STAFF RESOURCES

Minutes of January 28, 2015 Meeting

Present:
Jeanne Boyle (Vice President & University Librarian), Judy Cohn, Adriana Cuervo, Francesca Giannetti, Tom Glynn (Deputy Faculty Coordinator), Karen Hartman, Triveni Kuchi (Faculty Coordinator), Yu Hung Lin, Megan Lotts (Faculty Secretary), Laura Palumbo, Jane Sloan, Minglu Wang, and Zara Wilkinson
Excused:
Linda Langschied
Guests:
Melissa De Fino, Lila Fredenburg, Michele Petosa

1) Call to order

2) Adoption of the agenda

Tom Glynn will lead the discussion for 6.C Review RUL faculty ballot regarding eligibility, nominations, restrictions, and representation on.

3) Minutes of the December 17, 2014

The December minutes were voted on and approved.

Report of the Faculty Coordinator (Kuchi)

At the February PlanCo meeting the core competencies subgroup will report. Leslin Charles and Megan Lotts will share an assessment plan they are working on for RUL and would like faculty input. Michael Gower has agreed to speak about RCM budgeting at the March 6th RUL Faculty meeting program. If you have questions for Gower please send them to Triveni Kuchi or Tom Glynn ahead of time. Lila Fredenburg confirmed that new instructions and procedures for NTT Librarians have been signed off on by the union and are available at http://academiclaborrelations.rutgers.edu/resources/academic-promotions-non-tenure-track-university-libraries

These will apply to all NTT promotions after the first round, who are getting their letters by Jan 15th according to the calendar. There were some slight changes in procedures, and Lila Fredenburg discussed these with Tom Glynn & Triveni Kuchi over email. She will also reach out to the NTT subgroup to have them look at the document to make sure there are no further questions. The current NTT promotions will not be effected by this documentation. Instruction for appointment has been added to the faculty website. FYI. The Instructions, Appendices, & Forms [from the University HR pages] that are linked on the Staff Pages/Library Faculty were updated by the University in October 2014. Changes are highlighted in yellow. Tom Glynn & Triveni Kuchi met with PPAAC to talk about the service documents. Tom Glynn will continue to work on this task and meet with PPAAC in February.

4) Old Business (40 mins.)

a) Faculty visibility implementation update (Kuchi, Hartman, Wilkinson)

The subgroup has noticed there is inconsistency on the Departments, Centers list of the RUL website about how library faculty are listed. Faculty are listed under the category "Library Faculty" on all departments or units except Technical & Automated Services (TAS) & Scholarly Communication Center (SCC). There was a discussion, and PlanCo decided that the listing for Library Faculty category should be made consistent across all the library departments. There was discussion about the Find a Librarian page. The team is currently working on a Librarian Specialization list. The current list of subject selectors and other functional specializations are being reviewed to see how best they can all be represented on a single page. There is a question of who the "users" are and what would make sense to them. The subgroup has also consulted with Interim AUL Izbicki regarding the subject specialist list to expand it further and merge other functional positions. As next steps the subgroup will continue to work on the list and ask PlanCo and the faculty for their input in the near future. Zara Wilkinson is working on a description for the Librarian Specialization page. If you have questions please contact Faculty Visibility sub group members Karen Hartman, Triveni Kuchi, or Zara Wilkinson.

b) Review faculty committee charges, representation, communication and reporting of policies and decisions; discuss the network, relationships and connections between various committees - (All)

This is a continuing discussion based on the concept map that was prepared by Jeanne Boyle. The map was created to look more closely at how work is accomplished and reported within the RUL organization. There is a discussion about how task forces and working groups "work". Overall there is a desire for more consistency and better practices. A further discussion ensued about how decisions are made and how to prevent the stalling of projects. The document on planning, policy, and decision- making that accompanies the concept map could also be reviewed. It was suggested there may need to be a change in culture, including more accountability. There was also a question of what information needs to be reported at Cabinet and what does not. There was a suggestion that committees may need to re-visit their charges and how they report their work. There was an additional suggestion for a monthly digest of all minutes which would serve the purpose of a reminder for faculty and staff. It was noted that some of the staff pages are not up to date and many individuals feel out of the loop because of this lack of reporting. It was decided that a subgroup will be formed to look further at these issues that includes Triveni Kuchi, Tom Glynn, and Jane Sloan. This group will report back at a future PlanCo meeting.

5) New Business (50 mins.)

a) Guidelines for the Evaluation of Librarianship document (De Fino/PPAAC)

This document was discussed at the December PlanCo meeting and it was decided that this task was not a priority. PPAAC asked PlanCo to re- consider on the basis of further clarifications. PlanCo has charged PPAC to revise the Technical Services section of the Guidelines for the Evaluation of Librarianship document. PPAAC will report back at a future meeting.

b) Reading committee issues

This item was postponed from the December PlanCo meeting. The Reading Committee looks at all of the scholarly work of candidates for re-appointment or promotion. Members of the Reading Committee experience procedural difficulties in using the electronic version of materials. While having the electronic access is excellent, their work of reading lengthy and sometimes numerous publications makes it difficult to use only electronic means of reading. They would like to have the ability to print copies from the digital files (whether they are passworded or not) and request that they be provided. Lila and Michele shared the HR aspects of making arrangements for availability of candidates' scholarship materials. There was a question put forward regarding whether a candidate's CV and publications should be considered confidential or not. Both CV and publications are usually publicly available. Discussion ensued. It was also suggested that the candidates could provide the Reading Committee members an extra copy of all their scholarship materials. This would aid members from having to look for other means of finding some of the scholarship that may not be readily available, such as using ILL for journal articles not available at RUL. Further, Reading Committee members would like to receive candidate's contribution percent information for co-authored scholarship along with the scholarship materials. PlanCo suggested that such instructions could be added to the Guidelines to Evaluation of Scholarship document. Kuchi and Glynn will reach out to PPAAC regarding this update. Lila also pointed out that making small changes in the personnel action calendar could help resolve some of the issues. There was a proposal to change calendar to the following. By May 1st the Reading Committee will be chosen and appointed. Candidates must have their scholarship materials to HR by May 7th. Michele Petosa will upload the materials for electronic access, and the Reading Committee will have access on May 14th. Lila Fredenburg will follow up with Old Queens to clarify about issues with confidentiality and printing hard copies of candidate's CV and scholarship materials. Lila Fredenburg will report back to PlanCo when she has an update.

c) Review RUL faculty ballot regarding eligibility, nominations, restrictions, and representation

Tom Glynn and Triveni Kuchi met with the co-chairs of Rules of Procedure (RoP) Vibiana Cvetkovic and Stephanie Bartz. RoP acts as the nominating committee for RUL. Faculty may nominate using the online system, which has allowed for more participation as well as more individuals being listed on the ballot. It was noted that non-tenured faculty are often nominated to give them the chance to experience various aspects of work within libraries, but this can prove to be burdensome based on workload. There is also a concern that some positions should not be held by non-tenured faculty, in particular when budget cuts are involved. There was a question of who can chair committees and discussion resulted in suggestions that perhaps there need to be restrictions to tenured librarians only for certain positions. It was suggested that there could be a limit of how many committees a tenure track faculty could be on, and in order to chair a committee, one must have 3 years of service to RUL. A team will be formed to look at this matter more closely including Stephanie Bartz, Vibiana Cvetkovic (co-chairs of RoP), Tom Glynn, and Karen Hartman. PlanCo decided that RoP should have discretion to decide on the numbers of candidates standing for elections for certain positions, remove someone from the ballot if necessary based on criteria they develop within ROP. Last year, PlanCo had decided that only winners will be announced and vote counts will be excluded for election results.

6) Report of the Interim University Librarian (Boyle)

  1. Dean's council did not meet in January.
  2. Please save the date for the RUL faculty authors celebration scheduled for March 25th at 5pm.
  3. University facilities is working on a master plan and the Libraries would like to be involved. RUL has plans to send out an RFP to architects who can consult with us on how we should move forward, including priorities on space. Originally Cabinet thought this would cost $100,000. The actual cost is $250,000. Cabinet will continue to discuss options.
  4. There was discussion at Cabinet about a meeting with the chief financial officer's (CFO's) of all four universities. They gave RUL a scenario that would not work for our organization. They have asked RUL for more detail and Abby is currently working on providing more meaningful data. Not everyone understands how the Libraries work, but we are hopeful RUL can educate the CFOs about the needs of the Libraries. It is possible that RUL may need to build the budget from the ground up. RUL's budget may also have to stretch because of the finalization of the union contracts. The raises for faculty salaries may be higher than what was originally projected.
  5. Jeanne Boyle and Judy Cohn were at the recent Virtual Academic Library of New Jersey (VALE) council meeting, including 40 directors in attendance from across the state and a subsequent executive committee meeting. There were planning discussions for the future of VALE, and it was noted this is an organization for libraries not librarians. There were discussion of e-texbooks, more collaborating, and a questions of how VALE participants can work better together. There is talk that VALE may start to focus more on the business side of the collaborative. There may be better organizations out there that can participate in professional development.

7) Summary of meeting outcomes; future agenda items (Kuchi)

The faculty visibility subgroup will continue their work and bring a report back to PlanCo in February or March. In terms of committee charges and the concept map, many suggestions were made and a subgroup has been formed to look further at this topic. They will report back at the February or March meeting. PlanCo has charged PPAAC to revise the Technical Services section of the Guidelines for the Evaluation of Librarianship document and bring it back to PlanCo for the February meeting. Lila Fredenburg will talk with Old Queens to find out how to provide digital and hard copies for reading committees. There will be a change in the Personnel Action Calendar for when candidates need to submit their scholarship materials for re-appointment, tenure, and promotion. There was a discussion about the RUL faculty ballot regarding eligibility, nominations, restrictions, and representation, and a subgroup has been formed to further explore and make recommendations.

8) Announcements/Information Sharing

Please note there is a Rutgers AAUP-AFT gathering outside Old Queens on Thursday from 1:30-2:30.

9) Meeting Adjourned at 11:50am.

Next meeting February 25th, 2015.



 
URL: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/fac_coordinating_com/minutes/coordcom_15_01_28.shtml
Website Feedback  |  Privacy Policy

© Copyright 1997-2017, Rutgers University Libraries