Minutes
University Faculty Meeting: October 26, 2021
3:30 p.m.
In-person in Broun Hall rooms 238 & 239
and on zoom
In this meeting, provision was made for faculty to follow the meeting remotely via zoom.
While remote participants were able to ask questions or make comments, they were not able make motions or to vote.
Call to Order
Todd Steury (University Faculty Chair) called the meeting to order at 3:30 pm. Chair Steury noted the novel hybrid nature of the meeting and asked for patience with any technical issues. He discussed the rules that would be used during the meeting, in the room and on zoom. He emphasized the need for decorum especially because the agenda included some contentious items.
Approval of the minutes from the University Faculty Meeting of March 30, 2021:
The minutes were approved with no objections by unanimous consent.
Remarks and Announcements: President Jay Gogue, President of Auburn University
President Gogue began by noting he would leave comments on covid issues until the later agenda item. He proceeded to summarize for faculty some key points out of the most recent Board of Trustees meeting. In that meeting, the Trustees had heard about the success of the Eagles Program which provides post-secondary educational opportunities on campus for students with intellectual disabilities. He extended his own appreciation for the work of faculty on the program.
The President then spoke on the latest news on admissions and enrollment for fall 2022. At this point, Auburn has 200% more applications than last year on the same day. In the first tranche of admission offers, the average GPA was 4.15 and the average ACT was over 28. There are now over 160 high schools across Alabama engaged in dual enrollment with the university. Dual enrollment offers a pathway for students to attend Auburn via credits earned before graduating from high school. Recently, Auburn extended dual enrollment to Fulton Co., Georgia.
In another effort to add more diversity to student enrollment, the university has attracted significant money from donors for needs-based scholarships since September.
Overall, the financial standing of the university is strong. The university increased its budget by 56.9 million dollars for the 2021 fiscal year. This includes a 3% merit raise pool for employees.
The new budget also includes 5.5 million dollars in extra funding for students, primarily needs-based. There was no tuition increase this year. Research expenditure reported to the NSF for 2020 was 256 million dollars, up from 232 million in 2019.
The President also noted the availability of a new emergency department and medical center in the Auburn Research Park. He took the opportunity to praise Auburn’s ROTC program, which is in the top 1% of ROTC programs nationwide. He mentioned Auburn’s success in various rankings, including Princeton Review which ranked Auburn high in the “most loved” category among others. Forbes recently ranked Auburn as the top university in the state. Universities are ranked on the basis of a number of factors, including return on student investment, accessibility to low-income students, early career starting salaries, and average level of student debt. Auburn was also ranked as one of the best places to work.
He finished by encouraging faculty to think of the United Way campaign which is raising money for those less fortunate in the community.
Action Items
Voting on Changes to the Faculty Handbook; re: Faculty Constitution and Zoom meetings
Presenter: Todd Steury, Chair – University Faculty
University Faculty Chair Steury spoke on why this amendment was needed. It would allow Faculty meetings to be held remotely or online in future, should the Executive Committee of the University Faculty so choose.
Michael Stern (Economics) began by noting that Steury’s comments were contradicted by the fact that meetings of the University Faculty had already been held online. He observed that, in those previous meetings, the university faculty meeting had not followed Robert’s Rules of Order, as Robert’s Rules requires that meetings be held in person unless the body’s Constitution provides otherwise.
He moved on to draw attention to another, separate, contradiction in Steury’s application of Robert’s rules as Chair. He observed that both during President Gogue’s remarks and in the most recent meeting of the University Senate, administrators were allowed to direct comments to one another, while faculty were instructed to go through the chair. He asked that all speakers should be treated in the same way.
Sunny Stalter-Pace (English) spoke in favor of moving meetings to electronic formats, or at least having the capability to do that. She noted that it increases accessibility, including for those who have problems getting to in-person meetings because of family care commitments.
The motion was passed by voice vote. The change will be made to the faculty constitution.
Information Item: Moving past COVID – The future of University operations
Presenters will be identified by name in this section of the minutes, but, for the most part, faculty questions or comments will not be treated individually. Please consult the recording of the meeting in order to identify specific contributions to the debate.
Scott Fuller (Assistant Vice President, Facilities) and Carter Miles (mechanical engineer, Facilities) presented on the initial response from Facilities to the covid emergency, as well as its future plans. Facilities’ initial responses included cleaning and disinfection; adapting campus building systems like improving air filters to increase the rate of air change and installing touchless fixtures; adding signage and modifying spaces to facilitate distancing; introducing new guidance for contractors on campus and ensuring information on COVID measures was available to the campus via a facilities covid website.
Moving forward, staff are still not going into personal offices to clean unless requested. Facilities will continue to provide wipes and hand sanitizers. The covid website continues to be updated. They are still examining possibilities for mechanical upgrades for air systems (filtration units, air handlers, and HVAC systems) and are working on supplemental filtration for buildings that need it. Other aspects of Facilities’ work have returned to normal, including its work on space studies and with contractors.
When asked about how long Facilities will continue measures which are no longer deemed necessary by scientists and covid experts, including the focus on sanitization, Fuller responded that this had been discussed by Facilities. They were not ready to discontinue efforts in relation to sanitization as yet, but he thought they might do so in future.
Dr. Fred Kam (Medical Director, AU Medical Clinic) then gave a general update on COVID on campus, locally, and regionally. He predicted that numbers would ebb and flow, but he was optimistic. He noted an ample supply of vaccine on campus, and across the country and that there was no problem getting first doses, second doses, third doses, or booster shots. Appointments can be scheduled through the covid resource center website. Larger vaccination events will take place in Beard Eaves Colosseum on November 1, 2, 22, and 23. The AUPCC will add more capacity if there seems to be a backlog of people wanting vaccines.
When asked if there were plans to mandate vaccines for students, Kam replied that he did not anticipate a vaccine mandate for students. He noted that the data for infection rates at Auburn is not substantially different from that of universities with different vaccination or testing policies.
Provost Bill Hardgrave spoke on implementation of executive order 14042, issued in early September. The university received guidance on the order in late September. At this point the administration started working on how to meet the requirements of the executive order. In the end, they came to the same conclusion that other universities have come to – that the only way to meet the requirements of the executive order was to require all employees to be vaccinated by December 8. If the university was not in compliance, it would jeopardize federal contracts, ongoing and future. The university is already seeing federal contracts which include language requiring that the university complies with the executive order.
The administration is still working out how to capture and verify vaccination information and will issue more information to employees as soon as they have it. The announcement issued last week was timed to give those not already vaccinated the greatest possible flexibility in choosing a vaccine.
Todd Steury (University Faculty Chair) asked the Provost to speak more on the consequences of not meeting the requirements of the order. The Provost noted that some 200 million dollars of federal contract money would be in jeopardy if the university did not comply with the executive order. He restated that this meant that by December 9, nobody on the university payroll could be unvaccinated.
At this point in the meeting, the debate on the topic of the executive order opened up, with a range of representatives from the administration tackling wide-ranging faculty questions.
Asked about the 200-million-dollars number, James Wehenmeyer (Vice President for Research & Economic Development) noted that this represented a total full value of federal contracts currently in place in the University and not a single-year amount. The immediate cost would be less than 200 million. Non-compliance would of course also prevent the university entering into new contracts, however. Late compliance is not an option.
Asked about how exemptions would be handled, Provost Bill Hardgrave noted that there was guidance on this online. All exemptions would be handled by AA/EEO.
Chair Steury asked whether the requirement encompasses the ROTC and veteran programs. Provost Bill Hardgrave said that his understanding is that it does. It also applies to extension offices.
Pressed on how the university had come to its “interpretation” of the executive order, Provost Hardgrave responded that the university had followed guidance issued by the federal government. The Office of the General Counsel had also consulted with other universities to resolve outstanding questions. Jaime Hammer (General Counsel) noted that the university followed the federal guidance issued to explain the terms of the executive order. Federal agencies incorporate the same guidance into their contracts. The federal guidance defines “covered employee” and “covered workplace.” At an institution like Auburn University, it is clear that this applies to all or substantially all employees. This determination was carried out in the General Counsel’s office.
Chair Steury asked Jaime Hammer to confirm his understanding that “covered employee” included anyone directly on the contract, anyone who indirectly handles the contract, anyone working in the same building as someone working on a contract. Hammer added that it also included any employee who could be in the building that might be a workplace for a covered employee.
In response to a separate question about whether anyone on campus might be exempt, Jaime Hammer noted that the General Counsel could not do individual determinations for every single employee and that the risk of not capturing all employees is steep. The university policy applies to all university employees.
Asked whether the fact that only one vaccine was currently fully licensed, and the others were still only being delivered on an emergency basis, made a difference, Fred Kam noted that all vaccines were being administered under the auspices of the FDA and the CDC. He did not know if the public was able to access the findings of the relevant institutional review boards on the different vaccinations.
Questioned on who would be responsible for verifying vaccinations, which is going to be difficult given the diversity of employment types in the university, including a wide range of student employees, Jaime Hammer responded that University HR has not completely worked out how to target who needs to be vaccinated, but, as far as she knew, it would not be individual supervisors. The most likely scenario is that anyone who received a paycheck and a W2 would be required to vaccinate. The university also has not finalized how to document vaccinations. Federal guidance does include information on what sort of documentation is acceptable.
Kelli Shomaker (Vice President for Business and Finance / CFO) noted that students have received a separate email with guidance on who would have to comply to the order. It included information on the importance of the W2 in determining who did and who did not need to comply.
Asked about how termination would play out for employees who seek an exemption from the vaccine mandate but potentially do not receive it, particularly in the discrepancy between the December 8 deadline and the pay periods set by the universities, Jaime Hammer promised to look into the issue. Kelli Shomaker noted that a faculty member filing a request for an exemption should allow the process to complete before making any firm decisions. The J&J vaccine can be taken relatively late, and so there was time to wait.
Asked again how vaccination proofs would be collected, it was reiterated that a process had not yet been finalized. Information cannot be gotten from the university or the state database. Kelli Shomaker responded that the university will be using vaccination cards, but faculty should wait for further instructions on how to submit these.
Asked about what deadline will be set for submitting exemptions, given the process is time sensitive, Kelli Shomaker noted that the AAO/EEO office says that exemption decisions take 3-4 days. Asked whether there is a potential appeal process or a hearing on declined exemptions, Jaime Hammer responded that she did not know specifically but that normal EEO processes would be followed.
Asked about the termination process for faculty members, Jaime Hammer confirmed that faculty that did not meet the December deadline would go through the normal dismissal process for faculty as outlined in the faculty handbook. Faculty would be put on unpaid leave during the dismissal process.
Jaime Hammer noted that employees who demonstrated a good faith attempt to meet the requirements but who were not in full compliance on December 8 would be placed on unpaid leave rather than immediately terminated.
Asked if there were any other options rather than termination for a group 1 offense, for example an alternative testing regime, Chair Steury indicated the administration did not see any alternative options under the language of the federal contracts. Testing is not an option under the terms of the executive order.
Asked if employees might be reemployed if dismissed for a group 1 offense, it was noted that this would require a change of policy. It was suggested by a faculty member that employees terminated for non-compliance with the vaccine mandate might be allowed to be rehired at a later date.
Asked if there was any way to delay the implementation of the mandate, Provost Hardgrave reiterated that the December 8 deadline was a hard deadline. Some universities have done what Auburn has done. Other universities are delaying their decisions, for instance in Florida. However, those universities, in anticipation that they will have to act anyway, have been stockpiling the one-dose J&J vaccine.
Asked whether or not treatment with monoclonal antibodies might fulfill the vaccine requirement, Fred Kam answered that there was nothing in the federal mandate that indicated that monoclonal antibodies would fulfill the mandate. Instead, it was clear that antibody levels would not be a criteria for “testing out.” He also noted, however, that those who received monoclonal antibodies should not be vaccinated within 90 days, and people in this situation should request a temporary medical exemption with medical documentation.
Asked if the university would be liable for any injuries caused by vaccinations, Jaime Hammer said that it would not.
Asked how it was determined that non-compliance would be a group 1 offense, Jaime Hammer noted that group 1 offenses are those that lead to immediate termination. Because the December deadline is a hard and fast deadline, and employees could not be allowed to remain in employment, the offense was put into group 1.
Michael Stern (Economics) noted that group 1 offences are not listed in the faculty handbook and questioned whether they apply to faculty.
He then asked why the university was not following the order made by Alabama Governor Kay Ivey banning cooperation with the President’s executive order. Jaime Hammer responded that Ivey’s executive order was only applicable to executive branch agencies and the university is not an executive branch agency.
Finally, it was asked what specific and concrete limitations there are to what information the university can require of an employee as a condition of employment. No one chose to respond to this question.
Old Business
None.
New Business
Hearing no new business, Chair Steury adjourned the fall 2021 General Faculty Meeting at 4:58pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Ralph Kingston
Senate Secretary