Friday, March 17, 1972 THE MICHIGAN DAILY Page Five PAID SUPPLEMENT RIGHTS and RESPO SI I IT ES REPORT [continued] (Continued from Thursday's paper):,> igan faculty to determine policies af- Goals and Operation of CAA ticipation in decision-making, parti- to provide relevant data. (Memorandum University of Michigan, it was decided lation to the third choice, "do fecting their own professional a n d! cularly in academic affairs. See A 1 that an examination of its contribu- know." for 59 per cent of 256 resp Seven committees have not been dl- economic interests and the administra- a faculty group working on specific pendix C to the Report of the Senate- Speaking of the respective roles of tions to faculty well-being might pro- ents chose this answer for the C rectly referred to in this report. The tion's ability to enjoy a cooperative. areas of educational policy such as Assembly Committee on the Rights & the Vice President and the Commit- vide more useful insights concerning mittee on Academic Affairs while Regentally established Tenure Com- collegial relationship with faculty tenure, enrollment size, and fellow- Responsibilities of the Faculty, 1971.] tee, another one former member of the effectiveness of faculty participa- 39 per cent elected that response mittee is a standby committee, rarely would seem to lie on a diminishing ship programs, it was not until a re- In response to the query, "What do CAA expresses the view that since the tion in University decision-making than CESF. used. The Civil Liberties Board includes course. organization in 1959 that the basis for you think the faculty role should be Vice President has the responsibility of a study of almost any other advisory Faculty impressions of the influ students and is a case by Itself, though The committee believes that the sub- the present Academic Affairs Commit- in academic affairs?", and given the taking action, whether he takes action body. of the CESF, and of its assignm sone aspects of its situation parallel stantive and structural changes it re- tee came about. Five subcommittees five options, "almost always deter- on or against the advice of the Com- then, vary greatly. The most favors what has been shown of other com- commends will serve to support values of a larger Educational Policies Com- mine," "usually determine," "recom- mittee is his prerogative. (Memorandum Procedureestimate of the Influence of C mittees. The work of the Classified fundamental to the very existence of a mittee were proposed in 1959. Reports mend to administration, but I a t t e r 8) The same member states that, on the The first step was to examine the comes from that segment of the fac Research Committee and the Research university community and to advance dealing with separate areas of academic I should decide," "not usually involved," whole, the Vice President has quite annual reports, of the Committee on assumed to be most informed at Policies Committee has already been constructive changes in its life. life were requested. Committees on the and "no role," 73 per cent of the wisely agreed with the Committee, a the Economic Status of the Faculty. faculty governance, 97 past or pres heavily exposed during the spring of Role of the University in the Educa- sample of 250 said "almost always" and not surprising circumstance since he 1596-57 through 1969-70. A list of Senate Assembly members. 1971. The Student Relations Commit- COMMITTEE PROCEDURES AND tional System of the State, Staff Ex- 22 per cent said "usually." No one ( and most of the members of CAA are the topics mentioned in the reports, tee has been reorganizing since the ACKNOWLEDGMENTS cellence, Student Quality. Improvement voted for the last two options and rational and experienced persons of by academic year, was compiled and Achievements of CESF establishment of a vice presidency in of Instruction, and A Center for the only 5 per cent for "recommend." broad views. It is also the product an attempt was made to describe the Over a period of fifteen years, this area. Relations of the Academic From March 3 to June 8, 1971 the Study of the University were proposed. Whof this member's experiences with the treatment the Committee accorded each CESF has become a body designed Services and Financial Affairs commit- committee held fifteen meetings, with The first four of these were imple-;about the rle is ei Committee that while the Committee item in terms of a (1) mention (2) re collect and disseminate informat tees to the vice presidents are similar numerous consultations in between mented and were operational until fair' are examined in terms of replies h been presented with alternatives es quest for study, (3) general request, re offer advice of member experts relwat comit ees, dodzeote col n throughout the summer. Several 11963. each dealing effectively with its by scos a xmnd olees fe un eits e adtain h ai suso 4 pcfcrqus.As oe eomn oiisadpirte, tdozen persons were interviewed by in- specific subject matter. The topics foud to have hige percentages than have been discussed and the result has were occasions when the Committee in a limited way, to represent the C. Faculty Participation: Past, Present, dividual members of the committee. A were uniform and specific and the sub- the result for the whole group (73 per been a rational choice of alternatives. indicated that a proposal had been cuity on economic matters. and Future substantial bibliography was read and committees acted for the mutual bene- cent), [School and college percentages Concerning the allegation that the accepted or that it was made again discussed. The committee studied the fit of faculty and administration, with aie not given if the total number of Vice President has dominated CAA, the The second step was to conduct a From 1956 through 1970 CESF exesv 90r respodgen fo the uita wasmess saeCmitemebrsy:"h series of interviews with former chair- (ports consisted of statistics on sale 1. AAUP Study: The University of extensive 1970 report from Michigan neither group having exclusive domin- respondents from the unit was less same Committee member says: "The of th om i fre benefits, obtained from State University on the same sub- ion over the initiation of an issue, than ten. in favor of the category Vice-President is a man of great abil- men ande Office of Staff Benefits and of Inst i Ject and other reports and contracts ' At the suggestion of then Vice-Presi- "almost always determine." The L.S.&A. ity and he speaks very freely. On the Wilam Haber, Douglas Kahn, Diktheir euvaent In 1970-71 AAUP's nationwide survey from around the country. It found dent Heyns, these subcommittees were percentage was 80, and Engineering, 75, other hand, members of the Committee Leabo, James Morgan, Harold Shapiro, the times with oextrapolations by on "Faculty Participation in College these documents lacking in specific either assigned separate committee j Public Health, 91, Business Administra- are in no way in awe of the Vice-Presi- and Stanley Siegel.] They were asked tertimeith and University Government." long- relevance to local circumstances need- status (e.g., the Role of the University tion, 80, and Education, 733.3. Three dent, and in my experience have not to verify and interpret the impressions pert members. range budgetary planning was last in ed, so proceeded to forge its own in- in the Educational System of the State units which had lower percentages than hesitated to speak just as freely as he gained from the study of the commit- The very origin of CESF was a sig relative amount of faculty participa- dependent report. became a standing committee advisory the general faculty responses (73 per does. There have been frequent meet- tee reports, to comment on the mis- ficant achievement in itself, for tion in a list of 31 items. Individual Former SACUA chairmen Joseph to then Vice-President Niehuss), or cent), were Medicine at 58, Dentistry at ings without him, and for a while it sion of the Committee as they under- not only established the right of faculty salaries was next to last, and appeared re merged into a new Educational 50, and Law at 71 per cent, although was the deliberate policy of the Com- stood it, and to make recommendations faculty to be informed in some de short-range budgetary planning (1-3 before the full committee, as did Pro- Policies Committee which was to be an all of them were at 50 per cent or over. mittee to meet without him. The Com- about its future operation. Former about its collective economic sta years) next up the line, then relatiye fessors Wilfred Kaplan and W il l i a m advisory committee to the Vice-Pres.. When the respondents were divided mittee's functions have by no means Vice President Marvin Niehuss was but also created the machinery to staff sixes of disciplines, faculty salary Porter, and Vice-President Allan dent for Academic Affairs. The latter into two groups - 155 representative been dominated by the Administration, also interviewed at this time. vide data for, at the least, a retros] cales, programs for buildings and fa- Smith. Full information was obtained committee served as a clearing house members of the faculty and 95 Assembly and the Committee has frequently se- The next step was to submit a first tive view of the comparative status culties, choice of president and' deans, on the aims and activities of the ma- for those matters coming from or going members - the responses of the more lected issues it wanted to discuss.' draft of a report to former members the Michigan faculty. and determination of average teach- jor bargaining agents, on related labor to(Memorandum 8) of the Committee on the Economic Year after year great efforts ing loads. In order, faculty had most law, and on collective bargaining pro- Affairs, as well as being the standing bers) were even more favorable to "aL CAA has also experienced problems Status of the Faculty (hereinafter call- put forth, for the most part by 1 to do with deciding on academic per- cedures. An effort was also made to committee advisory to Vice-President most always" and "usually," 76 as co- of implementation. Perhaps because it ed CESF) and to other informed mem- chairmen, in the presentation of r formance of students, curriculum, de- survey the activities of all the major Heyns. It usually met twice a month. pared with 71 per cent. While this dif- has not had a well-defined mission, a bers of the University, including cer- vant and concise explanations of gree requirements, membership a n d faculty committees serving the entire once in each of these capacities. The ference was not statistically significant, clear course of action has not always tain executive officers, for comment changing economic status of the specification of departmental commit- University faculty, Vice President used the committee as on no other aspect of University de- been associated with a recommenda- and criticism. A number of written culty, especially in relation to ot tees, types of degrees offered, and es- a sounding board and consulted with cision-making were the results so tion. The Assembly and/or SACUA have statements were received [James Gate, Institutions AAUP data have tablishment of new educational p r o- Professor Eggertsen undertook t h e it regularly. During the mid 1960's. strongly favorable to faculty determina- not followed a uniform policy in' sup- Dick Leabo, James Morgan, Cecil Nesbit, supplemented and for the past grams, Authority of faculty in govern- intensive investigations into the work and accompanying a change in the tion of policy. porting recommendations. They have Alan Polasky, F. M. Scherer, Stanley years comparisons among UM ca ment was 13th down the line. of the committees on Academic Af- functions of the Vice President f o r Stanley years cndpao'isgns an TeM c fairs and on Economic Status of the Academic Affairs, came a shift in em- TlIhe views of those who believe that Asometimes ailed to discuss reports of E. Seashore, Stanley Siegel, Robert Sup- scho On the matter of faculty authority y reported in Appendix A and phasis for the Committee. While be- CAA should influence University policy CAA or to distribute them to the en-er, Gerhard Weinberg.] and several in- The data preseted over the pe iversiy o gan score h- B. He also provided useful data on fore the reorganization many of the and that the present ability of the tire faculty. dividual and group discussions were indicate that the University of Mi in the upper quartile of responses current faculty attitudes through the group's assigned functions were on faculty to do so in one way or another The result is that the work of CAA 'condteeone rakn h muto aut ee-fhas sometimes been ignored without While an effort has been made fairlygafcuthshdalelofcn ranking the amount of faculty deter- questionnaire reported in Appendix Senate oriented issues, as well as ad- is not great enough, are supported by aseis accored onype.t refle and iporae the viws status enjoyed by few at o mination and joint action, as was true C. ministrative ones, the reorganization 'the responses to another question explanation and is accorded only per- t reflect and icorporate the views state universities. If economic be in most items, with the especially not- seems to have created a committee which asked about the ability of the functory attention in decision-making and recollections of all persons who ment could be traced to the work able exceptions of relative staff sizes Professor Terrence Tice was charged which became, with important excep- individual member of the faculty to Follow-up machinery often works on Iwere consulted, the responsibility for the Committee, there would be 1 of disciplines, programs for buildings with organizing committee business, tions, a forum for issues Initiated by influence the Vice President for Ace- an ad hoc basis depending on the the form and substance of this report doubt that CESF had served the fa joand facilities, and short- and long- gathering resources, drafting, and doing the administration deiaic Affairs. The options selected by interests of groups in and outside the is that of the writers. To the fullest 'ty well. gathe ridgresy"pcenindrafting andt).isgpthemadminystrtkon.udd ric Affa.r2. T" , se faculty. Altogether, the lack of im - extent possible the written statem ents range budgetary planning (0 per cent). ,supplementary- background research.' 250 respondents were "extreme.7pepeenaon rcdushsrdcdadtentsmde foalofr- Uftutey teeis esn A relatively high degree of consultation Other committee members contributed Perhaps due to shifts in purposes cent. "muc," 17 per cent, "some," 40 plementation procedures has reduced enc the notes made of oral confer- Unfortunately there is reason was reported by both the administra- to and discussed the drafting at various each committee from 1967 to the pre- per cent, "ittle" 26 per cem. and the impact CAA might otherwise have ences have been compiled and placed uween the activity of the Commi tion and 'the Ann Arbor chapter for stages. Some committee sessions were sent has felt it advisable to define its "note,1per cent. pe It itr had. o on file in the office of the Senate Ad- an the ec icty of fac' all of these exceptions but budgetary devoted to this task. The chairman, goals anew, and has relied on its that very much the same responses Lembers has ao be a o to fisfor comuttion bypersons ac- planning, where the two sources agreed Professor John Reed, and Professor chairman and the Vice President for t emembers has also been an obstacle to fairs for consultation by persons ac members at Michigan. Perhaps C that there is little or no faculty par- I Tice edited the penultimate draft, Academic Affairs for guidance. Some red to other executive officers the effective functioning of the Com- corded permission to use them. has had little influence one way or ticipation. On dismissal for cause and which then was considered by the full examples of changes in focus are: b notedth atat rese there mee Little or no staff support has All of the former members of CESF other, for other factors may have appointment of academic deans, the committee and approved. Care was tak- t t bl t ish of who replied to the invitation to react a dministration and chapter answers en to provide exact and comprehensive "With some regrets it was decided sno comparably st ronfor teitae ofnCAA t twe aenou t fit drat arett 1differed, 'the administration supposing information, so that faculty w o ut 1 d Ithat the Committee should operate ihe wiut't ud nvriyplcyPooasfrteFtr fCAt the onentsa ontheis dratoge hihdere fdeemnain rjinnhv finance, research, and state rela- 'The most objective possible analysis wihtegnrlcnlsosadtn state universities, (2) the overall fix a hghdegee~fdetrmnaionorjont av agood basis for making consld - both .as a Sub-Committee of tbona as is expressed with regard to of such materials as are available for of the report. Seven of them suggested cniino h saeo ihgn action by the faltthe chapter ered judgments of their own and so SACUA and as an advisory com-codtn.fthsaefMihg, cco e n seb embrs d mAtUA to ts V Pd enty o r academic affairs. this report, (including what might be changes in interpretation or comment- fluent in the early sixties and less clatmnonly ' hihdg fcnhae aeqate foeby ebrs taking Academi Afais. Ite mustreidn besifhrtotattog termed minority views) leads to the ed upon the meaning of the findings in recent years, and () a political sultation. have adequate background for taking Academic Affairs. It must e said here. too. that though conclusion that the best interests of for the future conduct of the activity mate increasingly favorable to the s These findings corroborate what has action on the several recommendations. From the 1967-68 Report. the differences are again not statis- the faculty would be served through of CESE port of the broad educational bas been reported in earlier sections of this The Committee takes this opportunity " tically significant, the Assembly re- the assignment to CAA of the follow- the expense of excellence at the p reot.and in the three appended to thank the. many persons who con- "The main function of this Coin- spondents were only slightly more in- Am iuity fteMsino h h xes feclec ttep report nd h trbtek to mts pfrsns pheased mittee is to consult with and ad- dined to rate their ability to influ- ing missions: (1) to review and make Ambigty of the Mission of tie mid's top. The links between the o studies tributed to its efforts. It is pleased iteVice-President for Academic recommendations about any and all Comittee on the Economic ation of these variables and the w to rescognize that only a few minor vi ence the Vice President for Academic issues related to academic affairs and Status of the Faculty of CESF are difficult to find, 2. Faculty. Attitude at the University. additions seemed indicated in view of Affairs with respect to academic Affairs "Extreme," for the comparable ()to isusrtdexercise roaespniiity aforpbPrhap the chie difcly cuCmEe, ater aficl, is hardly m of Michigan the considerable information made matters of University-wide signi- percentages, were 10 (Assembly) to 5') to ofeall resposinfor for pub- Perhaps the chief difficulty the nt- Committee, after all, is hard" vaabehrghTeIsiueo n- ficance." (non-Assembly) "much" 13-19, "some" Influtncenlir all reports and for focussing ;ered in an attempt to assess the in- powerful than King Canute. ( Results of a questionnaire returned tinavailable throEducation Iconference Con- f From the 1968-69 Report. 43-37. "little" 13-6 per cent f influence of the total faculty in fluence of CESF in University policy- Memorandum Number 2, in the i by some 250 Universit of Michi an Ltheir implementation. making arose from uncertainties about of SACUA). on't 1958-59, it was addressed to the people nd- of Michigan and their elected repre- om- sentatives. In 1969-70, CESF attempted only to communicate with the faculty. While for in several years the report was given the label of "confidential", it was nce thought mainly to be furnished to the ent, administration for use in Lansing. able The lack of a specific mandate to CESF uESF it is believed by some Committee mem- silty bers, has led the group to be reactive sout rather than positive. Executive officers ent have tended to take issues to CESF when they were thought to be pressing ones or, often, to report what had al- the ready been done, or to present limited to options. ion. It has become usual for the Commit- to tee to meet only when such issues were and, brought to it, except that a number fa- of sessions have been called as the time for the report drew near. Meet- re- ings to consider economic issues pre- sented by the Administration have been lary rare in recent years. In 1970-71, for the example, CESF was not called upon to s at advise on the impact of the three per ext cent budget cut on the economic status of the faculty. The administration may have consulted other groups, for it gni- I might well be expected to wonder, un- it der present circumstances, "What group the do we consult about what problems." tail Perhaps also due to a lack of clarity tus, of purpose, some recommendations ap- pro- pear vague and naive, as in 1959-60, pec- when someone not defined was asked s of to provide more money for the faculty. Uncertainty about function may, also were, be partly responsible for the alleged he: ease with which CESF sometimes un- ele- I critically agreed with policies recom. the mended to it. It may also have been fa- in part responsible for a failure to ther study salaries in relation to the total een budget or to the adoption of a salary few, schedule. pus Since confusion has existed concern ade ing the goals of CESF, and especially riod about what was meant by its "advis- chi- ory" role, it is hardly surprising that om- no formal mechanisms for the further ther discussion or implementation of its ter- recommendations has come into exist- of ence, or that little coordination of its ittle activity through Senate Assembly me- cul- chanisms has occurred. The same doubts about purpose, ac- to companied by a feeling of ineffective- be- ness, may have caused some CESF ttee members to feel that they were treat- ulty ed paternalistically, as p e r s o n s who ESF could not understand issues so com- the plex - that only officers who devoted had full time to them in all their ramifi- sal- cations could do so. One executive of- days ficer reminded members that they be- iong longed to a minority group. Another, isal according to the complaint of a re- af- cent chairman, was uncooperative in s s making economic information available. cli- up- It must be noted here that the frus- at tration of CESF members may have yra- arisen in part because of their inabil- per- ity to negotiate with the approval of ork the faculty. Faculty preference until The now seems not to have favored CESF more as a negotiating or bargaining commit- See tee. (Memorandum 3) files The Future of the Committee .y ava j uvry u unga Fult.Pwr Collective Bargainn faculty are detailed in a report to be on Campus," held in Ann Arbor Sep- fTios attached here (Appendix C). Among tember 17-18, 1971. The conference re-Efunctions: form jSenate Assembly members still port, scheduled for publication early 1. advises the Vice President for available, 95 responded - over half of in 1972, will be available to supple- Academic Affairs on matters which those who had served since its incep- ment this report and other material he refers to the Committee and it ,ion in' 1964-65. The remainder were i to be kept on file in several UM meets regularly with him. chosen at random. Contrary to expec- libraries. 2. considers other subjects relating tations, on most items the two groups.to educational policy and makes differe.d little in their replies. :.;:.:.:.::::.:::: .... ?.::;: :k'-;;; ,;;;;;,;:" as compared: :;a: with the affirmative ai- ing to be so widespread as to be vir- rdm ,tw mmbr sdthtmittee has had influence on a decision- "reactors" rather than initiators. As a :.............. Igiiggglggggggas compared iihteafraiea- changes in chronology be made and mite ha a mfum m eiin "cors"ene rather thaoirtars Aeibrs ai swers of the sample of 159 non-Assem-, tually inevitables even for institutions two others disagreed with committee making level, but sometimes only after consequence, in our former member's' likeD "N E'I of Mihgn n1iw tws feunl omte bly members, only 19 per cent of whomi like the University of Michigan. Un- colleagues about the nature of rela- initial decisions on alternatives and whichm fiddled while Ronme bumne APPENDIX B resyoned "es The difherences be-n questionably, massive changes In gov- tionships that have existed between their importance h (Memorandum tween the groups, significant to the yningsucr and in pcdre - A dadni ierrenthr pranehave been made else- (Mmrn; no. 9). The Committee on the Economic tentegopsgiiat1 te ~rnlg srueureand n poceure af j CA ad aminstrtiverepesetatvesStatus of the Faculty, 1955-70 one per cent level, is one of the few nerting faculty economic status are The present report seeks also to re- where. While this point of view seems to item pont wh , suen a feec uderway throughou tecountry. tu fleet the views of those who disagreed Faculty View of CAA be that held by most of the former I g.....ss.sbn a substantial rol in thi T ha t with the majority of respondents on From this brief review of the work members of CAA who responded to an sembly respondents- e s. o wha the issue of relationships and on the invitation to participate in the analysis, Purpose r extent increased experience will pro- genera tone of the first draft of theconcluded that while That the faculty, even so divided, be- duce further reasons and pressures sup- report. (Memorandum 1 and 8). 'o CAAthe group has exercised influence on is not unanimous. This examination of the performance lieves that the CESF exerts signifi- nortive of collective bargaining remains t group h er d i)fluenceno oq nf f win ra n. ... >f the Senate Assembly Committee on ant infuence.relati'e to that exerted , particular fringe benefit? 1. The mission of CESF must be pre- -How many will be able to shift cisely stated and expanded. from payment of their own funds onI 2 Its recommendations should be such a fringe benefit payment frotf dpresented to the Senate Assembly and 'University funds? 'carried further only with strong sup- -How many would not take advant- port from that body. age of increased Univeristy support for 3 CESF, in combination with SACUA a fringe benefit, preferring to 'have, or some other extant or newly created for example, 80 cents in their own body, should fuly utilize faculty pocket than have the University spend strength in urging the adoption of its a dollar on benefit not desired? (Me- srengmmenduring the adinisfrit recomnmendat ions upon the administra- nmorandum 2X tion The result nas been the implicit con- construction of a "utility function" f o r Alternative Two the faculty by CESF. It has meant that while some members have been worse 1. The mission of CESF must be more off, the majority have enjoyed an im- precisely stated. proved statushthrough tax advantages j 2. It must no longer be called, or gained through direct university bene- regarded as, "advisory." fit purchase. (Memorandum 2) For 3. It should become an "executive" most, then, significant advances were committee' to act with the President, made largely on the basis of CESF ad- or other executive officers, in the sam vice on group life insurance, retire- way campus school and college execu- ment, group travel insurance, disabil- tive committees now join with deans in ity, health programs, and insurance. In governance these matters, CESF nearly always( r made determinations within the al- 4. This would mean that measures in- ready established range of allocations. itiated by faculty or administration A member of CESF. comments about which affect the economic status of the improvements in fringe benefits that faculty would be adopted only with the the Committee may have had less to! agreement of the new CESF. do with alleged gains than is some- 5. This change in status might be ef- times claimed, for "certain fringe bene- fected through changes in Regental By- fits attained by the faculty in the last Laws or adopted through a memorand- three years were first granted to non- um of agreement. academic personnel as a result of bar- Whether strengthened in one of these gaining. They wdre later granted to the ways or in some other way, to be ef- academic faculty under the policy that fective in raising faculty compensation, academic fringe benefits should at especially to meet the consequences of least equal those granted non-academic inflation, CESF must be expected to personnel." (Memorandum 1) perform such functions as the follow- In at least two cases CESF acted to ing: affect priorities related to salary lev- 1. Maintain and direct its own inde- els. For many years the CESF urged pendent and continuing fact-finding that priority be given to salary raises agency through the use of full-time for younger faculty members in order personnel; and press for a full array of to attract instructors and assistant pro- information that will display the ab- fessors. That this recommendation has solute and relative status of the fa- been followed is shown by AAUP rank- culty. Examples: (a) The Committee ings of AA for these groups, while the must have access to information con- comparable ranking for, full profes- cerning comparative status changes of sors has dropped to B. CESF may be administrative, service, and research accorded more credit for this outcome staff components of the university; (b) than it deserves since the balance The Committee must seek information struck may have been largely a reaction with respect to patterns of individual tocompetitive conditions in the market status changes and the manner in for academicians. which significant changes may be con- The recommendations of CESF were cealed within rank averages: (c) The also followed in the readjustment of Committee must consider changes in pay patterns when Term III c a m e the'distribution of fractional-time ap- into being. Committee lore nas it that pointments and the proportions of fa- the struggle over this issue was sharp culty on full-year and part-year ap- and that the CESF view prevailed when pointments; (d) The Committee must it became clear that it represented inquire into faculty income and bene- strong fapulty opinion. fits derived from their faculty position On this issue, as on others which and function but not formally part of affect faculty compensation, CESF has the University's compensation system. been effective as a channel of com- (Document 3) munication. The interests of faculty 2. Produce factual, well-documented have been served by early awareness and comprehensive reports, which fully of directions of administrative plan- examine alternatives. ning and the consequent raising of is- 3 Make clear and well-supported re- sues which might otherwise nave been com edarns- overlooked. (Memorndum 2) Executive Icommendations. officers have consulted CESF on eco- 4. Address reports which take into nomic tissues from time to time,, al- account "opportunity cost and market though this function seems to have be- forces" with each audience. come less important in recent years. A ! 5. Attempt a determination of what recent chairman and long-time member salaries "should be", as the Commit- of CESF reports:. "We have not been tee attempted to do 'in 1969-70, taking called upon recently." (Memorandum 7) competition, cost of living, and per Another members writes: "During the capita income into account, in a move past three years, one member of Staff away from solely retrospective eval Benefits Office attended one meeting nations toward predictive forecast. of the Economic Status Committee It is clear that in the future the This is the one and only instance of faculty will have to make effective contact between the Committee and the economic recommendations if any mea- Administration." (Memorandum 1) -.. ,+a i t. n..Iu-n } vv, Live vi cuncctave Liargaining remains 1 i ne views of tnose wno ao not agree cant umunce reiuiv Lo nacexere.