MSU PROFESSIONAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
                            March 20, 2002
                                   
Members Present: Jim Mitchell, Clyde Carroll, Becky Ward, Carina Beck,
               Leslie Schmidt, Jim Manning.
Members Absent: None.
Others Present: Susan Alt and Jane Herbes, Personnel and Payroll
               Services.

The meeting was called to order at 2:00 PM by Chair Jim Mitchell.  The
minutes of the February 13, 2002, meeting were approved as
distributed.

Chair's report - Jim Mitchell.
     - UPBAC is currently receiving budget amendments.  The $10
     million in amendments will be prioritized.
     - Preliminary reports indicate new student enrollment will
     increase next fall
     - Two terms on Professional Council are ending, and elections
     will be held to fill the positions.  Jim Manning (representing
     Academic Affairs) and Carina Beck (representing Student Affairs)
     are both eligible for re-election to three-year terms.
     Constituents in Academic Affairs and Student Affairs will be
     given an opportunity to nominate contract professionals for the
     positions.

MAP - Discussion with Susan Alt and Jane Herbes.
     - MAP grew out of dissatisfaction with the then-current
     state-wide classification system, which looked at a position
     only, not at an individual's performance within that position.  A
     Montana University System-wide committee explored possibilities,
     and MAP is the outcome of those discussions.
     - The part of MAP addressing development of performance plans is
     well underway.  What is still unknown is the mechanism for
     setting and managing pay levels (how to change the responsibility
     of an individual in a position and where the money for added
     responsibilities will come from).  However, it has been
     determined that this progressive pay must be preplanned.
     - Under the new classification system, there is an MUS labor
     management committee.  MSU and UM labor management committee's
     operate under the system committee.
          - Candy Holt has been hired through a $125,000 grant to work
          as the system-wide MAP co-ordinator through March, 2003.
          - When any MAP pay rules are changed, they will be subject
          to collective bargaining, also.
          - Pay can't be influenced a lot, but "quality of work"
          issues can be improved with MAP.  Performance and career
          advancement are provided.
     - The next part of the plan is to determined the amount of money
     assigned to each pay band.  It is hoped to have this and other
     pieces of the plan in place by July.
     - Accountability for hiring and managing positions will move to
     university departments.  Payroll will monitor for EEO  issues.  A
     balance will have to be maintained between flexibility in pay
     levels by departments and equitable pay for similar work across
     campus.  There is recognition that the ability campus-wide to pay
     for equity is an issue.
     - Already, the new recruitment process has allowed departments to
     fill positions more quickly.
     - This new classification system requires training of
     supervisors.  A training and development specialist is needed in
     Personnel to provide it.
     - The Professional Council offered to be a "sounding board" for
     MAP on the MSU campus as further parts of MAP are developed.

Contract professional budget amendment.
     - The Provost has requested that for the coming fiscal year,
     faculty and contract professionals prepare separate budget
     amendments.  If an MSU vice president is needed to introduce the
     amendment from Professional Council, the VP for Administration
     and Finance will introduce it.
     - The Chair distributed a budget amendment for professionals.
     The 1% requested (which helps make up for the 3% approved by the
     legislature two years ago but not given at MSU) can be used for
     equity, only.  The $72,000 request includes administrators.
     - This budget amendment raises another issue.  Since the budget
     amendment applies to state general funds, only, departments that
     don't receive general funds must take the money out of existing
     funding.
     - The Council voted to send the budget amendment forward, as
     presented, requesting that an additional 1% be added to the
     salary pool for professionals.

Vehicle Use Agreement.
     - All university employees are being required to provide
     Personnel and Payroll Services a list of traffic violations since
     October, 2001.  The purpose is to enforce state statutes
     regarding employees operating a motor vehicle on state business.
     - It would appear the same objective can be reached without
     invading the privacy of every employee on campus.  Might a
     disclosure, such as one used by car rental companies, provide the
     coverage the state needs without invading every individual's
     privacy?
     - Employees may, if they have reason, send the reason for
     refusing to sign the form to Personnel with the form.  These
     refusals will be considered on a case by case basis.
     - Jim Manning moved a memo be sent to the administration stating
     there is a less-intrusive way to deal with the issue and
     Professional Council objects to the procedure of requiring every
     university employee to disclose his/her driving record.  The
     motion was seconded and carried.  The memo will be sent to Susan
     Alt and copied to President Gamble, Jeff Shada, and Leslie
     Taylor.
     - Jim Manning moved that professionals be made aware through
     e-mail that employees may refuse to sign the form by attaching a
     reason for the refusal.  These will be considered on a case by
     case basis.  The motion was seconded and carried.

As there was no further business, the meeting adjourned at 3:15 PM.

ATTACHMENT: Results of the Ombudsman Survey Returned by Professionals

RESULTS OF OMBUDSMAN SURVEY - CONTRACT PROFESSIONALS
March, 2002
sent to 226 contract professionals
returned: 36
1.  If an Ombudsman Office had been available when you started at MSU,
how often do you think you might have used it?
A.        Once every year   5
               Comments: I've only been here less than a year.  Since
2000
B.        Once every five years 11
C.        Once every ten years  6
D.        Never    13

2.  Are there unresolved issues that you, personally, might bring to
an ombudsman?
                     A.  Yes  7
                    B.  No  28

Issues: Inequitable pay compared to individuals on campus with similar
positions and responsibilities.  Job Performance Evaluation - in the
past year and a half, things I've used and needed to do my job have
been taken away.  Hiring practices.    It would be nice to have
someone like this to discuss how I might go about bringing up issues
with my boss about things such as the fact that I was hired on a
professional appointment with a professional job description and he
treats me as nothing more than his secretary - not allowing me any
power to make decisions and that he has professionally cut me off at
the knees in front of my peers.  Salary restrictions dependent on the
MSU budget rather than program monies.

3.  Do you think creating an MSU Ombdsman is a good idea?
                     A.  Yes 24
                    B.  No   6
Comments:
Possibly, with a number of reservations: Can any one "lay" person
     really understand the  scope/breadth of the issues they would be
     expected to handle?  Can a faculty member adequately respond to
     the issues of interest to a professional or vice versa?  Physical
     location presents a very real problem...  Where would such a
     person be housed?  Who wants to be seen walking in the ombudsmans
     office?  Security is paramount: How will files be kept? Computer
     files, even the trash, would need to be secure, confidential, and
     physically disconnected from the University's system.  Who would
     be responsible for the training... what kind of training,
     approved/constructed by whom?  An on or off-campus person?  And
     finally, where else has an idea like this been tried and what
     were the results?
Maybe - I'm not if the person can be trusted.  I don't care for the
title of this position.
[Yes], providing funding is available and there is a need university
wide.

Maybe, though it seems like a lot of power to vest in one person.  I
     was thinking as I read  your note, "what would happen if this
     person wasn't very good?"  A mediocre person in the job would
     have very little oversight, very little impact.  A really bad
     person would eventually be confronted, but a mediocre person
     would probably last 30 years.
Maybe.

4.  Personal information:

How many contract professionals are in your department or
administrative unit?
1- 5: 19
6-10:  8
11-20:  1
21-30:  0
31-40:  0
41+:  0
Not sure.  Perhaps 2-3.  My impression is that over the past 10 years
     the tendency has been  to put new hires in under the classified
     system.

How many years have you been at MSU?
     Less than 1:  2
1- 2:       1
3- 5:       5
6-10:       9
11-15:      5 (but in two cases only 6 years as a professional)
16-20:      4
21-25:      2
26-30:      1
31-35:      0
36-40:      1
40+:       0