Employee Assembly Meeting
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
12:15 — 1:30 p.m.
316 Day Hall
Minutes

I. Call to Order (D. Goss)

D. Goss called the meeting to order at 12:23 p.m.

D. Goss would like to change the agenda to have “New Business” discussed before “Committee Reports” so we discuss the Inclement Weather Policy prior to any other agenda items.

II. Call for Late Additions to the Agenda (D. Goss)

There were no late additions to the existing agenda.

III. Report from the Chair (D. Goss)

D. Goss stated she would like to suspend this item to the end of the agenda also.

IV. Trustee Report (M. Esposito)

M. Esposito reported the Trustees will be on campus in two weeks for a full round of meetings. He will give a full report at our next meeting.

V. New Business

D. Goss asked all the guests to introduce themselves.

She then thanked Mr. Bruce for coming, then gave a brief overview of the February 14, 2007 university closure. She then noted she had forwarded the link to the policy and the petition that was circulated for everyone to view.

Thomas Bruce then gave the group a bit of background as to why he wrote the petition and what he hoped to accomplish. He said he has worked on campus for about 20 years and has been in a faculty position at the law school for the last 10 years.

He noted there are many more staff than there used to be, and a majority live 20 miles away or more. The need for people to get here on campus to do their work everyday has changed and the ability to get here has also changed. He feels the snow policy is almost nostalgic and is not in tune with the times. The petition has brought into focus issues the university should address. He raised concern as to why so many people are afraid of signing this petition.

He said he would like to make two recommendations:
1. Establish an intermediate operating level between “closed” and “open.”
2. Allow people to make their own decision to stay home without repercussions, and without a loss in pay. People are confused when local authorities say “no unnecessary travel” and what the university is implying when they remain open.

The president has asked Steve Golding and Mary to chair a committee to discuss inclement weather issues and policies. They will ask the EA to appoint a member for this committee.

B. Vangasbeck commented that some people had declined to be named on the petition, noting some may wish to maintain their privacy, some may fear repercussions, and some may simply not agree with certain points of the petition. She agrees the policy needs to be looked at.

M. Esposito said the discussion on the Inclement Weather Policy is a good one. However, he feels this petition was irresponsible and offensive. It would have been better to work through the official university channels via the Employee Assembly. He feels the EA was circumvented on this occasion, and the impact of that will be felt for a long time.

I. Mahler asked when Cornell decides to close, whether the issue was around paying staff. Mary said everyone was paid. When we go to “closed” status, it is because local roads have been closed. When we (Cornell) does close, we go to “essential staff only” status. She noted that we cannot ever fully close the campus because there are research projects in process, animals to be fed and cleaned, students to take care of, roads to be cleared, heating plants to operate, etc. At a minimum, we have thousands of people who have to get to campus. When this happens, staff is paid at “premium pay”, which means millions of dollars a day in additional costs, which is not factored in the decision to close.

Mary added that the primary issue on campus is whether we can keep the campus roads clear enough to be traveled safely. The people who made the decision made it at 3:00 a.m. The decision really should be made at 5:00 a.m. because that is when the first shift starts. We were caught off guard by the amount of snow. About 25% of staff came to work that day. We moved people who were not working at home from using personal time to paid release time. Everything will be reviewed, as improvements can always be made.

VI. Committee Reports

SRAC
L. Lawrence said the committee is meeting regularly and hopes to have 1 or 2 people receive the GPADS award before the semester is over.

Communications Committee
H. Hall handed out a powerpoint presentation from their meeting today. She pointed out that the name of the forums has been changed. When all events were at lunchtime it worked to call them “Leadership Lunches”, but now that a breakfast event has been added, they will be called “Supervisor Speaks.” P. Korolov made a flyer similar to the one from “Chili Chat.” He will send it to Mary for review along with a draft budget.

Finance
P. Mahoney sent around the most recent draft budget. $12,000 is our request for the 07–08 budget. P. Mahoney said she welcomed questions and comments.

M. Esposito said that he did not see the Staff Graduate Reception in the budget. P. Mahoney said she had taken this out and wanted to know if that was acceptable. M. Esposito said he thinks it is a well-received event and should continue. D. Stein reported that this event has been given 9 or 10 years of support.

L. Lawrence asked if Human Resources or others at the University contribute to this event. D. Stein believes there are other contributors, including the Office of Human Resources. P. Beach and D. Stein will get the full budget.

K. Howell graduated and attended the reception and from her prospective, they could omit the food and music. She felt that being recognized in front of your peers and having time with the president was very special. Her suggestion was cut expenses, but not eliminate the event.

D. Goss asked about the $500 for the SEED event. Nancy Leonard in ODS is responsible for this.

B. Vangasbeck asked about the New Employee Packets, noting this is the third year we have talked about these. This would involve creating a packet that would be given to new employees that would introduce them to the EA. If we are going ahead with this then an EA member would have to be at the Orientations to hand them out.

D. Stein said the new employee orientation program is undergoing review. The EA should decide what they want to do, then discuss with HR how to distribute the materials.

B. Vangasbeck said that if we could get a list of new employees on a regular basis, we could send them an envelope of information on behalf of the EA.

D. Goss said she feels that $1,500 is too high for EA meeting lunches and it should be reduced.

D. Goss noted we have four items in the budget under consideration right now: the SEED Event, the Staff Graduation Reception, the New Employee Packets and EA meeting lunches. These will all be discussed at our next meeting.

Emergency Grant Fund
D. Goss said there were no new applications.

There was discussion on why there were no applications, and whether the application form is part of the problem. Perhaps the form asks for too much financial information, and this may embarrass some people.

J. Miles said this fund is for people who are in dire need of money due to a fire, a flood or other disaster. It has even been discussed if we could help people with rising gas expenses. However, the policy changes would be hard to make the way the program is set up.

M. Esposito said they are evaluating the process now. Many people have churches, neighborhoods that support them when they are in need.

D. Stein said that the committee has struggled with how to get enough information to make a correct decision for each application.

Employee Education Committee
D. Goss reported that Empire College is very close to partnering with TC3 on a regular information session with staff. They will be at the SEED event.

IOC
A. Goncarovs said the Master Plan had two community forums recently. In early February about 400 people attended. Over 100 comments were yielded. Additionally, there was a nice article in the Ithaca Times. They are at the end of Phase 2 now. The EA will be involved again in April with more community workshops. The website is up to date with lots of new information.

D. Goss encourages everyone to go to the website and look at the flags and powerpoint presentations. She then asked everyone to please read through them carefully, as staff seems to have been left out to a large degree. Please respond with comments.

D. Stein was discouraged that the process, which involved the Employee Assembly early on, has resulted in so few staff being mentioned.

D. Goss feels that the Employee Assembly should write a letter to Nina at the University Planner or Steve Golding to be sure that staff issues are addressed.

L. Lawrence was on the website this morning and noticed that AAP is having an open forum.

Elections
A. Goncarovs handed out election packets to the incumbent EA members.

He noted that as of today, not many people have picked up elections packets, so we will need to rethink the deadline. He asked that all members go to the Assemblies Office and pick up packets to give to people in your area who are interested.

B. Vangasbeck said that if Andri would draft an email, she could send it to the EA list-serve.

H. Hall asked if the deadline for turning in packets could be extended.

A. Goncarovs said that we have a meeting hopefully tomorrow to see how far we can extend the deadline. We have a new version of the letter to send out to staff through email.

L. Lawrence wanted to know if electronic voting has been put on hold. A. Epstein is the contact person and said we will need to do written ballots to reach everyone because not every employee has an active net ID. P. Beach added that if there are people without active ID’s then it leaves the system open to abuse.

M. Esposito asked if we approached anyone from the expanded group, this is a good group of people to target.

P. Beach said that elections are a huge investment of time and money. She recommended the EA wait until they are sure there will be an election before agreeing to this investment.

K. Howell said to make it more personable in the Pawprint, we should list a persons name/email so that anyone who was interested would have someone they could call on to ask any questions.

A. Goncarovs said that in the article in the Pawprint Andri and Amy’s names are listed for points of contact.

Executive Committee
Due to time constraints, there was no report given from the Executive Committee.

VII. Old Business

Code of Conduct Resolution
T. Jacobs said that in meeting with the CJC they seem to be moving in the direction we would like them to go. L. Lawrence and P. Korolov met with her recently to discuss the resolution, and it was decided we should go ahead with the resolution.

D. Goss proposed approving the language that is here and Torrey could work with Ari later to make it more formal.

P. Beach thought it would be best for everyone to see the final resolution before voting on it.

T. Jacobs will be sending this out electronically to the EA for approval. D. Goss asked Torrey to send it as a word document to everyone, and in turn, everyone could use “track changes” and/or fax a hard copy with any changes back to T. Jacobs quickly.

Inclement Weather Person
B. Vangasbeck suggested P. Mahoney to be the EA representative for this committee. L. Lawrence seconded this nomination. P. Mahoney accepted, she will be the EA’s representative.

A. Epstein made a suggestion to save EA meeting time, the EA’s Personnel Policy Committee could have met to discuss and decide this, and brought their suggestion to this EA meeting.

VIII. Adjournment

B. Vangasbeck motioned to adjourn, J. Miles seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 1:34 p.m.