By Shannon Vicic
A proposal to alter the academic calendar has stirred up plenty of debate
on the floor of the Urbana-Champaign Senate in recent meetings.
At the senate's Feb. 3 meeting, Walter Arnstein, chair of the Calendar Committee,
presented a proposal under which each fall semester would begin three days
earlier but would include an entire week of vacation for Thanksgiving rather
than the current two-day vacation.
The senate was to vote on the committee's proposal at its Feb. 24 meeting.
But when the proposal came up for discussion, three professors -- Ruppert
Downing, social work; Terry Weech, library and information science; and
Peter Feuille, labor and industrial relations -- proposed to amend it.
Under their amendment, the semester would begin three days earlier, but
the Monday and Tuesday of Thanksgiving week would be reinstated as instructional
days, and the semester would end two days earlier -- on a Wednesday rather
than Friday.
The faculty members proposed the amendment because they were concerned that
the original proposal would shortchange students with classes that meet
only on Mondays or Tuesdays.
However, Arnstein said the amendment couldn't be accepted as friendly because
ending the semester on a Wednesday would necessitate a change in the final
exam schedule. Since that could have implications for the date of fall commencement,
Arnstein said he couldn't support the amendment without resubmitting it
to the committee.
To help resolve that issue, Arnstein asked Weech if his group would accept
an amendment to its proposed amendment that would reinstate the Monday and
Tuesday of Thanksgiving week as instructional days but keep the rest of
the original calendar proposal the same. That amendment would increase the
total number of days in the fall semester from 72 to 74.
Arnstein said that the altered amendment would constitute only a minor change
to the original proposal, which would mean that he could accept it on behalf
of the Calendar Committee. Weech accepted the suggestion, and a movement
was made to amend the amendment.
Wesley Seitz, a professor of agricultural and consumer economics, recommended
that the senate vote against the suggested calendar alteration. He noted
that the development of the calendar is a complex process and trying to
amend the calendar on the senate floor is very tricky.
Kelly Doyle, a junior in fine and applied arts, urged the senate not to
amend the amendment further, but to approve the first amendment proposed.
At the Feb. 3 meeting, Doyle had lobbied for an earlier end to the fall
semester so students could pursue seasonal employment.
A vote taken on the motion to amend the amendment passed 39-24. With time
in the meeting running short, H. George Friedman, a professor of computer
science, moved that the debate of the newly amended proposal be closed,
so a vote could be taken.
But before the amended proposal could be voted on, Alfred Kagan, a professor
of library administration, asked for a quorum call. Since no quorum was
present, the meeting was adjourned.
The senate reconvened March 3 to vote on the amended calendar proposal.
A motion to send the amended proposal back to the Calendar Committee was
defeated by only a three-vote margin, 46-43, and, ultimately, the voting
process was stymied once again by a quorum call that fell short. The calendar
proposal will be taken up again at the senate's March 17 meeting.
Pouring Rights Contracts
In remarks at the beginning of the Feb. 24 meeting, Chancellor Michael Aiken
addressed the issue of "pouring rights" contracts. At a previous
meeting, students had requested that they have more input into the decisions
surrounding soft drink providers for the campus.
According to Aiken, the university currently has three arrangements with
soft drink providers. University Housing has an exclusive arrangement with
Coca-Cola for the residence halls. The Department of Intercollegiate Athletics
has an exclusive arrangement with Pepsi for DIA events. And Coke, Pepsi
and other beverages are sold in vending machines other than those in student
housing through a contract with the Illini Union's campus vending.
Currently, the university is trying to determine whether a package arrangement
with one beverage company would bring additional revenues into the university.
Other universities, such as Indiana University and the University of Minnesota,
currently have such package arrangements, Aiken said.
The university put out a request for proposals for pouring rights contracts
in November. At that time, the university also put out a request for proposals
from fast food franchises, possibly to take over the Illini Orange and/or
a location in the Union.
If a package arrangement with a beverage provider brought in additional
income, it would help pay for programs to enhance the lives of students,
such as the First Year Impact program, Aiken said. This year, that program
served 600 students. Next year it will be offered to twice as many students,
and the university would like to make it available to all freshmen.
Aiken also mentioned the need to continue funding programs such as the new
student convocation and mandatory sexual assault seminars. In addition,
he said that the university is committed to increasing programs for Native
American and Asian American students.
With regard to athletic programs, Aiken pointed out that the university
has one of the smallest sports programs for women in the Big Ten. To increase
sports opportunities for women, the university has pledged to add a women's
soccer program and softball team, which will each cost $300,000 per year
on a recurring basis.
"We have one of the worst records on gender equity [in sports] in the
Big Ten. I'm not very proud of that, and I think we need to do something
about it by adding these two sports. But we have to pay for it," Aiken
said.
If the university can produce new income through its pouring rights arrangements,
then it can use the money to address some of these issues, he said. The
university already has received proposals from several companies, but university
representatives haven't completely finished analyzing the proposals yet.
Aiken said he will be holding meetings with students this week to get input
on the pouring rights issue.
One of the issues that the university must consider is a shift from the
current cans-only arrangement to a mix of cans and plastic. That would have
an impact on the university's recycling program, which is currently paid
for by recycling cans. Aiken also noted that the university will set a standard
price for soft drinks, which will increase the price of pop in student housing
from 50 to 60 cents, regardless of the university's decision concerning
the proposals.
Evaluation of Fitness to Work
In other action at the Feb. 24 meeting, the senate approved the Evaluation
of Fitness to Work proposal. Under that policy, if there are concerns about
an employee's fitness to work, that employee can be required to be examined
by a university-designated health-care professional.
Several faculty members objected to the proposal because it doesn't give
the employee the right to choose his or her own physician. The proposal
only says that the employee shall be consulted about the selection of the
health-care professional "where practicable."
Law professor Matthew Finkin pointed out that there are many reasons that
employees shouldn't necessarily be allowed to choose their own doctor.
Provost Larry Faulkner added that when employees become a threat to themselves
or others, it may not be feasible or wise to involve them in choosing a
health-care professional to evaluate their fitness to work. Faulkner reminded
the senate that the appeals process is available for anyone who believes
that he or she may have been treated unfairly.
Several faculty members continued to express concern with the phrase "where
practicable," so the proposal was amended to delete that phrase before
it was approved.
In Other Business
Freidman, chair of the committee on University Statutes and Senate Procedures,
moved that a Terms of Employment proposal be withdrawn from the Feb. 24
meeting agenda so that the committee would have more time to consider suggestions
received recently from university counsel.
Also at the Feb. 24 meeting, John Braden, chair of an advisory committee
charged with reviewing the campus options for fire protection and emergency
medical services, discussed the options being considered and the process
the advisory committee is using to evaluate those options. The advisory
committee plans to complete its evaluation process and make a recommendation
to the Chancellor by spring break.
###