THE PURDUE UNIVERSIT Y NORTH CENTRAL SENA TE
REPORT FROM WEST LAFAYETTE
18 JAN UARY 2 013
This report refers to two meetings:
University Policy Committee
University Senate Faculty Affairs Committee
19 December 2012
7 January 2013
Next University Senate meeting:
28 January 2013
Office of Vice President for Ethics and Compliance, Alysa Rollock
UNIVERSITY POLICY COMMITTEE
Wednesday, 19 December 2013, 10:30 - noon.
Room 1017, Young Hall
The meeting was entirely devoted to a very preliminary, free discussion of the ethics of receiving gifts from vendors and other entities.
Notes taken by the UPC secretary:
Gratuities Policy Discussion
Intro - different philosophies/approaches, each with own problems
1. No gift is accepted, even as small as a stick of gum – nothing is to be received from a vendor or potential vendor. “Walmart”
approach.
2. Only restrict certain people with decision-making authority and/or in high positions.
3. Government approach: “stand-up / sit down theory” – if you eat standing up it’s okay, sit-down meals not allowed.
4. Limit gifts to dollar amount – practices vary from industry to industry and company to company, from no gifts to $100 limit
to accept anything.
Comments/Examples/Questions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
State Gov’t OH - nothing over $20.
Lunch meetings, conferences are valuable for learning about products and networking with peers to learn what they are doing
with vendors. Why should university pay for lunch/conference if it doesn’t have to, as long as individual isn’t just enriching
him/herself.
Balanced approach is wisest, no definitive line – decisions made on a case-by-case basis.
Hotels and caterers are always stopping by conferences division with goody bags or food samples. Hotels offer points and
know to talk to secretaries because they’re the ones who book lodging for visitors. Good relationships are important – maybe
the fact that you get a goody bag does influence decision a little, but you want to use the vendor who provides good service,
nurtures the relationship.
Professional societies – are they included or counted as a vendor? No, but if a vendor is offering to pay registration fee for
society conference, then might fall under policy.
Accreditation visits – can we provide a gift to the accreditation entity? Wouldn’t be part of this policy, focusing on gifts
coming in.
Need to think about what the problem is we are trying to solve. Is the gift benefitting the individual or the university?
Example, offered an IPad in return for attending a webinar – if the IPad is used by the department then seems okay to accept.
If issue has to do with how we choose vendor, shouldn’t approval process for purchase address that – when someone exceeds
signature authority dollar amount, the purchase has to be vetted with higher authority. Look at policies and procedures for
granting signature authority limits what documentation needs to accompany purchase orders. Is due diligence being
followed?
Public sector vs. private sector – If Purdue is restricted, but private companies aren’t, do we set ourselves up for missed
opportunities?
It is not possible to imagine every circumstance and how we should react beforehand. Better to try to set guidelines that allow
us to address questions when they arise. Don’t want a policy that encourages selective enforcement.
What about having a statement to sign saying won’t accept gifts for influence? Difficult to enforce. Technically, those
working under contract already signed that they will follow all policies.
Is BOT covered under this policy? No, has its own.
Need to define words like nominal/modest. Many peer institutions set a dollar value for nominal.
When companies provide free t-shirts, etc., they’re benefitting more from the free advertising than the individual who
wears/uses the item.
Jimmy Johns often hands out free sandwiches to everyone in a department/building. Should we have to refuse them?
What about student athletes who get goodies at a tournament? NCAA regulates athletics.
16. If the policy only covers certain individuals, do we worry about one-time purchases of high dollar amounts that are
influenced by someone not otherwise covered by the policy? Example – a faculty member choosing a piece of equipment for
a lab.
17. Some of these issues are also covered by the university’s Statement of Integrity.
Next steps
Poll of the group showed committee members favor a policy that allows for exceptions, not the “Walmart” approach.
VP Rollock will bring a draft policy to UPC for discussion along with benchmark of peer institutions.
3. When UPC thinks the draft seems reasonable then will send out for general discussion.
______________________
1.
2.
After the meeting the faculty representative discussed a matter of concern at Purdue North Central with Vice President Rollock. A
number of faculty members at PNC were disturbed that the Dean of Students was officially sponsoring a Christmas Tree fundraising
activity on campus with the Salvation Army. The Salvation Army has been accused of discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Laura Odom, the EEO Officer at PNC, received assurances from the local Salvation Army spokesperson that the Salvation Army does
not discriminate. The faculty members were not satisfied but there was no time to take further action; the Christmas event concluded
on schedule.
Vice President Rollock observed that the problem was more fundamental than whether the Salvation Army discriminates against
LGBT individuals. What is PNC doing sponsoring a religious organization on campus to begin with?
A corollary issue discussed was the reticence of junior faculty members to voice their opinions on important issues such as the
campus’ sponsoring of a Salvation Army event. While several untenured faculty members were highly disturbed by the matter, they
were too fearful to raise it to the Administration. Eventually a tenured faculty member did. Vice President Rollock was not surprised.
This is one of the reasons why tenure is so important. Tenure is not only for job security.
Purdue University Senate
2012/2013 FACULTY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
Fourth Meeting Jan 7, 2013 2:30-4:30PM
Room 119 Hovde Hall
I. Call to order
 Acceptance of Agenda
 Approval of minutes from November meeting
II. Subcommittee Reports
 Censure and Dismissal Procedures
 Faculty Compensation and Benefits (Professor Donald Buskirk, Chair)
 University Grade Appeals
III. Old Business
 Clinical Faculty Policy
 On-line Course Evaluation System
COACHE survey
IV. New Business
 VP Luis Lewin Health Care Strategy Committee
 Summer Pay Policy Review
 Other
V. Announcements/Items of Interest
 Beverly Davenport Sypher, Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs
 Alysa C. Rollock, Vice President of Ethics and Compliance
 Mark J.T. Smith, Dean of the Graduate School
The PNC representative was out of state and unable to attend. The Chair informed him that the most important issue would be
information about the impact of the Affordable Health Care Act to be presented by Vice President for Human Resources Lewin.
Reported by Janusz Duzinkiewicz
2