PRESENT: Approximately 50 members

1. REFERENDUM REGARDING FUNDING OF THE McMASTER FACULTY ASSOCIATION

The Chair, Henry Jacek, called upon Les Robb, MUFA Vice-President, to lead the discussion regarding this issue. Dr. Robb welcomed both members and non-members who were invited to attend this portion of the meeting. He explained that, while the majority of universities in Ontario are either unionized or moving in that direction, the Executive still supports the idea of a collegial relationship with the administration. If the referendum passes, McMaster will be breaking new ground for non- unionized universities in Ontario by requiring membership in MUFA as a condition of employment for faculty on the CP/M Scheme.

MUFA represents all faculty on the CP/M Scheme regarding remunerations and working conditions and all faculty, whether on the CP/M Scheme or not, on matters dealing with academic matters. Financial resources are required for membership in provincial and national organizations which are active in lobbying, provide legal representation, and supply data that allows local associations to represent their members more effectively (approximately 40% of budget). On occasion, it is necessary to obtain additional legal and professional advice to understand what the alternatives are and how best to protect faculty interests (10% of budget). Staff are required for daily support in attaining Association goals (30% of budget). It is in that context that the Executive believes it is fair for all faculty to support Association activities. The current mill rate is 6.2 which is tax deductible. Hopefully, the mill rate will be reduced somewhat if the referendum passes.

In response to a question, Dr. Robb explained that the vote would be decided by a simple majority. In answer to Dr. Schwarcz's concern about payments to OCUFA and CAUT for faculty who opted to contribute to a charity rather than joining the Association, Dr. Robb assured him that the Association would be paying the provincial and national associations only for those members who remitted dues to the Association. Dr. Steiner wondered how much of the MUFA budget was spent on faculty representation, to which Dr. Robb responded, 100% þ everything the Association does has as its goal the representation of faculty. Drs. Geagan and Smyth assured Dr. Steiner that neither OCUFA nor CAUT contributes money to any political party.

A long and lively discussion followed regarding the value of membership in CAUT and OCUFA. The current Executive has taken the view that it is important to work within these organizations and to influence their activities. It is essential, however, to review their activities and their budgets on a regular basis. It was suggested that the Presidents of OCUFA and CAUT might be invited to a general meeting to discuss with members their concerns.

2. MINUTES

Motion

That the minutes of the General Meeting held on January 17, 1996 be aproved as circulated.
B. Lynn/B. Smyth
Carried

3. BUSINESS ARISING

There was no business arising.

4. COMMITTEE REPORTS

Motion

That the Committee Reports be accepted as submitted.
D. Dawson/E. Hayton
Carried

M. Pisa asked how MUFA planned to address the concerns regarding arbitration which were raised in W. Lewchuk's report as Chair of the Remunerations Committee. Dr. Lewchuk responded that he will be drafting an article about those concerns to appear in the Newsletter this fall in order to encourage discussion among membership.

G. Smith wondered about the status of the Working Group assigned to revise the Pension Plan text. Dr. Lewchuk explained that the Group had not met since the fall. They had decided to deal with MUFF (McMaster University Futures Fund) first. Those discussions are now complete and the Group will resume discussions regarding the text.

In response to M. Pisa's question, Dr. Lewchuk noted that the administration has promised in the Joint Committee to provide MUFA with an accounting of how CP/M awards are made across the University between Faculties and between ranks.

5. RECOMMENDATION RE MILL RATE

Motion
That the Executive's recommendation regarding the Mill Rate be endorsed.
R. H. Johnston/F. L. Hall
Carried

6. TREASURER'S REPORT - W. Wiesner

a. 1996/97 Preliminary Budget and Annual Statement of Income and Expenditure. D. Wiesner noted that there is an anticipated decrease in membership dues for 1996/97 primarily because of the increased number of retirements this year. To what extent this situation will be offset should the referendum regarding the funding of MUFA pass, remains to be seen.

Motion
That the Preliminary Budget for 1996/97 be accepted.
W. Wiesner/A. L. Robb
Carried

b. Appointment of Auditor for 1996/97

Motion
That Richard Hoecht be appointed as the auditor for the Factulty Association for 1996/97.
W. Wiesner/A. L.Robb
Carried

8. RETURNING OFFICER'S REPORT - D. P. Santry

David Santry reported that, as there were no further nominations for the Executive Committee by the March 29, 1996 deadline, the Nominating Committee's slate which was distributed to the membership on March 15, 1996 is declared elected. The 1996/97 Executive is as follows:

MEMBERS AT LARGE
Virginia Aksan, Elise Hayton, Robert Johnston, Leslie J. King, Bernadette Lynn, David Pengelly, Jacqueline Roberts, Anna St Leger Lucas, Judy Shedden, Wayne Warry

9. PRESIDENT'S REPORT - H. J. Jacek

"Even in an era of reduced government funding, we must continue to identify and reward those whose work achieves new heights of research and scholarship, whose teaching attains high levels of performance, and whose valuable contributions allow us to serve our clients more effectively" (Directions, McMaster University, p. 4, approved by the Senate and the Board of Governors, December 1995).

Our organization, MUFA, has spent a great deal of this past academic year, as we have so much in the past, trying to get the University, the government and society to see that "Rewarding Accomplishment" is at the heart of the successful university. This is as true for faculty and academic librarians as it is for students and support staff.

It is for this reason we have fought hard to get the University administration to live up to its commitment to fund the Career Progress/Merit (CP/M) Plan. This goal has been at the top of our remunerations agenda, even to the point of conceding short-term budget relief to the administration þ next year it will be $7 million because of the combination of temporary non-replacement of faculty leaving McMaster (approximately 100 in my count) and over 1.2% temporary salary cut in exchange for 3 "Harris Days".

While we were able to make some headway on this goal, it is regrettable that only half of our merit for 1994 has been funded so far and unfortunately we have received only 8/11ths of our CP/M funding for 1995. I hope next year's Remunerations Committee will be able to get the remaining half merit for 1994 and the 3/11ths merit for 1995.

Rewarding merit has other meanings as well. I think we are making progress on resolving the unfortunate CAWAR problem in the Health Sciences Centre. It is unfortunate that individuals who have committed so many years of their lives to McMaster and brought a great deal of outside financial support should find themselves financially at risk and their appointments subject to termination when the external environment reduces its financial support to university researchers.

"Rewarding Accomplishment" also means providing the appropriate conditions so we can carry out our research and teaching functions in a professional manner. As there are fewer and fewer faculty and academic librarians, we must become more efficient in carrying out our academic responsibilities. To do this some provision must be made to increase University support for our research and teaching efforts.

It is disappointing that the administration has shown little interest in even modest increases in our Professional Development Allowances (PDA). The current amount has been frozen for a number of years. Clearly the amount is inadequate and many faculty find they must subsidize the University by paying increasing amounts of our stagnate after-tax incomes for conference attendance and the purchase of scholarly journals and books. The latter items are more and more pressing as funds for our libraries cannot keep up with the prices of new and existing scholarly journals.

We recognize that the ultimate source of our troubles lies with the current federal and provincial governments. The federal government continues the unfortunate legacy of previous Conservative administrations in cutting the support for both post-secondary transfers to the provincial government and the research granting councils. Members of our Executive and members of the Association have written to federal officials about these matters. We have received nice letters back, but the cuts continue. The last letter I received, from the Chair of the federal Liberal Caucus Committee on Higher Education, is brief and despondent. It notes that it has carried our message forward "As far as possible," and ends "we will continue to do what we can". The federal cabinet is not listening to them or us.

Provincially, matters, as we all know, are just as bad. The Conservative government seems uninterested in the plight of university education while cutting us substantially more than hospitals, primary and secondary schools, municipalities and correctional facilities. We have lobbied face-to-face with the Premier, the Minister and even invited the Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Education and Training to campus. Yet the cuts continue. We must all try to raise public concerns by telling the public and government officials of the terrible long-term consequences of these negative actions.

Of course MUFA has done many other things this year. You can get a flavour of these from the reports of Committees and Boards. The Executive Committee has worked very hard this year and I thank them. Our Past President, Lorraine Allan, has always helped me when I needed advice, which was often, and I have great confidence in the energy, commitment and knowledge of my successor, Les Robb who will be President one week from now.

While all of the Executive worked hard, two jobs are especially difficult þ Remunerations and Special Enquiries & Grievances. Wayne Lewchuk and Louis Greenspan responded above and beyond what I could reasonably expect. Both were successful in my view. The year-to-year structure of this organization provides a model for others in this University. If the University were as well-organized as MUFA, we would certainly be the most efficient university in Canada. For all this, we must thank Phyllis and Kelly. Finally, I want to thank all of you, MUFA's loyal members, for your work and commitment to the Association, including attending meetings such as this one and keeping informed. These latter activities are important to all organizations. Thank you once again.

 7. OTHER BUSINESS

Words of Appreciation

Rhoda Howard thanked members of the Executive for their time and energies on behalf of the MUFA membership. Les Robb thanked Henry Jacek for his leadership and efforts over the years and as President of the Association. He commended him especially for his role in political and public relations.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:15 p.m.

3. Treasurer's Report

It was agreed at the Annual General Meeting on April 22, 1996 that if the Referendum regarding Faculty Association membership dues was successful, a revised 1996/97 budget would be presented at the next General Meeting.

A new estimate of Expenditures has been prepared in the light of MUFA's increased membership. Income is calculated on the assumption that members will have a dues mini-holiday þ a reduction in the Mill Rate to 2.5 for the months of February and March 1997, only.

The Executive recommends that the Mill Rate be lowered, effective April 1, 1997, from 6.2 to 5.3. When the Mill Rate was last changed in 1990, it moved from 5.5 to 6.2.

The success of last spring's referendum, which made payment of membership dues to MUFA a normal condition of employment of faculty on the CP/M scheme, has resulted in an increase in membership. MUFA argued at the Joint Committee that while it represented all faculty in negotiations with the administration regarding salary and benefits and conditions of employment, only two-thirds of faculty on the CP/M scheme actually paid MUFA dues. Now that the Association's expenses are being spread among more people, it is possible to lower the Mill Rate.

For your information, a list of the mill rates for several other Ontario universities follows:

* Waterloo is planning to increase their mill rate by at least 15%.

**Western has an individualized fee schedule, which, when calculated using our data translates to 5.20.

Just a reminder:

DEADLINE for receipt of nominations: February 14, 1997

INQUIRIES TO: 416-979-2117 or your Faculty Association Office (ext. 24682; mufa@mcmaster.ca)

Recent early retirements brought to light an aspect of our retirement programme that required clarification. At the time individuals make final pension arrangements just prior to retiring, they are given the option of taking their pension in a `lump sum' form or in the normal `monthly payment' form. If the `lump sum' form is chosen, our Pension Plan calls this a "termination option". The question then arises as to whether an individual taking this option is retired and entitled to retirement benefits. MUFA has taken the view that if one qualifies for a retirement pension under the Rule of 80 or after reaching normal retirement age, it should not matter how the cash is received. The administration was sympathetic to this position and discussions made it clear that McMaster had slipped into, rather than chosen, this interpretation. Subsequent to raising this matter in the Joint Committee and passing the motion reproduced below, President George has agreed to this being McMaster policy in the future.

Motion passed by Joint Committee: THE JOINT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS TO THE PRESIDENT THAT, IN THE FUTURE, THOSE FACULTY WHO AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT ELECT THE PENSION PLAN'S TERMINATION OPTION, SHOULD CONTINUE TO QUALIFY FOR THE NORMAL RETIREMENT BENEFITS.

The President also agreed to a second recommendation from the Joint Committee to the effect that this interpretation would apply also to early retirees in December 1996 and June 1997.

A. L. Robb