March 12, 2024

Minutes: Mallory Newell, Erik Wodbury, Michelle Hernandez, Andre Meggerson, Bidya Subedi, Daniel Solomon, Debbie Lee, Dr. Alicia De Toro, Dr. Robert Alexander, Eric Mendoza, Erick Aragon, Gabriela Nocito, Hieu Nguyen, Ian Ang, Martin Varela, Mehrdad Khosravi, Melinda Hughes, Patty Guitron, Tim Shivley, Tina Lockwood, Vins Chacko

Agenda Review: Mallory reviews agenda for some discussion before moving into groups. 

Approval of Minutes: Minutes approved from last meeting. 

Updates to Personnel Request Forms: Tri-chairs have updated the Personnel Request Forms based on feedback. These are used to submit requests for a new position. In preparation for the next round, the forms were updated. If you go to the RAPP Personnel Prioritization Process page, we have them posted there. Faculty position form has some updates and staff/administrative requests have one change. Updates are as follows: 

The data displayed in the past only had percentages for faculty load ratios for full-time faculty. Now people can see how many full-time faculty are in those positions. The other thing added is within the question re: whether the position was required and to provide documentation. When reviewing, some people thought it was confusing -- said it was required when it wasn't. If a position was truly required, it would be submitted as an emergency request, so question was taken off of the form. Also removed from staff and administrative form. 

Then we added to the Faculty for for  instructional and non-instructional, Questions #6. This was suggested by Tim - asks to describe the current and history of staffing and how this impacts the health and vitality of the program. This addresses how many faculty they've had in the past and how it’s changed over time. 

All other questions remain the same, so it is aligned to the master plan, equity plan, how they use data, how they support ongoing college operations in our student success, how the position contributes to the health of the program, how work will be accomplished if the position is not filled. Everything else is the same. The new Classified and Administrative request form is still the same. It is still in line with RAPP’s guiding principles. Their questions are different because they don't have data; how they use data is different from their practices. We removed the questions re: if the position is required or not. 

All forms and ready for the next round. No questions asked. Mallory states that there will be training for people who want to submit forms early in Spring Quarter. 

Timelines: Mallory reviews the dates for Round 1 and Round 2. Technically we just finished Round 2 and it took longer than expected. Now we're starting a new process in Round 1 which we will pick up all the positions. What we requested is what -- based on feedback, we want to set dates when the positions that were submitted became vacant. 

Round 1 that starts in Spring will pick up positions October 1-April 30. And that would be what we’re looking at for this Spring. Round 2 will pick up from May 1 through Sept 30. We were using specifics instead of quarters. For Round 1 that we start soon, those forms would be due April 30. Any discussion people want to have around the dates? Tina says thank you for the updates. 

Criteria for Emergency Requests: 

Erik W. reviews tri-chairs proposal for the definition of “emergency requests.” Previously, it meant it was required by law, but RAPP never defined it. Tri-Chairs came up with a proposal and present to RAPP: 

1) Needs to be filled due to law or accreditation requirements. Examples: Nursing and Articulation Officer 

Two new criteria: 

2) For some reason, a 100 percent Non-Tenure track rack temporary one-year position would not work or had already been in place for a year. It needs to be reviewed. 

3) Part-Time Faculty can not meet the department needs or student demands. 

Debbie says she understands the first new criteria but doesn’t get how the second one constitutes an emergency. Let's say the second one, a temp has been in place for a year, she understands that you can't rehire that person as a temp for the second year, but why is that an emergency? Gives example about faculty taking unpaid leave for up to 2 years so you could have a one year temp replace that person for one year, but they couldn’t do it for the second year. The line has not been given up yet. Erik asks for clarification. Debbie states if someone takes unpaid leave for 2 years, the 1st year the college gets a one year replacement but that person can not be hired for the 2nd year; but under this criteria, it says the department could go out for a Full-Time position considered as a emergency but the line has not been granted because the original faculty member is still on unpaid leave. 

Erik says this would only apply to vacant positions. Tim says that  it seems to be contingent on whether there are Part-Time Faculty who can fill the load. So it's a retirement and resignation -- if the program will be destitute, then that's the emergency. 

Erik says Debbie is referring to unpaid leave. Mallory says the funding wouldn't have been released. Erik says Debbie raises a very good question re: unpaid leave but is not sure of answer. If you're not doing it as a growth position, he thinks it would be different. Asks Debbie if she has a way to address it. Debbie says shes trying to understand because it’s subjective what Tim is saying re: if Part-Time faculty are available. How do we determine that? Do we check for all Part-Timers and interview them? What determines whether or not there are Part-Timers available? Daniel S. says the way the criteria is worded isn't about the availability of Part-Time faculty. It's around the ability of the Part-Time faculty to meet the demands. That can mean there is no one in the dept to meet the skill set for the requirement. Maybe there is no one around to hire for the need. Erik adds the duties may fall outside Part-time duties. 

Thomas states if the dean shows they have tried and there's not one available, that means there's no part-timer to fill the position. Erik asks Debbie if it's been resolved. Debbie said there is subjectivity around criteria. Even re: the criteria re: skillset, how do you determine if something can't be met by someone? 

Tim says he  thinks the 2-year length of leave is a sticking point and can play a factor in whether the leave can be granted. That presents jeopardy if it's over a year. Michele cautionsus against being so specific that this has to be a faculty position because there are non-instructional or non-faculty positions that are required by law. Erik says he hears what she's saying but right now the practice for administrative and classified positions is that they roll over --they don't come back to this committee. Michele says she’s  referring to a new position that may come up. 

Tina asks why it is that if someone is on leave for two years, why can we only hire part-timer for 1 instead of 2? Erik says in short, that's what the contract says. Tim says it has something to do re: the amount of quarters someone works and gets tenure. Erik states that leaves and hiring is separate from emergencies. If someone is out on extended leave, everything we’ve considered so far has to do with vacancies. Emergencies are not new positions -- they are existing positions that  become vacant. New positions that are out of cycle. Mallory says is this something we want to bring back and approval? Erik says yes we’ll bring it back next week.