February 12, 1999
Meeting of the Faculty Council
February 12, 1999. 3:00 p.m.
Assembly Room, 2nd Floor, Wilson Library
Chancellor Michael Hooker and Professor Richard N. Andrews will preside.
INFO 3:00 Chancellor’s Remarks and Question Period.
- Chancellor Hooker invites questions or comment on any topic.
INFO 3:20 Chair of the Faculty’s Remarks.
- Prof. Richard N. Andrews
INFO 3:30 Annual Report of the Committee on Buildings and Grounds.
- Prof. David Godschalk, Chair
DISC 3:40 Priorities and Space Planning for the Natural Sciences.
- Prof. Greg Forest, Senior Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences
DISC 4:10 Priorities and Space Planning for the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences.
- Prof. William Balthrop, Chair, Communication Studies
INFO 4:30 Annual Report of the Faculty Information Technology Advisory Committee.
- Prof. Darryl Gless, Chair
INFO 4:40 Annual Report of the Faculty Welfare Committee.
- Prof. Stephen Bachenheimer, Chair
ACT 4:50 CLOSED SESSION
- Second Report of the Committee on Honorary Degrees and Special Awards.
- Honorary Degrees to be Awarded at Commencement 2000. Prof. Joseph S. Ferrell, Secretary of the Faculty
ACT 5:00 RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
Joseph S. Ferrell
Secretary of the Faculty
ACT = Action
INFO = Information
DISC = Discussion
Present (54): Angel, Bangdiwala, Bender, Black, Bolas, Bowen, Carl, Clegg, Covach, Cravey, Debreczeny, Devellis, Eckel, Elvers, Fishman, Foshee, Fox, Gasaway, Harrison, Holmgren, Hooper, Huang, Hyatt, Johnson, Kaufman, Kjervik, Levine, Lubker, Ludlow, Madison, Marshall, McKeown, Meehan-Black, Melchert, Moreau, Nord, Owen, Panter, Passannante, Pfaff, Plante, Platin, Raab-Traub, Raper, Rosenfeld, Steponaitis, Straughan, Strauss, Taft, Tysinger, Vevea, Weiss, Werner, White.
Excused absences (23): Adler, Assani, Blackburn, Bluestein, Collins, Cordeiro-Stone, Dalton, Estroff, Favorov, Graves, Grossberg, Hattem, Jackson, LeFebvre, Lentz, Lord, Margolis, Molina, Newton, Postema, Schaller, Shea, Sekerak,
Unexcused absences (9): Daye, Haskill, Maffly-Kipp, Mill, Graham, Pagano, Thorp, Wells, Williams.
Chancellor Hooker noted that whereas the January Council meeting took place on the anniversary of the opening of the University, today’s meeting takes place on the anniversary of the arrival of the first student, Hinton James.
The chancellor gave the Council his perspective of the issues involved in the discussions revolving around allegations that clothing bearing the University’s logo is often produced in “sweatshop” conditions. This University licenses use of our trademarks through Collegiate Licensing Corporation (CLC), which contracts on our behalf with manufacturers of clothing and other articles. The royalty revenue is earmarked: 75% for need-based scholarships awarded through the Office of Scholarships and Student Aid, 25% for athletic scholarships awarded through the Athletics Department. The typical business arrangement for apparel companies is for the company to enter into a supplies contract with a middleman who then contracts with the factories that actually produce the goods. At any given time, the apparel company is receiving completed goods from literally thousands of factories that may or may not have a continuing relationship with the company. Some of these may be relatively large with 100 or more employees; others may employ only two or three workers. The system invites abuse. It is to the advantage of the middleman to contract with factories that will produce the greatest volume of goods at the lowest price and that often means very low wages and oppressive working conditions. In order to bring pressure to bear that will end or alleviate these abuses, students are demanding that the locations of the factories be disclosed. The apparel companies do not object to inspection of the factories by a disinterested third party. They do object to full public disclosure of the locations because allowing the information to fall into the hands of their competitors could damage their competitive advantage through disclosure of trade secrets and other special manufacturing processes or techniques. CLC has developed a code of conduct to which licensees will be expected to conform but it does not yet include meaningful enforcement provisions. A task force that the chancellor appointed last year has recommended that we subscribe to the code as proposed, with several additional stipulations and an ongoing review process. The students are urging that we insist on including provisions requiring public disclosure of factory locations. The task force has recommended that we establish an implementation committee to study the issue of public disclosure and the definition of livable wage. The chancellor is now in the process of doing so. Pete Andrews and Rut Tufts (director of auxiliary services) will co-chair the committee. In the chancellor’s view, the issue in controversy at this point is whether public disclosure of factory locations is sufficient to ensure meaningful compliance with the CLC code. He has not been persuaded that this is the case. He prefers to endorse the CLC code as proposed and study implementation for a full year. If at the end of that time the committee recommends a full disclosure requirement in new contract negotiations, the chancellor will make that recommendation to the board of trustees.
Chancellor Hooker emphasized once again the very serious financial needs of the University. We especially need additional funding for faculty salaries that will permit us to catch up with peer institutions such as Virginia, Michigan, Berkeley, and UCLA. The prospects for State funding for this purpose in 1999-2000 seem remote. Our capital needs are also daunting, but in this area he is encouraged by ideas being developed by Vice Chancellor Ramsey who is nationally recognized as an expert in “creative financing.” With respect to the salary issue, the chancellor has come to agree with Provost Richardson that the only way we can remain competitive is by adjusting our tuition rates to bring them nearer to the levels of our peer institutions. If that is to take place, there will have to be a major change in North Carolina’s long-standing public policy that tuition at our public universities should remain as low as possible. “We have to engage [this issue] and engage it we will.”
Chair of the Faculty’s Remarks
Speaking as a co-chair of the Task Force on Licensing Issues, Prof. Andrews expressed his gratitude to the faculty, staff, and students who served on the task force. The group reached a strong consensus on its recommendations. Prof. Andrews also expressed his deep respect for the students who continue to keep us aware of the larger issues involved. The challenge now is to move ahead to build a broad coalition of universities, manufacturers, and others to make a serious impact on the problem of working conditions in apparel factories abroad, which is a global problem not only in the apparel industry but in many other industries as well.
Prof. Andrews announced to the Council the establishment of FASTOC, an acronym for Faculty and Staff Operations Concerns. This pilot project provides a “hotline” telephone number that one can use to call attention to things that need to be addressed but that do not fall within any existing category such as the classroom hotline or security services. Examples include overflowing outdoor ashtrays, the need to move a bus stop so as to avoid noise interference with a classroom, inaccurate or missing signs, and the like. The project has been in use for several months in a few departments and has proved useful. To help evaluate whether it should be placed on a permanent basis and extended campus-wide, the project is being announced to members of the Faculty Council and the Employee Forum. Prof. Andrews noted with appreciation Prof. Richard Pfaff’s key role in launching this initiative.
Prof. Andrews asked Prof. Ferrell to report on the results of a survey of Council members asking about interest in scheduling more meetings at the Friday Center. Prof. Ferrell said that the majority of those responding prefer to meet on the central campus. While some members (and the Faculty Governance staff) prefer the Friday Center’s convenience and superior facilities, the majority view is symbolized by the fact that the library is in many ways the intellectual heart of the University. It is appropriate for that reason, if nothing more, that the Council holds its meetings here. Prof. Andrews added that Prof. Ferrell has asked that the need for a permanent home for the Council be included in the upcoming capital campaign.
Prof. Andrews asked Mr. Jerry Lucido, director of admissions, to report on a recent faculty phon-a-thon. Mr. Lucido reminded the Council of Prof. Miles Fletcher’s announcement at the December meeting about a new subcommittee of the Advisory Committee on Undergraduate Admissions that would be involving faculty members in efforts to recruit the very best students in our applicant pool. On January 27, eleven faculty members participated in telephoning students who have been invited to the honors program. They were Dirk Frankenberg (Marine Sciences), Jan Boxill (Philosophy), Fred Mueller (Physical Education), Miles Fletcher (History), Bernadette Gray-Little (Psychology), Provost Dick Richardson, Todd Austell (Chemistry), Richard Kramer (Sociology), Sue Goodman (Mathematics), Tom Baer (Chemistry), and George Lensing (English). Over 200 calls were made and 100 students contacted directly. The students and their families were thrilled that a faculty member at Carolina would take an interest in their intellectual growth and development. The event had been planned for two hours but went on long after that. The effort was a great success. We are now planning another such event for March which will involve up to 40 faculty members calling as many as 500 or 1,000 students who have been admitted here and elsewhere and are agonizing over which invitation to accept.
Priorities and Space Planning for the Sciences
Dean Greg Forest, Senior Associate Dean for the Sciences of the College of Arts and Sciences, reported to the Council on planning efforts now in progress within the College to position Carolina as one of the top five public institutions in the nation with respect to the natural sciences. The College is developing this plan with the assistance of a panel of advisers chosen from the natural sciences departments of the College with representatives from the School of Medicine and the School of Public Health. Chaired by Dean Forest, the advisory panel includes Professors Fred Brooks (Computer Science), Peter Gordon (Psychology), Anthony Hackney (Physical Education, Exercise & Sport Science), Bill Marzluff (Biochemistry), Casey Miller (Environmental Sciences & Engineering), Michael Rubenstein (Chemistry and Materials Science), Ted Salmon (Biology), Richard Smith (Statistics), Richard Superfine (Physics & Astronomy), Michael Taylor (Mathematics), Holden Thorp (Chemistry), and Franciso Werner (Marine Sciences). Dean Forest’s presentation was illustrated by slides containing detailed information. This material will be found on the Faculty Governance website. At Chancellor Hooker’s request, the panel has identified the University of California-Berkeley, the University of Michigan, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and the University of Washington as peer institutions in the realm of the natural sciences.
The College’s planning comprises two major branches: innovations in science education both at the K-12 level and within the University, and physical facilities needed by existing and proposed programs. At the K-12 level, plans are being laid for a Science Olympiad for high school students to be held in the summer months, and a UNC Web Science School. Much of the planning work to date has focused on a proposed science complex on the main campus. This work began in May 1998 when Provost Richardson appointed a task force headed by Prof. Tom Clegg (Physics & Astronomy). This task force reported in October 1998, whereupon the Provost assigned the task of implementation to the College of Arts & Sciences. Dean Palm has placed Dean Forest at the head of this work. Three major new buildings are now being planned: a 333,070 square-foot Genomics Science Building, a 453,160 square-foot Interdisciplinary Physical Sciences and Information Technology Building, and a 294,322 square-foot Environmental Studies Building. Dean Forest’s slides identify specific programs and faculty to be housed in each of these buildings.
Barbara Tysinger (Health Sciences Library) asked whether consideration is being given to library resources. Dean Forest replied that a separate task force headed by Prof. Karl Petersen (Mathematics) has addressed the matter of a science library. Prof. Catherine Marshall (Education) asked whether Dean Grumet has been involved in planning for the K-12 initiatives. Dean Forest said he has met with Dean Grumet and that the College is interested in building strong relationships with the School of Education. Prof. Tim Taft (Orthopaedics) asked how these plans might affect sister institutions with the UNC System. Dean Forest replied that NC State’s School of Engineering is the principal focus of their science programs while we have links to public health and medicine that NC State lacks. He thought our separate programs actually complement and strengthen each other. Prof. Madeline Levine noted the absence of women among the College’s science advisers. Dean Forest replied that the point is well taken; several women had been considered but the appointments did not work out for various reasons.
Priorities and Space Planning for the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences.
Prof. William Balthrop (Communication Studies) gave an interim report to the Council for a working group that is addressing priorities and space planning for the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences in the College. He chairs the group. Members include Professors David Brower (City & Regional Planning), Darryl Gless (Senior Associate Dean), Jim Hirschfield (Art), Dottie Holland (Anthropology), George Houston (Classics), Hannelore Jarausch (Romance Languages), John Nadas (Music), Gerald Postema (Philosophy), Alan Shaprio (English), Dick Soloway (Senior Associate Dean), Ruel Tyson (Institute for the Arts & Humanities), and Russel Van Wyk (History). The working group is not as far along in its process as is Dean Forest’s as it was appointed only recently. However, the group has tentatively identified a list of five capital projects which it is now developing. These are a Communication, Language, and Cultural Center; a Center for Global and International Studies; a building for the Center for the Study of the American South; a Center for Public Policy and Research in the Social Sciences; and a Digital Multimedia Instructional Center. Prof. Balthrop illustrated his report with slides. They will be found on the Faculty Governance website.
Prof. Andrews asked whether the working group has been in touch with the professional schools. Prof. Balthrop replied that the group has invited participation from Journalism & Mass Communication, Education, Law, and Information & Library Science. Prof. Stanley Black (Economics) noted that the social sciences appear to be under-represented on the group. Prof. Balthrop acknowledged that fact but assured the Council that the group would be careful to involve all departments.
Faculty Information Technology Advisory Committee
Dean Darryl Gless reported on the work of the Faculty Information Technology Advisory Committee (FITAC) in the past year. With the assistance of Bob Henshaw of the Center for Instructional Technology, he conducted a tour of the FITAC website [http://www.unc.edu/cit/fitac/]. It contains full information on the committee’s current projects. Dean Gless called special attention to the reports of the Pedagogy Task Force, chaired by Prof. Sheila Englebardt (Nursing) and the Tools and Technology Subcommittee, chaired by Assistant Dean Russel Van Wyck. Mr. Henshaw then briefed the Council on the upcoming Carolina Technology Expo ’99 that took place on February 24.
Committee on Buildings and Grounds
The annual report of the Committee on Buildings and Grounds was received without question or comment.
Faculty Welfare Committee
The annual report of the Faculty Welfare Committee was received. Prof. Richard Pfaff (History) expressed concern about the reported possibility that the University may limit 403B pension plans because of pressure from the federal government in terms of accounting restrictions. Ms. Nora Robbins answered that the Benefits Office has been conducting an ongoing review and improvement process for the supplemental 403B pension program in order to bring it into compliance with IRS primary guidelines. We have recently sent out contracts to all of our providers asking them to agree to certain IRS stipulations and asking them to report on certain quality standards and financial aid standards. To date, ten companies have agreed to the terms we stipulated. Another thirteen have asked to add certain stipulations. Only one company has at this time indicated that they will not comply with our contract. Twenty-nine companies are in various stages of replying to our terms. The Benefits Office hopes this will not affect anyone’s retirement pension. We acknowledge that there may be some companies that may discontinue their payroll deductions. We will not require a faculty member to move investments from any company that is now or has been participating. Ms. Robbins urged anyone who is considering such a move to think carefully before doing so lest one incur penalties, surrender charges, or possible tax liability.
Committee on Honorary Degrees and Special Awards
On motion of Prof. Ferrell, Secretary of the Faculty, the Council went into closed session to consider the award of honorary degrees.
The Council returned to open session and adjourned.
Joseph S. Ferrell
Secretary of the Faculty