00-01:R-04 SENATE McGILL UNIVERSITY Minutes of a meeting of Senate held on Wednesday, November 8, 2000 at 2:30 p.m. in the Robert Vogel Council Room (Room 232), Leacock Building. PRESENT: Ahmad, Faiz Baines, Malcolm Baraniak, Wojtek Bateman, Andrew Bélanger, Pierre Berk, Dimitrios Blachford, Gregg Boksa, Patricia Bond, William Bray, Dorothy Brown, Gregory Chalk, Karen Corber, Marvin Cowan, Deanna Crago, Martha de Takacsy, Nicholas Dean, Kevin Deschenes, Jean Drew, Robin Drummond, Derek Drury, Donald DuBow, Michael Eley, Robin Etemad, Hamid Farrell, Patrick Flanders, Kappy Frankman, Myron Gehr, Ronald Gisel, Erika GowriSankaran, Kohur Groen, Frances Grover, Amit Gruzleski, John Head, Michael Hershfield, Michael Hobbins, John Hussain, Jalaluddin Hsia, Adrian Janda, Richard Johnson, Gail Jones, Peter Jonsson, Wilbur Jukier, Rosalie Kazemi, Kambiz Khanna, Rakesh Large, J. Andrew Lees, Victoria (Secretary) Leuprecht, Peter Levy, Barry Lewis, David McSweeney, Kerry Mehuys, Guy Meighen, Edward Mendelson, Morton Miller, Carman Miller, Norman Morton, Suzanne Mullen, Kathleen Nasmith, Louise Noumoff, Samuel Paré, Anthony Péron, Clara Riva, Patricia Ruvo, Vince Saroyan, Alenoush Schubert, Peter Shapiro, Bernard (Chair) Shaughnessy, Honora Shore, Bruce Silber, Arin Sim, Robert Straehle, Christine Tuck, Patricia Turgay, Uner Vinet, Luc Yalovsky, Morty Zannis-Hadjopoulos, Maria REGRETS: Khaled Abul Sharaf, Bantwal R. Baliga, Sharon Bezeau, Deborah Buszard, Gael Eakin, Hélène Ezer, Abraham Fuks, Ratna Ghosh, Sabrina Jafralie, Richard Lawton, James Lund, Anthony Masi, Storrs McCall, Richard Pound, Marie- Claude Prémont, Heather Ritch, Gerald Ross, Fred Sagel, Georg Schmidt, Alan Shaver, Ted Tewfik, Kevin Wade 1. REPORT OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE The Chair welcomed to his first meeting Mr. Rakesh Khanna, an undergraduate representative from the Faculty of Medicine. He also welcomed as visitors Professor Frankman√ïs first-year seminar class on the role of government. The Report of the Steering Committee (00-01:R-04) was received. Regarding Item 1, on motion by Professor DuBow, seconded by Dean Gruzleski, the minutes of the meeting of October 25, 2000 were approved as circulated. On motion by Profressor GowriSankaran, seconded by Professor Mehuys, Item 2, Confidential Session, was approved. Item 3, Report from the Honorary Degrees and Convocations Committee, was noted. The Principal reported that the following individuals have been elected as representatives of Senate on the Advisory Committee Regarding the Principalship: Professors Richard Janda, Samuel Noumoff, Bruce Trigger [alternate], and Edward Meighen [alternate]. On behalf of Senate, he thanked all those who had allowed their names to stand. The Principal stated that at an earlier meeting of Senate, Professor Noumoff had raised concern that Centraide had withdrawn its support to the black community. The Principal reported that at a recent meeting of the McGill Centraide Committee, the Committee heard in detail the events leading up to Centraide√ïs decision to no longer fund a particular agency, NDG Black. The Principal stated that committee members were satisfied not only that Centraide continues to fund a range of community agencies dealing almost exclusively with the black community but also that all Centraide agencies are open to all Montrealers. Professor Noumoff asked whether the Principal had contacted the particular agency to ask for a position paper. The Principal responded that he had written to the agency and would be happy to share with Senate the agency√ïs response, if such a response arrives. 2. AGENDA On motion by Professor DuBow, seconded by Professor Meighen, the Agenda was approved. 3. QUESTION RE CHANGE OF STATUS FROM PART- TIME FACULTY LECTURER TO COURSE LECTURER Professor Noumoff asked the following question: Until recently, persons on a limited term nine-month appointment as a Part Time Faculty Lecturer received an appointment to discharge their responsibilities, with a specified salary, plus benefits (pension, medical, dental, and the like) if they desired them. Currently colleagues in this category have had their status changed from Part Time Faculty Lecturer on appointment, to Course Lecturer on contract, with a specified salary, but without the right to benefits. This has resulted in cases where persons who have taught for 10 years + at the University, and received benefits during that time, are no longer eligible for them. (1) Is the Administration prepared, as an act of fairness, to grandparent colleagues who have been employed for five or more years as Part Time Faculty Lecturers prior to the imposition of this new classification and reinstate their eligibility for benefits? (2) Does the reclassification from Part Time Faculty Lecturer to Course Lecturer in any way effect the continued increase in severance pay entitlement (i.e. number of years and average salary level over the past three years)? (3) Has a person who has been reclassified from Part Time Faculty Lecturer to Course Lecturer been "severed" and therefore eligible for severance pay, while remaining on contract? (4) As the current distinction between Course Lecturer and Part Time Faculty Lecturer is, the former teaches 6 credits a term, while the latter teaches 9 credits a term, will a person who is a Course Lecturer in the first semester of an academic year (6 credits a term with no benefit eligibility), but teaches 9 credits in the second semester of that same academic year, and therefore eligible to be considered as a Faculty Lecturer, have their benefit package reinstated for that semester? (5) Why are persons who teach 6 credits in one Department and three credits in another Department, not categorized as Part Time Faculty Lecturers, and therefore eligible for the benefit package? Vice-Principal Vinet requested leave to postpone his reply to the next meeting of Senate so that the necessary research could be carried out. Professor Noumoff responded that this was entirely appropriate. 4. QUESTION RE STANDING OF PREVIOUS MOTION Professor Noumoff asked the following question: In response to my motion of praise of Professor Wapnick's achievement in gaining the World Scrabble Championship, Senate, in its wisdom passed a motion introduced by Professor Farrell which tabled the Wapnick motion sine die, on condition that all praiseworthy information be forwarded to the Principal, and that the Principal circulate this information to the wider McGill Community. At the Senate meeting of 11 October, the Principal indicated that he would not take responsibility for informing the entire community. Given the Principal's refusal to comply with a part of the Farrell resolution, what is the standing of that resolution? The Principal stated that he wished to make clear that the part of the motion he could not agree to comply with was that he be responsible for informing the entire community of praiseworthy achievements. As to the status of the motion, the Principal stated that since discussion of Professor Noumoff√ïs original resolution had been postponed sine die, Professor Noumoff could, if he wished, reintroduce it. As a supplemental question, Professor Noumoff asked the following: when a motion is passed with provisos, and one or more of the provisos is judged to be beyond what the person responsible for implementation wishes to do, is the motion affected? The Principal and Professor Noumoff agreed to refer this question to Steering Committee. 5. SEMI-ANNUAL REPORTS ON FULL-TIME ACADEMIC STAFFING CHANGES Vice-Principal Vinet presented the Semi-Annual Reports on Full- time Academic Staffing Changes (D00-21). In response to a question from Mr. Hussain, Vice-Principal Vinet stated that he did not believe Continuing Education teachers were included in the figures. In response to a request from Professor DuBow, Vice-Principal Vinet agreed to reinstitute the practice of indicating the nature of departures (death, retirement, withdrawal from the University). Professor Baines asked how many assistant professors (special category) are active at the University and how are they listed in the table. Dr. Vinet stated he did not have the answer. Professor GowriSankaran requested that future reports indicate how many newcomers hold Canada Research Chairs. A number of arithmetical errors were noted in the report. Vice- Principal Vinet noted that he would take up these discrepancies with the Academic Personnel office. [Secretary√ïs note: Corrected versions of the Semi-Annual Reports are attached to these minutes.] In response to comments about the problems likely to arise when newcomers are hired at salaries higher than those of staff already here, Dr. Vinet stated that roughly the same amount of money put aside for new recruitment has been earmarked for improving the salaries of those already here. The anomaly envelope and the McGill/Dawson awards can also help adjust salary discrepancies. If necessary, other means will also have to be developed. As for inter- faculty differences, the University is developing a strategic plan, part of which is already in place (use of the CRCs and the McGill/Dawson awards). He stated that the University will have to consider its future directions when it comes time to replace professors who have left. 6. SENATE COMMITTEE ON PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 1999/2000 Vice-Principal Yalovsky presented the Senate Committee on Physical Development Annual Report 1999/2000 (D00-13). He noted two typographical errors: on page 1, the figure for deferred maintenance should read $8.4 million, not $4.3, and in the third line of page 2, 550 Pine Avenue should read 505 Pine Avenue. Professor Gisel requested that the minutes record that the schools of the Faculty of Medicine are not included in the long-range plan. She noted that by 2036, 50 per cent of Canadians will be 75 and older, yet all the schools in Medicine are inadequate, and that the School of Nursing√ïs accreditation body has deemed its facilities unsatisfactory. She asked what the Committee has done in regard to the building needs of the schools, and where this issue is reflected in the physical planning process. Vice-Principal Yalovsky stated that Medicine is not listed in the report. Because of creation of the MUHC, the schools that are part of the Faculty of Medicine, and their needs, have not come before the Committee. The Committee cannot carry out long range planning in their regard until there is some sense of where Medicine is going. Mr. Baraniak requested that the minutes record that although the Senate report gives the impression that the University funded the completed portion of University Centre renovations, this work was, in fact, funded completely by student contributions. He also noted that the second floor of the University Centre has been renovated and is now home to a new food court. Mr. Baraniak invited senators to visit the food court, thereby helping the students to fund the remaining portion of the renovations. Dean Gruzleski noted that one of the items listed in the report as being in the planning stage is the new Information Technology Building, which has recently been named the Lorne M.Trottier Building in recognition of Mr. Trottier√ïs gift of $10 million to the University. Dean Gruzleski noted that this building will be used largely for undergraduate teaching. Dean Gruzleski, seconded by Professor Mendelson, moved that Senate express its appreciation to Mr.Trottier for his support of teaching at this University. The motion of thanks was voted upon and carried unanimously. Vice-Principal Yalovsky then responded to questions and comments relating to the Report. 7. CONFIDENTIAL REPORT OF THE HONORARY DEGREES AND CONVOCATIONS COMMITTEE Senate then moved into Confidential Session to discuss the Report of the Honorary Degrees and Convocations Committee (D00-19). The minutes of this confidential session are not published or circulated but are attached to the permanent minutes of Senate as Appendix "A". The meeting ended at 3:50 p.m.