Members not in attendance:
Kathy Galaviz,
Georgia Branch,
Matthew Daude,
Ping Chu,
Casey Trevino,
Chris De La Ronde,
N/A,
Stephen Bosworth,
Nancy Stano,
Lorlie Braxton,
Sharon Simpson,
Lisa Gelineau
1)
Review of previous (February 2016) eStaffing Committee meeting minutes.
Andrew
February 2016 minutes approved. {jl, db}
2)
Review of 2016-2017 MSTA Process
Committee
A discussion took place concerning the degree of rigidity vs. flexibility that should be built into the MSTA process. The consensus was that the eStaffing programs should follow the administrative rules, but allow for overrides when needed. One dean cited the need for flexibility when there are mitigating circumstances, and one admin cited a case of a data error requiring some form of human intervention to correct.
Ideally what is desired is that at the Appointment level, there is an option to make a change, and the change must be accompanied by a reason for the change.
IT will attempt to follow the general framework of (a) keeping the system rule-based, (b) allow for flexibility, but require explanations/documentation when changes are made, in the maintenance of the eStaffing programs, including the annual MSTA functionality.
Note: It was recommended that the AFA strongly consider rewriting the administrative rules that relate to eStaffing.
3)
Review of of Fall 2016 eStaffing
Committee
A few items that were reported were:
(1) Some full-time faculty assignments were showing in eStaffing as available during the first hours of phase 1 section preferences.
(2) ECS/ECHS were not coded correctly in the sense that they could not be viewed in eStaffing.
(3) When departments were performing section assignments, the 'middle section' was missing.
The AFA is still very interested in seeing the 'Senior' status on the Info page. IT was unable to add this functionality in time for Fall 2016 eStaffing.
4)
Administrative Support for eStaffing
Committee
The Non-Compliance Report is compiled 3 times per year.
Once after Fall eStaffing, once after Spring eStaffing, and once after Summer eStaffing.
Sometimes a department will not meet the compliance requirement, either due to non-recognition of the eStaffing timelines, the need for training due to DC or admin turn-over, or departmental changes that conflicted with the existing rule-based architecture of the eStaffing program.
The eStaffing Committee is most concerned about the departments that repeatedly fall out of compliance with the administrative rules affecting adjunct faculty staffing. Two departments in particular were cited as repeat violators.
The committee requested that after the completion of the Spring 2017 eStaffing period, the Compliance Report be especially annotated to display those departments with a history of compliance failure. Several members of the eStaffing Committee would then form a compliance grievance to compel future compliance.
5)
Requests for Future Changes
Committee
Committee is still awaiting an update as to whether the AFA will be recommending a change in MSTA categorizations.
State-mandated Block Scheduling may impact eStaffing. In preparation for it, the Committee was advised to consider opening up the possibility of partial exemptions from eStaffing if impacted by Block Scheduling.