

would allow complainants to be pro- Irvine, the report is available on the gram, at (805) 893-3677 or at

vided with full information about the world wide web at the address: http:// kranney@uoeap.ucsb.edu.

outcome of a hearing. www.ucop.edu/senate in the “Docu-

ments of Interest” section.





Notice Voluntary Contribution Plan Update

is published eight times during the academic

year for the University of California faculty by UC Voluntary Contribution Fund Performance

the Academic Senate’s Academic Council. As of April 30, 1997

Duncan A. Mellichamp, Chair

UCOP, 22nd Floor, 300 Lakeside Drive Rate of Return, Rate of Return,

Oakland, CA 94612 Fund Last 12 Months Last 1 Month Unit Price

David Krogh, Editor

Room 422, 2223 Fulton Street Equity 18.71% 4.09% $176.1

UC, Berkeley, CA 94720-1020 Bond 16.44% 2.23% $85.9

(510) 642-6068 Savings 6.22% 0.50% N/A

david.krogh@ucop.edu ICC 7.61% 0.60% N/A

Money Market 5.52% 0.45% N/A

Notice is available on the World Wide Web Multi-Asset 12.38% 2.08% $20.5

at: http://www.ucop.edu/senate



6