September 15, 2014 Meeting of Administrative Council

1. Review of student wage allocation: Greg Knott and Sue Searing, 15 minutes
2. Reference Services Committee: Lynne Rudisill, 10 minutes
   Procedure for updating of the specialists’ referral list
3. AP/LOA evaluation procedures: Susan Avery, 10 minutes
   Questions from CPS: Supervisors need a better understanding of the process; develop a consistent evaluation procedure and forms; consistent sending of letters to APs, LOAs
4. Electronic methods of scheduling Library staff: Melody Allison, 10 minutes
   Investigate alternative methods to create a more efficient process
5. Budget group request procedure: Cindy Kelly, 10 minutes
6. Technology allocation policy: Beth Sandore Namachchivaya, 10 minutes
   See draft of policy sent by Beth on 9/11/2014

 

John Wilkin, chair; Melody Allison, Susan Avery, Greg Knott, Joanne Kaczmarek, Cindy Kelly, Mary Laskowski, Beth Namachchivaya, Lisa Romero, Chris Quinn, Lynne Rudasill, Mary Schlembach, Sue Searing, Tom Teper, Sandy Wolf; Recording – Kim Matherly

Review of student wage allocation: Greg Knott and Sue Searing
Sue has received several comments that the student wage allocations need to be reviewed because some units get too much and some units have too little. No one has looked at student allocations in a while. The numbers don’t tell the whole story. So Sue and Greg would like a couple of people to work with them to think about the issues surrounding the allocations and see if we need to make adjustments.

The suggestions for the group included Jessica Lecrone, Mary Schlembach and Cindy Kelly.

1.       Reference Services Committee (RSC): Lynne Rudasill
Procedure for updating of the specialists’ referral list
The specialists’ referral list needs to be updated and kept updated. The RSC feels it would best if the Division Coordinators (DC) would take charge of updating the sections that fall under their individual divisions. RSC is asking that the DC update the list at least once in the fall and once in the spring. This year they can send their changes to Lynne Rudasill to compile and she will send updates to Bill Mischo.

John asked that the first update be done by October 15, 2014 and that we incorporate it into Clean-up Day, two times a year.

It was also suggested that the list be included in the checklist for new hires.

2.       AP/LOA evaluation procedures: Susan Avery
Questions from CPS: Supervisors need a better understanding of the process; develop a consistent evaluation procedure and forms; consistent sending of letters to APs, LOAs
There are a few different forms that can be filled out for evaluating APs. Supervisors are asking for a consistent form and a better understanding of the process for evaluating of APs. Supervisors want something standardized.

Cindy Kelly offered to send out an email reminding supervisors when the reviews are due.

John appointed a small group to look at the forms and come up with a standard for the Library. The group will consist of Cindy Kelly, Susan Avery (or someone from CPS), Jennifer Teper, Jim Dohle or Tom Habing and or Jennifer Maddox Abbott.

3.       Electronic methods of scheduling Library staff: Melody Allison
Investigate alternative methods to create a more efficient process
There are a number of challenges in the way we do schedules and timesheets right now.  Melody would like a way to minimize those challenges.  Students sometimes come in late or leave early and there is not electronic way to document that. It would be very helpful to have a system with e-sign in and out for accuracy of same.   Timesheets can be moving targets and can take a great deal of time and effort to keep them accurate at the end of the pay period.  She wondered what option there might be to investigate a holistic payroll system that tied together staff sign in/out, staff scheduling, staff timesheets, and payroll. Having such a system, would minimize duplication of efforts, and keep schedules ‘real time’ instead of the numerous last minute changes that sometimes get lost particularly at the end of the payroll period when changes happen after the timesheets are approved and submitted, which when happens must be changed on the next timesheet. A system that ties this to payroll would make the whole process seamless and efficient, and reduce potential for errors in reimbursement.  There are such systems for smaller scale operations. Melody wondered if there might be a way to upgrade our current system, or advocate for a change at campus level for one that can do all these things —at least next time campus is doing RFPs for one. She has talked to JoAnn Jacoby and gotten information about ScheduleSource, a program that is used for chat reference scheduling, which would be useful for scheduling but wonders about the possibility of advocating for something more robust.

Cindy Kelly commented that scheduling and payroll are two completely different systems in Banner. Payroll has rigid guidelines within Banner, which does not lend itself to scheduling. They have updated to electronic timesheets, but those still need the individual to physically enter the number of hours they actually worked as well as having the them updated [return the timesheet to staff, staff correct, and supervisor re-submits] when schedules change after the timesheet is submitted.

John Wilkin stated that systems like Banner are slow to offer this kind of integration capability. There are no plans by campus to consider a new system in the foreseeable future. John asked Melody to work with JoAnn Jacoby and/or Wendy Gregory to see if there is a way to expand ScheduleSource for both scheduling and signing in/out. This would address some but not all of the issues Melody delineated, which is the best that can be accomplished by the program options available to us. If Funk Library is interested in using this ScheduleSource or some other similar program, John invited her to submit a program and funding request for consideration.

Budget group request procedure: Cindy Kelly
Budget Group (BG) is working on a form to make it easier for supervisors to supply the BG with all the information it needs, when a position request is put forward.
 
John would like the Library and the BG to look at what we need instead of just replacing someone because that’s what we did in the past. He wants to allocate our resources in a way that is consistent regarding the direction we want to take the Library.

Reclasses – Some people have shifted into doing more duties, although we don’t always have the resources to support more. We need to be intentional about the work we assign. We don’t have infinite resources. Last year we overspent in reclasses.

Cindy wanted to remind everyone that reclasses are not a reward for longevity. They are for changes in job duties only.

Send any suggestions for the form or process to Cindy Kelly, Greg Knott or Tom Teper.
 
5.       Technology allocation policy: Beth Sandore Namachchivaya
See draft of policy sent by Beth on 9/11/2014
This is for permanent APs and permanent faculty. The policy gives people an idea about what happens when you initiate a web form for a request to make a change in the kind of workstation you have. It shows several phases and roughly how long it will take to make the change. Right now IT has 65-70 laptops assigned to faculty and APs and expect that to increase up to 175 by 2016. IT is committee to adding increments of 50 laptops per year.

Beth is working on a revision.

6.       Additional Agenda item

Sue Searing asked if anyone knew of a policy regarding working with Registered Student Organizations. No one knew of a policy.