Employee Assembly
Minutes
April 1, 1998
Day Hall Board Room
12:15 p.m. - 1:30 p.m.

I.Call to Order

The meeting was called to order at 12:15 p.m. by M.Overstrom.

II.Minutes

The minutes were approved as amended: on page 1, the second-to-last paragraph, the External Committee was changed to the Communications Committee; the last sentence on page 2 of paragraph 7 was changed as per G.Brandt’s request; on page 3, the vote on removing the newsletter from the budget was changed to reflect that there was one abstention; and on page six, the vote on funding the Open Forum was changed so that it reads “an undetermined amount” instead of “an undisclosed amount.”

III.Announcements and Reports

a. Report from Trustee Cyndy Tkachuck -

C.Tkachuck reported that there were two main issues addressed at the last Board of Trustees meeting. The first issue was that of need-blind admissions. Every year, the Board has reconsidered whether or not need-blind admissions would continue at Cornell. This year it was decided that this policy will continue indefinitely. C.Tkachuck noted that this decision is due in part to the aid packages that are offered by other schools. While Cornell cannot offer the amount of aid that is offered by some other schools, aid has increased through items such as scholarships.

The other issue discussed at the meeting was the Student Activity Fee. Specifically, the addition of NYPIRG to the fee was the cause of some controversy; however, the Board decided that rescinding its approval of the fee would undermine the self-governance system in place at Cornell. C.Tkachuck noted that this counts as a vote of confidence in the self-governance system and that this bodes well for the May presentation by the EA. Also in May, C.Tkachuck said that she hopes that EA members will be invited to a luncheon with the Board.

b.Opperman/Rogers Meetings -

M.Overstrom stated that she believes that the next Opperman/Rogers meeting will be held on April 20. C.Gardner will confirm this date.

c.Assemblies Leadership Meeting -

M.Esposito stated that two questions were brought to this Leadership meeting. The first issue was brought up by the SA, who wanted to know why they receive program documents so late in the spring semester and after the Board of Trustees has already voted on the budgets. The administration agreed to give these documents to the SA as soon as possible after the budgets have been finalized in January by the Board.

The second question asked was whether or not the University had already appointed its three members to the Board of TCAT, and who are the members? The answer was that these members had been appointed and they are Hal Craft, Fred Rogers, and Hank Dullea. If people have concerns, then there are several methods of communication; one can contact any of these people, TCAT, directly and/or the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC). It was agreed that the Cornell members of the TCAT Board will meet once or twice a year with TAC to ensure that the lines of communication are open.

M.Esposito stated that the final point was that the administration will begin to bring topics for discussion to these Leadership meetings.

M.Purvis informed members that the President stated that he is forwarding the SA resolution that would give both staff and students Martin Luther King, Jr.’s day off to the appropriate people. She stated that she thinks that if this day is given off to employees, then the time will probably come from somewhere else.

M.Overstrom noted that M.Opperman believes that employees should have more holidays off, however, this may come out of Christmas time off.

M.Esposito noted that the problem with this resolution is that the academic calendar is planned so that all classes meet for a certain number of times. By having one day off, this would affect the whole system.

C.Gardner stated that the resolution was prompted by the fact that the Martin Luther King Day was the first day of classes this spring. The students would like to have the first day of classes on Friday and have the following Monday off in the future if Martin Luther King Day falls on the first day of classes.

M.Purvis noted that not all the students are on campus the Friday before classes start. Because of CoursEnroll students no longer have to be on campus to register for classes the week before they begin.

M.Overstrom stated that she believes that additional days off will not be given. If employees do not work on the holidays that everyone else has off. This will probably mean a depletion from the Christmas vacation.

P.Tufford pointed out that the winter holiday break is not to compensate for other days that employees do not have off. What M.Opperman would like to do is to add additional days off to the schedule.

IV. Business of the Day

a.Campus Info & Visitor Relations -

Celisa Manly, Assistant Director, Campus Info & Visitor Relations, stated that her department is responsible for several items. For example, it has several publications, like the campus map that details information about Cornell. In addition to this, campus tours are given. Campus tours are available every day except for Thanksgiving and the days following Thanksgiving, and winter holiday break. Tours constructed for private groups are also available upon request. Such tours will be customized for each group.

However, most of the work done is answering questions that people may have about Cornell. Currently, CIVR has twenty-five phone lines, and calls are answered Monday through Saturday. Directory assistance is given, as well as general information. C.Manly noted that the CIVR number is usually the first number that people call when they need information about Cornell.

In addition to answering phone calls, CIVR also helps to maintain the four Visitor & Information Booths on campus. It also provides the top level homepage for Cornell. C.Manly noted that this is somewhat confusing. If a person is logging on the Cornell homepage from a computer connected to the Cornell network, then they are automatically sent to CUInfo. However, there is another homepage that all people who are not on the Cornell network arrive at, and this is the one that CIVR maintains. It contains more generalized information than CUInfo.

C.Manly stated that the mission of CIVR is to be the last stop for any information request. If the answer is not known, then the number of the caller will be taken and the caller will be contacted when that information is found. C.Manly stated that CIVR also answers questions from people at Cornell. In order to do all of the above functions, CIVR has 60 staff members.

In response to questions, C.Manly stated that private tours are provided at a cost because the money is not included in CIVR’s budget. For the general interest tours, the first thing done are introductions for the whole group so that the tour guide can tailor the tour to the members of the group. No two tours are ever the same. Also, at every tour time, there are eight tour guides available, so eight tours can be given at the same time. C.Manly noted that they try to not crowd the Day Hall lobby and so if twenty people are present when headcounts are taken, then a tour is sent out early.

C.Manly stated that she would be happy to accommodate employee tours. It would be easy to do, especially if she knows the time that new employees will meet. Also, the tour guide will be informed of this so that the guide can focus on information deemed of interest to employees.

C.Manly noted that campus maps are now shrink-wrapped in bundles of 250. Each bundle costs $20. However, if a small amount is need, like 20 or 30, then CIVR will just give the maps to whoever needs them.

V.Old Business

a.Transportation Statement -

M.Overstrom stated that at the last meeting the new transportation permits were discussed, but no statement was made that T.Calvert could take back to the Transportation Advisory Committee. Therefore, she would like it if one could be decided upon at this meeting.

T.Fraboni stated that he did not see much difference between the S permits and the M and T permits except for the price increase, from $30 to $100. He noted that this price increase will probably be passed on to the customer.

In response to concerns raised by members, M.Overstrom stated that there are two types of S permits— the regular S permit and the “floating” S permit. The floating S permit costs about $500 and it is specific to the department, not the vehicle or individual. In the new system, everyone will pay the same price.

T.Fraboni clarified that one can divide the S permits into three types: 1)permits that are issued to an individual, 2) permits issued specifically to a vehicle, and 3) floating permits. The floating permits are given to temp employees so that they can use their vehicle on campus. Lists are kept of who currently has each floating permit, and the employee is expected to return the permit after they leave Cornell.

T.Fraboni noted that his department needs the S permit because employees use their own vehicles to haul toolboxes, which are quite heavy. Also, fuel oil tanks are hauled by his department. They have tried to lower their prices across campus, but if it costs more for the new M and T permit, then prices will once again go up. T.Fraboni also questioned the wisdom of requiring a vehicle owned by the University to have a permit and noted that the price increase may affect some employees’ ability to work flex-time hours.

M.Overstrom stated that such cases would need to be looked at on a case-by-case basis. This is not possible until P2K is finished and the computer systems are upgraded. M.Overstrom noted that the purpose of this new system is to devise a program where there are more spaces open for certain permits.

T.Fraboni stated that he thinks that the data the EA currently has is wrong. He stated that before a statement is made, the EA should get more information.

M.Overstrom pointed out that the purpose of the changes being made is to encourage people to buy booklets of permits instead of a floating permit. Therefore, more parking spaces can be opened up.

M.Purvis stated that some departments buy a floating S permit that is used for business purposes only two or three times a week. However, on the days that the permits are not in use, employees use them for their personal vehicles. Thus, spaces are taken up that should be empty.

M.Overstrom noted that there is also the example of the building manager who had an S permit but never left the building. These S permits are not required by their users, and so under the new system, they will not be issued.

M.Overstrom stated that the new M and T permit allows a person to park anywhere except in handicapped places. There are several types of M and T permits: 1) a temp M and T permit, 2) a project M and T permit, for contractors’ vehicles, 3) daily M and T($10 each or one can buy a book of ten), and a vendor M and T permit that will cost $600 per year.

M.Overstrom stated that she believes that more information is needed, like a list of the floating S permits on campus. She noted that all departments affected by this proposal have members on the committee.

M.Purvis reminded members that one should also be concerned about the people who purchase permits, but cannot find a parking space because too many S permits are used.

M.Overstrom asked whether or not members would be willing to send the following statement: “The EA supports a proposal that will reduce the number of vehicles on campus.”

M.Esposito stated that such a statement was too vague. For example, a reduction of vehicles on campus could come about if all prices were raised.

T.Calvert noted that another problem with the new system is that there is no limit set on the number of the M and T permits that will be available. It should not be assumed that increasing the price will decrease the number of permits purchased. The review process for the new permits may also not work, since individuals may be able to make it seem like they need an M and T permit. A realistic finite number of permits should be issued in order to ensure the numbers actually decrease.

M.Overstrom stated that in the interest of time, she and T.Calvert will work on the statement. It will support the reduction of the number of S permits, but question the cost increase and the fact that there is no cap placed on the number of permits.

b.Budget -

M.Overstrom reminded members that at the last meeting the EA voted on their annual budget. However, no amount was specified for the Open Forum because it was not known at that time. Since then, C.Gardner has compiled a list of expenses and so the Open Forum will be listed at $3000. A list of costs for the last Open Forum were handed to members.

VI.Committee Reports

a.IOC -

M.Purvis stated that at the next EA meeting, members will vote on the candidates for the empty EA seats. Candidates were required to fill out a petition and submit a statement of interest. M.Purvis asked members what information they would like the IOC to provide for them.

Members stated that they would like to have each candidate’s statement of interest. Also, the topic of IOC making candidate recommendations was brought up.

M.Purvis stated that she would not feel comfortable with making recommendations because it would be a committee of three people making a decision for the whole group.

T.Fraboni disagreed, stating that there are guidelines to follow in making recommendations. He stated that he believes that the IOC should make recommendations because the EA will not have much time to review the candidates.

It was decided that the IOC will make recommendations to the EA. These recommendations will be based on the guidelines available and on the information they collect.

VII.Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 1:40 p.m.