CIVIL SERVICE COMMITTEE

MINUTES OF MEETING

March 24, 2011

Morrill Hall Room 300

[In these minutes: update on job family study; committee business; selection of Benefits Advisory Committee nominees]

PRESENT: Frank Strahan (chair), Don Cavalier (chair elect), Carolyn Davidson (treasurer), Josette Barsness, Susan Rafferty, Rick Densmore, Blake Downes, Amy Olson, Nancy Fulton, Pat Roth, Chris Stevens, Susan Cable Morrison

ABSENT: Karen Lovro

GUESTS: Mary Luther, Director Twin Cities Office of Human Resources

OTHERS: Library Representative

Frank Strahan called the meeting to order, and welcomed those present.

Job Family Study –

Mary Luther, Director Twin Cities Office of Human Resources (OHR), provided the Civil Service Committee (CSC) with an update on the progress of the job family review being conducted by OHR. She stated that the Civil Service Classification and Compensation Study and the Professional and Administrative Employees’ Compensation Study was the foundation for the project. Currently, OHR is working on four job families. Human Resources, Information Technologies, Communications, and Grants Administration. Going forward, they will be working with Community Relations, Alumni Relations, and Development. They have not yet had any meetings with senior management in Student Services but many areas within Student Services have expressed interest in building better career paths. She went on to state that OHR completed a pilot study of the Human Resources job family. OHR has also hired a new employee who will work half time on JEQ and job posting and half time on job family project management.

She then explained the job family study process of research, project teamwork, and developing a questionnaire. Next, she showed the committee the online questionnaire and took them through the process for completing it. First, the supervisor verifies the report. Then they upload the job description. OHR is hoping the process gives the supervisor and employee a chance to talk about the position. This expectation is included in the instructions and training. Next, Ms. Luther noted that there is a specific section of the questionnaire that allows for descriptions of unique jobs. She contrasted the previous job classification process with the now process and noted the improved definition section that will assist employees in better describing their jobs. She also pointed out the equal opportunity section of the questionnaire that provides examples so that employees understand how they do this type of work. The questionnaire also allows employees to indicate how much time they spend on different aspects of their jobs. Additionally, the budget responsibility and planning section of the questionnaire would be changed as a result of feedback received from the pilot questionnaire.

In response to Pat Roth’s question, Ms. Luther noted that the questionnaire allows employees to stop in the middle and return to it at a later time. When the employee completes the questionnaire, they send it to OHR. Then the supervisor fills out the questionnaire, and it will be pre-populated with the employee’s answers. The employee receives a copy of the supervisor’s responses to the questionnaire, and then the local human resources contact reviews and comments on the questionnaire.

Ms. Luther stated a job family web site has been created. (http://www1.umn.edu/ohr/toolkit/compensation/jobfamily/index.html). The website has an overview of the project, frequently asked questions section, key terms, and presentations and training information. Mr. Strahan asked if any have of the job family studies are completed. Ms. Luther responded that HR would be the first to use the system. Pat Roth asked if the Finance job family would be revisited. Ms. Luther stated the other job families would be completed before the Finance job family is revised. She stated OHR would like to have a continual process of managing and updating the job classification system. Ms. Luther noted she has been training supervisors involved in the pilot project and based on their feedback, she believes very little training will be necessary for completion of the questionnaire because the instructions are sufficient. She believes training will be available but not required, and asked committee members for their input. Ms. Roth stated she likes the fact that the training may not be required. Blake Downes expressed the concern that employers and supervisors would rush the process if training if insufficient time were provided for completing the questionnaire. Ms. Luther stated the expectation is that employees will spend one to three hours on the questionnaire. Ms. Fulton noted it is important to convey this to supervisors. Mr. Downes recommend creating a sample questionnaire for employees to walk through. Ms. Luther responded favorably to this idea. Ms. Luther also noted there is a built in system to remind employees and supervisors to complete the questionnaire. Ms. Roth asked if there is information on the questionnaire that points out to employees the importance of the project. Ms. Luther stated this information could be placed on the OHR website.

Mr. Strahan thanked Ms. Luther for her presentation.

Chairs Report – Frank Strahan

· Human Resources Prep Meeting – Mr. Strahan met with Patti Dion, Twin Cities Office of Human Resources (OHR) Director and Susan Rafferty, OHR Assistant Director. Mr. Strahan reported to them on the Employment Rules Hearing and the upcoming University Senate vote to include the CS Senate in the University Senate Bylaws. He stated that Ms. Rafferty reported that interest in the retirement-incentive-option training sessions has been strong, but only nine individuals had decided to participate as of the time of the meeting. This is expected to increase. OHR is tracking issues that may affect CS employees such the loss of programs at Crookston and the changes in Facilities Management at Duluth.

· New Employee Orientation- In March, about 20 CS employees participated in the new employee orientation. About half of these were new to the University.

· Senate Transition– The CSC approved all of the governance documents, reached an agreement with OHR on amendments to the CS Employment Rules, and held hearings amendments to the Employment Rules.

· Looking Forward – Mr. Strahan stated the committee should begin planning for next year. Chair-elect Don Cavalier should meet with the Senate Office to schedule next year’s Civil Service Consultative Committee (CSCC) meetings, and work with the Senate Office to implement the CS Senate.

Vice Chairs Report – Don Cavalier

Mr. Cavalier thanked Mr. Strahan and Mr. Downes for their work on the CS Employment Rules amendments and hearing. He noted that he would like to survey the CS employees to determine their interests and develop at strategic plan for the CSCC. He also indicated he would like the subcommittees to submit written reports on a monthly basis so they are available at CSCC meetings and can be included in the e-InTouch. He asked committee members to contact him if they are interested in taking part in a strategic planning group that he and Ms. Olson will be leading.

Treasurer’s Report –Caroline Davidson

Ms. Davidson stated there had been no changes since last month.

Subcommittee Updates

Compensation Benefits –Nancy Fulton

Ms. Fulton had to leave to attend the Benefits Advisory Committee so there was no report.

Professional Development - Carolyn Davidson

Ms. Davidson presented three professional development funds requests:

· Community Program Specialist for $185.00 to attend a symposium,

· HIM Manager for $200.00 for an annual meeting, and

· Office Manager for $75.00 for a course in Website Basics.

The committee approved the office manager ‘s funding request, and denied the requests of the Community Program Specialist and HIM Manager because they had both received professional development funds from the CSC last year.

Advocacy Subcommittee Report –Susan Cable-Morrison

Ms. Cable-Morrison reported that a constituent contacted the Office for Conflict Resolution (OCR) regarding an issue with a supervisor. The constituent questioned whether the supervisor could require the constituent to take vacation time in 40 hour/one week increments. Previously, the employee had taken every Friday off. Information was provided to the OCR regarding CS Employment Rules concerning the use of vacation leave. Ms. Cable Morrison sent an e-mail to the constituent to follow-up, but has received no response. Ms. Rafferty noted that issues like this would probably arise more frequently as coverage gets tighter, and stated it is important for employees and supervisors to talk through vacation issues. Mr. Cavalier noted that at Crookston, supervisors can suggest employees take vacation, but they cannot require it. Discussion occurred regarding the information Ms. Cable Morrison provided to OCR. She stated it was general information about the application of the CS Employment Rules regarding vacation.

Communications -Amy Olson

Ms. Olson stated that the e-InTouch Newsletter would go out next week, and that her goal is to send it out the week after committee meetings. Ms. Olson reported that the most recent e-InTouch had received 647 hits, which was an improvement over the previous newsletter. She suggested readership might be increased if there is a bullet-point summary of the content at the top of the newsletter.

Legislative -Amy Olson

Ms. Olson encouraged committee members to continue to contact their legislators regarding the University’s budget needs. And recommended they include their home address on their communications. Employees can go to the UMAA page to take part in advocacy efforts. Ms. Rafferty noted that Donna Peterson, Associate Vice President of University Relations, has been regularly communicating with the University community about the legislative session and the funding of the University. Josette Barsness asked Ms. Olson the best method for receiving a response from state legislators. Ms. Olson indicated that it works well to specifically request this in your correspondence. She stated she would put a link in the e-In Touch to the UMAA site. And emphasized the message that for every $1 the state invests in the University, the state gets $13 back on its investment.

Ms. Rafferty noted that many human resources decisions are currently in a “holding pattern” because the state budget is not yet solidified. She asked committee members to provide her with any human resources issues they would like more information on at future meetings.

Rules – Blake Downes

Mr. Downes reported on the Employment Rules Hearing. He stated that overall it had gone smoothly and there were only minor typographical changes to the rules following the hearing. One question arose during the hearing regarding proposed changes to Rule 11.7 on parental leave. A constituent raised a question about the change from ten days per year to five days per incident. Mr. Downes stated it is the CSC’s position that ten days per year benefits the majority of constituents. Mr. Strahan stated the committee might need to consider redefining the term “incident” if the “per incident” provision was kept.

Mr. Downes noted the Rules Subcommittee would be considering the best use of technology for future rules hearings. The Subcommittee will also work with OHR to prepare the rules for the Board of Regents. Mr. Downes stated the CSC would need to vote to change its name to the CSCC after the Regents meeting in May.

Mr. Downes asked CSC members if they had any questions regarding the rules changes. Hearing none he moved for approval of the rules changes. The CSC voted in favor of the changes. Mr. Downes thanked Ms. Rafferty, Mr. Strahan, and Lori Nichols for their work on the rules changes and the hearing.

Selection of CS Nominees to the BAC

The CSC considered over 20 applicants to be Civil Service representatives on the BAC. Nancy Fulton and Pat Roth were applicants for the BAC nominations, and therefore recused themselves from the selection process. The CSC voted to submit the following individuals to the BAC Selection Committee: Nancy Fulton, Pat Roth, Mike Marotteck, and Susann Jackson.

Selection of OCR Panelists

The CSC voted to defer its selection of CS employees to serve as OCR panelists and OCR Hearing Officers until it receives additional applications.

New Business

CS Libraries Employees’ Job Histories

Mr. Strahan stated the Libraries Human Resources Office is compiling a job histories list. However, an issue has arisen regarding seniority because some union positions were converted to civil service positions. Mr. Strahan stated that employees’ earlier job histories were not captured electronically when the conversion to People Soft occurred. Mr. Downes discussed CS employees bumping rights and the application of the CS Employment Rules. He recommended that OHR consult with the employees about their job histories and then is transparent about lay-off situations. Mr. Strahan suggested the CSC could draft a resolution requesting transparency in the process and asking central OHR to compile the list. Ms. Rafferty acknowledged drafting a resolution encouraging compilation of job histories would be a more practical solution than suggesting central compilation of a civil service seniority list. Mr. Downes, Ms. Olson, and Mr. Strahan stated they would help draft the resolution.

Vice-chair Election

The CSC voted to approve Ms. Olson’s nomination as vice-chair of the CSC for 2011-12.

CSC Membership

Mr. Strahan noted he has received applications for the CSC from individuals in Crookston and Rochester. He stated he would be traveling to Morris and Crookston to meet with the Chancellors and CS employees in order to seek new members for the CSC and tell them about the CSC conversion to a Senate. He also indicated the full CSC would be meeting in Duluth in May. Chris Stevens indicated he would assist in coordinating this meeting.

Hearing no further business, Mr. Strahan adjourned the meeting.

Dawn Zugay

University Senate Office