Present: Deb Muenchrath, Judy Dolphin, Dianne Bystrom, Claudia Mendes, Linda Charles, Theresa McCormick, Jill Bystydzienski, Laura Hamilton, Pat Miller, Leslie Bloom, Barbara Caldwell, Quincie Cooper and Blue Maas. Guest: Denise Vrchota

McCormick introduced Claudia Mendes as a new member on the UCW. She is a graduate student in English as a Second Language and is interested in issues of social justice. McCormick noted other new members are Megan Davis and Mikie Walker.

Vrchota, president of the Faculty Senate (1998-99), presented a proposed Faculty Conduct Policy to the committee. Vrchota pointed out that the policy was not administration driven. She noted two years ago the local chapter of the AAUP asked the Faculty Senate to look over the university's sexual harassment policy because it was not believed to be in compliance with AAUP guidelines. The committee appointed to do so (Vrchota, Jack Girton and Heimir Geirsson) went beyond its initial charge after looking over the Faculty Handbook and finding that there was a different way of dealing with nearly every offense. The committee then wrote a draft policy that develops a common procedure for dealing with all offenses and brings language about faculty misconduct into one section of the Faculty Handbook. The committee sent its proposed policy to the National Institute of Health (NIH) to be sure it was in compliance with its guidelines (failure to comply could result in lost university funds) and also worked with the administration to reach a policy that was mutually acceptable.

The proposed policy has both an informal and a formal procedure that be followed. The informal procedure makes use of assistors and mediators to try to resolve a complaint informally, and generally would be used in more minor disputes. The formal process requires a hearing committee that makes recommendations for minor sanctions to the provost and major sanctions to the president. In both cases, the provost or the president would make the final decision, Vrchota said.

She pointed out that the concerns in forming the proposed policy were to include peer review and to provide the possibility of varying degrees of sanctions. Currently, sanctions are either dismissal or no action.

The conduct policy also includes a separate sexual harassment policy for faculty. Vrchota said this was because faculty have special issues of academic freedom that would not affect others at Iowa State.

Bystrom questioned the need for a separate sexual harassment policy for faculty, asking how the faculty are different from other ISU employees when it comes to sexual harassment complaints.

Vrchota noted that in her class she shows a film clip of a movie that shows a man and woman in bed together. Vrchota said without special protection she could be accused by a student of sexual harassment.

Bloom asked if either the provost or university president had the power to frame the document. Vrchota responded that even with shared governance between the faculty and administration, if the administration did not approve of the document it would send it back to the Faculty Senate for revisions so it behooved the Senate to work with the administration while preparing the document.

Miller expressed concerns about having a separate sexual harassment policy

for faculty. She suggested that a statement about academic freedom be included in the sexual harassment policy, but that there be only one policy.

Maas noted that she was glad to hear discussion of the sexual harassment policy, adding that there are many places beyond the university that are not nearly as far along as Iowa State in developing a policy or dealing with sexual harassment.

Bystrom also advocated one sexual harassment policy for all, and noted concerns about P&S staff who teach. She wondered how those staff members would be protected if faculty were pulled out of the sexual harassment policy and had their own policy. She wondered how P&S staff members also could be protected with academic freedom in their teaching roles.

Bloom also asked if situations of cronyism could be covered under the abuse of power section of the policy, saying if one faculty is the subject of favoritism (i.e., better classes, more travel money, etc.) it can fragment a department.

Charles asked if the policy was in compliance with procedures set down for P&S and Merit staff. Vrchota said the faculty conduct policy would take precedence over other procedures when a faculty member was involved in a complaint, but several on the UCW committee questioned whether that could happen if the policy did not coincide with contracts negotiated through collective bargaining procedures.

Vrchota asked the UCW to prepare a response to the proposed policy. McCormick appointed Caldwell, Bloom and Bystrom to a subcommittee to coordinate a response. Committee members were to email concerns about the policy to Bloom by Oct. 15. The UCW response needs to be sent to Vrchota by Nov. 8.

McCormick also said Vrchota will serve as the UCW liaison to the Faculty Senate. Vrchota will alert McCormick to issues of concern to women that are coming up in the Senate, and McCormick is to notify Vrchota of issues of concern the UCW has that the Senate might consider. Vrchota was asked about a committee on women that the Senate had discussed forming last spring. Vrchota said that committee was in response to concerns that there were not enough women and minorities on the Senate.

Data/Assessment -- Muenchrath reported that the committee had met Sept. 15 and Oct. 1 and agreed that during the fall, the committee will collect data focusing on: gender demographics in the College of Agriculture, Iowa State as a whole and at ISU's 11 peer institutions. Information will be gathered on students (undergraduate and graduate, department and degree, and university totals) on enrollment and graduation; on P&S (by college and department) on pay grade; and faculty (tenured by rank, tenure track, adjunct, affiliate, temporary and instructors). Data for ISU will be collected from the following years: 1980, 1985, 1990, 1992 and each year thereafter. Data from the peer institutions will be collected for 1980, 1990 and the most recent year available (hopefully 1999). In the spring, the committee will synthesize the data and do a more detailed analysis of a couple of the best and worst departments in the College and submit a final report in April.

Among the challenges to data collection among the peer institutions is the difficulty of matching departments among universities.

Networking/Outreaching -- Cooper reported that the committee is in the process of developing a resource list for women in the university and large Ames community. It is creating a survey that will be sent out to various organizations asking their purpose and mission, services provided (especially those that address the needs and/or concerns of women), and so forth. The committee still is developing the survey and hopes to have it sent out in November.

Charles reported that an email discussion group has been created. The forum is intended for discussions of women's issues that concern both men and women. The forum also can be used as a resource for those seeking information that members of group might have. The email address for the discussion group is: womens-network@iastate.edu.

Provost Relations -- Bystrom reported the committee had met with the provost on Oct. 11. Attending the meeting were Bystrom, Miller, McCormick, Rosenthal, Bystydzienski, and Thomas. Bystrom said the Provost seemed interested in establishing communication with the UCW and showed an interest in issues of concern to women. The provost expressed interest in input from the UCW on salary/equity issues, spousal accommodation and lack of representation of women in the administration. The provost will attend the Nov. 15 UCW meeting.

Bloom asked for suggestions of topics. Among the suggestions were the Faculty Conduct Policy, investment advice on planning for retirement, and careers over a lifespan (which could be a panel of several women at different stages of their careers).

McCormick reported that she and one other person would attend the conference on Nov. 4-5 in Cedar Rapids. McCormick encouraged anyone interested to attend. Cooper expressed interest in the conference and Bystrom suggested she apply for a student scholarship to cover the costs.

McCormick asked if this was something UCW wanted to continue now that it has been a success for several years. However, with our new committee structure, there no longer is a standing committee to organize it. Miller asked that the Women in Touch lunches be continued and said there was time to do two this year. Miller will work on organizing the luncheons.

McCormick reported that the Provost’s Office would fund the reception if UCW organized it. Last year, invitations were only sent to new women on campus and several voiced concern that that not happen again this year. McCormick reported that she has been working with ADP to get a complete mailing list this year. Bystrom suggested that, while UCW would want to involve the Women's Center, the reception be held somewhere where there was more room, such as the Campanile Room at the Memorial Union. A subcommittee was formed to organize the reception. On the committee will be Miller (chair), McCormick, Pam Thomas and Claudia Mendes.

Committee members agreed they wanted to attend open forums for the College of Agriculture dean candidates. Maas volunteered to attend the forums and Cooper expressed interest in attending also. Several members noted that they attend as many of these types of forums as they can. McCormick will advise Maas on when the forums are as soon as she knows.

The next meeting will be 2:30-4 p.m., Monday, Nov. 15, in the Memorial Union Pine Room.

Respectfully submitted,

Linda Charles