MINUTES
University Assembly Meeting
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
4:30–6:00 p.m.
316 Day Hall

I. Call to Order

M. Lukasiewicz called the meeting to order at 4:35 pm.

Voting Members Present: K. Albert, R. Ataya, J. Blair, E. Cortens, B. Cristelli, P. Goldstein, T. Grove, R. Kay, N. Celle, K. Javaji, M. Lukasiewicz, S. Murphy, B. Schafner, R. Wayne

Voting Members Absent: B. Cristelli, W. Fry, H. Howland, N. Celle, N. Raps

Also In Attendance: A. O’ Donnell, A. Epstein, A. Bores, N. Doolittle

II. Approval of the minutes from December 6, 2011

M. Lukasiewicz then asked if there were any changes to the minutes. J. Blair and E. Cortens suggested some minor changes. R. Ataya motioned to approve the minutes with the suggested changes. S. Murphy seconded. Seeing no opposition, the minutes from December 6 were approved.

III. Call for any Late Additions to the Agenda

R. Ataya had an update on the website he was designing for class councils and other bodies of student governance.

IV. Updates

a. Responses to the four Resolutions passed by the UA at the December 6 meeting

• (i) Resolution 2:

Kyu Whang, President for Facilities Services had responded to M. Lukasiewicz saying that he had the opportunity to review the resolution and had a few questions, as well as, several recommendations for modification. He had sent a version of the modified resolution, and would also be happy to meet with the UA in person.

• (ii) Resolution 3:

M. Lukasiewicz informed the UA in his mail to her, President Skorton agreed with core points of the resolution but had some questions and corrections to be forwarded to the Transportation Committee. After this, he would be happy to support the resolution.

• (iii) Resolution 4:

In his email, President Skorton while recognizing the discussion of the UA along with the Cornell Chapter of United Students Against Sweatshops, had discussed concerns on this issue with Mike Powers, and Vice Presidents Bruce and Murphy. They will resume their discussions at greater length in the spring semester. Based on the outcome of these discussions, he will then come to a decision regarding Cornell’s affiliation with the FLA.

• (iv) Resolution 5:

M. Lukasiewicz reported Mary Beth Grant believes the information in the resolution wasn’t quite accurate. She has prepared annual Judicial Administrator’s reports from 1999 - 2009. She was late with her reports from ‘09–10 and ‘10–11, but she expects to have a report for both years completed soon. She also said she would be happy to come talk to the UA about the resolution. M. Lukasiewicz said MB Grant is invited to come to the February 28 UA meeting to address these issues.

b. Committee Chairs’ updates on their committee meeting dates & times

• (i) Campus Infrastructure Committee

S. Murphy said the committee would be meeting Mondays at 4 pm. The committee is currently working with David Lieb on transportation related issues and they are also gathering information from other universities on issues related to sustainability.

• (ii) Codes and Judicial Committee

P. Goldstein said he sent out a doodle regarding meeting times. He said there would be 2 meetings a month initially as the CJC had a lot to discuss. He said a proposal regarding Title IX was rejected at the last meeting. A counter proposal was suggested which will be discussed and voted on at the next meeting. He was aware the executive committee had asked for a deadline on the title IX issue, and said the CJC is working toward a solution.

• (iii) Campus Welfare Committee

R. Ataya said the committee will be meeting at the same times as last semester to maintain consistency. He said the committee had Linda Croll Howell at the last meeting and she spoke of how recent endeavors in off-campus services for Cornell students have been strengthened. They are working on advertising this. Specifically, they were working on issues of integrated relations with local Ithaca residents where students could interact with local residents, based on areas of study. In terms of issues in the future, L. Croll Howell said many faculty and staff members are taking care of their aging family members and relatives, and the university can help in this regard.

V. New Business

a. Appointing a representative on the Judicial Codes Counselor Search Committee.

M. Lukasiewicz informed the UA a member from the UA had to be appointed as a representative on the Judicial Codes Counselor search committee. A. Epstein elaborated on the details. She then opened the floor for nominations. R. Ataya nominated P. Goldstein. S. Murphy nominated himself. R. Kay nominated himself. Seeing no more nominations, the UA moved to vote by paper ballot. The candidates gave short speeches on why they wished to be on the committee. The voting was done by paper ballot. There was a tie between R. Kay and P. Goldstein for the post, so there was another paper run off taken. R. Kay emerged with the most votes, and was appointed as the UA representative on the search committee.

b. Determine if the UA has any desired follow-on actions related to President Skorton’s decision on UA Resolution #4

J. Blair said the UA’s decision had been to severe ties with the Fair Labor Association. However, President Skorton has made it known he wants to negotiate with the FLA first. J. Blair said he had communicated with Mike Powers in University Communications to shed some light on the issue. During that conversation, M. Powers’ explained the FLA is different from the Workers’ Rights Organization. He also said he was going to a meeting with the president of the FLA soon and taking two students from the Student’s Against Sweatshops group with him to discuss the issues. J. Blair said while the UA worked with students of sweatshops, the UA may not have been fully aware of the other side of the issue as presented by Mike Power’s office. This was something the UA should avoid in the future. He said he invited M. Powers to come to a UA meeting on February 28 to talk about this issue. Therefore, J. Blair proposed the issue be tabled until then. He said they intend to prepare and send a list of things the FLA must address. A. Bores reported President Skorton had said if the FLA did not properly respond to the list, the university would disaffiliate itself from it. To help ensure the UA avoids missing a stakeholder when considering resolutions J. Blair recommended procedural changes. Resolutions should go out on a distribution list that includes interested parties at least a week in advance so organizations and necessary offices could have time to review and have an opportunity to provide input. J. Blair said if the resolution was not out a week in advance, there should have to be some action by the UA to suspend the rules if they intended to take a vote. E. Cortens suggested a line be put in the bylaws that a resolution be publicized at least 24 hours before a meeting. J. Blair agreed and said he would work on it with A. Epstein. Seeing no more discussion, the issue was agreed to be tabled until the February 28 meeting.

c. Discussion on guidance to the CJC on when the UA expects to take up a Resolution in response to the Title IX Dear Colleagues letter

J. Blair said the CJC had hoped to come to a consensus on the Title IX issue but there had been a lot of areas to discuss, and it therefore had been a slow process. P. Goldstein said a resolution had been put forth at the end of the last semester and had been voted down. They have since prepared another resolution, which they hope to vote in favor of this semester. J. Blair said the CJC is making solid progress, but he could not anticipate what was going to come through. He said if the next resolution was voted down, a compromise resolution might need to be formulated by the UA. He recommended meeting on March 13, so the CJC could inform the UA on the status of the resolution. This would offer the CJC three opportunities to work on the issue. If they still couldn’t resolve it, J. Blair felt it would make sense for the UA to try to solve it, so it could be resolved by the end of the term. If it was not done, the university would then take on the process. Thus, J. Blair proposed a motion the CJC present a comprehensive resolution on March 13 or anytime before that. E. Cortens seconded the motion for discussion. P. Goldstein, as the chair of the CJC did not agree with this. E. Cortens agreed with J. Blair’s suggestion of setting a deadline. He felt the UA could not procrastinate on this issue any later than April and it needed at least 2 meetings to deal with it. P. Goldstein asked if things broke down in the CJC again, would the UA agree to reconcile with it? M. Lukasiewicz said the CJC could present 2 different perspectives with their reasoning behind with each of their arguments. The UA would then go through these rationales and come to a decision before presenting it to President Skorton. A. Epstein felt it might be problematic if they tried to incorporate both the mandates instead of working along a correct legal premise. J. Blair said ultimately, President Skorton would turn to Nelson Roth. Therefore, if the CJC recommended something that wasn’t considered fully compliant, the CJC would have to justify its position.. J. Blair said before passing a resolution related to this matter, the CJC would consult with Nelson Roth’s office. Seeing no more discussion on this matter, M. Lukasiewicz then moved to vote on setting the deadline for the CJC to present its final resolution to the UA to March 13. 11 in favor, 0 against, 1 abstained. The motion passed.

d. A briefing on the general results from last semester’s Employee Staff Survey and what happens next

T. Grove informed the UA on the results of the recent staff survey. The results had been mostly positive and satisfactory. She said over all, there was not much difference between the general picture and the picture in small units. What they need to work on was the opportunity for staff to evaluate their supervisors, career choices, awards for staff, work distribution, and equity of distribution across areas. J. Blair said he hoped the EA would press for a survey to be administered every one or two years. T. Grove said it would be but she didn’t know the time frame, but likely every few years.

T. Grove also brought up the possibility of extending the surveys to TA’s and graduate students. E. Cortens said although TA’s and graduate students work for the university, they are not employed by the university in the real sense and should not be included in the survey.

e. Brief review the recently provided Ombudsman Report for 2010–2011 and determine if any follow-on actions are desired

As the UA was at a time crunch, E. Cortens suggested postponing discussion of this until the next meeting. J. Blair seconded. Seeing no opposition, the matter was decided to be discussed at the next UA meeting.

f. R. Ataya’s proposed website design

R. Ataya spoke of his website, a comprehensive forum that would compile information on class councils, assemblies and all other bodies of student governance. He said the site could be a medium through which students could readily access information on student governance. He further said he coded and put together most of the logistics of the site. However, he had some issues in terms of gaining publicity for the site and retaining it. He was also concerned with finding someone to continue maintaining the site once he (the managerial head) graduates. After taking this into consideration, he feels it would be a good idea to do this project in collaboration with the Daily Sun. This way the Sun could get financial benefits from advertisements, while student governance would receive more credibility and accountability.

R. Ataya wanted to know if he would need permission from the assemblies to publicize information like photos, legislations or resolutions. E. Cortens said the SA was the only assembly that posted pictures and info online. He also said R. Ataya should consult the SA first about publicizing their photos and information. M. Lukasiewicz suggested he consult with A. Raveret from the SA.

g. Childcare update

J. Blair spoke on behalf of R. Wayne, since he was not present. After giving the figures of surveys conducted, he said turnover had been low, though wages, benefits and training had all significantly improved. The ratings had gone up tremendously, from 8% to 56%. J. Blair felt this was going in a good direction.

VI. Adjourn

Seeing no further business for the day, M. Lukasiewicz adjourned the meeting at 6:05 p.m.

Respectfully submitted by,

Shriya Patnaik