Faculty Association by dfsdf224s


									                                                                                      December 2007
Faculty Association                                                                   Issue 12
                Newsletter - June 2004:3/ (250) 721-7939


             Prepared by the Faculty Association Ad-hoc Committee on Post-retirement Issues
                                               Nov 21, 2007

                                              Committee Members:
                                      Tom Cleary - tom.cleary@shaw.ca
                                        Ed Ishiguro - ishiguro@uvic.ca
                                         Colin Scarfe - scarfe@uvic.ca
                                         Jan Storch - jstorch@uvic.ca
                                   Mary Sanseverino – msanseve@uvic.ca
                               Consultant: Elizabeth Banister – ebaniste@uvic.ca



•   Retirement with dignity
•   Incentive to retire by knowing that certain rights and privileges will be available to the Retired Member
•   Incentive to stay engaged with UVic and the UVic community as per the 2007 Strategic Plan (Objective 8):

The Ad-Hoc Committee wishes to put forward the following points for consideration:

Post retirement appointments may come in several forms:
         o without salary;
         o post-retirement stipend per unit taught;
         o research stipend from certain grants/contracts;
         o negotiated stipend for work within a Dept (may include teaching)
         o administrative stipend from the University for administrative projects

Currently, there is not a “one size fits all” solution or recommendation for all Faculty and Librarian retirees. The
Retired Members themselves, as well as their departments, faculties, and/or divisions will all have different needs.
Moreover, all units on campus will have different resources available for use in the support of retirees. It is clear
that both UVic retirees and the university itself will benefit from recognition of the significant contributions that our
Retired Members can, and do, continue to make.

Objective 8 of the 2007 UVic Strategic Plan seeks the following: To engage retirees who are willing and able to
make significant contributions in research, teaching and other important aspects of the life of the university.
We recommend that every unit on campus be encouraged to make as much effort as possible to keep interested
retiree Faculty and Librarians involved and engaged in the life of the university. As well, we recommend that the
Office of the Vice President Academic work closely with the various divisions across campus to find and/or
reallocate resources that can help facilitate such engagement. The goal of this assistance and commitment from
the VPAC’s office should be to lead by example and help change, for the better, the culture around how UVic’s
Retired Members are valued.

The following are suggestions that we recommend be put in place. These ideas, some of which are minimal in
cost and support, can go a long way to help keep our retired Librarians and Faculty engaged with the UVic
    • Titles:
         o 1) Professor Emeritus/Emerita otherwise;
         o 2) Librarian Emeritus/Emerita
                                                                                                 Page 2 of 11

   • Titles:
      o 1) Professor Emeritus/Emerita otherwise;
      o 2) Librarian Emeritus/Emerita

    •   Retired Members should have reasonable access to shared office space at the university. Such access
        should include the following facilities:
        o E-mail account and webspace
        o listing in university, faculty, and department web and printed directories
        o mailbox in department office
        o secretarial support for mail and telephone messages, copying and faxing
        o access to computer with connection to university network
        o access, where available, to secure lockable space in which to store files and other property related
            to university activities, preferably located near to the relevant department office
        o library card

•   Retired Members should continue to have reasonable access to and possible sharing of labs and other
    special facilities, if the retiree is active in research or is teaching, engaged in graduate student supervision,
    or holding a research grant;

•   Retired Members should be able to submit internal and external grant applications and should be subject
    only to the normal approval processes applied in the same manner as for regular working Members. Retired
    Members with grants will receive continued support from research accounting and research administration;

•   UVic should support Retired Members who have ongoing research programmes such that they are eligible
    to supervise graduate and undergraduate students’ research, in accordance with the Faculty of Graduate
    Studies and department policies;

•   UVIC should support Retired Members who continue to serve effectively on external committees at
    International, National, Provincial and Local levels, and in this continuing volunteer service are recognized
    by those committees as a representative from UVIC, by recording their contributions and supporting their
    needs for printing agendas, minutes, supporting material and reports sent to them on a regular basis via e-
    mail attachment or via WEB.

•   UVic should support Retired Members who have ongoing research, or who have confirmed teaching or
    administrative duties, in the application and hiring of work study students;

•   When the academic interests of Retired Members coincide with undergraduate and graduate programmes
    offered by their department, retired Members may be invited to teach courses;

•   As Members approach their stated date of retirement they should submit an indication of what teaching,
    research, or service activities, if any, they would like to continue after retirement .The purpose of collecting
    this information would be to ensure that each unit has an inventory of the services available from its retirees
    and that all retirees have an opportunity to advise the university of their continuing interests.
    In order to blur the transition into retirement, we recommend that at least one year prior to a Member’s
    stated date of retirement, the Member’s Chair/Dean/Director/University Librarian should make arrangements
    to meet and discuss the Member’s plans vis a vis the university;

•   The Faculty Association, along with the VPAC’s Office, and the UVic Retirees Association arrange a yearly
    event targeted to Members that are within 5 years of possible retirement at age 65. This event will be an info
    session on things that Members might need to be aware of. The goal is to get Members thinking pro-actively
    about issues around retirement;

•   UVic should maintain an up-to-date registry of Retired Members and make this available on-line at the UVic

This is certainly not an exhaustive list of recommendations – there are many more that could be mentioned.
However, we feel that these recommendations are key to keeping retired Faculty and Librarians engaged in the
life of the university.
                                                                                              Page 3 of 11

This is certainly not an exhaustive list of recommendations – there are many more that could be mentioned.
However, we feel that these recommendations are key to keeping retired Faculty and Librarians engaged in the life
of the university.

Should you wish to contact any of us, either individually or as a group, for more discussion, please don't hesitate to
get in touch. We see this as an area where the UVic Retirees Association, the Faculty Association, and the Office
of the Vice President Academic can work together to come up with strategies that can benefit the entire UVic

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the UVic Faculty Association by:

Tom Cleary
Ed Ishiguro
Colin Scarfe
Jan Storch
Mary Sanseverino

Consultant: Elizabeth Banister


Here are the results of the ratification ballot concerning the negotiated Agreement on issues arising from
the elimination of mandatory retirement dated November 26, 2007.

The results will be posted on the Association website at http://web.uvic.ca/facassn and will also be
mailed to Faculty Association Members.

Ballot Question:
I approve the negotiated Agreement on Issues Arising from the Elimination of Mandatory Retirement
dated November 26, 2007.

        Results of the Ratification Vote

                Eligible to Vote:                         780

                Total Ballots Returned:                   165 (21.03%)

                Spoiled Ballots:                          0

                Status:                                   Passed

                In favor:                                 135 (81.71%)

                Opposed:                                  30
                                                                                                   Page 4 of 11


Context and Background

The Administrative Process Review Task Force is a joint Faculty Association/Administration Committee formed to
“inform itself about administrative processes and tasks that are perceived to be overly-burdensome or complex
and [to] explore a variety of creative responses to administrative responsibilities that will promote the ability of
Faculty Members to give their primary attention to teaching, research and professional service.” The Committee
was further required to “make recommendations to the Parties related to changes in practices, policies and
procedures to achieve this end.” (Terms of Reference of the Committee, Attached as Appendix A).

The Committee was formed to undertake this task following negotiations between the Parties in which the question
of Faculty workload had been discussed. Following the negotiations, the Administration supplied the Faculty
Association with a range of information relating to Faculty workload. The Association conducted its own survey of
members. After considering the data obtained, the monthly Joint Executive meetings focused on the issue of
administrative work as a key to increased concern about workload in the University. This Committee was then
proposed, its composition and terms of reference agreed to, and it commenced work in January, 2007.


The Committee comprises seven members, including the Chair. The membership is:

Mary Anne Waldron, Associate Vice-President, Legal Affairs, Chair
Peter Driessen, Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering
Murray Griffith, Executive Director, Financial Services
Rebecca Johnson, Professor, Faculty of Law
Gary MacGillivray, Chair, Department of Mathematics and Statistics
Thomas Pedersen, Dean, Faculty of Science
Rachael Scarth, Director, Office of Research Services

Support was provided to the Committee by Barbara Parnell, Assistant to Mary Anne Waldron, by Jan Nolan,
Director of Faculty Renewal and Academic Leadership Initiatives and by Edith Cheng, Law Co-op Student.

Work of the Committee

From the period January 18 until April 24, the Committee met six times. At its first meeting, it reviewed its terms of
reference, discussed and decided on its process. Since September, 2007, the Committee has met twice more.

The Committee decided that its first task was to gather information. It decided to adopt three methods of gathering
this information: Exploring and consolidating the experiences of Committee members in administrative work as the
Committee members represented a number of areas in the University, both administrative and faculty; soliciting
views from the University community, including a review of the Faculty Association Workload Survey; and
conducting interviews with selected staff to gain their perspectives on the problems.

Throughout its meetings, the Committee gradually identified a number of themes that seemed to be repeatedly
referred to by many of its sources. This document was reviewed on several occasions by the Committee. Its latest
iteration is attached as Appendix B.

In addition to discussions of their own experiences, members of the Committee attended Dean’s Council to seek
input and discuss the terms of reference of the Committee. An article appeared in the Ring with contact information
for Committee members. The Committee received several written submissions on burdensome processes from
Faculty and staff. These items of correspondence and the comments of the Deans were reviewed and major
themes incorporated into the Themes documents.

At its meeting on April 11, the Committee was joined by three Administrative Officers from a cross-section of
departments. John Hall, Biochemistry, Jill Michalski, Music and Puri Pazo-Torres, English, joined the Committee,
provided it with their individual perspectives on the administrative procedures they observed and responded to
questions from Committee members. The Administrative Officers had been sent the then-current draft of the
                                                                                                   Page 5 of 11

At its meeting on April 11, the Committee was joined by three Administrative Officers from a cross-section of
departments. John Hall, Biochemistry, Jill Michalski, Music and Puri Pazo-Torres, English, joined the Committee,
provided it with their individual perspectives on the administrative procedures they observed and responded to
questions from Committee members. The Administrative Officers had been sent the then-current draft of the
Themes document and were asked to comment upon it.

In receiving and discussing processes that Faculty and staff found burdensome, the Committee was conscious of
the fact that the University must preserve collegiality of decision making, as part of the UVic culture, but that this
on occasion leads to greater administrative burdens. As well, the Committee was aware that a number of the
processes seen as burdensome are beyond the control of the University, being imposed upon it by external
agencies such as government or granting councils. These factors complicated considerably the analysis by the
Committee of the tasks that were within the University’s control and that had become unnecessarily complex.

In addition, while many of the submissions to the Committee were helpful and useful, the Committee did determine
that a number fell outside the scope of its terms of reference. In these cases, the central issue either was a budget
issue causing what was perceived as lack of staff support, were situations in which the administrative process
complained of was not one that impacted on faculty workload or concerned matters that were dictated by the
Framework Agreement which has been negotiated between the Faculty Association and the Administration. In the
case of matters falling under the Framework Agreement, it was necessary to separate the administrative
processes put in place to implement the provisions of the Agreement (which are of legitimate concern to this
Committee) and the substantive provisions (which are matters for the Parties to negotiate at the bargaining table).

The Committee also had extensive discussions regarding a number of specific recommendations. One of these
was the possibility of a Travel Card which would allow Faculty to charge directly costs of research related trips.
Pros and cons were discussed, including the simplicity of the Travel Card arrangement versus the difficulty of
collecting back inappropriate charges and the requirements of the research granting agencies. No final conclusion
was reached but the matter continues to be of interest to the Committee.

The Committee determined in April that it would prepare and present to the Joint Executive meeting an interim
report of its work and progress. While the Committee had hoped to meet over the summer, this proved difficult to
arrange. The Committee’s work is continuing over the fall term as it moves from its information gathering and
analysis stage to a consideration of potential solutions to some of the problems identified.

Issues Currently Receiving Attention

The Committee was also aware and has kept contact with several initiatives that are closely related to its work.
First, Project Nova is replacing many systems that have become burdensome and time consuming. The
Committee has identified a number of matters that may emerge either from the Project itself or related projects,
such as the reduction in paper copies of forms. Dr. MacGillivray’s department is currently testing electronic
appointments forms.

Second, some units have already addressed matters that were brought to the Committee’s attention. For example,
it was a recurring complaint that purchasing limits for the purchasing card were too low. Murray Griffith has
informed the Committee that as of April 1, those limits have been raised.

Third, a Service Level Review initiative has been begun under the auspices of the Vice-President Finance and
Operations and a call for projects issued. Several items brought before this Committee may be addressed in that
process, including the reduction of paper forms, complaints about the charge-back system and the administrative
structure of units.

Certain other problems, such as multiple sign-offs on appointment forms and the awards approval processes that
were raised by submissions to the Committee are also being addressed through separate processes, often
coordinated with this process through overlapping membership in this committee and the body tasked with
amending the process. The issue of multiple sign-offs and the meaning of signatures is being addressed by the
Vice-President Academic’s office which has reviewed the delegation of signing authority for various appointments.
A revision in procedures to reduce and clarify many short term appointment processes was approved by the Board
of Governors in October. The process of approving awards is being reviewed by a committee working with the
                                                                                                  Page 6 of 11

A revision in procedures to reduce and clarify many short term appointment processes was approved by the Board
of Governors in October. The process of approving awards is being reviewed by a committee working with the
University Secretary’s office that is proposing measures to simplify the awards approval process.

Other initiatives have also been undertaken as a result of this Committee’s liaison with the Administration and other
units. The question of excessive email has been raised at Dean’s Council and a best practices document is being
prepared. The New Academic Administrator’s Workshop this fall had a section on conducting meetings and a Chairs
and Directors workshop is planned for this year on handling electronic communications. A pilot workshop was held
this year for faculty employing grant-funded staff to provide them with information and support in this process. Other
methods of extending support to faculty who are employers of grant-funded staff are also actively under

In fact, during the time the Committee has been meeting, many positive steps have been taken to deal with some of
the problematic themes identified by the Committee. The Committee is encouraged by these steps and will consider
methods of facilitating and continuing such initiatives.

Future Goals

The Committee concludes that at this time it has surveyed a significant number of issues relating to administrative
processes and that it has informed itself with respect to these problems and, in some cases, to processes already
underway that are attempting to address several of the issues.

Although it has yet to make general recommendations, considerable work has already been done through a variety
of avenues to focus upon and address a number of the important issues in the Themes document. The heightened
awareness of faculty, staff, and administration of the issues involved in our complex administrative system has
generated a variety of approaches, solutions and ideas that are already being implemented.

Over the fall, the Committee will meet to:

    1. Assess the Themes document in light of recent submissions and in light of various initiatives that have
       begun to address the issues raised;
    2. Decide which areas are most in need of direct recommendations from the Committee;
    3. Determine which of these areas it can most usefully address;
    4. Develop a work plan for approaching these selected areas;
    5. Consider whether there should be an on-going structure that might continue to monitor and propose change
       to burdensome administrative processes; and
    6. Formulate its general recommendations and final report.

A major area of interest currently is the possibility of developing best practices for Committee work in units. This has
been raised repeatedly as a source of increased workload and is not under active review by any other group.

The Committee intends to produce another report in January, 2008, at which time it will produce recommendations
to Joint Executive meeting as to future developments in the work of streamlining and simplifying the University’s
administrative processes.
                                                                                           Page 7 of 11


                                          Terms of Reference

The University Administration and Faculty Association have been engaged in discussions about concerns arising
from the complex environment in which Universities today operate, and the perceived increase in administrative

While the parties also acknowledge the importance of administrative work to promote the collegiality of decision-
making that is unique to the University of Victoria and to fulfill the many accountabilities of the University
internally and to government and the community, the Parties agree that levels of administrative work should be
reviewed in order to create efficiencies and to minimize its impact on the core mission of the University.

The Parties therefore agree to form a committee to examine this issue. The committee will consist of:

    1. The Associate Vice President Legal Affairs who will serve as Chair of the Committee and will be
       supported in that role by the Director of Faculty Recruitment and Academic Leadership;
    2. One member of the Faculty Association executive nominated by the Faculty Association; and
    3. One faculty member nominated by the Faculty Association.
    4. One Chair or Director of an academic unit nominated by the Faculty Association;
    5. A Dean nominated by the administration;
    6. One representative from the Office of the Vice President Research familiar with research procedures;
    7. One representative from the office of the Vice President Finance and Operations familiar with
       administrative procedures;

The Committee will inform itself about administrative processes and tasks that are perceived to be overly-
burdensome or complex and may explore a variety of creative responses to administrative responsibilities that
will promote the ability of Faculty Members to give their primary attention to teaching, research and professional
service. The Committee will make recommendations to the Parties related to changes in practices, policies and
procedures to achieve this end. The committee’s work will commence in January 2007 and will provide an
interim report to the parties by May 2007.
                                                                                        Page 8 of 11


                             ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES TASK FORCE

                             IDENTIFIED THEMES AND PROBLEM AREAS


  1. Email
   Spam, internal and external – Can unnecessary email be reduced?
   Use of email by students – Can volume be controlled? Can time lines for response be established? Can
     guidelines as to when or when not appropriate be established? Can expectations be managed?

  2. Accessing Information
   Finding where information is available and who can help for various administrative and technical tasks –
     Can this be facilitated or better organized?
   Reaching people who can solve the problem – Can reasonable time lines for response be established?


  1. Promotion/tenure/reappointment/salary reviews
   Amount of work in generating CV and teaching dossier – Can this be made manageable?
   Volume of material produced --- Is there any way of setting standards as to what is “enough”?

  2. Other reporting processes
   Annual report of outside activities – Can this be more efficiently handled?
   Deadlines and important dates – How can these be brought to everyone’s attention?


  1. Complexity of expense claims – Who needs to see/sign/handle? How can documentation be
  2. Complexity in professional development expense claims – Who needs to see/sign/handle? Can any
     simplification be made?
  3. Purchasing processes – Can limits be increased? Can processes be simplified?
  4. Are all signatures currently required on various documents necessary and is everyone who signs aware
     of what signatures mean?
  5. Can the training related to the FAST system be provided separately for faculty and for staff who have
     differing objectives?


  1. Committee loads are high, especially for some faculty – Can committees be streamlined? Can
     guidelines about committee type/use/size be constructed? Can committee duplication be reduced?
  2. Committee processes complex – Can meetings be more efficient? Can roles and responsibilities be
  3. What matters are appropriate for academic committees – Can some matters be better handled by
  4. How has “downloading” of work contributed to committee loads and is there any way to address that?
  5. Can guidelines be developed for how much is “enough”?
                                                                                       Page 9 of 11


1. Preparation and revision of CV’s for research activities – Can this be simplified?
2. Administration of grants/contracts – hiring and management of grant-funded employees; reporting for
   granting councils – Can these processes be standardized/simplified/better coordinated?
3. Reporting of grades – Do too many people handle/see/approve?
4. Are processes for handling student discipline/appeals too complex?
5. Processes for hiring RA’s and TA’s – Are there redundant processes/paperwork?
6. Issues surrounding small capital projects – cost, efficiency issues.
7. Administrative support for research grant funded operations – Can this be improved?
8. Course responsibilities that may have administrative component – evaluation of medical excuses,
   accommodation issues – Can support be improved/process facilitated?
Page 10 of                                                                                      Page 10 of 11
                                                                                                 Page 10 of 4
4      Page 11 of 11

 Excellence in Mathematics Scholarship
 Bill Pfaffenberger, Past President, Faculty Association retired on September 1, 2007 after a remarkable
 career at UVic spanning thirty-eight years. In addition to his work with the Pension Board, Faculty
 Association, Board of Governors, and many other academic interests, his mentoring of students was

 We have received a very generous offer from two of Bill’s business friends in Vancouver. They will
 match all donations, dollar-for-dollar, up to $100,000 to boost the Excellence in Mathematics
 Scholarship. Bill created this scholarship to recognize the high achieving participants who wrote the
 Canadian Mathematics Competitions in Grades 11 and 12. Recognizing that these exceptional
 students are usually high achievers in all their academic pursuits, Bill felt that they – and future students
 like them – deserve to be encouraged to attend UVic through the Excellence in Mathematics
 Scholarship. The plan was successful and, over time, we have attracted many outstanding students to
 UVic with his scholarship. All of these students have brought honour and repute to our University and
 many of them have excelled in their careers.

 Thanks to Bill’s efforts, the Excellence in Mathematics Scholarship Endowment has grown over the
 years. There are no restrictions on which Faculty or School the recipient may enter. The eligibility
 criteria are as follows:

        One or more scholarships of $1,000 to $4,000 are awarded to students entering
        the University of Victoria directly from secondary schools who have achieved
        outstanding performance on The Fermat (Grade 11 Mathematics Contest) and/or
        The Euclid (Grade 12 Mathematics Contest). Selection will be made by the Senate
        Committee on Awards upon the recommendation of the Department of
        Mathematics and Statistics.

 As a fitting tribute to Bill Paffenberger’s remarkable career at UVic, we are hoping to meet the
 challenge and match all of the $100,000. We are asking Members of the Faculty Association, to
 participate in this unique opportunity to help some outstanding students achieve their academic

 The contact person for donations is as follows:

        Ms. Marion Grau, Manager, Annual Giving
        Faculties of Science and Engineering
        University of Victoria
        PO Box 3055 STN CSC
        Victoria BC V8W 3P6
        Telephone: 721-6003
        Email: mgrau@uvic.ca

 In appreciation,

 Dr. David Leeming
 Professor Emeritus
 Department of Mathematics and Statistics
             Faculty Association – December 2007                                             Page 11 of 11

                         Faculty Association Entrance Scholarships
  Newsletter –
                         The Senate Committee on Awards is pleased to inform you that the award for the 2006-
   December              2007 academic year has been assigned to the student(s) listed below.
Phone:                   Brandy Runzer - $3,000
(250) 721-7939           Christine Meijer - $3,000
Fax:                     Amy Burg - $3,000
(250) 721-8873
                      Faculty Association Office Closure for Christmas
Editor: Mark Flaherty
Managing Editor:      The Faculty Association office will be closed from December 25 to January 1, 2008 and
Denise Lunger         reopen on January 2, 2008.

                         Have a safe and happy New Year!

We’re on the Web!
See us at:

To top