Employee Assembly Minutes
Wednesday, October 21, 1998
2123 Comstock
12:15 p.m. - 1:30 p.m.

I. Call to Order and Introductions

C.J. Lance-Duboscq called the meeting to order at 12:15 p.m., and introduced Lisa Kendall from the department of Work and Family Services. She explained that Ms. Kendall would be giving a presentation on Work and Family Services, a part of the Office of Human Resources, and what it provides employees.

Present: C.Gardner, L.Kendall, M.Esposito, T.Calvert, C.J.Lance-Duboscq, J.DeMarco, D.DiBene, L.Russell, J.Worden, A.Vail, G.Brandt, M.Overstrom

II. Open Forum

M. Esposito informed the EA he felt the dedicated service award has been quite successful. He proposed honoring Mr. George Peter, who has done a lot for the EA over the years, by re-naming the dedicated service award after him. M. Overstrom seconded the motion. Mr. Esposito then went on to explain that in light of the EA’s previous discussion about honoring M. Opperman, he had come up with the idea of having a yearly award for outstanding employees which could be named after Ms. Opperman; he then asked for feedback about this idea at the next meeting.

J.DeMarco stated he thought there would be no problem with re-naming the dedicated service award The George Peter Dedicated Service Award. D.DiBene asked for more information about Mr. Peter. M.Overstrom explained that Mr. Peter was the first Employee-elected Trustee, an original staff member at Cornell’s site in Arecibo, very active in the original campus governance system (which had only two employee representatives), and with his help and initiative, the Employee Assembly was started.

C.J.Lance-Duboscq called for a vote on re-naming the award the “George Peter Award for Dedicated Service.”

The Employee Assembly unanimously approved the naming of the dedicated service award “The George Peter Award for Dedicated Service,” effective immediately.

M. Overstrom handed out a schedule for the Trustee Council meeting, and let the EA know when the State of the University address would be given, while suggesting that as many people as possible attend this address by President Rawlings.

G.Brandt agreed with M.Overstrom and noted that last year, the address was an exceptional opportunity to hear President Rawlings and other top administrators speak about changes in the University.

C.J.Lance-Duboscq informed the group that the deadline for the PawPrint insert completion was November 19th, and there would be another planning/layout meeting on Wednesday, October 28th from 12:15–1:30.

G.Brandt asked for an explanation of the policy regarding non-mandatory EA meetings. C.J. relayed the EA’s charter states that only meetings called at the beginning of the year are mandatory, but this is an issue she would like to revisit at a later time.

III. Approval of Minutes

J.DeMarco requested that the minutes be amended to read (under Employee Day) “J.DeMarco reported the next employee night would include different types of chili, to eliminate confusion about choosing food.”

The minutes were unanimously approved as amended.

IV. Old Business

C.J.Lance-Duboscq reminded the people who had agreed to work on a reception for M.Opperman that they should get moving. M.Overstrom suggested the group pick a date for the reception that surrounded a special employee event.

V. Business of the Day

A. Presentation by Lisa Kendall

L.Kendall spoke to the EA about the department of Work and Family Services, which is under the auspices of the Office of Human Resources. She thanked the EA for being invited to present and explained that she was here not to give an in-depth presentation, but to give a brief overview of the program, explain where the department was moving, and gain feedback about the EA constituencies’ concern with work and family issues. Ms.Kendall asked if anyone was familiar with the program, and D.DiBene replied that he had no knowledge of the program before he discovered Ms. Kendall was slated to present to the Assembly. C.Gardner explained that in general, there was a pretty large variation in the amount of information different employees on the Assembly would have about the program.

Ms. Kendall clarified that where the department had been was not necessarily where it was headed. She gave a brief history of the department, which began ten years ago with a list of demands brought to the Cornell administration by a group of University community members who were dissatisfied with the growing tension between work and family concerns. The University decided to create a new department, Work and Family. In the ten years since its creation, there have been a substantial number of changes in University policy, but there is a long way to go before there will be an entirely family friendly work environment. L.Kendall noted that she had taken the position just this past August, and that work done prior to her joining the office included the creation of flexible scheduling, jobsharing, enforced workplace policies, and an official University “Work and Family Life Policy Statement.”

Based on that policy, Ms.Kendall related that her office has two objectives: to create a workplace where people with families can grow and thrive, and to articulate a strategic commitment to the work and family interface. Ms.Kendall’s office consists of a program coordinator, Sonja Baylor; an administrative assistant who also handles M.Opperman’s work, and a director. Often, crossover occurs between the Office of Human Resources and the Department of Work and Family. L.Kendall shared that in her short time on campus, she has noticed that Cornell is unique in the diversity of departments and policies it has. Based on that diversity, her office has devised a strategy designed to reach out to all the different departments. Using the Human Resource Network as their initial conduit, the department hopes to bring information that all employees need regarding work and family issues to each worker on campus. Ms.Kendall admitted that this was a very broad area to be working within, since the combination of our work lives and family lives total virtually one hundred percent of what we do. She stressed that her office has a lot of information about how work and family programs have been implemented in industries and in other businesses, and they will be researching and sharing that information.

L.Kendall explained that today, workers and organizations need to approach the workplace in different ways in order to get their jobs done. No longer do people work eighty hours per week and bring work home as well. Companies need to understand that for them to get a premium performance and a high level of productivity from their workers, they must recognize that the happiest employees are the most productive employees. This is because they have reached a balance between their family lives and work lives. New issues are affecting the work and family sector: health care for the elderly; increased employee assistance programs; resources for marital problems; and child care. The Department of Work and Family provides educational programs, supervisor training programs, and extensive referral services. Ms.Kendall would like to see the office also branch out into areas of policy creation, administrative referrals, etc. Again, she referenced the notion that because of the diverse nature of Cornell offices and departments, the best strategy available would be to reinforce the idea that employers must attempt to honor and respect the whole person and the idea that their employees do have lives outside of the workplace that influence how they do their jobs. Support for employees in every aspect of their lives will create a sense of pride and goodwill in the workplace.

L.Kendall illustrated how implementation of the policy and of Work and Family programs will have different effects in different departments. The main interest is to get out there and let employees know that there is a specific policy that the office is working from and can use as a template in settling disputes and resolving issues. Programs will contain an emphasis on teaching negotiation and interpersonal relationship skills, as well as empowering workshops. Closing her presentation, she reiterated the concept that people are the University’s greatest resource, and it is in the best interest of Cornell employers to recognize that fact and act accordingly by being responsive to the needs of employees.

M.Esposito brought up the fact that there are many employee complaints about the relative expenses incurred with campus child care, even though there was a sliding scale fee rate. L.Kendall explained there is a threshold for child care rates that prevent them from sliding below a certain point, and she was aware of that concern and would take it back to her office.

M.Esposito raised the idea that job flexibility, while beneficial, can discriminate against people without children when they are asked to cover shifts for those employees called out of the office for family reasons. L.Kendall agreed that this was true, but the University was making a move to get out of the “work v. family” paradigm and figure out how people at different stages in their lives can integrate all different sorts of family concerns with a pleasant work environment. She also reminded the EA that child care isn’t the only issue that calls people out of the office, but elder care, volunteerism, and political responsibilities can also have an effect.

M.Overstrom brought up a concern that she had with L.Kendall’s department utilizing only the Human Resources Network for its outreach programs. She felt that unless the H.R. person assigned to a specific department was truly outstanding, the information would never filter down to the employees. M.Overstrom explained that she felt it was important for the Department of Work and Family to engage in an all-out public relations campaign, utilizing PawPrint and perhaps personal letters to employees. L.Kendall thanked her for that suggestion and said the H.R. Network was only meant to be a starting point and other avenues would be utilized.

B. Transportation Report - Trudi Calvert

T.Calvert reported to the group that at the last Transportation Advisory Committee meeting (TAC), C. Cohen stated the changes in the S and MT permits had been favorable, with the number of permits being reduced by about 500, with no complaints. More people were being transported from parking lots to work by buses and that conversion seemed to be working well. The TAC anticipates big changes because of the construction occurring on West and North Campus, both during the physical work and after the campuses are completed. Expect changes to the amount of parking and the circulation of traffic. Plans for parking renovations include increased parking at WSH, the elimination of the lot next to Lincoln Hall, and a small decrease in space between Martha Van Rensslear and that building’s annex.

Ms.Calvert noted that B.Wendt stipulated that any increases in fares were approved by the administration’s Executive Budget Committee and not the Transportation Committee. She further clarified that this comment seemed to be a defense made in preparation for dealing with the EA’s proposed Advisory Committee, which the administrators on TAC seemed very distressed with. T.Calvert related that she attempted to explain the purpose of the new EA committee would be to involve the community more in transportation decisions, inform employees about proposed changes before they became a fait accompli, and thus eliminate so much of the dissension caused when employees are hit in their pocketbooks. She said the concerned people planned to write a letter to PawPrint. J.DeMarco asked whether or not the letter would be providing contact information as well. T.Calvert said that they would do that and let people know that their meetings are open to the public.

C.J.Lance-Duboscq clarified that in the past, there was an ad hoc committee charged with looking into the structure of the TAC; it was her opinion that this group never really finished their job. Recently, she sent the charge of the TAC to T.Hoebbel with some serious questions and concerns which remain. C.J.Lance-Duboscq was concerned with what appears to be a TAC heavily weighted with people employed by the Transportation Department, as well as partisan people appointed by Transportation. She wanted to suggest to the chair of the University Assembly that perhaps that body should discuss the charge of the TAC (since it is part of their Charter) and see if it was still viable. T.Calvert confirmed the Chair’s suspicions and said that in her opinion, the TAC acted merely as a rubber stamp for policy. C.J.Lance-Duboscq informed the group that after realizing these concerns, she contacted Kurt Dunham and Pam Kellogg, the EA representative to TAC, and requested that each of them make a presentation to the EA. Eventually, she got a response from both of them and they will be presenting at the meeting on November 18th.

M.Overstrom pointed out that whether or not the group was biased toward transportation professionals, the employee, student, and community representatives have a responsibility to speak up at meetings. M.Esposito pointed out two things: if a committee is in trouble, it is the responsibility of the group to work within the committee first to attempt to fix it internally, and go to outside solutions later; and he also reminded the group, because it is involved with a committee as influential as TAC, the EA should hand-pick their representatives and make sure they will be people who truly represent employee interests. Otherwise, if the committee fails, it is nobody’s fault but the EA’s. T.Calvert asked who had appointed the representatives and C.J.Lance-Duboscq indicated it was the Employee Assembly. There was a question about what community members the charge specified should be on the committee. The members agreed to get more information about this from the UA. M.Overstrom suggested that with all these questions, it might be a good idea to wait until after the November 18th meeting before a new EA committee was formed.

T.Calvert informed the group that the TAC met on the second Monday of each month. C.Gardner pointed out that the EA’s recent involvement in this issue is due largely to the fact that they now have a liaison to the TAC, which strengthens the linkage between the EA proper and TAC members appointed by the EA. T. Calvert thought that EA members should go to meetings because there actually is such a thing as a free lunch!

C. Division of Biological Sciences Resolution

C.J.Lance-Duboscq reported that she had attended the Assemblies’ Leadership Meeting where the undergraduate and graduate students brought up the academic concerns they had with the proposed changes to the Division of Biological Sciences. She relayed that there is a concurrent employee concern regarding how the reorganization will affect employment in the Division. Both the Faculty Senate and the UA have asked for resolutions calling for more time and information to be given to the Cornell Community before a decision is made, The students agree with these proposals and have drafted some of their own. The GPSA, SA, and UA are all looking to the EA to support the quest for information and time.

Several people made it clear that if the EA was to write a resolution, it should deal with staffing issues and not academic issues. C.J.Lance-Duboscq agreed and let the group know that the SA was looking for the EA to support them at the Leadership Meeting with the President that afternoon. She explained that concerns centered around the report of a task force that came up with findings about the Division of Biological Sciences, as well as a rebuttal by several faculty in that department. This report translated into three administrative choices which are the subject of University-wide concern. G.Brandt pointed out this was an issue generating a lot of emotion on the part of the faculty because roughly 500 professors have some link to this Division. He agreed with the idea that the EA resolution should be specific to employees, but reiterated the concept that it should support the request for a delay in decision making about this issue.

The chair put a motion on the floor to support the Assemblies’ need for more information regarding the proposed changes and a request for a delay in the President’s decision about the fate of the division.

The motion to support the SA, UA, and GPSA in their requests for more information regarding the proposed changes to the Division of Biological Sciences, as well as the request for a delay of the President’s decision regarding the fate of the program, was passed unanimously.

D. PawPrint Insert

C.J.Lance-Duboscq and A.Vail both brought up the fact that there hasn’t been much communication or publicity regarding EA meetings. D.DiBene explained to the group that in the future, the Communications Committee will be doing more advertising and implementing new strategies. The majority of the group agreed that the plan to move the second semimonthly meetings around campus was a good strategy. G.Brandt suggested that there be food offered at EA meetings.

M.Esposito said that he wanted to identify and publicize specific goals, such as increasing employee participation in the EA. D.DiBene advocated increased dialogue regarding parking, dental care benefits for endowed employees, and an explanation of tuition discounts for employee’s children who choose to attend Cornell. M.Overstrom suggested that goals regarding parking be formalized to say that the EA is planning to review the charge of the TAC and to determine whether or not it is fulfilling its role. J.DeMarco pointed out that a goal should be increased involvement of employees in developing benefit plans. C.J. stated that a goal would be to work more closely with their constituent assemblies on issues that can be conjugally worked on; and to also develop a relationship between the Faculty Senate and the Assemblies. C.J. mentioned that the EA should reference the retreat discussions in thinking about goals and include issues of diversity and town and gown relationships. J.Worden shared that she felt interconnectivity between groups and constituencies was important and that PawPrint shouldn’t be the only method of communication available. C.Gardner brought up the past suggestion that employees pass emails about meetings, current events, etc., to other employees through the use of listservs. D.DiBene announced that the next issue of PawPrint would contain information about the November 18th EA meeting, to be held in the Unit One Lounge at Balch.