Service Professional
Advisory Council
SPAC Minutes
May 21, 2015
8:30am – 10:00am
Human Resources, Bldg #91, Conference Room
Hostess: Cheryl Goldberg
Present:
Suzanne Siler, Mark Young, Mary Kate Wolter, Dylan Rust, Trevor Luttinen, Cheryl Goldberg, Kim Knowles, Alicia Krzyczkowski, Kathleen Carpenter, Shari
Miller.
Guests: Laura Funk, Tina Sutton, Robbie Bergman, Debbie Martin, Diane Verkest, Kate Florman, Susan Neeb
By Collaborate:
Gail Westerlund, Dan Davidson, Elizabeth Wilkinson, Susan Lauer
Absent:
Stephanie McCarthy, Yael Bernstein, Justin Hagin, Andrea Graves, Bernadette Presloid
8:30am
Call to Order & Introductions
Called to order by Suzanne Siler with introductions for in-person attendees.
Suzanne Siler, Chair
8:35 – 9:00am
NAU’s Compensation Philosophy
Cathy Snow, Associate Director, Human Resources
Q: Ever adjust downward based upon market research?
A: Not during her time at NAU. Raises very unlikely this year! They use market research (ERI survey of many employers of a variety of job types).
CUPPA surveys and other such as health care, public safety, IT that are very specific (some have private employers in them and various geographic
regions). NAU participates in the surveys as well. Once a year, NAU salary data is compared to the market data. HR is trying to identify benchmarks
across institutions, such as job titles (e.g. academic advisors). Accurate data is key. They look at outliers and research to determine if figures are
accurate. HR rolls up the data into job families and sectors (IT, etc.) for comparison; NAU is a little behind the market in the highly competitive areas.
HR shares the info with VPs and explains the basis and why NAU is situated where it is. That is incorporated into the request for funding from the
state via the budget office (to ABOR which submits a large budget request from all three of the universities).
Annual workforce planning cycle is timed to the period when there is the most current salary information. Is more challenging when money is tight
but HR will work with departments; there is central funding for adjustments. Employee job duties may change and this is a process to review that.
Varies by year, some years 500, others 100 submitted for review. Three staff review the applications and if there is money for any resulting job
upgrades. The reviews are independent of a department’s ability to pay for an increase. President will decide if there is money to pay for upgrades in
this process. Look at market for this determination. May still be able to recruit easily, make internal comparisons, logic in relationships within a job
family. HR does lots of desk audits to learn about the functions and responsibilities of the job. VPs have to approve the requests, but may decide not
to approve it as well. Most of the time they are approved. If department can’t afford, HR will help department get employee into a classification it can
afford by splitting off responsibilities, etc. Is very rare. The same process is used for job posting as well.
Performance based increase process: may not have funds this year. VPs each had own idea on how to administer the performance based increases
incorporating the following conditions:
At least one year at NAU, must have at least a good, no active discipline and constraints from Bjorn on how much they can spend and limited to a
certain number of employees (SP and CS), last year it was 20% of employees in those categories. HR provides criteria to consider. Options: one time
award or increases to base salary.
Q: Are NAU salaries compared to ASU and U of A?
A: ASU and U of A comparisons: are not good comparisons, are very different employers but they participate in the same surveys so the data would
be in the survey results. May be times that we ask for particular jobs/ for specific jobs, but very cautious about comparing salaries with institutions so
difference than ours.
The historical system of salary review was not good, all three U’s participated in it and it was very difficult to manage it. ABOR policy changed about
10 years ago to use our own systems.
Q: How does NAU address concerns about equal pay?
Service Professional
Advisory Council
A: Gender disparities are reviewed by Affirmative Action. Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) did a review about 15 years ago and about 4
years ago. Affirmative Action is in charge of protected class equality in pay.
Questions: Please contact your assigned HR professional or email Cathy Snow at cathy.snow@nau.edu.
9:00 – 9:15am
Tobacco Task Force
Daniel Bruey, Director of Adminsitration, Campus Health Svcs
Daniel is the Chair of the Implementation Team for a tobacco-free campus. History of movement: Early 2000’s campuses started to think about going
smoke free probably related to city ordinances. American University, DC, is a very liberal school and students saw it as a right to smoke. Was at
Temple University before coming to NAU.
Working with Beth Applebee and with Health Promotions. President Cheng and Sarah Bickel agreed that NAU will be a tobacco free campus.
The Student Health Advocacy committee has been working for several years to achieve this. They have looked at health care costs by tobacco users.
Dan has been designated the one to implement this initiative. It will take several years to implement. In Fall 2012-2013, the student advocacy
committee collected cigarette butts and brought them to meetings to use as a visual cue of the environmental impact as well as other ramifications.
Forest fires are risks, too! Dan is working with users to help them stop using tobacco, is an addiction and hard to quit. Want to promote the health of
people. The implementation team has met twice with reps from all over campus; they look at issues such as sustainability, litter, fire danger, health,
enforcement, assessment, but the most important is education that NAU is going tobacco free. This project is “not even in its infancy; the baby hasn’t
been thought of yet.” In short, there is support from upper-level administration, as well as students, but implementation will take years, requires
funding for implementation, support, and enforcement. 1,100+ colleges and universities in the U.S. are tobacco-free, and none of these have arrived
there overnight.
Hookah is a carcinogen. There are concerns with international populations but he has seen some research that international students may actually
want to go tobacco free when in the US.
A website will be created, which will include FAQs, concerns about enforcement (addressing the health and environmental affects, not cause users to
hide and still use). Have to provide help for users to stop.
About 1100 universities have gone tobacco free. There are varying enforcers depending upon campus.
Percent of staff are users: will provide information (is not a high percentage). Affects visitors, not just students and employees, contracted employees
such as Sodexo, construction workers.
Questions: Daniel.bruey@nau.edu
Suzanne Siler will serve on the committee.
Diane Verkest
Change underway regarding benefit eligibility status: due to budget cuts. Proposing to look at FTEs who work less than .75 down to .5 who get
benefits equal to full-time employees (full coverage for them/their eligible dependents). Affordable Care Act requires offering others benefits if
employee works over 30 hours in a benefit period. Goal is to align NAU with that standard. Looking at peer institutions and local employers, there are
very few who offer full benefits for 20 hours per week.
This initiative is moving forward; VPs have been discussing this change, which would currently effect about 100 NAU employees (.5-.75, part-time
employees). Next steps (to follow) will be taken within the coming months: 1) engage ABOR—this policy should be similar across the university
system which will require some ABOR policy change, 2) approach AZ Dept. of Administration who sets the benefits. There are a complex set of rules
governing benefits, and it will be a complex process. Earliest effective date for implementing the policy: 1-1-2016. (There may be some lead time,
NAU would like to give as much as possible, but can’t promise it at this point.)
Considerations: 100 employees who are working less than the new threshold, how did they get there, options to address it. Approach it cautiously, is
a sensitive issue. Dollar amount of savings could be up to $950,000—this will likely be less than this amount, as many departments may choose to
increase employee workload (to .76 – 1) in order to allow them to keep their benefits). Must have funding on department side to increase hours to be
benefit eligible at the higher level. Need to maximize the productivity for the benefit dollars expended. Will provide a more cost effective benefit
program. No more .5 - .75 positions are being created as of 5-1-15 (this includes new and current employees who want to go below .75).
HR is looking at other savings options including phased retirements, sabbatical.
Questions regarding this policy? Please go up the chain of command to your VP.
If you would like a form to adjust employee hours, please contact Diane.Verkest@nau.edu
Q: Why not just limit it to 1.0?
Service Professional
Advisory Council
A: Need some flexibility. Is a challenge to deal with frequently changing FTEs. Have requirements at all levels of government regarding this. ASRS is
still 20/20 rule. Some are working part time not by choice but by funding for the position.
NAU BCBS: annual review in June, plan to continue, BCBS PPO plan is much less costly than other state DOA plans.
Marcia Warden update on performance appraisals: use current form, in June/July for 14-15 appraisal; will use new form for 15-16 appraisal year which is
due on 9-30-16.
9:15am – 10:00am SPAC Business



o
Council Nominations
o Need four nominations
o Have one nomination which will be sent out by email
o Vote by email
o Extending deadline through June 15
Next Meeting
o To vote on nominations and elect officers
o Third week in June approved (June 17, 2015) at HRM at 8:30-10
Approval of Minutes – March 2015
March minutes approved
SPAC Committees

Supervisory Training (Brown Bag Lunches): no further events for FY15
o No update

Publicity (Newsletter/Website):
o No updates, next newsletter for next fall, none for summer

SPAC Ambassadors:
o In June, will review list then (considering that the hiring freeze means that there have been no new hires in the last few months)

Service Projects:
o Date: Saturday, June 20 for Adopt an Avenue on Windsor Lane

Annual Meeting/Mixer:
o Update: It was successful! Food, speaker, a good time. Attendance wasn’t impacted by the speaker, the catering is not sustainable
o Awards presented to Kelley McKee, Coordinator of Student Success Coaching
o Good time!

Leadership Award:
o To Kelley McKee
University Committees

President’s Cabinet:. https://www4.nau.edu/pair/CabinetReports/Cabinetindex2014.htm
o Cancelled

President’s Strategic Planning & Budget Council: http://nau.edu/Strategic-Planning/Planning-Council/
o Cancelled

Academic Standards Committee:. http://nau.edu/Provost/OCLDAA/Academic-Standards-Committee/
o Year end (emailed by Kathleen Carpenter)

Employee Development Day Conference:
o Was yesterday, was well received, over 400 people!

Classified Staff Advisory Council:
o No report

Commission on Ethnic Diversity: http://www.nau.edu/ced/
o Wrap up: New project on symposium series (bringing it back from 2007), maybe involving other commissions on campus, possibly
“piggybacking” on new faculty orientation to engage new faculty
Topics, just exploring it

Commission on the Status of Women: no report. http://nau.edu/csw/
o Highlights sent by Cheryl

Faculty Senate: http://nau.edu/faculty-senate/
o Kathleen Carpenter: LuAnn Leonard was not able to show.
o Pres. Cheng: budget issues, reiteration that we all need to collaborate more (instead of pointing fingers at other departments, we
need to look within our own departments and make continuous improvement)
Service Professional
Advisory Council
o






Other faculty concerns: why do we need to increase enrollment? Pres Cheng: increase class size; on the one had we have a cost and
business cost, and on the other side we used to have resources to pay for salaries and building maintenance; with only two sources of
revenue, (tuition and state funding) we cannot reduce enrollment; increase in student housing actually should help with housing
prices and get the students within walking distance of NAU; Cheng suggested smaller committees and less time at meetings;
o Liberal studies capstone course revamp for all capstone courses
Parking and Transportation:
o Permits have not gone up for the past 2 years
o Parking Services uses permits to do things like parking garage repairs and parking lot repairs
o permits sales will begin August 1 and AE staff permits will be a different color
o 3 new buses were purchased and the turnover for bus drivers has gone down
Benefits: no report. http://nau.edu/Human-Resources/Benefits/
o Just getting started
Commission on Disability Access and Design: Nhttps://www5.nau.edu/diversity/commission/LeadershipAward.aspx
o Met yesterday, President Cheng attended, continue moving forward to improve accessibility on campus, technical standards for ISE to
show more motion than the traditional wheel chair icon. Will be on new spaces, is not the official symbol. Facility services, elevator to
bookstore, paths around HRM because of Wall, and sidewalks around Cline (too steep), working on a new strategic plan. Oct events
because of ADA 25th anniversary.
Parking and Transportation: . http://nau.edu/parking-shuttle-services/
o
Permits are probably not going up. Information similar to Erin’s previous presentation. Use permit fees to pay all expenses related to
the department, is self-sustaining. Sales to be as of August 1, color coding will change as well as signage. NAU has purchased 3 new
buses.
Portal Steering Committee:
o Current portal is now frozen, only production fixes. Will shift to new CRM SaleForce (is second phase) first is call center and financial
aid. Then portal functionality will be incorporated into SaleForce.
LGBTQIA - http://nau.edu/lgbtqa/
o Much going on: Campus Climate survey had 1900 responders, analyzing data currently
o Diversity Banquet was May 5
o ID Cared office is operational with preferred name
o Fundraising continues for scholarship (balance over $5000) Goal of $25,000 for it to be endowed
o Conversation continues on when to begin disbursing funds
o Orientation events discussed and next year’s plans
o 266 attendees at NAU Pride (substantial increase from last year)
o The LGBT patient care health study is ongoing at Flagstaff Medical Center: Still looking for additional participants
o Bias protocol: at legal, some differences which have set it back.
Good of the order:
Meeting concluded: