Newsletter
October, 2002
___________________________________________________________________
The 2002-03 Faculty Senate officers and membership:
Chair: Charles
Weaver (Arts and Sciences)
Chair-elect: Joe Cox (Business)
Secretary: Eric C. Rust (Arts and Sciences)
Publicity: Pat Sharp (Education)
Arts and
Sciences: Robert Baldridge Rosalie Beck Gregory Benesh Anne-Marie Bowery Raymond J. Cannon William F. Cooper Tom Hanks David L. Longfellow
Ann McGlashan Linda McManness
Jim Patton Kevin Pinney Eric C. Rust Charles Weaver Business: Joe A. Cox Mark G. Dunn Kent Gilbreath Patricia Norman Charles W. Stanley Jane G. Williams Education: Dale Connally Eric L. Robinson Pat T. Sharp Engineering
and Henry Walbesser Law: Marianne Auld Libraries: Ellen Brown Music: Jane Abbott-Kirk Michael Jacobson Nursing: Linda Haynes Truett Seminary: Liz Ngan
Computer Science:
Comments by Joe Cox, Faculty Senate Chair
What is the role of the Faculty Senate at Baylor? The Senate Constitution, which can be found in the Faculty Handbook, states the Senate is “to serve and function as the representative, deliberative, and legislative body of the Baylor University Faculties” (Faculty Handbook, p. 91) The handbooks also states that the Senate is “a forum for the full and free discussion of all matters affecting Baylor University and through its representatives and through consultation with the faculty seeks to express collective faculty judgment on campus issues and to encourage effective faculty participation in the formation of University policy, especially as that policy bears on academic governance of the University” (Faculty Handbook, p. 18).
Perhaps the most important part of the Senate’s charge is the last phrase of the above paragraph: the Senate serves as the primary voice of the faculty in mattes of academic policy and governance. This is a task that we take seriously.
Is the Senate a representative body? Without a doubt. Roughly half of all faculty return ballots each year. Faculty turn to the Senate to express concern and opinion—Senators routinely receive calls and emails from colleagues suggesting the Senate address various topics. (In fact, the area in which I was least prepared when I took over as chair was the sheer volume of information that passes through the chair’s office.)
It would be easy to portray the Senate as the “loyal opposition” of the university administration; some would even remove the modifier. To do so is unfair. In many substantive areas the goals of the Faculty Senate mirror those of the university administrators. Often, the disagreements center around the implementation of those goals. The Senate strives for an environment in which faculty input is encouraged and appreciated. For the Senate to be successful in its role, Senate opinion need not always be adopted, but it needs to be considered.
The Senate will be addressing a number of areas this academic year. Briefly, here are some of the issues to be discussed:
How can the Senate best be involved in the implementation of the A/B faculty classification?
As the University moves toward Vision 2012, tenure and promotion criteria will change. The Senate will seek clarification of issues surrounding retention, tenure, and promotion. Specifically, we will be looking at service expectation of junior faculty, as well as making clear religious expectations. Finally, we will examine the possibility of college-level tenure committee, rather than continuing to rely on a University-Wide tenure committee.
The Senate continues to be concerned with recruitment and hiring issues. Charles Stanley completed a university-wide hiring survey last year, and this will be forwarded to the university administrators with specific recommendations for action. Furthermore, we are concerned that too many scholars who share the University’s religious commitment are being rejected because they do not articulate fully-matured religious beliefs during the brief interview process. We will discuss whether the university may wish to adopt a more “developmental” approach to religious growth and involvement of newly hired faculty
The Senate
will investigate ways to increase involvement and career
development of under-represented faculty and administrators. We will
pursue possible workshops with AAUP, for example.
The Senate
has invited a representative from the Retired and Emeritus
Faculty to serve as a non-voting Senator
The Senate
is in the process of amending the constitution to accommodate
a Senator from the Honors College.
The Senate
will ask to be included in the formulation of new guidelines for
the Peer Review of Teaching.
The Senate
will follow closely the process of searching for and hiring a
new Provost and Chief Academic Officer. In fact, we have formally
requested that a member of the Senate be appointed to the search
committee.
I encourage you to follow closely the activities of the Faculty Senate. Should you have concerns or suggestions, feel free to contact me or any of the senators elected from your academic unit.
Update
on Benefits
By Marilyn A. Crone, Vice President for Human Resources
and Richard Amos, Asst. Vice President and Director of Compensation &
Benefits
Post
Retirement Benefits
Thank you for the positive feedback we have received from many of you regarding
the recent changes to post retirement benefits. I would like to take this
opportunity to provide you with information as to the supporting rationale
for the changes.
We now regularly review our benefit offerings to insure appropriateness and competitiveness. Evaluation of our previous post retirement benefits against those of Tier One institutions supported the need for and feasibility of a reduction in the years of service requirement from 20 to 10. Baylor’s age requirement of 55 was also supported by this survey and remains unchanged. As you are so keenly aware, the change in the years of service requirement will directly impact the university’s ability to recruit and retain world-class faculty.
Data from another survey examining benefits of 20 private institutions, including ten TierOne schools, and Big 12 universities supported enriching the benefit for the surviving spouse of an official retiree. This benefit enrichment was also frequently requested by members of our faculty.
A surviving spouse will now pay only the retiree’s portion of the monthly premium (currently $348) and Baylor will pay the balance of the premium. This premium purchases coverage for the retiree or the surviving spouse and eligible family members if needed. The surviving spouse may now continue in the same group medical plan available to active faculty/staff as long as needed beyond Medicare age, or until opting out of the Baylor group plan or becoming covered by another comparable medical insurance plan. The survey indicates that Baylor’s revised surviving spouse benefit is very generous.
The surviving
spouse will also have an option for Baylor to pay the full cost of the Medicare
Supplement unless a comparable Medicare Supplement is provided by another
entity. The previous policy did not provide the surviving spouse the option
for a Medicare Supplement paid by the university.
Other
Benefit Revisions
Your feedback, along with the outstanding work done by our human resource
professionals, has effected several positive benefit changes that have shaped
our present total benefit package. I would like to take this opportunity to
point out several key changes that have occurred in recent years. Our benefits
promote and enhance the well-being of our faculty and staff. It is essential
that you know about them so that you may access benefits as needed—so
that they are truly an advantage to you.
Medical insurance plan benefits and the premium structure were enhanced and modified to allow faculty and staff to choose enrollment in one of four tiers of employee and family insurance coverage. Current review of the prescription drug program, which represents more than 25% of total medical costs for our group plan, indicates prospective service improvements and drug cost savings in 2003. We are endeavoring to maintain quality service and yet control plan costs as they significantly impact your premiums and the university’s costs.
Dental insurance
benefits were improved by the coverage of 100% of preventive dental services
and the waiver of the previous $50 annual deductible for such services. Dependent
life insurance coverage for children of all ages was made equal to spousal
coverage. Additional supplemental/voluntary catastrophic illness policies
and long term care insurance have been made available to faculty and staff.
The maximum benefit of $5,000 per month for long-term disability insurance
was increased to cover 60% of monthly predisability earnings up to a new level
that covers virtually all faculty and staff. Annual limits to Flexible Spending
Accounts (FSA) for unreimbursed medical or dental expenses have been increased
from $4,500 to $5,500 to enhance personal budgeting and tax savings opportunities
for faculty and staff. A 529 College Savings Plan has been added to allow
faculty and staff to save for the college expenses of their children with
plan earnings then distributed tax-free.
Years of evaluative work and financial modeling by faculty and staff members,
supported by approval of the Administrative Committee and increased funding
by the university, resulted in the following changes to the Retirement Income
Plan effective 2001: the addition of faculty and staff ages 21-29 as participants
in the plan, a new university contribution schedule that enhanced staff benefits
and continued to provide outstanding benefits to faculty, a new contribution
category of Senior Lecturers, and the addition of Vanguard and TIAA-CREF as
new plan vendors creating more opportunities for choice.
Several new options for voluntary Tax Deferred Annuity contributions have
been added: American Funds, Ministers and Missionaries Benefit Board, and
First University Credit Union. Recent tax law changes allowed for the addition
of a new 457(b) Deferred Compensation Plan that provides faculty and staff
greater opportunity to defer additional compensation and save taxes.
Tuition changes made effective in 2000 allow an eligible spouse of a faculty or staff member to take a full course load in each academic session for courses leading to a degree or certification program. Previously, a full course load was available only to eligible children. Additionally, a spouse also became eligible for special provisions that cover situations such as a faculty/staff member’s leave of absence, total permanent disability, official retirement or death.
I am hopeful that you will continue to agree that these changes to our benefit policies are in the best interests of both current and prospective faculty and staff. If you have additional questions, please contact Dick Jackson (8571), Beverly Tieman (2218), or Richard Amos (8577).
It is the
desire of our human resources team to serve the needs of our faculty and staff.
Please continue to forward us your suggestions and questions.