Appalachian State University

Faculty Senate Minutes

 January 8, 2007 (Unapproved)

The Faculty Senate meeting was called to order by Chair Marking at 3:19 pm in the William Strickland Conference Room in I.G. Greer on Monday, January 8, 2007.  Senators Ehnenn, Felkel, Horton, Johnson (who is replacing Diane Mines during Spring 2007 semester), Marland,  McKinney, and Tiller were not in attendance.

I.            Announcements:

              A.          Chair Marking welcomed senators and asked visitors to introduce themselves.  Visitors were Dr. Dave Haney (Academic Affairs), Mr. Greg Lovins (Business Affairs), Dr. Michael Moore (History), and Mr. Gunther Doerr (University Police).

II.          Visitors Reports:

A.          Mr. Greg Lovins presented a PowerPoint presentation on construction and renovation projects on campus which included the University bookstore, Hoey Residence Hall, Student Recreation Center, pedestrian bridge on Rivers Street, Baseball Stadium, Sofield Family Indoor Practice facility, University Hall, New Dining Hall, steam plant, stadium parking lot, and the parking deck adjacent to the new library.  He reported that he received the Event Parking Proposal that was submitted jointly by the Faculty Senate, Staff Council, and SGA.  He submitted the proposal to the Vice Chancellors for their consideration and commented that it was viewed favorably by them.  He will meet with individuals on campus who have ticketing responsibilities for their input and he will report back to the Faculty Senate.  Senator Butts noted that the pedestrian walkway on Rivers Street continues to be a hazardous situation and Senator Malloy suggested that temporary lights be installed under the bridge to illuminate that section of Rivers Street.  Mr. Lovins concurred that the current crosswalk situation is hazardous.  Rivers Street is a state-owned road, therefore, ASU can only make recommendations to the state.  Mr. Lovins thanked Senator Malloy for his suggestion and will forward his recommendation to the state. 

B.          Mr. Gunther Doerr discussed the Taser X26 policy emphasizing that it is a less-lethal weapon that is designed to incapacitate a target without causing death or permanent injury.  The University Police Department policy is to use only that level of force that reasonably appears necessary to control or otherwise subdue violent or potentially violent individuals.  The TASER X26 may be used by authorized and trained officers against individuals who demonstrate an overt intention to use violence or force against an officer or another person.  Mr. Doerr added that Boone police and the Watauga County sheriff’s department use the Taser X26.  Several Senators recommended that the University Police Department’s Taser Policy and Use of Force Policy be in agreement and mutually supportive.  Mr. Doerr commented that he will review both policies and make sure that this is the case.

C.          Dr. Michael Moore (History) presented the Report on the Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Retirement.  Discussion about the report included issues and comments relating to whether or not automatic designation of emeritus status is desirable, whether or not granting emeritus status should remain within the purview of DPC’s and not be automatic, and whether or not granting emeritus status should be contingent upon the level and/or degree of a faculty member’s anticipated contributions to the university after retirement.  Chair Marking raised a point regarding travel funds for emeritus faculty.  Dr. Moore commented that this would be based on negotiations between the department and the faculty member and is dependent upon the availability of resources.  He further added that the committee recommends that colleges include in their salary metrics a section for phased retirement faculty who might be eligible for merit raises.  Senator McBride moved and Senator Mamlin seconded that the Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Retirement provide a list of recommendations that they presented in their report to the Faculty Senate for further consideration and review.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #1).

III.          Minutes:

A.          Chair Marking asked for a motion to approve the November 13, 2006 Faculty Senate minutes.  Senator Ramsey moved and Senator Butts seconded.  Senator Strazicich requested that the words “the cost of clean up” be replaced with “the ASU Foundation” in the Budget Committee’s Report in Section V, Item C.  The corrected sentence should read “Senator Strazicich mentioned that perhaps alumni who attend tailgating parties and football games may be interested in contributing to the ASU Foundation”.  Motion as amended was passed.  (See Vote #2 ).                      

B.          Chair Marking asked for a motion to approve the December 11, 2006 Faculty Senate minutes.  Senator Kaenzig moved and Senator McBride seconded.  Chair Marking noted that “Institutional Research and Assessment” should be replaced with “Institutional Research, Assessment, and Planning” in Section IV, Item B.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #3).

IV.        Provost’s Report: 

A.          No report.

V.          Committee Reports (Committee Chair’s name is in caps.)

             A.         Academic Policies  (HUELSMAN, Butts, Mamlin, Smith, Williams)

                          No Report.

              B.          Agenda Committee (MARKING, Arnold, Harris, Marland)

                            No Report.

              C.          Budget Committee (STRAZICICH, Marland, McBride, Scherlen))

                           No Report.

              D.          Campus Planning Committee (TILLER, Arnold, Kaenzig, Ramey)

                            No Report.

              E.          Committee on Committees (LAMBERT, Horton, Malloy, McGuire, Mines)

Motion:  To approve Howie Neufeld (Biology) to replace Heather Waldroup (Art) on the Library Services Committee, term expiring 2008.

Motion approved.  (See Vote #4).

              F.         Faculty Handbook Committee (MARKING, Arnold, Gates, Marland)

Motion FS 06-07/1-01 to replace the current Section 7.3.4.10 “Patent and Copyright Committee” of the Faculty Handbook with the proposed Section 7.3.4.10 “Intellectual Property Development Committee” of the Faculty Handbook as stated below:

CURRENT:

7.3.4.10 PATENT AND COPYRIGHT COMMITTEE

a. Members on Committee:  8 - 5 faculty, 1 staff, 1 student, and 1 representative from the Office of Business Affairs. 

b. Report to: The Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor

c. Areas of responsibility: 1) to receive and review all patent disclosures made by the faculty and staff of Appalachian State University; 2) make recommendations to resolve questions of invention and copyright ownership, and related matters that may arise between Appalachian State University and its faculty and staff members; and

3) recommend such measures as are necessary to assure prompt and expeditious handling, evaluation, and prosecution of patent opportunities.

 PROPOSED:

 7.3.4.10 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

a. Members on Committee:  10-- 5 faculty, 1 staff, 1 graduate student, who are voting members, 1 Information Technology Service representative, 1 University Attorney and 1 Graduate Studies and Research member, who are non-voting members.  All faculty will serve three-year terms.  Three faculty will be elected and two faculty will be appointed by the Provost in consultation with the Graduate Studies and Research representative. 

b. Report to: The Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor.

c. Areas of responsibility: 1) receive and review all patent disclosures made by the faculty and staff of Appalachian State University; 2) make recommendations to resolve questions of invention and copyright ownership, and related matters that may arise between Appalachian State University and its faculty and staff members; and

3) recommend measures necessary to expeditious evaluation and handling of patent opportunities.

Discussion concerning this proposed motion included concerns that the name of the committee does not accurately convey what the committee does, the use of the word “development” in the title of the committee does not seem appropriate and is misleading, and since patents are not considered intellectual property, patents should be included in the title of the committee.  Senator Butts moved and Senator Lambert seconded to retain the current title of “Patent and Copyright Committee” instead of the proposed title “Intellectual Property Development Committee”.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #5).

Senator McBride moved and Senator Lambert moved to replace the word “to” with “for” in the last sentence under Item C.  The amended sentence should read “3.  recommend measures necessary for expeditious evaluation and handling of patent opportunities”.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #6).

Faculty Handbook Committee moved that the amended motion be approved.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #7).  Amended Motion FS 06-07/1-01 approved as follows:

7.3.4.10 PATENT AND COPYRIGHT COMMITTEE

a. Members on Committee:  10-- 5 faculty, 1 staff, 1 graduate student, who are voting members, 1 Information Technology Service representative, 1 University Attorney and 1 Graduate Studies and Research member, who are non-voting members.  All faculty will serve three-year terms.  Three faculty will be elected and two faculty will be appointed by the Provost in consultation with the Graduate Studies and Research representative. 

b. Report to: The Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor.

c. Areas of responsibility: 1) receive and review all patent disclosures made by the faculty and staff of Appalachian State University; 2) make recommendations to resolve questions of invention and copyright ownership, and related matters that may arise between Appalachian State University and its faculty and staff members; and

3) recommend measures necessary for expeditious evaluation and handling of patent opportunities.

              G.          Faculty Welfare and Morale Committee (FELKEL, Ehnenn, Harris, McKinney)

                            No Report.

              H.          Welfare of Students Committee (RAMSEY, Carpenter, Davison)

                            No Report.

VI.         Old Business

              A.          Ad Hoc Committee on Assistant Chairs [MARTHA MARKING (Theatre/Dance), Paul Fox (Psychology), Glenda Treadaway (Communication), James Ivory (English), Paul Gates (Communication/Hubbard Center), Michael Moore (History)]

                           Motion FS 06-07/12-04

                           Remuneration Resolution

The assistant chair will receive a nine-month contract similar to that of the department chair.  The assistant chair will receive an 8% increase to the current-year faculty–base salary and a $1,000 stipend for the responsibilities associated with assistant chair and summer availability for administrative work.  In addition, during the nine-month contract period and on the basis of a 12-hour teaching load, ¼ time will be reassigned from teaching.  At the conclusion of the departmental assistant chair term(s), the above described compensation for the position will cease to be part of the former assistant chair’s compensation and the respective salary will return to the base faculty salary including any increases to the base salary.

                            Motion FS 06-07/12-04 passed.  (See Vote #8). 

              B.          Dr. Dave Haney reported that the online Faculty Handbook will be updated in a few weeks.

              C.          Chair Marking asked for volunteers to attend the Chancellor’s Advisory Meetings  scheduled this semester.  Senator Strazicich will check his calendar and Senator   Ramey volunteered to attend the April 23, 2007 meeting. 

              D.          Chair Marking shared with the Faculty Senate that an ad hoc committee on due process for grievance procedures has been formed.  Current members include Dr. Paul Gates, Dr. Chip Arnold, Mr. John Abbott, Mrs. Kate Mawhinney, and Ms. Martha Marking.

VII.       New Business

A.         Senator Arnold reported that elections for Faculty Senators and faculty to serve on university committees will be forthcoming and he asked for senators to encourage their colleagues to run for vacant seats.  He asked Dr. Calamai to inform the Council of Chairs.  Chair Marking noted that she had send emails to the deans.

B.          Motion FS 06-07/01-02 Technology Transfer (Intellectual Property Development) Resolution

PATENT AND COPYRIGHT COMMITTEE assesses the commercial viability of intellectual property created at Appalachian State University by its employees.  Members of the Committee should have a strong interest in the institutional promotion of economic development, excellent analytical skills, as well as knowledge of the patent and/or copyright process. Ideally, members should possess expertise and/or experience in one or more of the following:  commercialization, manufacturing, commercial trade, market research, business, or developing a business model.

Senator Arnold moved and Senator Williams seconded to amend the motion by deleting the last sentence:  “Ideally, members should possess expertise….”  Motion FS 06-07/01-02 to amend passed.  (See Vote #9).  Senator Ramsey moved and Senator McBride seconded to approve the amended description of the Patent and Copyright Committee.  Motion FS 06-07/01-02 as amended passed. (See Vote #10).   Amended Motion FS 06-07/1-02 approved as follows:

                            PATENT AND COPYRIGHT COMMITTEE assesses the commercial viability of intellectual property created at Appalachian State University by its employees.  Members of the Committee should have a strong interest in the institutional promotion of economic development, excellent analytical skills, as well as knowledge of the patent and/or copyright process.

Chair Marking asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting.  Senator Mamlin moved and Senator Ramsey seconded.  Motion passed.  (See Vote #11).  The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 pm.

Appalachian State University

FACULTY PRESENT AND VOTING SHEET for January 8, 2007

Y = Yes             N = No               A = Abstain

*  David Johnson (History) is replacing Diane Mines for Spring 2007 semester.

**Senator Malloy left the meeting prior to any voting.

Vote #1:                          Motion to have the Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Retirement submit specific recommendations to the Faculty Senate for further consideration and review.

Vote #2:                          To approve the November 13, 2006 Faculty Senate minutes as amended.

Vote #3:                          To approve the December 11, 2006 Faculty Senate minutes.

Vote #4:                          To approve Howie Neufeld to serve on Library Services Committee.

Vote #5:                          Motion to retain the current title of the Patent and Copyright Committee.

Vote #6:                          Motion to replace the word “to” with “for” in the last sentence under Section C of proposed Section 7.3.4.10 of the Faculty Handbook.

Vote #7:                          To approve the amended Motion FS06-07/1-01.

Vote #8:                          To approve the Ad Hoc Committee on Assistant Chairs Remuneration  Resolution.

Vote #9:                          To amend Motion FS 06-07/1-02 the Technology Transfer Resolution  concerning the description of the Patent and Copyright Committee by deleting the last sentence.

Vote #10:                        To approve Motion FS 06-07/1-02 as amended concerning the Patent and Copyright Committee.

Vote #11:                        Motion to adjourn the meeting.

APPENDIX A

TASER X26: A Conducted Energy Control Weapon

• General. The TASER X26 is a less-lethal weapon.  It is designed to incapacitate a target from a safe distance without causing death or permanent injury.  Statistics from law enforcement agencies that have deployed TASER conducted energy weapons have established the TASER conducted energy weapon as having the lowest risk of injury of any alternative less-lethal weapon.

• Purpose.  The purpose of this policy is to provide officers with guidance and direction on the use of the TASER X26, a less-lethal conducted energy control weapon.

• Policy. 

• The University Police Department policy is to use only that level of force that reasonably appears necessary to control or otherwise subdue violent or potentially violent individuals. 
• The TASER X26 may be used by authorized and trained officers against individuals who demonstrate an overt intention to use violence or force against an officer or another person.
• The TASER X26 may be used against an individual who demonstrates an overt intention to flee in order to resist or avoid detention or arrest.
• Do not point the TASER X26 at a person unless you are intending to fire.

• Definitions.

• TASER: the brand name for our less than lethal, conducted energy control weapon.
• TASER X26: a conducted energy control weapon that utilizes compressed nitrogen to deploy two small probes up to 21 feet. These probes are connected to the weapon by high voltage insulated wire.  When the probes make contact with the target, the TASER X26 transmits powerful electrical pulses along the wires and into the body of the target through and up to two inches of clothing.
• DPM: The digital power magazine is a custom lithium energy cell power supply system designed specifically for the TASER X26. 
• CID: The central information display is a two digit display on the back of the TASER X26 that tells you the percentage of DPM power remaining.
• AFIDs: Confetti-like pieces of paper that are expelled from the cartridge when fired.  Each anti-felon identification (AFID) tag contains an alphanumeric identifier unique to the cartridge used.

• Procedures.

• Authorized Users
• Only officers who have satisfactorily completed the ASU Police Department approved training course shall be authorized to carry the TASER X26.
• Officers wearing civilian clothes will not carry the TASER X26 without specific approval from the Chief.
• Weapon Readiness
• The TASER X26 will be carried in an approved holster on the side of the body opposite the service handgun.
• Officers carrying the TASER X26 will test fire it (without the cartridge) prior to beginning each tour of duty to ensure the unit is functional.  When test firing, do not allow the unit to go through the entire timing cycle as this will deplete the DPM.
• Officers carrying the TASER X26 will check the energy power level after test firing the unit, by putting the safety switch up in the armed position and reading the CID.  Do not use a TASER X26 when the DPM (energy supply) is below 20%. 
• The TASER X26 shall be carried fully armed with the safety on in preparation for immediate use when authorized
• Officers authorized to use the TASER X26 shall be issued a minimum of one spare cartridge as a back-up in case of cartridge failure, the need for redeployment, or in case the first cartridge’s leads break during engagement.
• Cartridges shall be replaced consistent with the manufacturer’s expiration requirements, five years from the expiration date printed on each cartridge.
• Only department approved battery power sources shall be used in the TASER X26.
• Deployment
• The TASER X26 is generally analogous to OC Pepper Spray on the use-of-force continuum, and decisions to use it involve the same basic justification.  As such, it is forbidden to use the TASER X26 as follows:
• In a punitive or coercive manner.
• On a handcuffed or secured prisoner, absent overtly assaultive behavior that cannot be reasonably dealt with in any other less intrusive fashion.
• On any suspect who does not demonstrate an overt intention to use violence or force against the officer or another person.
• On any suspect who does not demonstrate an overt intention to flee in order to resist or avoid detention or arrest.
• In any environment where an officer knows that a potentially flammable, volatile, or explosive material is present (including but not limited to gasoline, natural gas or propane).
• In any environment where the subject’s fall could reasonably result in death (such as in water or on an elevated structure).
• As in all uses of force, certain individuals maybe more susceptible to injury.  Officers should be aware of the greater potential for injury when using the TASER X26 against the elderly, children, or persons the officer has reason to believe are pregnant, equipped with a pacemaker, or in obvious ill health.
• Upon firing the TASER X26, the officer shall energize the subject the least number of times and no longer than necessary to accomplish the legitimate operational objective.
• The subject should be secured as soon as practical while disabled by the TASER X26 to minimize the number of redeployment cycles.  In determining the need for additional energy cycles, officers should be aware that an energized subject might not be able to respond to commands during or immediately following exposure.
• In preparation for firing, the TASER X26 shall be pointed in a safe direction, taken off safe, and then aimed.  Center mass of the subject’s back should be the primary target where reasonably possible; center masses of the chest or the legs are the secondary targets.
• The TASER X26 may also be used in certain circumstances in a “touch stun” mode.  This involves removing the cartridge and pressing the unit against an appropriate area of the body based upon training.  It is important to understand that when the TASER X26 is used in this manner it is:
• Primarily a pain compliance tool.
• Minimally effective compared to conventional cartridge-type deployments.
• More likely to leave marks on the subject’s skin.
• Subject to the same deployment (use) guidelines and restrictions as those of the TASER X26 cartridge deployments.
• The TASER X26 shall be pointed at the ground in a safe direction with the safety on during loading, unloading, or when handled in other than an operational deployment.
• Aftercare
• As soon as reasonably possible, individuals who have been incapacitated by the TASER X26 shall be evaluated by EMS.
• Whenever possible, safe removal and proper disposal of the TASER X26 probes should be done by trained medical personnel.
• The following persons shall be transported to the emergency room for examination following exposure to the TASER X26.  Any person who:
• requests medical attention; officers shall ask persons if they desire medical attention
• is hit in a sensitive area (e.g. face, head, female breasts, male groin)
• from whom the officers have difficulty removing the probes
• does not appear to recover properly after being hit
• is in one of the potentially susceptible population categories listed in paragraph V.C.2 of this policy
• has been energized more than three times
• has had more than one TASER used against him/her in any given incident
• has been subjected to a continuous energy cycle of 15 seconds or more
• has exhibited signs of extreme uncontrolled agitation or hyperactivity prior to TASER X26 exposure.
• Photographs of the affected area should be taken after the probes are removed.
• When the TASER X26 has been deployed operationally, the officer shall collect the cartridge, wire leads, probes, and AFIDs as evidence.
• Reporting
• The deploying officer shall notify the on duty supervisor as soon as practical after using the device, and complete the department use-of-force report.
• Officers shall specifically articulate the rationale in their use-of-force report for any instance in which: the TASER X26 was energized more than three times, an energy cycle longer than 15 seconds is used, more than one TASER is used against a subject in a given incident, or if the TASER X26 is used against an individual designated to be a “susceptible population” per V.C.2 of this policy.

VI. Updated by Chief Gunther E. Doerr, 11-15-06.

Appendix B

Report of the Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Retirement

January 8, 2007

This committee was authorized by the Faculty Senate in February 2005 with the charge to assess the relationship of retired faculty and the University and to recommend policies and practices pertaining to faculty retirement and the emeritus rank. The members of the committee are Professor  Michael Moore (HIST) chair, Professor Terry Cole (COM), Professor Marvin Hoffman (PS/CJ), Mr. Len Johnson (HRS), Professor Susan Keefe (ANT), and Professor Harold McKinney (MUS).

Introduction

Appalachian’s present demographic trends show that for some time to come there will be in any given year about 200 faculty members aged 55 or older. All of these people will retire, go into phased retirement, or be concerned about retirement. There is a growing need for clear, accessible information and resources not only among faculty members who have retired, are retiring or are approaching retirement, but also for faculty who should be making longer term plans for retirement.

After hearing from some retired, emeritus faculty that, to quote one, by simply conferring honorific titles to retirees the University is short-changing itself and the retirees and needs to tap into the wealth of wisdom, talent, and resources of its faculty emeriti, the committee felt the University should make more information and resources available to retired and emeriti faculty, to encourage their greater involvement in University academic and other activities, and to build stronger support for this part of the University’s community. At the same time, this committee has discovered over the period of its sitting, that many useful services presently are offered to retired faculty and that others have been offered by the University administration partly in response to this committee’s inquiries.

We have found that many retirees have not known of all the services the University makes available to them. Whether this has resulted from inadequately available information or a faculty member’s not being in a position to ask is almost immaterial. There is a need for improved statement of University policy regarding retirement and about the retiree’s continuing relationship with the University.

However, our committee also has become concerned over repeated reports of retired or emeritus faculty not feeling adequately involved in the University, or even feeling rejected by their department, department chair, and/or the University, by implication at least.

Similarly, this committee began its work with numerous reports of inconsistent information and treatment of faculty choosing phased retirement. There were complaints that phased retirement faculty were merely being used as classroom canon-fodder to hold down student numbers for regular faculty without regard to the phased faculty member’s professional load at the time of entering phased retirement. There were complaints that merit rises in salary after the first year were not forthcoming, and some concern that employment terms were not at all similar for phased faculty. Although our study confirms some of these criticisms, the phased retirement program seems to have now a more flexible structure for establishing workloads for phased retirement faculty that mimic those in effect when they were in regular faculty status. Nonetheless, there is more that can be done to cement the profitable mutual interests of the University and its faculty in phased retirement.

Our investigations have revealed that there is strong interest by all parties (faculty and administration) in providing for and clarifying the relationship of the University and its emeritus faculty. We have found that emeritus faculty do now enjoy nearly all the privileges accorded regular faculty, with some additional benefits such as free use of recreational facilities. Not surprisingly, various units at Appalachian have made local, on-the-spot decisions about emeritus faculty use of their services in departments and ancillary areas such as Academic Computing Services. This is laudable and we hope it continues. But, there continues to be a need for making these services better known to all faculty members planning retirement and in retirement.

It appears that in future there may be more faculty retiring and staying in the Watauga area, some year-round, than has been the case in the past. For them to maintain healthy mental and physical lives is not only a concern for the retirees, it should also be a concern of the University, which has benefited from their committed service over a long period of time. Many retired faculty will continue their scholarly and intellectual agendas and want to be active in the University and larger community. The word retirement, which derives originally from the Old French retyrer, meaning to go into seclusion, no longer has meaning that describes Appalachian faculty retirees.

The committee surveyed resources and services presently available at Appalachian to retired and emeritus faculty, reviewed the purpose and scope of the emeritus designation at Appalachian, conducted a survey of retired faculty concerning their retirement experience and their experience of the phased retirement program, if applicable, and researched retirement and emeritus polices and practices at peer institutions and a cross-section of other universities.

Despite there being existing practices that provide diverse benefits to retired faculty, we believe that there has been notably insufficient recognition of retiring faculty at Appalachian, which weakens the valuable synergy of our academic community that is sustained by faculty of all ages and intellectual interests. Since more retired faculty are staying in a physically closer relationship to the University, it is in the University’s and the faculty member’s interest to provide as much support as possible for the life of the mind and for that to be open to continuous exercise at our University.

In this regard, whenever the University considers housing options to help address costs-of-living concerns for faculty and graduate students, we encourage University planners to include the possibility of retired faculty being a part of any new housing options. This would be an ideal place to establish the full aspects of an intellectual and corporeal community committed to Appalachian.

It is important to note that, if this report is accepted, much of its success will depend on department chairs and deans finding ways in which to implement procedures that will build a closer and more meaningful inclusion of emeritus faculty into the University. Of course, much also depends on emeritus faculty who desire greater connection to their departments and the University to suggest ways in which they would like to participate.

This report contains five sections: review and recommendations regarding the emeritus rank; recommendations for improving the relationship of all retired faculty and the University; review and recommendations regarding the phased retirement program; Human Resource Services review and report on financial planning; appendices.

The Emeritus Rank

After surveying emeritus policies at our peer and other institutions, we conclude that by far the most common practice is for the rank to be automatically granted upon full retirement from the university. At those few universities where the rank is conferred after review by personnel bodies, it always brings guarantees of resources and support for emeritus faculty nearly equal to those for regular faculty. At Appalachian, concerns expressed by faculty and committee member’s own conclusions highlighted issues with the present process of voluntary initiative for seeking the emeritus rank. Faculty members who have given significant service to Appalachian and with other distinctive achievements in their careers here have not applied for the rank for a variety of reasons. Other faculty members have seen the process of application as a pro forma exercise that does not result in any clear-cut distinction for a potential emeritus retiree. The purpose of the emeritus rank is to celebrate and thereby mark a significant change of status in one’s career and one’s relationship to Appalachian following lengthy service in which one’s achievements and contributions already have been recognized by colleagues through the promotion process. It should also mean that the emeritus faculty member remains a part of the University, exercising his or her own control over the degree to which he or she might exercise the opportunities and privileges available to emeritus faculty.

We recommend that the emeritus rank should become automatic for a retiring faculty member holding the rank of Full Professor and having at least ten years of continuous service at Appalachian. The emeritus faculty designation should be accompanied by a letter of commendation from the Chancellor upon official notice of the faculty member’s full retirement from the University, i.e. at the end of any phased retirement service period or upon immediate, full retirement.

The emeritus designation should also be available to those faculty members in other ranks, including Lecturer, who have at least ten years of continuous service to Appalachian. For these ranks the application for the emeritus designation may be initiated by either the faculty member or by his or her department chair or dean.  A review of the faculty member’s record of achievement and contribution should be made by an appropriate departmental DPC with a recommendation for approval or non-approval as provided for other personnel decisions.  A positive DPC recommendation would require additional approval by those responsible for personnel decisions and recommendations, the department chair, dean, provost, chancellor, and trustees.

We recommend that there should be increased recognition of the emeritus distinction at Appalachian, in addition or as a supplement to the collection of biographies ably compiled and edited by Richard Howe (The Appalachian Faculty Emeriti, 6th ed., 2004). We have sought a public place on campus in which to make a permanent record of faculty accorded emeritus status. We have been in contact with Mary Reichel, University Librarian, and suggest with her blessing, that the wall outside the Faculty lounge/reading room on the second floor of Belk Library become a place where a permanent display of an emeritus faculty’s name, department, dates of service at Appalachian, and notation of other distinctive Appalachian/UNC awards earned by the faculty member be placed on a small plaque and become part of the display. The display should begin initially with plaques for those faculty members who have already received the emeritus rank (about 275) and be annually updated. This display should not become the responsibility of Library personnel or be funded or maintained by the Library. We recommend that its design and maintenance should be the responsibility of Academic Affairs and/or the Chancellors office in concert with Business Affairs.

Further, we recommend that the University create a special medallion for emeritus faculty with a ribbon in the University’s colors that can be worn at academic functions such as commencements or can otherwise be displayed on an appropriate base, for instance, in one’s home. This medallion would be presented to the emeritus faculty member at a ceremony such as a distinctive annual luncheon or dinner, hosted by the University wherein the achievements of retiring emeritus faculty may be publicly recognized.

We also strongly encourage departments and/or colleges to consider establishing a permanent recognition for emeritus faculty within their communities and to provide other distinctive functions appropriate to this significant transition. Also, emeritus faculty should, for instance, be included in invitations to department and college functions and their achievements and other life changes be recognized along with those of regular faculty.

We recommend that departments and colleges maintain email lists that include emeritus and retired faculty to use for announcement of events and other information that are not part of the diurnal communications about department business.  For instance, if a colleague is retiring, other retired colleagues should be informed. Further, we suggest that departments and/or colleges update regularly their web sites with appropriate listings and information about emeritus faculty in a manner similar to that for regular faculty.

We recommend that the University task HRS or another appropriate body responsibility to investigate, in conjunction with available emeritus faculty, the establishment of an Emeriti Faculty Association at Appalachian.

We recommend that the University News Bureau more actively publish stories about emeritus faculty and their past and/or present contributions to Appalachian in appropriate University publications. This will require departments to make this information available to the News Bureau. However, we also suggest that the News Bureau run stories about the annual retirement ceremonies for emeritus and retiring faculty, such as the University sponsored event recommended above.

We recommend that in all University academic convocations involving faculty processions there be a special place at the head of the faculty contingent for emeritus faculty who desire to participate. The University should also create a special flag for this contingent to be carried by one of the participating emeritus faculty.

Since the most important connections between emeritus faculty and the University will center on the University Library we recommend that at least three parking spaces be reserved for emeritus faculty either in the new parking deck or under Duncan Hall to facilitate library access.

We recommend other ways in which emeritus faculty can work with the University, such as in being directors for the University’s Appalachian House and Appalachian Loft. We welcome the initiative of Provost Aeschleman in establishing a review of this possibility. Also, we encourage the Office of International Education and Development to investigate the beneficial use of emeritus faculty in their international programs.

Some emeritus faculty would like the option of working with their departments and with the University as they pursue their scholarly or creative agendas in new phases of their lives. Indeed, in some departments this is already taking place. Therefore, we recommend that emeritus faculty be afforded franking and other electronic services (copier, fax, etc.) and mail services provided to regular faculty by departments and be able to order business cards through their department. Emeritus faculty should be allowed to keep for their use in retirement computers and other electronic equipment provided to them as regular faculty (as required by auditing policy, equipment identity will be maintained in department physical assets inventories and must be returned when retired faculty are finished with its use). Services other than those noted may be made available to emeritus faculty as a result of deliberations within departments or colleges in the University.

We recommend that emeritus faculty be able to negotiate with their department chair other privileges such as use of office, lab, or studio space, and for travel and other support necessary to carry on projects consistent with the mission of the department and the University. There is no guarantee of such privileges; but department, college, and University administrators should welcome such emeritus faculty initiatives and provide the requested services if the resources for such are feasible and are not at the expense of the requirements or needs of regular faculty and programs.

Departments should report on the professional activities of its emeritus faculty in departmental annual reports.  Emeritus faculty should not become nearly invisible to the University upon their retirement, and thus they should continue to be listed for a period of at least five years in all appropriate faculty directories, especially the University phone book (with their consent), and for the duration of their lives be listed in the General Bulletin. Emeritus faculty information should be maintained in appropriate databases such as the Banner system, so that they are included in University email services and other appropriate University information services, such as the Library.

Other privileges accorded emeritus faculty should include all those services, discounted services, and other perquisites and amenities accorded to regular faculty such as tickets to Athletic or cultural events and use of on-campus technology services for faculty electronic equipment.

We recommend that emeritus faculty may, through negotiation with and approval by their department chairs, teach courses, on or off campus, online or otherwise, in the regular and summer terms. The remuneration for these courses should be commensurate with the final salary of the emeritus faculty member at retirement, and the salary should be greater than that provided for employing adjunct faculty in similar roles. Emeritus faculty should be able to continue supervision of graduate theses and student creative projects in which they are involved when they retire; however, they may not sign the thesis or project as either chair or member of the committee. Other graduate teaching responsibilities would be contingent upon approval by the department chair and/or dean.

Finally, we recommend there should be developed one point of contact on campus through which all non-departmentally concerned services, information, and activities can be secured by retiring faculty. We recommend that this single point of contact for information and administrative location be Human Resource Services, and be available on its web site. Here, for instance, should be a full FAQ page, a checklist of what procedures to expect and what to do to prepare for completing all necessary forms for retirement, a suggested timetable for completion, and office locations with the telephone numbers of people to contact. Faculty should also find on the HRS website full and accurate information regarding Phased Retirement and the name and contact information for any specially designated University officer with responsibility for Phased Retirement (presently, this person is Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Tim Burwell).

Retired Faculty and the University         

Retired faculty, including emeritus faculty, are now eligible to enjoy a number of University amenities, not all of which may presently be recognized by retiring faculty. We believe it important that these benefits be clearly set out in one place, and we think that place should be the HRS website. In addition, we recommend that HRS (or even the Chancellor’s office) send an informational notice to presently retired faculty listing the benefits and services available to them. Such a communication to already retired faculty shows the University desires to have the best possible working relationship with them.

Presently, all retired faculty continue to use their regular faculty ID card and enjoy full library privileges, discounted season athletic tickets, free parking in all campus lots, free use of University recreational facilities, such as Mt. Mitchell, the Quinn Center, and the new recreation center, free access to use of Health Promotion and Counseling facilities and programs now provided through the Hubbard Center, and free use of all ACS services, such as equipment repair. Retired faculty may continue use of their Appalachian e-mail address for professional needs and they may enroll tuition free with permission of the instructor in courses offered by the University.

It is extremely important that the University find a way to assure continued use without interruption of the faculty identity card, since there have been many instances when, even without difficulties associated with the transition to the Banner system, emeritus and retired faculty have been dropped from the rolls. By accomplishing this, retired faculty will enjoy full and reliable access to library resources, to other email services such as the email list management page, and be able to park in gated lots that require active ID card access.

Phased Retirement at Appalachian

In order to better understand the experiences of retired faculty members at Appalachian, the committee conducted a survey of recent retirees late in the Spring Semester 2005.  Using information provided by Academic Affairs and HRS, a list was compiled of 168 faculty members who had either retired or entered phased retirement between 1997 and 2005. Each retiree was mailed a survey and responses were received from 39% (n=67) of the retirees. The survey instrument and detailed responses are appended to this report as Appendix F.

Phased retirement is supposed to offer highly experienced faculty members the opportunity to partially retire while remaining connected to the university and department. Phased retirees resign their tenured status at the university, begin drawing a retirement based upon the retirement plan chosen earlier (TSERS or ORP) and are compensated at half their pre-phased retirement salary while continuing with a reduced load during the three years of phased retirement.

In theory, a win-win situation is created. The university offers seasoned professors the opportunity to begin retirement while retaining their experience for up to three additional years while the faculty member is given the opportunity to “try out” retirement before fully severing his or her ties to the University. Indeed, a recent report to the Board of Governors stated that the overwhelming majority of phased retirees (system-wide) were happy with the program (Report to the Personnel and Tenure Committee, UNC Board of Governors, UNC Phased Retirement Program, November 10, 2005).

However, local phased retirees report significant dissatisfaction with the system.

Several key points emerged from the survey and the reader is urged to read the survey and individual responses (which is found in Appendix A):

• Faculty members entering into phased retirement reported significantly varying treatment by their Chairs and Deans as to the arrangements that were made for teaching opportunities and for travel and research support during phased retirement. A phased retiree’s relationship with the chair as well as the retirement planning acumen of the retiree seems to markedly affect how phased retirees are treated in terms of their concluding an appropriate phased retirement contract with their chair.

b. Some areas of contention identified by phased retirement faculty members include: 

1.       11.% of respondents shared an office during phased retirement

2.       20.% received travel funds to support their research whereas 80% did not

• 26% of respondents received a pay adjustment (increase) in their salaries; 74% reported they did not

• 68% taught 4 classes a year during phased retirement; whereas 32% did not.
•  

Overall, the phased retirement plan offers the potential for faculty members to be celebrated for their prior career accomplishments and their potential for service during their transition period. Nonetheless, some faculty members entering into phased retirement felt their chairs discouraged them from entering into phased retirement or expressed displeasure about the phased retirement plans of faculty because of the inability of the department to fill the faculty line with a full-time replacement. Chairs, in particular, should avoid creating the appearance of a disincentive to faculty members who choose to exercise the university system’s policies concerning phased retirement. Although the evidence is anecdotal, comments from more recent retirees indicates still varying treatment by chairs of those who have entered phased retirement since the survey was completed in summer term 2005.

Many of the retirees, both regular retirees and phased retirees, felt that more should be done to recognize faculty in transition after a productive career at Appalachian.  Suggestions were offered about discounts at the bookstore or for parking, greater recognition at the department-level, and more comprehensive advice about financial planning prior to retirement.

Faculty reported dissatisfaction with the quality of information offered by various university offices concerning phased retirement.

The Committee believes that the university’s information provided to the faculty is not as comprehensive as it could be and, on the surface, some of the available information appears to be outdated. For example, the Hubbard Center information dates to 2005. 

The Committee also believes that Appalachian would be well advised to develop and publish a Frequently Asked Questions section as part of its Phased Retirement information as does the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Faculty members will benefit from reading the questions asked by other potential retirees but do not  know of the questions or of the university’s answer to those questions.

The following are some of the responses to the question, How could information be improved concerning phased retirement?

I was treated poorly, like a leper, by director of department

UNC-GA web info contradicted ASU info.  Associate Provost had different info than HR; dept chair and dean not up to date

Should be eligible for pay raise and to teach summer school but told no $

                          I was given incorrect info on SS and Medicare

The following are illustrative of the responses to the question concerning AThings I wish I knew then but know now

Plan for rise in health care insurance for your significant other

I was informed adequately by someone in personnel

ASU info must be current; dept, chairs treat faculty different; need consistency; HR overworked

Had all the info I needed

Re salary adjustments, there is discrepancy between what is said and what happens

Once in PR, I felt regarded as an adjunct rather than a sr. professor--tacit age discrimination.

Faculty who retired more recently apparently received increases in their phased retirement stipends (not the retirement payment from whichever retirement system the member belongs to but rather the payment from Appalachian for teaching and other services rendered during phased retirement) that was not afforded earlier phased retirees. 

In this regard, and subsequent to completing the survey, the Committee heard from phased retirees that no formal notice was afforded to them concerning the salary adjustment for phased retirees and faculty learned of it when they noted a change in their monthly payroll check from the university. The Committee believes that the impersonality of this situation is symptomatic of a larger disconnect between the University and its phased retirees.

The Committee recommends that colleges include in their salary metrics used by department chairs to recommend salaries for their faculty an identifying section for phased retirement faculty who might be eligible for merit raises. There is now no such identifying part to remind that phased retirement faculty may be considered for merit pay.

The Committee also believes that it would be beneficial to the faculty as a whole if HRS would publish a series of questions that each faculty member should review prior to making retirement decisions. Qualified professional retirement planners should be asked to compile such a list of questions and the list should be published as part of the retirement information page maintained by HRS. Additionally, the questions should be reviewed during pre-retirement briefings offered by the University. It might be helpful if these questions were integrated into the FAQ recommendation above.

Len Johnson, Director of Human Resources and a member of the committee, has reported that, subsequent to the survey=s completion, HRS has improved the amount and quality of pre-retirement planning information available to faculty (see below).

HRS Services for Retirement and Retired Faculty

In April, 2005 Dr. Michael Moore convened an ad hoc committee of the Faculty Senate to study all aspects of faculty retirement, including improving the planning process and seeking new ways of recognizing the contributions of faculty emeriti.

Foremost on the agenda was the subject of a regular and comprehensive approach to faculty retirement planning. In the past, faculty sought information from colleagues, chairs, financial institutions, friends, family, the internet, and other sources as appropriate.  The result was a time-consuming, patchwork approach to planning that was sub-optimal and frustrating. 

With the addition of an experienced trainer to Human Resource Services, planning began to create a more orderly and effective approach to retirement planning. Discussions were held with several Optional Retirement System (ORP) vendors all of whom offered to help with seminars, presentations, and non-sales oriented advice.

During 2006, general workshops were held on the subject of financial planning, using faculty from the Walker College of Business. These sessions were open to the entire university but, on average, only 3 faculty members were in attendance at each session. 

After reviewing pre-retirement programs in place at other universities, HRS presented a comprehensive list of topics to the Committee for comment. The objective was to provide a consistent source for a more in-depth look at retirement topics and an opportunity where related information could be integrated in a meaningful way.  

The following were confirmed by the committee as being the most relevant subjects for retirement planning:

·Financial planning

-TSERS or ORP retirement assets

-Asset allocation and diversification

-Payout options

-Additional tax sheltered annuity options, particularly 403b and 401(k) investment choices

·Social Security

-SS Retirement income

-Post-retirement earnings limits

·Lifestyle adjustments

·Health concerns

·Phased Retirement

·Social, personal and psychological factors related to retirement

·State Health Insurance and Medicare

·Legal and Estate planning

The Pre-Retirement Planning curriculum (summary below) was then created, resource notebooks reproduced, and qualified experts recruited to present each topic at no charge to the University.  Participants developed a personalized action plan for retirement in the following areas

·Financial planning

·Health and aging

·Housing options

·Social adjustment

·Personal issues

The program was announced via the faculty and staff listservs and email reminders were sent. Announcements were also made at the Faculty Senate and the Staff Council.  The workshops were scheduled for the fall semester 2006 on Friday afternoons to avoid potential teaching conflicts. Despite the publicity, attendance was very low ranging between 2 and 12 participants.  

Retirement planning is clearly an important subject and programs such as this are considered to be a valuable benefit. Consequently, we would ask for assistance from all sources to effectively promote the next series in 2007. Examples:

·Recommendations and announcements from the Faculty Welfare and Morale Committee and the University Benefits Committee.

·Support from the Faculty Senate

·Support from the Deans’ Council and the Council of Chairs

·Letter to the faculty from the Provost

Issues still in progress:

·Designations for retirees and faculty emeriti retirees have been requested in the Banner database. The appropriate coding at employment termination would facilitate communication with faculty retirees. Similarly, it facilitates the transfer of information to other subsystems such as the Library to ensure that privileges are continued. 

·Consideration needs to be given as to how best to honor faculty emeriti who have died in a given period of time.  For example, it may be appropriate to publish their names in connection with the annual Retirees’ Luncheon.

RETIREMENT PLANNING SYLLABUS

Respectfully submitted,

Michael Moore, Chair

Terry Cole

Marvin Hoffman

Len Johnson

Susan Keefe

Harold McKinney

Appendix A

ASU Faculty Senate

Results of a Survey of Recent Retirees

A mail survey with postage paid return was sent to 168 recently (1997-2005) retirees. We received returns from 67 persons (return rate=39%).  Somewhat anomalously, three respondents were from outside the targeted retirement years.  Appendix F is the actual survey that was used.  Of those who replied, 27 persons indicated they had chosen to participate in Phased Retirement; the remaining 40 respondents were traditional retirees.

Findings:

• A variety of factors were cited as influencing the respondents one way or the other concerning phased retirement.  (See Appendix B)

• Respondents varied in their reports about the adequacy of information given them when they were planning to retire.  On a 1-5 scale, ranging from 1=poor to 5=excellent, respondents reported:

• Not all sources of information were seen as equally helpful to prospective retirees.   On this question, 1=Very Poor, 2= Poor, 3=Marginal, 4=Good and 5=Excellent.

• Not all of the respondents reported being treated the same way during phased retirement.  Here are the responses to a variety of questions:

                                                                                                                              Yes           No

Had Office during Phased                                                         26               1

Shared an Office during Phased                                               3              23

Had a Telephone during Phased                                            27            

Had Access to University Fax                                                                   26              

Served on Department Committees                                                        6              21

Served on College Committees                                                 3              24

Served on University Committees                                            4              23

Received a Reduced Load for Research                              3              22

Received Travel Funds to Support Research                       5              19

Had Help of GA or Work Study                                             11             14

Continue to have ASU Computer                                          25               1

Have Use of ASU Laptop                                                            5              19

Encountered Problems w Computer Account                                      4              22

Received Tech Assistance for Comp Problems               25               1

Encountered Problems Using Library                                                    27

Received Pay Adjustments during Phased                           7              19

Received Travel for Conference Presentations                 9              15

Received Support for Page Fees                                               3              12

Taught Four Courses during Phased                                                      17               8

Taught Both Fall and Spring                                                                     12             15

Taught the Courses You Preferred                                         24               3

Taught in Summer School                                                           3              22

Taught an Off-Campus Course                                                3              23

Received Supplement for Teaching Off Campus             2              14

• Respondents offered a variety of suggestions about improving the information flow about retirement and phased retirement. (See Appendix C).

• Respondents offered comments on things they wished they knew then but know now.  (Appendix D).

• Respondents offered suggestions about when and how to recognize retirees.  (Appendix E)

• Respondents were both recent retirees and those who retired earlier.

                                                             Year Retired or Entered Phased Retirement

                                     Year Retired or Entered Phased Retirement

• Respondents came from all colleges.
•  

                              College/Unit Respondent Retired From

                                                            College/Unit Respondent Retired From

                                                                                          Appendix B

What factors influenced your choice whether or not to enter Phased Retirement?

Circumstances were such that I wanted out, now                                                                         

Did not want to leave as part time faculty                                                                                      

Did not want to do same job at half pay                                                                                        

I knew nothing about it                                                                                                         

My age (57)                                                                                                                    

Talked with other faculty members                                                                                               

No Answer                                                                                                                      

Ready to leave ASU                                                                                                              

Spouse retired and I wanted to move to FL                                                                                      

No Answer                                                                                                                       

Age, dept conditions. & Phased Retirement Plan                                                                                 

Devote time to civic work                                                                                                       

Ready for Full Time Retirement                                                                                                 

PR not beneficial for student health service                                                                                    

Hostility from dept faculty & "Femi-Nazis"                                                                                    

No Answer                                                                                                                       

Ready, after 37 years of teaching                                                                                               

No Answer                                                                                                                       

PR is a great way to make transition                                                                                                   

Got a new job                                                                                                                   

Retirement income assured, more time for other pursuits, outside income                                                        

PR did not exist when I retired                                                                                                

Had other issues to consider, phased would have interfered                                                                     

Taking new position in Ohio                                                                                                     

Wanted to be somewhere else; went overseas for 2 yrs                                                                           

PR not an option for me                                                                                                            

Time in service                                                                                                                

Didn’t want to phase out                                                                                                       

Felt PR decreased focus on teaching                                                                                            

Changes in university, weather, years of service                                                                               

Family reasons                                                                                                                 

Liked PR concept; chair easy to work with                                                                                      

Liked phasing out of a lifelong career rather then abrupt stop                                                                

No Answer                                                                                                                       

As an administrator I did not want to hang around.                                                                              

Wanted to work did not see benefit in TIAA                                                                                     

Did not wish to remain associated with the dept.                                                                               

Was the right time                                                                                                             

PR not fair to dept because dept cannot hire new faculty, not very phased; pressured to attend department meetings                                        

It was a good time to quit                                                                                                     

No Answer                                                                                                                       

Not tenured                                                                                                                    

To ease into retirement; minimize economic shock                                                                                

It was time                                                                                                                    

PR program sounded good                                                                                                         

Liked having free time and could still teach                                                                                   

Love to teach                                                                                                                   

I did not want to work full time for half time pay nor did I want a closet office                                              

Desire to enter retirement gradually                                                                                            

Worn out - PR still full time basically; More work in one semester; difficult for Chair                                         

Financial evaluation good; Personal performance; neg feeling to ASU for faculty treatment                                      

Waiting for my wife to retire                                                                                                  

Transitional opportunities                                                                                                      

I was not teaching faculty                                                                                                           

No Answer                                                                                                                       

Medical problem                                                                                                                

No Answer                                                                                                                       

My age                                                                                                                        

Not offered the option                                                                                                          

Not offered, also wanted to retire early                                                                                       

Allowed making some investment $                                                                                               

More free time; gradual transition                                                                                             

PR a lot of work for low wage, wanted time for research, would reduce dept teaching staff                                      

Wanted gradual retirement                                                                                                      

My health and I desired less work load and still do something I love                                                           

It was time to stop; did not like TIAA/CREF drawdown of own $ not the state's                                                    

PR is a sorry deal that favored the administration.  

                                                                                          Appendix C

How could information be improved concerning phased retirement?

I was treated poorly, "like a leper", by director of department                    

UNC-GA web info contradicted ASU info.  Associate Provost had different info than HR; dept chair and dean not up to date                 

I felt we became person non grata                      

Should be eligible for pay raise and to teach summer school but told no $                                      

No discussion about social security

I do not see it as ASU'S job to go over SS benefits with retirees                                                                           

It has been tough getting raises in Yrs 2 & 3                                                                                  

            No one had answers or the answers kept changing                                                                                 

Mrs. Foster was helpful; everyone else did not have a lot of answers                                                                                                                                               

I was given incorrect info on SS and Medicare                                                                                                                     

Nothing                                                                                                                     

Was given no info about SS                                                                            

There should have been a general meeting with info; chair did not support PR        

Appendix D

Things I wish I knew then but know now

I was prepared       

Plan for rise in health care insurance for your significant other                                           

Just retired and don't know yet     

Learn how to change med benefits under state plan over to retiree status                                     

Needed seminars in financial planning; I had to pay for any advice I received                                       

There were disadvantages of retirement; PR allowed me remain active in academic community     

Brand new retiree; no response      

I was informed adequately by someone in personnel                                                                 

ASU info must be current; dept. chairs treat faculty different; need consistency; HR overworked     

Retire as early as practical to gain access to $; avoid faculty meetings and committees           

I wish there was an annual booklet highlighting activities of phased retirees                                              

People should determine their needs; ASU could offer financial planning                                

Suggest one stop not multiple offices to get info    

I would have retired sooner!      

Need more data from HR on insurance options                                                                 

            Had all the info I needed          

No problems, I began early; got needed info                                                                  

Nancy Foster in HR was a big help  

           You must be psychologically ready for retirement; need activities                                     

Form support group for phased retirees     

A packet with all info rather then bouncing around to find out everything.                              

Had all the info I needed  

Give more info about salary raises during years 2 and 3                                                                                                                            

Had all needed info         

Had all the info I needed  

Re salary adjustments, there is discrepancy between what is said and what happens.       

Have one person sit down with a faculty member who can explain all benefits                            

Nothing              

I was confused about options available for dental and eye coverage                                    

Once in PR, I felt regarded as an adjunct rather than a sr. professor - tacit age discrimination             

None            

Consider extending contract for more than three years                                                  

Give more info on deadlines; Medicare A& B apply during phasing &before & after 65                          

Be sure to have your needs put in writing                                                                      

More info from ASU on Optional Retirement Plans                                                         

More info on teaching options, course selection, additional compensation                                            

Be more clear about SS & Medicare options; know more accurately how much you will get from retirement fund                                                                                                          

Nothing   

PR was perfect for me   

Keep working as long as you are able, get your house paid for.

                  No complaints

More Estate Planning

Did not receive info on making Blue Cross secondary when I received Medicare                           

Most was learned by word of mouth not from personnel office                                             

Doesn't cost as much as you think to live here                                                              

I wish I could have known what the stock market would do.                                              

PR would have been big mistake.  By retiring fully, I was replaced by competent qualified faculty member rather than adjunct.

Diversify both your portfolio and personal interests; volunteer and travel                              

                                                                                          Appendix E

Suggestions about how and when to honor retirees                                                                                                                                                      

Give retirees support for research, writing and travel; could finally do the work missed during f/t teaching

BOG luncheon is good!  Recognize retirees at last graduation ceremony; Dept dinner

Recognition should be given before phased retirement begins                                             

Recognize close to Midterm of last semester

Recognize when the phased retirement is completed                                                       

Every time they make a contribution

No recognition was ever forthcoming from my department                                                 

Confusing when ASU recognizes-- luncheon or commencement; full retirement or phased

Annual booklet of activates of each person to be published and distributed                             

At dept. graduation celebration                                                                                    

Funding should be made available for phased faculty, seems phased faculty are out of the loop

Honor at end of phased, entry into full

At end of phased, I didn’t consider myself retired and everyone else did                                

Consider them retired when they start PR

There are broader questions to be asked regarding retirement and emeritus status                       

Don't recognize

Print article in paper at end of year about retiring faculty members                                   

Recognition at end of PR, beginning of emeritus status                                                  

Decision about recognition should be made between faculty member and ASU                               

PR not a benefit to dept or students Should have a list of everything available to retired faculty

PR's should be treated with respect

Pay adjustments

Should be eligible for raises all 3 years, encourage PRs  to be a part of service/scholarship activity

Recognize throughout by providing teaching needs, give appropriate salary raises and tapping into expertise

Usual retirement action

Spring of retirement, end of phased retirement

Year preceding retirement

Allow retiree full access to facilities on campus free of charge                                          

Include retired faculty in spring lunch

At annual university dinner/lunch in spring

Ask each person when is best for them

Your recognition should come from within                                                               

Have parties on reunion weekend part of football half time - make everyone emeritus                                                  

Appendix F

Appalachian State University Faculty Senate

Survey of Recent Retirees

• As a recent retiree, did you choose to enter the Phased Retirement Program at Appalachian?
• Yes
• No

What factors influenced your choice one way or the other?

• Recalling back to when you decided whether to enter the Phased Retirement program, please rate on a scale of 1=very poor, 2=poor, 3=marginal, 4=good and 5=excellent how adequate the information was that you were given by Appalachian in helping you to evaluate your options about phased retirement.

• Concerning your expected earnings during phased retirement?
• Concerning your retirement benefits?
• Concerning your teaching options during retirement?
• Concerning your non-teaching duties during phased retirement?
• Concerning how to learn about your Social Security benefits?

For areas rated less than “good” please describe what was lacking and how this information could be improved: 

• While on phased retirement, did you:
• Keep your university office?                                                            Yes        No         NA
• Share an office with someone else?                                                Yes        No         NA
• Have an office telephone?                                                                Yes        No         NA
• Have access to a university fax?                                                     Yes        No         NA
• Serve on Department Committees?                                                Yes        No         NA
• Serve on College Committees?                                                       Yes        No         NA
• Serve on University Committees?                                                  Yes        No         NA
• Receive a reduced load for your research?                                   Yes        No         NA
• Receive travel funds to support your research?                          Yes        No         NA
• Receive help from a work study or graduate assistant?           Yes        No         NA
• Continue to have an ASU office computer?                                Yes        No         NA
• Have use of an ASU laptop?                                                            Yes        No         NA
• Encounter problems keeping your computer account?             Yes        No         NA
• Receive technical assistance for your computer problems?      Yes        No         NA
• Encounter problems using our library?                                         Yes        No         NA
• Receive pay adjustments in your phased retirement salary?     Yes        No         NA
• Receive travel funds for conference presentations?                   Yes        No         NA
• Receive support for page fees charged by journals?                   Yes        No         NA
• Teach four courses while on phased retirement?                        Yes        No         NA
• Teach both Fall and Spring?                                                             Yes        No         NA

• Teach the courses you preferred?                                                   Yes        No         NA
• Teach in summer school?                                                                  Yes        No
•                   NA
• Teach an off-campus course?                                                            Yes        No         NA
• Receive a supplemental stipend for teaching off-campus?       Yes        No         NA
• Find the gradual transition to full retirement beneficial           Yes        No         NA

• How helpful was each of the following in furnishing you with information about your retirement options?  Use a scale of 1=Very Poor, 2= Poor, 3=Marginal, 4=Good and 5=Excellent.  Use a 9 if you did not contact a particular office, position or source of information.

• Your Department Chair
• Your Dean
• Academic Affairs
• Human Resources
• The State Health Plan Office
• The State Retirement System Office
• Social Security Office (or online system resources)
• The Optional Retirement Plan (TIAA, VALIC, Lincoln National, Fidelity)
• Colleagues who recently retired
• Financial planning magazines

• If you knew then, what you know now, what information do you wish had been available for someone planning his or her retirement?

• Do you have any suggestions concerning how and when retirees and participants in the phased retirement program should be recognized for their contributions to Appalachian?
•  
• In which year did you either retire or enter phased retirement? ____________

• In which college were you a faculty member?  ________________________

An addressed envelope is enclosed for your reply.  Thank you for your time and be assured that your information will be of use to your colleagues.

                                                                        Other Bibliography

The University of North Carolina Survey of Senior Faculty

http://www.ncarts.edu/institutionalresearch/SrOverview.pdf

2004 Faculty Age Study, IRAP website

Report to the Personnel and Tenure Committee, UNC Board of Governors, UNC Phased Retirement Program, November 10, 2005 found at http://intranet.northcarolina.edu/docs/aa/departments/faculty_support/BOG_PRP_Report_11-10-05.pdf, December 13, 2006

Report of the Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Retirement

January 8, 2007

This committee was authorized by the Faculty Senate in February 2005 with the charge to assess the relationship of retired faculty and the University and to recommend policies and practices pertaining to faculty retirement and the emeritus rank. The members of the committee are Professor Michael Moore (HIST) chair, Professor Terry Cole (COM), Professor Marvin Hoffman (PS/CJ), Mr. Len Johnson (HRS), Professor Susan Keefe (ANT), and Professor Harold McKinney (MUS).

Introduction

Appalachian’s present demographic trends show that for some time to come there will be in any given year about 200 faculty members aged 55 or older. All of these people will retire, go into phased retirement, or be concerned about retirement. There is a growing need for clear, accessible information and resources not only among faculty members who have retired, are retiring or are approaching retirement, but also for faculty who should be making longer term plans for retirement.

After hearing from some retired, emeritus faculty that, to quote one, by “simply conferring honorific titles to retirees the University is short-changing itself and the retirees and needs to tap into the wealth of wisdom, talent, and resources of its faculty emeriti”, the committee felt the University should make more information and resources available to retired and emeriti faculty, to encourage their greater involvement in University academic and other activities, and to build stronger support for this part of the University’s community. At the same time, this committee has discovered over the period of its sitting, that many useful services presently are offered to retired faculty and that others have been offered by the University administration partly in response to this committee’s inquiries.

We have found that many retirees have not known of all the services the University makes available to them. Whether this has resulted from inadequately available information or a faculty member=s not being in a position to ask is almost immaterial. There is a need for improved statement of University policy regarding retirement and about the retiree=s continuing relationship with the University.

However, our committee also has become concerned over repeated reports of retired or emeritus faculty not feeling adequately involved in the University, or even feeling rejected by their department, department chair, and/or the University, by implication at least.

Similarly, this committee began its work with numerous reports of inconsistent information and treatment of faculty choosing phased retirement. There were complaints that phased retirement faculty were merely being used as classroom canon-fodder to hold down student numbers for regular faculty without regard to the phased faculty member=s professional load at the time of entering phased retirement. There were complaints that merit rises in salary after the first year were not forthcoming, and some concern that employment terms were not at all similar for phased faculty. Although our study confirms some of these criticisms, the phased retirement program seems to have now a more flexible structure for establishing workloads for phased retirement faculty that mimic those in effect when they were in regular faculty status. Nonetheless, there is more that can be done to cement the profitable mutual interests of the University and its faculty in phased retirement.

Our investigations have revealed that there is strong interest by all parties (faculty and administration) in providing for and clarifying the relationship of the University and its emeritus faculty. We have found that emeritus faculty do now enjoy nearly all the privileges accorded regular faculty, with some additional benefits such as free use of recreational facilities. Not surprisingly, various units at Appalachian have made local, on-the-spot decisions about emeritus faculty use of their services in departments and ancillary areas such as Academic Computing Services. This is laudable and we hope it continues. But, there continues to be a need for making these services better known to all faculty members planning retirement and in retirement.

It appears that in future there may be more faculty retiring and staying in the Watauga area, some year-round, than has been the case in the past. For them to maintain healthy mental and physical lives is not only a concern for the retirees, it should also be a concern of the University, which has benefited from their committed service over a long period of time. Many retired faculty will continue their scholarly and intellectual agendas and want to be active in the University and larger community. The word Aretirement,@ which derives originally from the Old French Aretyrer,@ meaning to go into seclusion, no longer has meaning that describes Appalachian faculty retirees.

The committee surveyed resources and services presently available at Appalachian to retired and emeritus faculty, reviewed the purpose and scope of the emeritus designation at Appalachian, conducted a survey of retired faculty concerning their retirement experience and their experience of the phased retirement program, if applicable, and researched retirement and emeritus polices and practices at peer institutions and a cross-section of other universities.

Despite there being existing practices that provide diverse benefits to retired faculty, we believe that there has been notably insufficient recognition of retiring faculty at Appalachian, which weakens the valuable synergy of our academic community that is sustained by faculty of all ages and intellectual interests. Since more retired faculty are staying in a physically closer relationship to the University, it is in the University=s and the faculty member=s interest to provide as much support as possible for the life of the mind and for that to be open to continuous exercise at our University.

In this regard, whenever the University considers housing options to help address costs-of-living concerns for faculty and graduate students, we encourage University planners to include the possibility of retired faculty being a part of any new housing options. This would be an ideal place to establish the full aspects of an intellectual and corporeal community committed to Appalachian.

It is important to note that, if this report is accepted, much of its success will depend on department chairs and deans finding ways in which to implement procedures that will build a closer and more meaningful inclusion of emeritus faculty into the University. Of course, much also depends on emeritus faculty who desire greater connection to their departments and the University to suggest ways in which they would like to participate.

This report contains five sections: review and recommendations regarding the emeritus rank; recommendations for improving the relationship of all retired faculty and the University; review and recommendations regarding the phased retirement program; Human Resource Services review and report on financial planning; appendices.

The Emeritus Rank

After surveying emeritus policies at our peer and other institutions, we conclude that by far the most common practice is for the rank to be automatically granted upon full retirement from the university. At those few universities where the rank is conferred after review by personnel bodies, it always brings guarantees of resources and support for emeritus faculty nearly equal to those for regular faculty. At Appalachian, concerns expressed by faculty and committee members= own conclusions highlighted issues with the present process of voluntary initiative for seeking the emeritus rank. Faculty members who have given significant service to Appalachian and with other distinctive achievements in their careers here have not applied for the rank for a variety of reasons. Other faculty members have seen the process of application as a pro forma exercise that does not result in any clear-cut distinction for a potential emeritus retiree. The purpose of the emeritus rank is to celebrate and thereby mark a significant change of status in one=s career and one=s relationship to Appalachian following lengthy service in which one=s achievements and contributions already have been recognized by colleagues through the promotion process. It should also mean that the emeritus faculty member remains a part of the University, exercising his or her own control over the degree to which he or she might exercise the opportunities and privileges available to emeritus faculty.

We recommend that the emeritus rank should become automatic for a retiring faculty member holding the rank of Full Professor and having at least ten years of continuous service at Appalachian. The emeritus faculty designation should be accompanied by a letter of commendation from the Chancellor upon official notice of the faculty member=s full retirement from the University, i.e. at the end of any phased retirement service period or upon immediate, full retirement.

The emeritus designation should also be available to those faculty members in other ranks, including Lecturer, who have at least ten years of continuous service to Appalachian. For these ranks the application for the emeritus designation may be initiated by either the faculty member or by his or her department chair or dean.  A review of the faculty member=s record of achievement and contribution should be made by an appropriate departmental DPC with a recommendation for approval or non-approval as provided for other personnel decisions.  A positive DPC recommendation would require additional approval by those responsible for personnel decisions and recommendations, the department chair, dean, provost, chancellor, and trustees.

We recommend that there should be increased recognition of the emeritus distinction at Appalachian, in addition or as a supplement to the collection of biographies ably compiled and edited by Richard Howe (The Appalachian Faculty Emeriti, 6th ed., 2004). We have sought a public place on campus in which to make a permanent record of faculty accorded emeritus status. We have been in contact with Mary Reichel, University Librarian, and suggest with her blessing, that the wall outside the Faculty lounge/reading room on the second floor of Belk Library become a place where a permanent display of an emeritus faculty=s name, department, dates of service at Appalachian, and notation of other distinctive Appalachian/UNC awards earned by the faculty member be placed on a small plaque and become part of the display. The display should begin initially with plaques for those faculty members who have already received the emeritus rank (about 275) and be annually updated. This display should not become the responsibility of Library personnel or be funded or maintained by the Library. We recommend that its design and maintenance should be the responsibility of Academic Affairs and/or the Chancellors office in concert with Business Affairs.

Further, we recommend that the University create a special medallion for emeritus faculty with a ribbon in the University=s colors that can be worn at academic functions such as commencements or can otherwise be displayed on an appropriate base, for instance, in one=s home. This medallion would be presented to the emeritus faculty member at a ceremony such as a distinctive annual luncheon or dinner, hosted by the University wherein the achievements of retiring emeritus faculty may be publicly recognized.

We also strongly encourage departments and/or colleges to consider establishing a permanent recognition for emeritus faculty within their communities and to provide other distinctive functions appropriate to this significant transition. Also, emeritus faculty should, for instance, be included in invitations to department and college functions and their achievements and other life changes be recognized along with those of regular faculty.

We recommend that departments and colleges maintain email lists that include emeritus and retired faculty to use for announcement of events and other information that are not part of the diurnal communications about department business.  For instance, if a colleague is retiring, other retired colleagues should be informed. Further, we suggest that departments and/or colleges update regularly their web sites with appropriate listings and information about emeritus faculty in a manner similar to that for regular faculty.

We recommend that the University task HRS or another appropriate body responsibility to investigate, in conjunction with available emeritus faculty, the establishment of an Emeriti Faculty Association at Appalachian.

We recommend that the University News Bureau more actively publish stories about emeritus faculty and their past and/or present contributions to Appalachian in appropriate University publications. This will require departments to make this information available to the News Bureau. However, we also suggest that the News Bureau run stories about the annual retirement ceremonies for emeritus and retiring faculty, such as the University sponsored event recommended above.

We recommend that in all University academic convocations involving faculty processions there be a special place at the head of the faculty contingent for emeritus faculty who desire to participate. The University should also create a special flag for this contingent to be carried by one of the participating emeritus faculty.

Since the most important connections between emeritus faculty and the University will center on the University Library we recommend that at least three parking spaces be reserved for emeritus faculty either in the new parking deck or under Duncan Hall to facilitate library access.

We recommend other ways in which emeritus faculty can work with the University, such as in being directors for the University=s Appalachian House and Appalachian Loft. We welcome the initiative of Provost Aeschleman in establishing a review of this possibility. Also, we encourage the Office of International Education and Development to investigate the beneficial use of emeritus faculty in their international programs.

Some emeritus faculty would like the option of working with their departments and with the University as they pursue their scholarly or creative agendas in new phases of their lives. Indeed, in some departments this is already taking place. Therefore, we recommend that emeritus faculty be afforded franking and other electronic services (copier, fax, etc.) and mail services provided to regular faculty by departments and be able to order business cards through their department. Emeritus faculty should be allowed to keep for their use in retirement computers and other electronic equipment provided to them as regular faculty (as required by auditing policy, equipment identity will be maintained in department physical assets inventories and must be returned when retired faculty are finished with its use). Services other than those noted may be made available to emeritus faculty as a result of deliberations within departments or colleges in the University.

We recommend that emeritus faculty be able to negotiate with their department chair other privileges such as use of office, lab, or studio space, and for travel and other support necessary to carry on projects consistent with the mission of the department and the University. There is no guarantee of such privileges; but department, college, and University administrators should welcome such emeritus faculty initiatives and provide the requested services if the resources for such are feasible and are not at the expense of the requirements or needs of regular faculty and programs.

Departments should report on the professional activities of its emeritus faculty in departmental annual reports.  Emeritus faculty should not become nearly invisible to the University upon their retirement, and thus they should continue to be listed for a period of at least five years in all appropriate faculty directories, especially the University phone book (with their consent), and for the duration of their lives be listed in the General Bulletin. Emeritus faculty information should be maintained in appropriate databases such as the Banner system, so that they are included in University email services and other appropriate University information services, such as the Library.

Other privileges accorded emeritus faculty should include all those services, discounted services, and other perquisites and amenities accorded to regular faculty such as tickets to Athletic or cultural events and use of on-campus technology services for faculty electronic equipment.

We recommend that emeritus faculty may, through negotiation with and approval by their department chairs, teach courses, on or off campus, online or otherwise, in the regular and summer terms. The remuneration for these courses should be commensurate with the final salary of the emeritus faculty member at retirement, and the salary should be greater than that provided for employing adjunct faculty in similar roles. Emeritus faculty should be able to continue supervision of graduate theses and student creative projects in which they are involved when they retire; however, they may not sign the thesis or project as either chair or member of the committee. Other graduate teaching responsibilities would be contingent upon approval by the department chair and/or dean.

Finally, we recommend there should be developed one point of contact on campus through which all non-departmentally concerned services, information, and activities can be secured by retiring faculty. We recommend that this single point of contact for information and administrative location be Human Resource Services, and be available on its web site. Here, for instance, should be a full FAQ page, a checklist of what procedures to expect and what to do to prepare for completing all necessary forms for retirement, a suggested timetable for completion, and office locations with the telephone numbers of people to contact. Faculty should also find on the HRS website full and accurate information regarding Phased Retirement and the name and contact information for any specially designated University officer with responsibility for Phased Retirement (presently, this person is Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Tim Burwell).

Retired Faculty and the University         

Retired faculty, including emeritus faculty, are now eligible to enjoy a number of University amenities, not all of which may presently be recognized by retiring faculty. We believe it important that these benefits be clearly set out in one place, and we think that place should be the HRS website. In addition, we recommend that HRS (or even the Chancellor=s office) send an informational notice to presently retired faculty listing the benefits and services available to them. Such a communication to already retired faculty shows the University desires to have the best possible working relationship with them.

Presently, all retired faculty continue to use their regular faculty ID card and enjoy full library privileges, discounted season athletic tickets, free parking in all campus lots, free use of University recreational facilities, such as Mt. Mitchell, the Quinn Center, and the new recreation center, free access to use of Health Promotion and Counseling facilities and programs now provided through the Hubbard Center, and free use of all ACS services, such as equipment repair. Retired faculty may continue use of their Appalachian e-mail address for professional needs and they may enroll tuition free with permission of the instructor in courses offered by the University.

It is extremely important that the University find a way to assure continued use without interruption of the faculty identity card, since there have been many instances when, even without difficulties associated with the transition to the Banner system, emeritus and retired faculty have been Adropped@ from the rolls. By accomplishing this, retired faculty will enjoy full and reliable access to library resources, to other email services such as the email list management page, and be able to park in gated lots that require active ID card access.

Phased Retirement at Appalachian

In order to better understand the experiences of retired faculty members at Appalachian, the committee conducted a survey of recent retirees late in the Spring Semester 2005.  Using information provided by Academic Affairs and HRS, a list was compiled of 168 faculty members who had either retired or entered phased retirement between 1997 and 2005. Each retiree was mailed a survey and responses were received from 39% (n=67) of the retirees. The survey instrument and detailed responses are appended to this report as Appendix F.

Phased retirement is supposed to offer highly experienced faculty members the opportunity to partially retire while remaining connected to the university and department. Phased retirees resign their tenured status at the university, begin drawing a retirement based upon the retirement plan chosen earlier (TSERS or ORP) and are compensated at half their pre-phased retirement salary while continuing with a reduced load during the three years of phased retirement.

In theory, a win-win situation is created. The university offers seasoned professors the opportunity to begin retirement while retaining their experience for up to three additional years while the faculty member is given the opportunity to “try out” retirement before fully severing his or her ties to the University. Indeed, a recent report to the Board of Governors stated that the overwhelming majority of phased retirees (system-wide) were happy with the program (Report to the Personnel and Tenure Committee, UNC Board of Governors, UNC Phased Retirement Program, November 10, 2005).

However, local phased retirees report significant dissatisfaction with the system.

Several key points emerged from the survey and the reader is urged to read the survey and individual responses (which is found in Appendix A):

• Faculty members entering into phased retirement reported significantly varying treatment by their Chairs and Deans as to the arrangements that were made for teaching opportunities and for travel and research support during phased retirement. A phased retiree=s relationship with the chair as well as the retirement planning acumen of the retiree seems to markedly affect how phased retirees are treated in terms of their concluding an appropriate phased retirement contract with their chair.

b. Some areas of contention identified by phased retirement faculty members include: 

1.       11.% of respondents shared an office during phased retirement

2.       20.% received travel funds to support their research whereas 80% did not

• 26% of respondents received a pay adjustment (increase) in their salaries; 74% reported they did not

• 68% taught 4 classes a year during phased retirement; whereas 32% did not.
•  

Overall, the phased retirement plan offers the potential for faculty members to be celebrated for their prior career accomplishments and their potential for service during their transition period. Nonetheless, some faculty members entering into phased retirement felt their chairs discouraged them from entering into phased retirement or expressed displeasure about the phased retirement plans of faculty because of the inability of the department to fill the faculty line with a full-time replacement. Chairs, in particular, should avoid creating the appearance of a disincentive to faculty members who choose to exercise the university system=s policies concerning phased retirement. Although the evidence is anecdotal, comments from more recent retirees indicates still varying treatment by chairs of those who have entered phased retirement since the survey was completed in summer term 2005.

Many of the retirees, both regular retirees and phased retirees, felt that more should be done to recognize faculty in transition after a productive career at Appalachian.  Suggestions were offered about discounts at the bookstore or for parking, greater recognition at the department-level, and more comprehensive advice about financial planning prior to retirement.

Faculty reported dissatisfaction with the quality of information offered by various university offices concerning phased retirement.

The Committee believes that the university=s information provided to the faculty is not as comprehensive as it could be and, on the surface, some of the available information appears to be outdated. For example, the Hubbard Center information dates to 2005. 

The Committee also believes that Appalachian would be well advised to develop and publish a Frequently Asked Questions section as part of its Phased Retirement information as does the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Faculty members will benefit from reading the questions asked by other potential retirees but do not now know of the questions or of the university=s answer to those questions.

The following are some of the responses to the question, AHow could information be improved concerning phased retirement?@

AI was treated poorly, Alike a leper@, by director of department@

AUNC-GA web info contradicted ASU info.  Associate Provost had different info than HR; dept chair and dean not up to date@

AShould be eligible for pay raise and to teach summer school but told no $@

                          AI was given incorrect info on SS and Medicare@

The following are illustrative of the responses to the question concerning AThings I wish I knew then but know now@

APlan for rise in health care insurance for your significant other@

AI was informed adequately by someone in personnel@

AASU info must be current; dept, chairs treat faculty different; need consistency; HR overworked@

AHad all the info I needed@

ARe salary adjustments, there is discrepancy between what is said and what happens@

AOnce in PR, I felt regarded as an adjunct rather than a sr. professor--tacit age discrimination.@

Faculty who retired more recently apparently received increases in their phased retirement stipends (not the retirement payment from whichever retirement system the member belongs to but rather the payment from Appalachian for teaching and other services rendered during phased retirement) that was not afforded earlier phased retirees. 

In this regard, and subsequent to completing the survey, the Committee heard from phased retirees that no formal notice was afforded to them concerning the salary adjustment for phased retirees and faculty learned of it when they noted a change in their monthly payroll check from the university. The Committee believes that the impersonality of this situation is symptomatic of a larger disconnect between the University and its phased retirees.

The Committee recommends that colleges include in their salary metrics used by department chairs to recommend salaries for their faculty an identifying section for phased retirement faculty who might be eligible for merit raises. There is now no such identifying part to remind that phased retirement faculty may be considered for merit pay.

The Committee also believes that it would be beneficial to the faculty as a whole if HRS would publish a series of questions that each faculty member should review prior to making retirement decisions. Qualified professional retirement planners should be asked to compile such a list of questions and the list should be published as part of the retirement information page maintained by HRS. Additionally, the questions should be reviewed during pre-retirement briefings offered by the University. It might be helpful if these questions were integrated into the FAQ recommendation above.

Len Johnson, Director of Human Resources and a member of the committee, has reported that, subsequent to the survey=s completion, HRS has improved the amount and quality of pre-retirement planning information available to faculty (see below).

HRS Services for Retirement and Retired Faculty

In April, 2005 Dr. Michael Moore convened an ad hoc committee of the Faculty Senate to study all aspects of faculty retirement, including improving the planning process and seeking new ways of recognizing the contributions of faculty emeriti.

Foremost on the agenda was the subject of a regular and comprehensive approach to faculty retirement planning. In the past, faculty sought information from colleagues, chairs, financial institutions, friends, family, the internet, and other sources as appropriate.  The result was a time-consuming, patchwork approach to planning that was sub-optimal and frustrating. 

With the addition of an experienced trainer to Human Resource Services, planning began to create a more orderly and effective approach to retirement planning. Discussions were held with several Optional Retirement System (ORP) vendors B all of whom offered to help with seminars, presentations, and non-sales oriented advice.

During 2006, general workshops were held on the subject of financial planning, using faculty from the Walker College of Business. These sessions were open to the entire university but, on average, only 3 faculty members were in attendance at each session. 

After reviewing pre-retirement programs in place at other universities, HRS presented a comprehensive list of topics to the Committee for comment. The objective was to provide a consistent source for a more in-depth look at retirement topics and an opportunity where related information could be integrated in a meaningful way.  

The following were confirmed by the committee as being the most relevant subjects for retirement planning:

·Financial planning

oTSERS or ORP retirement assets

oAsset allocation and diversification

oPayout options

oAdditional tax sheltered annuity options, particularly 403b and 401(k) investment choices

·Social Security

oSS Retirement income

oPost-retirement earnings limits

·Lifestyle adjustments

·Health concerns

·Phased Retirement

·Social, personal and psychological factors related to retirement

·State Health Insurance and Medicare

·Legal and Estate planning

The Pre-Retirement Planning curriculum (summary below) was then created, resource notebooks reproduced, and qualified experts recruited to present each topic at no charge to the University.  Participants developed a personalized action plan for retirement in the following areas

·Financial planning

·Health and aging

·Housing options

·Social adjustment

·Personal issues

The program was announced via the faculty and staff listservs and email reminders were sent. Announcements were also made at the Faculty Senate and the Staff Council.  The workshops were scheduled for the fall semester 2006 on Friday afternoons to avoid potential teaching conflicts. Despite the publicity, attendance was very low B ranging between 2 and 12 participants.  

Retirement planning is clearly an important subject and programs such as this are considered to be a valuable benefit. Consequently, we would ask for assistance from all sources to effectively promote the next series in 2007. Examples:

·Recommendations and announcements from the Faculty Welfare and Morale Committee and the University Benefits Committee.

·Support from the Faculty Senate

·Support from the Deans= Council and the Council of Chairs

·Letter to the faculty from the Provost

Issues still in progress:

·Designations for retirees and faculty emeriti retirees have been requested in the Banner database. The appropriate coding at employment termination would facilitate communication with faculty retirees. Similarly, it facilitates the transfer of information to other subsystems such as the Library to ensure that privileges are continued. 

·Consideration needs to be given as to how best to honor faculty emeriti who have died in a given period of time.  For example, it may be appropriate to publish their names in connection with the annual Retirees= Luncheon.

RETIREMENT PLANNING SYLLABUS

Respectfully submitted,

Michael Moore, Chair

Terry Cole

Marvin Hoffman

Len Johnson

Susan Keefe

Harold McKinney

Appendix A

ASU Faculty Senate

Results of a Survey of Recent Retirees

A mail survey with postage paid return was sent to 168 recently (1997-2005) retirees. We received returns from 67 persons (return rate=39%).  Somewhat anomalously, three respondents were from outside the targeted retirement years.  Appendix F is the actual survey that was used.  Of those who replied, 27 persons indicated they had chosen to participate in Phased Retirement; the remaining 40 respondents were traditional retirees.

Findings:

• A variety of factors were cited as influencing the respondents one way or the other concerning phased retirement.  (See Appendix B)

• Respondents varied in their reports about the adequacy of information given them when they were planning to retire.  On a 1-5 scale, ranging from 1=poor to 5=excellent, respondents reported:

• Not all sources of information were seen as equally helpful to prospective retirees.   On this question, 1=Very Poor, 2= Poor, 3=Marginal, 4=Good and 5=Excellent.

• Not all of the respondents reported being treated the same way during phased retirement.  Here are the responses to a variety of questions:

                                                                                                                              Yes           No

Had Office during Phased                                                         26               1

Shared an Office during Phased                                               3              23

Had a Telephone during Phased                                            27            

Had Access to University Fax                                                                   26              

Served on Department Committees                                                        6              21

Served on College Committees                                                 3              24

Served on University Committees                                            4              23

Received a Reduced Load for Research                              3              22

Received Travel Funds to Support Research                       5              19

Had Help of GA or Work Study                                             11             14

Continue to have ASU Computer                                          25               1

Have Use of ASU Laptop                                                            5              19

Encountered Problems w Computer Account                                      4              22

Received Tech Assistance for Comp Problems               25               1

Encountered Problems Using Library                                                    27

Received Pay Adjustments during Phased                           7              19

Received Travel for Conference Presentations                 9              15

Received Support for Page Fees                                               3              12

Taught Four Courses during Phased                                                      17               8

Taught Both Fall and Spring                                                                     12             15

Taught the Courses You Preferred                                         24               3

Taught in Summer School                                                           3              22

Taught an Off-Campus Course                                                3              23

Received Supplement for Teaching Off Campus             2              14

• Respondents offered a variety of suggestions about improving the information flow about retirement and phased retirement. (See Appendix C).

• Respondents offered comments on things they wished Athey knew then@ but know now.  (Appendix D).

• Respondents offered suggestions about when and how to recognize retirees.  (Appendix E)

• Respondents were both recent retirees and those who retired earlier.

                                                             Year Retired or Entered Phased Retirement

                                     Year Retired or Entered Phased Retirement