LCSC Faculty Senate
April 10, 2008
Agenda

I. Call to Order

II. Introduction of visitors

Consent Agenda

III. Consent Agenda (In an effort to move business along efficiently, the “consent
agenda” presents items of routine business that do not require discussion. The
chair will ask for adoption of the consent agenda. If there is no objection, all items
and recommended action will be considered in the motion to adopt the consent
agenda. If a member objects, then the item(s) under objection are removed,
discussed, and managed by specific motion)

A.     Approval of the Senate minutes from 02/21/08 and 3/27/08

B.      Treasury Report (as of 04/03/08)

a.      Faculty Senate Appropriated account: $ 2,280.21

b.      Faculty Association account: $ 4,024.09

c.      Faculty Benevolence account: $ 3,893.90

Regular Agenda

IV. Provost's Report

V. Chair's Report

VI. On-going Business

Update on health insurance benefits

SCE update – Lynne Bidwell

LCSC Author Recognition Program – Lynne Bidwell and Brian Christenson

VII. New Business

          Petition Committee nominees

VIII. Standing Committee Reports

A. Administrative Procedures - Leanne Parker

B. Budget Liaison, including Compensation Review Committee, - Susan Odom
– report and recommendation attached

C. Curriculum - Chris Riggs report and recommendation attached

D. Faculty Affairs, SCE PG-08-57 - Brian Christenson

E. Faculty Development - Alan Marshall

F. General Education - Eric Martin

G. Student Affairs - Rachel Jameton

H. Technology Advisory Committee - Holly Patterson-McNeil

IX.: Inservice: Dr. Diane Douglas, Registrar

X. Other, Good of the Order

Adjournment

Faculty Senate and Association
Remaining Spring meeting dates 

4/10     Faculty Senate, 3:15, SGC 41

4/17     SBOE meeting

4/24     Faculty Senate, 3:15, SGC 41

4/30     Employee Award and Recognition social

5/1       Faculty Association meeting and social 2:45-4:00pm, WCC Clearwater/Snake

5/1       All campus meeting, 4:00-6:00pm

5/8       Faculty Senate, 3:15, SGC 41

Budget Liaison Committee  -  compensation recommendation report
(draft 3/10/08 This recommendation has been submitted to the CRC
pending approval by the Faculty Senate)

The Budget Liaison Committee moves that the following recommendation be submitted
to Administration via the Compensation Review Committee

The BLC is recommending an overall CEC range of 0 – 4.0% for faculty.  That
includes a 2.0 % market adjustment for faculty meeting satisfactory
performance standards and 0-2 % merit adjustment.

Background information:

The BLC has met and discussed the recommendation we are asked to make to the
Compensation Review Committee (CRC) regarding faculty compensation for FY 09

Employees will receive a compensation adjustment based on merit. At this time we
are assuming a 3.0% change in employee compensation (CEC). We are asked to
give a market (minimum merit) and merit adjustment recommendation.

Market factors include: satisfactory performance, job or discipline market adjustments,
cost of living/consumer price index approximations; market adjustments should be
made before merit adjustments

Merit factors include: performance evaluations; in the absence of performance
evaluations that delineate merit, distance below the midpoint of the pay range,
compression, equity, retention will be considered.

We assume each division will be given a pool of funds based on a 3% increase of base
salaries for FY 08. Division Chairs will get a CEC worksheet. There will be a separate
pool of funds for faculty, classified staff and professional staff in your division.

CEC Recommendation FY2009

Based on 3% CEC (3/11/08, this recommendation is submitted pending
approval by the Faculty Senate. It will be presented to the Senate on 3/27)

Employee Group ____Faculty_____________________

All compensation adjustments are based on merit. Merit can be further described as
1) a market adjustment or “minimum merit” and 2) a merit adjustment

The recommended range of overall compensation adjustment is 0-4%

For faculty the CRC recommends a market adjustment (minimum merit) of 2.0% based
on the above determining factors.

Lacking a performance appraisal tool that has levels other than adequate or
inadequate the CRC recommends that faculty be evaluated by rank for meritorious
performance and distance below the average of the salary range. Satisfactory
performance is assumed for any change in employee compensation. The most current
AAUP tables 4 (academic faculty) and 6 (technical faculty) will be used to determine
salary ranges.

Other details of CEC adjustment for faculty:

The CRC also recommends the following:

• Merit adjustments should be guided by performance appraisals. A performance
  appraisal tool that delineates levels of meritorious work should be created by
  each division. General guidelines common to all divisions must be prescribed by
  administration (e.g. promotion and tenure criteria) with division chairs and faculty
  detailing specific unit criteria. A three or four tiered labeled merit system should
  have the same headings in all divisions. The
  divisions must identify items in each section.
• Continue to fund the budget line item for faculty promotions; funding for promotions
  should not come out of CEC appropriations
• Initiate a budget line item for all employee internal equity and compression funding
  using salary savings. The following is from the “CEC Draft Resolution Effects” document distributed from the Legislative Services Budget and Policy
  Office on 2/15: Section  7 – Requires agencies to use any salary savings
  towards pay increases first, before shifting any personnel funding to
  purchase capital items or pay for operating costs.
• Adjunct faculty should be given a minimal 1.0% market adjustment with funds
  outside of CEC appropriations
• We recommend that in the future the CRC and Administration develop a three-tier
  system for compensation: Market (minimum merit), Compression/equity, and Merit.
  With a three-tier system we recommend that market (minimum merit) adjustments
  be addressed first.
• Division Chairs must discuss, with each faculty member, their salary adjustments
  for the next fiscal year and the tracking grid used to determine the change in
  employee compensation.

Sample Salary Table worksheet using market/merit considerations

Lewis-Clark State College
Curriculum Committee Senate Report
03-05-08

The Curriculum Committee has approved the following proposals.

Lewis-Clark State College
Curriculum Committee Senate Report
03-12-08

The Curriculum Committee has approved the following proposals.