The University of Oklahoma (Norman campus)
Regular session – October 11, 2010 – 3:30 p.m. – Jacobson Faculty Hall 102
office: Jacobson Faculty Hall 206
phone: 325-6789
e-mail: facsen@ou.edu web site: http://www.ou.edu/admin/facsen/
The Faculty Senate was called
to order by Professor LeRoy Blank, Chair.
PRESENT: Adams,
Asojo, Atiquzzaman, Ayres, Baer, Bergey, Blank,
Bradshaw, Chang, Chapple, Cox-Fuenzalida, Deacon, Devegowda, Dial, Gibson, Hahn,
Jean-Marie, Kosmopoulou, Lauer-Flores, Minter, Morrissey, Morvant, Moses, Moxley,
Muraleetharan, Natale, Palmer, Park, Sadler, Stock, Tabb, Taylor, Vehik, Verma,
Williams, Wyckoff, Yi
Provost's office representative: Mergler, Heiser
Graduate College liaison: Griffith
ISA representatives: Cook
ABSENT: Chiodo,
Gramoll, Kimball, Leseney, Marsh-Matthews, McPherson, O’Neill, Ransom, Remling,
Sandel, Strauss, Weaver, Xiao
________________________________________________________________________________
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Announcements:
New senators
Faculty death
2010-11 Academic Program Review Committee
Senate Chair’s Report
Faculty Senate meeting room upgrade
Accreditation
Honors Council
Conflict of Interest policy
Security scans for personally-identifiable information
Graduate College issues
Deans’ Council issues
Faculty Senate apportionment
OTRS credit for full-year sabbaticals and sick leave
Withdrawal policies
Unit representation on Faculty Senate
Benefits: retirement fund record
keeper
Election, councils/committees/boards
Academic Integrity Code
________________________________________________________________________________
The Faculty Senate Journal
for the regular session of September 13, 2010 was approved.
The following faculty members
were recently elected to the Faculty Senate:
Amelia Adams (Liberal Studies), completing the 2008-11
term of Aimee Franklin (Political Science), representing the less-than-1%
pooled programs;
Christian Remling (Mathematics), completing the
2008-11 term of Lucy Lifschitz (Mathematics),
representing the College of Arts & Sciences;
Priscilla
Griffith (Instructional Leadership & Academic Curriculum), representing the
Graduate College as an ex officio, non-voting member for the term 2010-13.
The
Faculty Senate is sad to report the death in August of faculty member Cindy
Foley (Law).
The following faculty will
serve on the 2010-11 Academic Program Review Committee
(formerly called Campus Departmental Review Panel): Sridhar Radhakrishnan
(Computer Science), Dan Ostas (Marketing & Supply Chain Management),
Richard Mallinson (Chemical, Biological &
Materials Engineering), Ann West (Chemistry & Biochemistry), and Randa Shehab (Industrial
Engineering). The panel also will
include Morris Foster (Associate Vice President for Research), Patricia Hardre
(Associate Dean of Education), and Graduate Council representative Paul Spicer
(Anthropology). The units to be review
are Botany & Microbiology, Mathematics, Physics & Astronomy, Zoology,
Geography, Geology & Geophysics, Meteorology, and Aviation.
The meeting room of the
Faculty Senate, Jacobson Faculty Hall 102, will be upgraded to allow
installation of video conferencing.
Currently, the Senate has been borrowing a portable video cart from IT to
communicate with the senators in Tulsa.
During the remodeling of the room, the Faculty Senate may be displaced
for a short time.
Accreditation is under
way. Faculty members were asked by email
to complete an HERI survey by October 12.
The Honors Council may
forward a recommendation to dissolve the council now that Honors is a College
and not a Program. The original
functions of the Honors Council have passed appropriately to the Honors College
faculty themselves.
Vice President for Research
Kelvin Droegemeier, who was in attendance, has formed a task force to look into
expanding the policy on Conflict of Interest to include conflict of commitment
activities. The Faculty Senate office
asked the two faculty members on the Conflict of Interest Committee to serve on
the task force.
The Information Technology
Council was asked to review the policies and procedures for scanning individual
computers for personally-identifiable information.
Graduate College Dean Lee William
met with the Faculty Senate executive committee and reported on the current status
of the Graduate College. He has some
good information about the quality of life for graduate students. Dean Williams has appointed an ad hoc
committee to re-examine the graduate status of deans who do not have graduate
degrees.
At a recent deans’ council
meeting, it was reported that we are trying to bolster the summer session enrollment. Ideas may be sent to Associate Dean of Arts
& Sciences Kelly Damphousse. There also was a brief discussion about some
of the changes that will tighten up the federal student aid procedures.
A faculty senator requested
that the apportionment language for the Faculty Senate be revisited. The executive committee decided that the
language was fine for the next three years but could be revisited when apportionment
is taken up again.
An issue has been raised with
respect to service credit for OTRS when a faculty member takes a full year
sabbatical. There are other issues, such
as the OTRS credit for sick leave. Prof.
Jon Forman (Law) agreed to help the Faculty Compensation Committee, chaired by Prof.
Muraleetharan, look into the issue, and the committee will report back to the
Faculty Senate. It may turn out to be just
an informational item.
Becky Heeney, Director of the
Graduation Office, Nick Hathaway, Vice President for Executive Affairs and Administration
& Finance, and Prof. Mark Morvant (Chemistry & Biochemistry and a
Faculty Senate member) visited with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee
about some proposed changes in the withdrawal policies that could improve
graduation and retention. The proposal
is to extend the date for course withdrawals with an automatic grade of W from
6 weeks to 10 weeks. Withdrawals during
weeks 11-15 would require permission of the dean, and
a grade of W or F would be assigned. In
addition, a student would be allotted only five withdrawals throughout his/her
undergraduate career. The proposal will
be referred to the Academic Regulations Committee, and the committee’s
recommendations have been requested to be forwarded as a resolution, if
appropriate, to the Faculty Senate.
The Faculty Senate office contacted
senators whose units have more than one Faculty Senate member and arranged for
the additional senators to represent units not currently represented on the
Senate. Shortly, the units will be notified
of the direct connection so any issues/concerns can pass both ways.
Prof. Blank explained that a
major change is forthcoming in the defined contribution plans (DCPs). The university will be appointing an
administrator to take care of our plans.
The Human Resources office taped the presentation so it could be made available
on the web. Prof. Blank encouraged the
senators to tell their colleagues about this important issue and have them
provide feedback through the Human Resources website. The issue will be discussed again at the next
meeting. All faculty
should have an opportunity for appropriate input. The slides shown at the meeting as well as the
video of the presentation are online at http://hr.ou.edu/rpmc/documents.asp.
Human Resources Director Hilburn
explained that some changes in IRS regulations say that retirement plan
sponsors have an increased obligation to make sure that the investment options
they offer are subject to a lot of scrutiny and due diligence. The options we have available should give our
employees the best possible opportunity to prepare for retirement. Currently, we have so many choices that many
employees are confused and do not make good decisions. Some of the goals are lower overall fees for
administering our plan, improved and simplified employee experience and
program, and compliance with IRS regulations.
In 2007, the RV Kuhns
consulting firm was hired to help us through the process. It is a national firm that works with major employers
in the public and private sector. In
March 2008, President Boren appointed a retirement plans management committee. It currently is made up of seven individuals
who have an interest and expertise in retirement plan assets. The members are Chris Kuwitzky, Chief
Financial Officer for the Norman campus [chair], Terry Henson, Chief Financial
Officer for the Health Sciences Center, K.K. Muraleetharan (Civil Engineering
& Environmental Science) from the Norman faculty, Michael Ferguson,
Associate Dean for Finance and Administrative Affairs in the HSC College of
Dentistry, Business Dean Ken Evans, OU Foundation Chief Executive Officer Guy
Patton, and Mr. Hilburn. The changes are significant and are consistent
with making improvements to the services and products that are available to plan
participants. In 2008 a Request for
Proposal was issued for a company that could provide overall administration of
our DCPs. We have three different plans:
401(a), 403(b), and 457(b). The
committee wanted to find a company that would help employees make good
decisions about their retirement and manage their plan assets more
efficiently. Going to a single record
keeper can resolve issues such as transferring assets from one investment
company to another and getting a comprehensive picture of overall assets if an
individual has assets in multiple plans. The company that will be recommended to the
president and regents as our administrator is Fidelity Investments.
Mr. Charlie Waibel from RV Kuhns noted that his company does this sort
of work for institutions across the U.S.
The company has about 300 different clients. About one-third of its work has to do with
organization and structure of DCPs. OU’s
is one of the more complex transitions, in large part because of the number of providers
under the current plans. One of the goals
was to make the entire plan simpler, more efficient, and more manageable. The expectation was a better experience for
the participants so they could understand what their plan could do for them and
execute it. The committee asked for
proposals from eight different investment providers, brought four in for
interviews, and narrowed the decision to two finalists. Based on a number of criteria, the committee
selected Fidelity to be the investment manager for the combined retirement
plan. Because the contract has not been
finalized, a few details cannot be shared yet.
The investment structure would consist of three tiers. Tier 1 is a single choice, target retirement date
fund. Its risk tolerance automatically changes
as the employee gets closer to retirement.
Tier 2 is a core lineup, a select group of funds that allows employees
to execute an individual portfolio strategy and adjust it to one’s particular
risk and return requirements. With the
assistance of RV Kuhns, the retirement plans management committee will select
the investment options available in this tier and monitor their performance and
execution. Tier 3 is a brokerage window
with over 3000 different mutual funds available.
Describing the fund selection
process, Mr. Waibel said RV Kuhns will assist the
committee in selecting good investment choices or funds and reviewing a fund’s
performance and execution. The fund
selection process involves quantitative screening, qualitative screening, and in-person
interviews, the sorts of things that employees have the responsibility of doing
currently. In Tier 2, there are index
options (highlighted in blue) and actively managed funds (highlighted in
yellow).
Tier 1, Target Retirement
Date funds will be the default option for participants. These funds transition from aggressive to conservative as the employee gets closer to retirement. Currently, the default option is cash; generally,
investing in cash 40 years from retirement is not a good idea. Tier 2 provides employees with the ability to
control risk and return. Individual
funds in this tier are selected by the committee to be the best for each
individual asset class. Tier 3 funds
fall into three different groups: funds
that have no transaction fees or loads associated with purchasing or selling
them, funds that have a transaction fee of about $75, and funds that have sales
charges and loads. Twenty-five exchange-traded
funds (ETF) were recently added in the no transaction fee group, which provides
an opportunity for index-type investing through the ETF vehicle.
The committee spent a lot of
time evaluating how to pay for the plan.
Currently, the cost for providing recordkeeping services is embedded in
the management fees of the funds. One of
the goals of this project was to bring those costs on top of the table. Because of administrative overlap, if someone
chose multiple providers now, the plan is likely to cost more than it
could. No one has negotiated a lower fee
because the contracts are run by each individual participant. Part of the selection process was to
negotiate a hard dollar charge per participant.
The committee estimates that the total fee burden will be cut in half at
least. The proposal is for two separate charges: a revenue-sharing fee and a per-participant
direct charge ($4/month) to offset the cost of plan administration. Those costs are a little less than $100 per
person on average. As assets accumulate,
the expectation is a reduction in the monthly charge to participants and the
ancillary (revenue-sharing) fees that are attached to individual investments. The net savings to the participants overall is
expected to be substantial.
Mr. Waibel
said employees will have to make new fund selections or re-affirm current
selections during the fund transition process.
Funds invested with TIAA-CREF will not be redirected but may be moved at
the employee’s discretion. The timeline
will allow for assistance and information at least two months before
implementation. If an employee fails to
make a decision, funds will be directed to the Target Retirement Date Fund. Administrative fees are expected to be about one-half
to one-third of what they are now.
Fidelity will have a large group of people here for education before and
after the transition date. The process
can be entirely electronic. A number of
things will be much simpler, such as beneficiary and address changes. The committee will be able to evaluate other
potential changes and is recommending that loans and hardship withdrawals be available from the voluntary plans.
Prof. Morrissey asked if the slides
would be made available. Mr. Hilburn said
the slides and the presentation would be available online later in the week,
and everyone would be notified by email.
Prof. Hofford asked whether employees would have to move TIAA-CREF funds
by a certain time. Mr. Waibel said TIAA-CREF funds would not be transitioned with
this new plan roll out, but may be moved electively by the participant at any
time. Mr. Hilburn said he expected to
have a very high visibility communication and education effort with employees
so there will be at least a couple months of individual meetings and group
meetings to explain the structure and options of the new plans.
Prof. Taylor asked for
clarification about the TIAA-CREF option.
Mr. Waibel said TIAA-CREF will not be an
option for new contributions in the core lineup, with the exception of the
traditional annuity. However, TIAA-CREF
funds will be in the brokerage window. Tier
2 will have several different providers, not just Fidelity. One of the requirements is all providers must
be able to work in an open environment.
Participants will have available the best that the committee can find in
any asset class. Prof. Taylor asked how
this would impact individuals who had been in TIAA-CREF their entire careers
and now cannot add new money to TIAA-CREF.
They will be rolled into a program where in terms of money generated in
that program, it is like they are new employees. Mr. Waibel said the
current assets invested with TIAA-CREF can stay with TIAA-CREF. TIAA-CREF options are available through the
brokerage window with a transaction fee.
The other options available are at least comparable to the TIAA-CREF
options. He said he realizes it is
disruptive for participants who are at the end of their career. What was important was to provide good
investment options. If someone chooses
to remain with TIAA-CREF, that possibility is still available.
Prof. Moses pointed out that
currently we have 88 different low cost funds with Vanguard. With the new system, there are only four, and
some specific asset classes are not represented. Furthermore, in Tier 3 Vanguard funds have a
transaction fee. If employees have to
pay a $75 transaction fee and average two transactions per month, the annual
cost in fees is $1800. Participants are
being forced into Tier 2 by high transaction fees. Mr. Waibel replied
that another option would be to use an ETF, which would give low cost,
index-like performance and in most cases is less expensive. One of the benefits of having a retirement
plans management committee is the committee can look at feedback and make
changes to the platform. It is a balance
to provide enough options so people can influence how their plans behave, while
recognizing that having too many choices can be a destructive thing to a large
number of plan participants.
Prof. Stock asked how much the
brokerage fee would be to continue TIAA-CREF in the third tier. Mr. Waibel said the
fee would be $75 per transaction. Participants
have the option to accumulate and move assets in large lumps and pay $75 for a
single transaction or pay $5 per month per fund. In most cases, the funds that are offered in
parallel to the TIAA-CREF funds have better performance and lower cost. Prof. Tabb said he assumed that an employee who
wanted to move funds from TIAA-CREF to the new platform would have to specifically
elect to transfer to the new fund and would have to have a new payroll
deduction form to do that. Mr. Waibel said the reenrollment will redirect the going-forward
contributions to one of the new options.
Prof. Tabb pointed out that the amount OU contributes will not change,
so an employee is not really being treated as a new employee in terms of the
amount, just in terms of where it is being invested. Mr. Waibel said this
would not affect the amount that OU contributes. Mr. Hilburn commented that the employee will direct
where the dollars the University contributes on the employee’s behalf are
invested.
Prof. Ayres said she would
like to better understand why the fee is so high in the Tier 3 and why there
cannot be more choices. If it is done
with electronic transfers, it should not cost much. Mr. Waibel said this
is a rarely-used option. The
participation rate tends to be 1-2 percent.
The committee pressed hard on the places that would benefit the largest
number of participants. The inclusion of
the ETFs as a no transaction fee option was a big step forward, but the
committee will continue to press on bringing the fees down.
Mr. Hilburn announced that
the tentative time line was to communicate the proposed changes to employees in
October and November. A copy of this
presentation, the power point slides, and frequently asked questions will be available
online. The web site will have a link
for submitting comments, and all comments will be shared with the
committee. The proposal will not be
final until after the campus-wide discussion and communication process. Representatives from Human Resources will come
back to the November Faculty Senate meeting to give an update. If things go smoothly, a recommendation will
be made to President Boren and then to the regents at their November 30 meeting. Employee education will begin after the first
of the year. The goal is for employees
to make personal decisions as opposed to having the election done automatically. For the component that gets defaulted, there
is a good default option available. The
program is anticipated to be effective July 2011. In summary, Prof. Blank said this is a huge
amount of information for everyone to absorb and a new way of doing
things. He encouraged the senators to
talk to their colleagues, have them look at the website, and bring concerns to
the next Faculty Senate meeting.
The Faculty Senate approved
the Senate Committee on Committees’ nominations to fill vacancies on university
and campus councils, committees and boards (attached).
For background information on
the proposal for a new Academic Integrity Code, see the September 2010 Faculty
Senate Journal. Prof. Blank noted that
some modifications in the proposal had been made since the last meeting (revised
version attached).
Associate Provost Greg Heiser
said the policy changes were in response to concerns in the past few years about
some contentious hearings. He said the focus
should be not just on the 20 or so cases that go to hearings but on the 200
students who go through the process each year.
One of the benefits of changing the system is to increase more student involvement
and responsibility for how the system is run.
Students should understand that integrity is a value they should
share. It is not just something that
professors worry about. At the last meeting,
some questions were raised about the extent to which the pledge is
binding. Section 1.5 of the proposal was
revised to substitute some language provided by Senator Tabb. Questions also came up about the policies
that will be developed. The plan is to
draft some procedures that would take faculty out of the prosecutor role and allow
faculty to refer academic misconduct to a panel. The faculty member would function more as a
witness. The student-run Integrity
Council would have oversight and advice from a board of faculty. The Faculty Senate would appoint five faculty
members to help draft the policies that would ultimately be approved by the
Provost and the President. Dr. Heiser
said he had talked to about half of the senators over the last couple of weeks
and had had a lot of good conversations about the proposal. Prof. Blank added that some faculty members
have been concerned that the proposed policies and procedures might be very
different from the current ones. Dr.
Heiser has assured him that we will start off with procedures that are similar
to what we currently have. Dr. Heiser
said many parts of the current system, such as the ability to use an
admonition, will be kept in place. Some
changes will have to be made to remove the faculty member from the prosecutor
role.
Prof. Blank pointed out that
the proposal had not been officially approved by the Student Association yet,
so it is possible that minor modifications may come back to the Faculty
Senate. The proposal was approved on a
voice vote.
The meeting adjourned at 4:50
p.m. The next regular session of the
Faculty Senate will be held at 3:30 p.m. on Monday, November 8, 2010, in
Jacobson Faculty Hall 102.
____________________________________
Sonya Fallgatter, Administrative Coordinator
____________________________________
Amy Bradshaw, Faculty Secretary