9-21-2005

Staff Assembly Executive Council Meeting Minutes

September 21, 2005

Sent to Staff-l on October 6, 2005

Present:  Trevor Werttemberger, Shelly Daughterty, Connie Hickman, Marcia Bertholf, Krystal Burns, Mary Beth Charleboix, Crystal Roberg, Rick Smith, Angela Ruff, Kim Gieber, Ray Lader.

Agenda Topics:

Committee purpose statements – Staff Assembly members would like to open up a two-way dialogue with committee members to review (and revise if need be) each committee’s purpose and responsibilities.  Current “job descriptions” (perhaps not an appropriate term) were tabled and never voted on.  In the next month SA members should read each description, try to condense it into a simple paragraph that would define the focus of the committee.  Then we will meet with committee members, the end goal being a clear, mutually agreed on purpose statement and description of responsibilities.

Diversity awareness program – Marcia Bertholf reported on this years Diversity Awareness Program (last year called “Passport”).  In cooperation with Jason Swain and Raymond Reyes, this year’s program will be at a new time (11:30 – 1:00 p.m., generally the third Friday of each month) and will feature a “Reference Book” where participants “write the chapters.”  This Friday, September 23, will kick off with “Laying the Foundation – A Common Language.”  Rick Smith pointed out that Plant Services has also scheduled a regular event for third Fridays of the month – something Marcia was not aware of.

United Way Campaign – Marcia also reported that this week is the kick off for the United Way Campaign.  We are looking for fun ways to get people involved on a limited budget. 

Continuation of discussion about SA representation, next steps - (This is an ongoing discussion) How can we do a better job of reaching out and involving a greater representation of the constituency of the staff at Gonzaga? 

-         Trevor began the discussion by asking “If Staff Assembly did not exist, how would we go about structuring it to involve a satisfactory representation of the diversity of staff?”

-         The Exempt/Non-exempt classification seems to fall short and doesn’t necessarily mean that people who share those classifications will have things in common.  Perhaps looking at schools, departments, offices, age, etc would provide a better structural representation.

-         The word “staff” itself can be problematic as people don’t know who that means.  HR classifications can make it confusing.  Basically anyone who is not faculty is considered staff (except Fr. Spitzer and Jacinta).

-         Perhaps we need to identify the groups that are under-represented and make a concerted effort to purposefully involve them.