MSU-Bozeman Classified Employees Personnel Advisory Committee Minutes

April 14, 1999

• Present:   Diane Allen, Susan Alt, Carol Bittinger, Donna Gollehon, Kathy Griffith, Darcy Halpin, Connie Hupka, Roberta Kerr, Jenny Knickerbocker, Dianne Kramarich, Helen McFaul, Nancy Topel, Sharon Townsend, and Dawn Watkins, and Brenda York
  

• Absent:   Jill Allison, Pete Boharski, David Eklund, Patty Gunderson, Lloyd Hansen, Sheron McIlhatan, Joe Miller, Larry Miller, and Bluette Phillips
  

I. Old Business

• Last month's minutes were discussed as some members did not review them. The minutes were then accepted by those members who reviewed them.



• Barb Valdez talked about the classified employees scholarship(s)

CEPAC had a few concerns/questions

• What did "seniority" specifically mean

• Financial need: applicants would have to apply for FA and then the scholarship committee would take that in consideration. So does the applicant have to have financial need? Yes, was the final answer.

• This first year the deadline has been extended. They hope to do more than one $500.00 scholarship.

• MPEA Negotiations:

• Susan Alt was thanked for the updates, she has sent out over the negotiation period

• HB 13 passed the 3rd reading; 3% classified employee money was put back in>

• continuing negotiating sessions-April 15 & 19

• legislators were upgraded to Grade 10

• Health insurance increased contributions are to start July 01, 1999

• $.10/hr doesn't equal the amount of the bonus given in the last two years

• $.15/hr would increase the bonus amount by $12.00

• the reason for the Oct. 01 date is to offer a larger base for future years

• Board of Regents:

• asked questions with concerns toward classified employees
  
  
  

• major topic of discussion was the reclassification process

  • -Why were upgrades taking on an average 6 months? Susan explained that this was because there was 1 person doing 4 campuses

  • -BOR want numbers on the upgrades denied/approved

  • -BOR is considering sending BOR reps to campuses to check on these questions

Carol brought up a couple of concerns she has for the reclassification process:

• taking 6 months and even though retroactive, what about the interest that has occurred while the university system has decided the upgrade? Then if an appeal is made, the retroactive pay only goes back to the filing of the appeal

• the discussion was tabled as a future agenda item

• Attendance issues:

• suggested that if not going to attend the CEPAC meetings then do not accept the nomination

• suggestion of taking a pledge; that they will attend, if not they will be replaced after missing 3 times, for example/P>

• what is the problem? Is CEPAC seen as ineffective? Scheduling conflicts? Etc.

• Maybe a letter from the administration to suggest that this is an important committee on campus. Kathy Griffith said to e-mail her and she will draft up the suggestions into a letter (possibly)

• computers are being or will be set up so that all employees have access to e-mail, this might make CEPAC more visible