Academic Staff Assembly celebrates 20 years

In August 1985, the Wisconsin statutes were amended to formally give academic staff at all UW System institutions the right to be “active participants in the immediate governance of and policy development for the institution,” including academic staff personnel matters.

At its Nov. 14 meeting, UW–Madison’s Academic Staff Assembly celebrated the 20th anniversary of shared governance, which was followed by a reception honoring Academic Staff Executive Committee members who have served since 1987.

Among the speakers at the meeting was Joann Elder, a leader in academic staff issues for more than three decades. She recalled that when the shared governance movement began in the 1970s, UW–Madison’s academic staff was “as invisible as the cupola that used to be on Bascom Hall” and had little influence.

“Organizing people to act in their own best interest is very challenging,” she says, adding that it was not easy to convince the academic staff that it needed its own voice.

The early goals of governance were to promote professional recognition and advancement, encourage a measure of job security and due process, and lobby for a fair share of budget resources.

“I don’t think that has changed much in the 30 years,” says Elder. “Over the years we’ve been trying to make ourselves visible and heard, and we’ve come a long way.”

Assistant Dean of Students Emeritus Steve Saffian, the first chair of the Academic Staff Executive Committee (ASEC), read from a March 1988 document titled “Governance: The Academic Staff Perspective,” in which he had concluded the following:

“The great fear for the current governance initiative is that putting formal structures in place will widen the existing gap between faculty, staff and students, and create new gaps where none existed. Early predictions of adversarial relationships have not materialized.

“The new interactions of staff and faculty and students and administration prompted by governance have been congenial and mutually supportive. Familiarity in this case seems to be breeding new respect. The net effect promises a kind of synergy which can only work in the best interests of the participants and the institution as a whole.”

Current ASEC chair Frank Kooistra, associate dean for administration in the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, told those gathered that although much progress has been made during the last 20 years, the job is not yet done.

“There is much that remains, including some dark clouds on the horizon,” said Kooistra.

“If you have followed the news lately, a single personnel matter has touched off discussion that impacts the status of our job security, annual and sick leave benefits, and the opportunity for indefinite appointments.

“There are still issues related to the policies and procedures associated with limited appointments and how those decisions will impact our own policies and procedures,” he says, adding that the impact of the audits commissioned by the legislature on the use of benefits and job security may be of even greater concern.

Kooistra noted that the institutional awards, professional development and academic staff mentoring programs have been improved and expanded in recent years.

He said that one of the most important ASEC activities for the future will be to develop and network with the Committees on Academic Staff Issues (CASIs).

The Academic Staff Executive Committee and the Assembly are well-established governance activities that have matured and exist at the campus level. Several years ago the chancellor directed colleges and division-level units to establish CASIs to advise on matters that impact staff.

“We have not seen a unilateral acceptance of the CASI concept and as leaders change, the level of activity of the CASI changes. Some CASIs have become inactive. The CASI will provide a necessary link to academic staff at the department level, and it will provide the bridge to getting staff more involved at that level.”

Kooistra said other priorities for the future include:

• reviewing salary ranges with the goal of raising salary maximums;
• working to raise awareness of and improve the use of the “Distinguished” prefix;
• re-introducing the issue of the instructional professor working title;
• monitoring staff promotions to ensure they are done in a timely manner;
• working with the rest of the university community to improve the campus climate; and
• seeking to encourage an improved level of performance evaluation.

Kooistra noted that the number of academic staff members has nearly tripled since 1975, when the university had 2,170 faculty members and 2,050 academic staff. Today there are 2,064 faculty and 7,100 academic staff.

He said some of that could be attributed to the outstanding faculty at the university.

“Those same numbers are drawing in a lot of category A and category B academic staff that have really been providing the engine which makes this institution go. Obviously the building blocks are the faculty, but what has kept us going is a three-fold increase in academic staff.”

Interim Provost Virginia Sapiro thanked those attending the meeting for their participation in shared governance. She said the celebration recognized “that we are all a part of this (university) community, and that has never been as critical as it is now.”