Not in Attendance: Daryl Campbell, Jessica Lim, Iryna Novachuk, Tony Owuor

Transcription

1 COLLEGE COUNCIL S U M M A R Y Present: Kim Cambern, Tony Costa, Joanna Haeck, Jim Hills, Kathie Hunt, Amy Kinsel, Mari Kosin, Stevie Lee, Molly Morse, Jerry Owens, Leslie Potter-Henderson, Kevin Severud, Stephen Smith, Kira Wennstrom, Holly Woodmansee, Michelle Wu Not in Attendance: Daryl Campbell, Jessica Lim, Iryna Novachuk, Tony Owuor Co-Chairs: Joanna Haeck and Jim Hills (November 5, 2013 Meeting: Co-Chaired by Joanne Haeck and Jim Hills) Recorder: Lori Yonemitsu STANDING ITEMS 1. REVIEW MEETING SUMMARY OCTOBER 15, 2013 By a thumbs-up consensus, the approved the October 15, 2013 meeting summary as written. 2. CHANGES TO THE COUNCIL AGENDA Tony C. referred to Daryl s statement about the role of the College and Tony s resulting request for agenda item #6 Role as a Member of the College. Tony requested that agenda item #6 be deferred to the next meeting. By a thumbs-up consensus, the approved the November 5, 2013 meeting agenda as amended. 3. OPEN COMMENT PERIOD Amy, Jim and Mari spoke about the November 2 nd dedication ceremony of the gingko biloba tree planted in memory of Erin Walker and the reception that followed. Many shared memories of Erin and stayed well after the formal program. Many from the International Education area felt a sense of fulfillment as a result of the ceremony. NEW BUSINESS 4. DEVELOPING A COLLEGE POLICY ON WORKPLACE BULLYING [Handout(s)/Reference Document(s): Draft Shoreline Community College Anti-Bullying Policy; Document/Policy Review Process: Ensuring Campus Dialogue (draft ); Shoreline Community College Resolution No. 108 (A RESOLUTION relating to the Establishment of a Policy Governance Framework ); Workplace Bullying and Disruptive Behavior: What Everyone Needs to Know from SHARP & the Washington State Department of Labor & Industries; Confronting Campus Bullies by Virginia Myers]

2 Page 2 of 5 Note: The Policy Manual Table of Contents related to the Shoreline Community College Policies & Procedures can be accessed on the College s intranet: Professor Sean Rody referred to the Anti-Bullying Policy Draft as well as the articles he had for forwarded to the prior to November 5 th. He noted that the Draft contained bits and pieces from other policies, that he was open to changes on the Draft and spoke of the prevalence of bullying Higher Education. Sean spoke of the literature related to the topic of workplace bullying and expressed that he thinks SCC can be on the forefront like other colleges such as Bellingham and Bellevue. Kathie asked Stephen whether the College had an existing policy or policies that would address workplace bullying. Stephen referred to the College s Sexual Harassment Policy and the Human Rights Universal Complaint Procedure (tied to Policy 4111 Affirmative /Equal Opportunity) noting, These are analogous but the College has no Anti-Bullying Policy in existence. Stephen stated that he agreed with Sean about the seriousness of bullying in the workplace and mentioned, as examples, peer-to-peer bullying and Administrator-Faculty bullying. He asked Sean: What is your expectation if bullying were to arise? Intervention? Is the purpose of establishing an Anti-Bullying Policy to identify a problem? What should happen if these instances were to be identified? Whether raising awareness versus establishing a policy would have the same effect. Sean referred to the article on Workplace Bullying and Disruptive Behavior: What Everyone Needs to Know and the term mobbing a group of coworkers targeting another worker. He spoke of preventative measures and the development and utilization of a Code of Conduct. Sean added that he would like someone from Bellingham Technical College to do Anti-Bullying trainings for Shoreline Community College personnel. Kathie noted that policies usually have procedures and that an Anti-Bullying Policy would have to contain a procedure that would stop bullying when it occurs. Stephen added, Usually when there is a policy, there is an underlying law. He asked, Can we enact an enforceable policy without an underlying law? Are we trying to prevent or to intervene? Stephen agreed that preventing and stopping this type of behavior is important. Amy referred to Policy 5030 (Student Conduct and Discipline) and Policy 4113 (Sexual Harassment) both of which link to State and/or Federal laws as well as contain reporting procedures. Amy inquired if the Human Rights Universal Complaint Procedure would apply in the case of a workplace bullying complaint. Stephen responded that he welcomes any form of complaint and that the Human Rights Universal Complaint Procedure extends across all areas of law. He noted that bullying is difficult to define as it is very individual and that if there is bullying going on, I, as the Vice President for Human Resources, needs to know. Stephen spoke of the challenges in creating a policy addressing bullying.

3 Page 3 of 5 Stephen noted that Sexual Harassment Policies are based on state and federal law and stated, Without a legal standing, a policy will be unenforceable. Stephen answered in the affirmative when Kim asked, Is this the same issue we ran into when we discussed developing a policy prohibiting weapons on campus? Sean stated that the College has many policies that are not tied to the law and spoke of Policy 5033 (Dishonesty in Academics), noting, I don t think there is a law on plagiarism. Joanna asked, Why can t there be a standard of conduct? Amy stated, College policies don t impact contractual obligations. Employment law is quite different than policies. We could put something in the contract. Stephen stated that he generally is not okay with policies that are unenforceable and saw antibullying principles contained more in the form of a resolution with the message We are not going to tolerate this type of behavior on campus. While expressing that he understood the request for a policy so that we have something to point to, he shared that a policy is not the most effective means of meeting these objectives and that it is better that we are clear upon the issue and the strategies to address the issue. In regard to policy creation, Stephen added, the standard we traditionally follow is to go with a review by the AAG (Assistant Attorney General). Jim shared that he heard Stephen explain the policy pathway but was not dismissing that there should be a pathway. Sean conveyed, I think the AAG review is a recent tradition. We were a much stronger academic institution and now have more senior administrators with law degrees. He added that he felt we can go beyond the law and expressed not wanting to have to rely on attorneys. Jerry informed the that there is a section in the Classified Contract that speaks to workplace bullying. Discussion continued as to the end goal of an Anti-Bullying Policy, enforceability of policies, what is currently in existence as far as the Classified and Faculty contracts are concerned related to workplace bullying, whether other colleges in the system have policies on workplace bullying and other avenues, besides policy, that would call out, intervene and stop such behaviors. Sean mentioned that the Draft Shoreline Community College Anti-Bullying Policy was originally written several years ago for the Faculty Senate. At that time, we were told that the Administration did not plan to go forward with the Policy. He added that he recently met with Interim President Campbell, who is supportive. Jim asked, What is an appropriate next step? Stephen suggested that the invite the President to have a conversation as to how he would receive a proposal on workplace bullying. There was general consensus amongst the that more information and dialogue was needed and that the campus is interested in addressing workplace bullying.

4 Page 4 of 5 By a thumbs-up consensus, the approved future presentations to the and discussion and determination of options (campaign, policy, education and training) to address workplace bullying. 5. EMERGENCY TEXT MESSAGES Kira heard concerns from several members of the campus community about the length of time it took to receive the text messages related to The Great Washington Shake Out ( on October 17 th. There were lags of up to 20 minutes or more. People also need to know to opt in to receive the text messages. Jim conveyed that the College uses Blackboard Connect for its mass notification messages. 1,657 texts took 21 minutes to complete and 15,000 s took 20 minutes to complete. Jim spoke of carrier issues in relation to service providers and the time it takes to deliver messages. After Holly informed the that the College is currently negotiating to get 3 AT&T cell towers on campus, Jim noted that he and other campus personnel are looking at two other providers for mass notification messages. After Michelle shared student concerns about emergency related texts and s getting buried due to excessive texts and s from the College, Jim addressed message fatigue and the College s using the mass notification system not only for emergency related messages but for a variety of campus messaging. 6. ROLE AS A MEMBER OF THE COLLEGE COUNCIL Deferred to the November 19, 2013 College meeting. 7. DEVELOPING A PLAN FOR POLICY & PROCEDURE REVIEW Amy provided an overview of the spreadsheet she put together containing the College s policies and information such as origination date, revision dates, etc. She asked the, How are we going to prioritize our policies in order to determine what needs to be eliminated, revised or created? Holly recently attended a system-wide BAC (Business Affairs Commission) meeting and communicated that many colleges are in the same situation and the BAC is developing a process for the creation and revision of college policies in an attempt to bring uniformity amongst policies, system-wide. The agreed that it would wait until we have a better sense of what the process (from BAC) will entail, before developing a plan for policy and procedure review.

5 Page 5 of 5 OLD BUSINESS 8. UPDATE: PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH PROCESS The Presidential Search site is up and running and members of the Screening Committee, announced. Stephen conveyed, We are a little behind the original schedule and are awaiting final board approval of the presidential profile that the ACCT put together, based on input from the campus community. In regard to the Interim VPASA (Vice President for Academic & Student Success) position, Stephen shared that the process will be expedited, is open to internal and external applicants and the anticipated appointment date is January NEXT MEETING Tuesday, November 19, 2013; 2:00 4:30 PM; Board Room FUTURE BUSINESS Date College Entered Lead(s) -From (10/1/13; 10/15/13) TOPIC Purpose Requested By Policies & WACs Review/ -From (10/1/13) College Governance Review/ (10/1/13) Memorial Procedures and/or Guidelines L. Potter- Henderson (10/1/13; 10/15/13) -A. Kinsel & S. Smith Questions for Campus Wide Committees Status Presentation(s) to the College Information/ -Summer 2013 (8/13/13) (10/15/13) Microsoft IT Training for November 19, 2013 Meeting Information L. Potter- Henderson