Faculty Senate

Information for the Faculty of the University of Louisville.




University of Louisville

Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes

February 5, 2014


The regular meeting of the Faculty Senate was held on February 5, 2014 at 3:00 P.M. in the Chao Auditorium, Ekstrom Library, Belknap Campus, Joseph Steffen presiding.


Senators Registering Attendance:

A&S: David Brown, John McLeod, Joseph Steffen, Beth Willey CoB: Robert Barker, Ben Foster Dentistry: Ricardo Caicedo, Robert Staat Education: Patrick Hardesty, Robert Pennington, Tom Simmons Kent: Sean Golder, Martin Hall Law: Luke Milligan, Enid Trucios-Haynes Libraries: Terri Holtze, Margo Smith Medicine: Forest Arnold, Richard Downs, Pamela Feldhoff Music: Ansyn Banks, Dror Biran, Krista Wallace-Boaz Nursing: Diane Chlebowy, Karen Singleton Part-time Faculty: Donna Gaus, Joseph Gutmann, Rose Mills, Susan Peacock, John Ritz, Michael Wade Public Health: Ray Austin Speed: J.P. Mohsen

Also Attending:

Ex Officio:            Shirley Willihnganz

Others:                 Bob Stenger (ULARP), Gretchen Henry, recording secretary



Senators Not Registering Attendance:

A&S: Annette Allen, Carrie Donald, Jasmine Farrier, Ron Sahoo, David Simpson, Elaine Wise, Tamara Yohannes CoB: Bruce Kemelgor, Robert Myers  Dentistry: Donald Demuth, David Willis Education: Daya Sandhu Kent: Wanda Lott Collins Law: Kurt Metzmeier Libraries: Gail Gilbert  Medicine: Yousef Abu Kwaik, Ted Feldmann, Saeed Jortani, Sham Kakar, Brad Keller, Nobuyuki Kuwabara, Steven Myers, David Stirling Nursing: Valerie McCarthy Public Health: Scott LaJoie Speed: Bruce Alphenaar, Roger Bradshaw, Kevin Walsh



CALL TO ORDER: – Steffen

IN MEMORIAM: Professor Edwin Render – Enid Trucios-Haynes

This is attached below and online.

ACTION ITEM: The meeting minutes from January 8, 2014 were approved unanimously as amended.

REPORT: Student Government Association – Grant Ford

Due to illness, no report was made.


REPORT: Staff Senate – Ginger Brown

No report was made, as the Staff Senate does not meet in January.


INFORMATION ITEM: Annual Report of the University Ombudsman - Belak

This report was available online and attached below.


INFORMATION ITEM: Annual Report of the Faculty Grievance Officer – Trucios-Haynes

This report was available online and attached below.

REPORT: Provost’s Report - Dr. Shirley Willihnganz

The Provost also gave the President’s report in his absence. The budget that the governor presented to the state legislature included a 2.5% cut to higher education and 5% cuts to other state agencies.  We had planned for a 2.5% cut in our budget Scenario A. The budget team is discussing various ideas about what can be done and is trying to figure out how to do what we want to do to move the University forward. The Provost addressed the weather and the many class cancellations it has caused. There is no capacity for make-up classes. Each unit will decide how to handle this issue.  Individual faculty cannot reschedule classes on their own.  Students cannot be expected to attend make-up classes on days and times not listed on the original syllabus. Campus Forums on the 21st Century Initiatives will be held this week and the Board of Trustees will get an update on February 13th. The world is quickly changing and we need to be able to keep pace and remain relevant to our students. She spoke of updating Gen Ed guidelines next year; looking for growth areas in various disciplines; our technology infrastructure and the various ways to use technology in teaching and learning; improving our internal communication and how we create a better environment where all feel safe; fixing the budgeting model for more transparency and ease of understanding; and, addressing vulnerabilities that exist in positions with financial responsibilities.

REPORT: Standing Committee Reports

Academic Programs Committee (APC) – This has reviewed 2 proposals: a joint MBA with UK and a PhD in Neuroscience. Both have been returned to the proposers for clarification.

Committee on Committees and Credentials (CCC) – This committee did not meet. Reminder: Elections will be held at the May meeting.

Part-time Faculty Committee (PTFC)-This report was online. The committee met with Bob Goldstein to discuss conducting a PTF salary review. 

Planning & Budget Committee (P&B)- This committee met, discussed and prepared the faculty Senate’s response to the 21st Century Initiatives Report. The document was sent to the Executive Committee for review and on to Provost Willihnganz. Chair Steffen lauded the committee for its work and well-written response.

Redbook & Bylaws Committee (RB) –The committee met just prior to this meeting to review revisions to The REDBOOK. A full report will be made next month.

Executive Committee (XC)- This report was available online.



Faculty Athletic Representative (FAR) – Elaine Wise – This report was available online.

Human Resources Advisory Committee (HRAC) – Pamela Feldhoff – This report was available online.

Parking Advisory Committee (PAC) – Karen Karp/Karen Singleton – This report was available online.


REPORT: Faculty Senate Chair – Steffen

The Board of Trustees meets next week and will discuss the 21st Century Initiatives Report. The Academic Technology Committee has been revived, with Speed Dean Pinto as its chair.


New Business


Old Business

The Executive Committee discussed the boycott of Israeli institutions that President Ramsey mentioned at the January meeting. The committee was in agreement with Dr. Ramsey’s letter, in which he supported the concept that a free exchange of ideas and academic freedom would not be consistent with a boycott. The Executive Committee did not think it necessary to add to the list of institutions/bodies that oppose any effort to boycott academic institutions, regardless of the political systems in which they operate.


Chair Steffen reminded senators that the Celebration of Teaching & Learning will take place this Thursday and Friday. Also, on March 3rd, Dr. Dom Caristi, a Fulbright Ambassador, will give a breakfast presentation on HSC and, later, on Belknap, for a lunch presentation at the University Club.



The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 P.M.





Respectfully submitted,

Gretchen Stein Henry

Faculty Senate Secretary




Edwin R. Render -- In Memoriam

Before the Faculty Senate of the University of Louisville

By Enid Trucios-Haynes

February 5, 2014


My colleague of 20 years, Edwin R Render passed away on January 4, 2014. He was a native of Beaver Dam, Kentucky.


He earned his Bachelor of Arts degree from Western Kentucky University, his law degree from Vanderbilt University, and masters of law degree from Harvard University.  From 1962 to 1965 he was a staff attorney with the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, from 1965 to 1967 an Assistant U.S. Attorney, and from 1967 to 1968 an associate at Greenebaum Barnett Wood & Doll (today Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP).  In 1968 he joined the faculty of the Louis D. Brandeis School of Law at the University of Louisville, where he taught until December 2013.  During his 45 years at U of L he taught thousands of lawyers in Louisville, Kentucky, and throughout the nation courses.  He taught, among other things, Property, Evidence, and Labor Law.


Ed Render’s relationship to the work of the faculty senate was behind the scenes.  He served for many years as a hearing officer for faculty and staff grievances, and as Chair of numerous Faculty Grievance Committees.

He was an active member of the Louisville and American Bar Associations, the Louisville Labor Management Committee, the American Arbitration Association, and the National Academy of Arbitrators.  He was on the Executive Board of the U.S. Branch of the International Society of Labor Law and Social Security.  For many years he was an active arbitrator, on one occasion determining the winner of the Indianapolis 500 auto race.  He was a founding member of the Brandeis School of Law’s Carl A. Warns Labor and Employment Law Institute, and supervised it for many years.


Ed was also a wonderful mentor to many of his younger colleagues at the Brandeis School of Law. His door was always open, and he was a willing mentor to many, both junior and more senior members of the faculty.  In particular, he helped many of his junior colleagues make a successful journey to tenure and throughout their careers. He was always ready to offer encouragement and assurances about the process.


He and I shared an interest in labor law issues as these relate to immigration law which is my field of research.  We often discussed the plight of the undocumented and he took a special interest in those whose voices often are not heard.


Most important of all, Ed was an incredibly gifted teacher during his 45 years as an active member of our faculty.  Ed never retired and he taught through the end of last semester in December 2013.  He had many thousands of students, most notably in Evidence and Labor Law.  His students today are successful lawyers and judges in Louisville and throughout the Commonwealth of Kentucky and across the United States. He was known for his wit in the classroom and his salty language which entertained students throughout the years.


Ed was a man of many interests.  He was an assistant leader of Louisville Boy Scout Troop 315.  He piloted his own plane to a wide variety of locations.  He loved to mountain climb at places like Mt. Rainier, Mont Blanc, and the Matterhorn.  He enjoyed good music, especially listening to his daughter Alice play horn with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra.


In honor of Ed’s service and commitment to the law school and our students for 45 years, we have established the Edwin R. Render Scholarship fund.





October 2012 – October 2013

University of Louisville



An ombud’s scope of duties and authority is limited and based on neutrality, independence, impartiality, and confidentiality. An ombuds must not disclose and must not be required to disclose any information provided in confidence with the exception of the statutory duty to inform of imminent harm to an identifiable person or abuse of elders or children. The ombuds should be able to develop, evaluate, and discuss options available to affected individuals and be capable of negotiating, facilitating, or mediating in conducting an inquiry. Another important role is education and identifying complaint patterns and trends and to make recommendations for the resolution of an individual complaint or a systemic problem to those persons who have the authority to act upon them.

An ombuds is not a substitute for a legal representative, personal representative, or advocate. Due to the informal, neutral, confidential, and independent work of the ombuds they typically do not have a role or engage in formal investigations, serve in any post that might compromise the neutrality of the office, receive notice to the organization, make binding decisions or mandate policies, or create or maintain records or reports to the organization. An ombuds may act as a personal coach to individuals who wish to transform themselves or the organizational culture.

An ombuds can be the eyes, ears, and intellect of an enlightened organization that recognizes the value and importance of alert and pro-active intervention of common and ordinary complaints, reflected as the value leadership places on the people who work in such a caring environment. It is a form of risk management with the added benefit of allowing people with a problem to work it out in an early and simple way, before it can get out of control or more difficult to manage.


During this period the ombuds conducted 16 university related teaching or training programs of at least one hour duration:

10 Professional Development (faculty and staff)

6 Student Centered Discussions


During this period the ombuds consulted with a minimum of 70 unique individuals:

34 Staff - Staff

32 Faculty - Faculty

4 Student - Faculty

These consultations may have involved several people over several meetings or telephone conversations but are counted as a single unit for the purpose of this report. The total number of people served may number in the hundreds. About 20 % of all cases involve staff-faculty issues.



A repetitive issue of concern involves relationship weaknesses, due primarily to poor communication, lack of respect or trust, and a sense of not being recognized for contribution to the common effort. Supervisors and managers probably do not recognize that successful communication is a two-way street. An exchange of expectations is different from giving instructions, and many have said the breakdown of the professional relationship was sudden and unexpected. When actions are consistent with words trust can be achieved and often arises from interdependence with others to achieve positive outcomes. Cooperation cannot be compelled and workplace interactions, the foundation of confidence or belief felt toward another to overcome fear or doubt, are often found wanting. Trust contains a strong emotional component but we do not share expectations, agree to steps to attain those expectations, sanctions for unmet expectations, and measurements of outcomes. This is a fair process, but many employees complain they thought they were doing a good job only to be formally censured, usually under the guidance of Human Resources policies and procedures. Over 70% of employees are not fully engaged in their jobs and only 12% report having the leaders they need. 80% of employees who are dissatisfied with their direct manager were disengaged, while 70 % who lack confidence in the abilities of senior leadership are not fully engaged. 78% of workers in the U.S. have expressed that being recognized for their work is necessary for them to be motivated to do their job. (Gallup State of the American Workplace Poll)

A recent survey by Philippe Glaude indicates that about 74% of respondents indicate that engaging people in a dialogue happens either sometimes or rarely. The same people say that this ability is important or absolutely important in 94% of cases. When looking at the ability to ask insightful questions 65% expressed rarely or sometimes results and 96% of these people say this ability is important or absolutely important.

More faculty are utilizing the services of the ombuds this year over last as trust of the office has grown and successful practices are being shared. Because faculty must consult the ombuds prior to filing a grievance, it may be possible this process is responsible for the low grievance filing and that matters of concern are being attended to earlier and with a neutral third party as a facilitator.



The Office of the Ombuds is working with Get Healthy Now and Dr. Pradeep Deshpande, professor emeritus, to bring about a program for the university community to raise individual consciousness and, thereby, the consciousness of the collective to enhance personal interactions, satisfaction, creativity, and compassion. Research indicates that empathy and compassion are higher in people who meditate regularly, and meditation diminishes age-related effects on gray matter in the brain and reduces the decline of cognitive functions. Compassionate management should be a core value at the University of Louisville. Compassion boosts employee well-being and health and the more we are compassionately connected the better we feel and the more others are there to support us when we need it, as we all will at some time. Care and compassion are not separate from being professional or doing the work of the university but are a natural and living representation of people’s humanity in the workplace.



Workplace conflict creates stress, destroys morale, decreases motivation, and reduces job satisfaction.  Given the negative consequences of conflict, most people do not choose to exacerbate these behaviors and act or react because they do not have the skills to deal with conflict in the workplace.


When people learn more productive ways to interact, they can communicate differently, and workplace relationships can improve.  The framework of a skills-development program is built on the precepts of conflict resolution and transformation, including perception clarification, empathetic listening, appreciation of diversity, collaborative problem-solving, and emotional intelligence (P.E.A.C.E . was developed by Dr. LaVena Wilkin, Director of graduate studies at Sullivan University, Louisville, Kentucky).


For interventions to be effective, they must address the root causes and antecedents of the conflict.  Communication and perceptions are at the root of almost every conflict, so these are fundamental components of any ombud’s interaction.  Additionally, self-awareness, empathy, and emotional intelligence have a positive effect on workplace aggression.  Self-awareness helps people become attuned to their emotions so they understand the motivations behind their actions and communications.  Likewise, empathy allows people to understand the other person’s feelings and view the world through his or her lens.  Finally, when people understand the role emotions play in their responses, they are less likely to react to negative situations in a destructive manner.


Although presented separately, the precepts of P.E.A.C.E. are not linear.  In fact, they overlap and build upon one another.  For example, perceptions are clarified by empathetically listening, appreciating diversity, and employing emotional intelligence.  Each of these will support collaborative problem solving, which is more respectful, satisfying, affiliate, and empowering.



The ombuds office has an online and anonymous kindness/civility survey capability for use within departments or schools to encourage open discussion of prevailing matters or issues of importance. The three question survey asks how we are treating each other on a scale of one to five, what acts of kindness have been witnessed by colleagues lately as well as any concerns regarding social media involving the group, and what concerns one may have regarding this particular workplace. Responses come to the ombuds and the information may be shared with the group in a facilitated discussion. The numerical score establishes a baseline and the survey can be repeated periodically to measure climate changes and identify issues for discussion. This can be an effective management tool if we embrace the philosophy that people are important and should be treated as human capital. Core values promoting trust, diversity, personal and professional growth, mutual respect, civility, and productive communication should be absolute necessities for our university to thrive and compete. Managers have been reluctant to utilize this method of raising and addressing concerns and matters of importance to employees, perhaps as a perceived threat to managerial authority and control. The most effective leaders at leading and adapting to change at any level in the organization are those that have the highest level of emotional intelligence. The components of knowledge, skills, and abilities that comprise emotional intelligence can be learned. Leadership competencies of adaptability, decision making, team building, and communication are essential to a healthy workplace with an emotionally healthy workforce. Deans should encourage department chairs to experiment with resources and tools offered by the ombuds office.


Tony Belak


October – December

Calendar Year 2013



During this period the Ombuds consulted with ten faculty members on a variety of issues dealing with inter-personal matters, compensation, or inter-departmental conflicts.


During this period the Ombuds consulted with six staff matters and one case involving three graduate students in one department.


During this period the Ombuds met with nine graduate students in a PLAN training session.



During the calendar year 2013 the Ombuds conducted 17 university related teaching or training programs of at least one hour duration:

10 Professional Development (faculty and staff)

7 Student Centered


During calendar year 2013 the Ombuds consulted with a minimum of 89 unique individuals:

44 Staff – Staff

38 Faculty – Faculty (Administration)

7 Student – Faculty

These consultations may have involved several people over several meetings or telephonic conversations but are counted only once for this report.





University Faculty Grievance Officer

Enid Trucios-Haynes

Annual Report to the University of Louisville Faculty Senate

Prepared January 15, 2014

This report is submitted as required by the Faculty Senate Redbook, Section 4.4.1.A, and covers the period from July 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013, unless otherwise noted.  My appointment as Faculty Grievance Officer [FGO] was effective January 1, 2010.


The Revised Dispute Resolution Process

Changes to the informal dispute resolution procedure at the University of Louisville were approved by the Board of Trustees on October 13, 2011, effective immediately.  A dispute is defined as difference of opinion between a faculty member and another faculty member or administrator that has led to a perceived material disadvantage by the faculty member.  A dispute becomes a complaint if the faculty member is unable to resolve the dispute personally and formally contacts either the University Ombudsperson or the Faculty Grievance Officer.   If the complaint is accepted by the University Faculty Grievance Committee it becomes a grievance.  Redbook, Chapter 4, Article 4.4.5.

As amended, Redbook, Chapter 4, Article 4.4 recognizes two types of disputes; each with distinct procedures.    Some disputes, referred to as Type 2 disputes, proceed directly to the grievance complaint stage of the process and are initiated with the FGO.   In most cases, a Type 1 dispute exists and consultation with the Ombuds Office is a requirement before a grievance complaint can be filed with the FGO.  There are a number of options to resolve disputes including facilitated and other informal discussions as well as formal mediation.  These options are available through the Ombuds Office generally and, for purposes of filing a grievance complaint, under the procedures specified in Redbook, Chapter 4, Article 4.4.

The faculty member must take action within 60 days of the decision/action being disputed or the date when the faculty member reasonably should have learned of the decision/action.   Within that 60 day timeframe, the faculty member must submit a written request for consultation with the Ombuds Office in a Type 1 dispute or submit a written statement of complaint with the FGO in a Type 2 dispute.  In the case of a Type 1 dispute, if informal dispute resolution is not successful or the faculty member chooses to proceed with a grievance complaint without pursuing informal dispute resolution, the Ombuds Office will confirm the consultation occurred with a written statement provided to the faculty member.  If the faculty member chooses to file a grievance complaint, it must be submitted to the FGO within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of the Ombuds Office written statement. Redbook, Chapter 4, Article 4.4.5.A.1.

Instructions for potential grievants are available on the FGO website, as well as forms for  Type 1 and Type 2 grievance submissions.


Grievance Statistics and Activity

This report covers the period from July 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013, unless otherwise noted.  A chart of activity during this period summarizing the grievance activity by unit is also included in this report.  My last report was submitted in October 2012 and included information from July 1, 2011- June 30, 2012.

During this 1.5 year period of time, three new grievances were filed and two grievances remained pending from the prior year which had beeen filed under the prior grievance process in place as of October 10, 2011.  The Redbook amendments were approved by the Board of Trustees on October 11, 2011.   Currently there are three grievances pending.  Five grievances were concluded under the grievance process during this time period, and one grievance was resolved outside of the grievance process.

During the time period, I consulted with a total of 13 individuals.  A few of these consultations were one-time meetings to discuss the nature of the faculty member’s dispute as well as the Redbook procedures and options for dealing with a dispute.  In these cases, I invariably referred the faculty member to the Ombuds Office.  Some faculty members returned months later to the FGO after consulting with the Ombuds Office.

A significant number of these consultations consisted of on-going meetings over the course of several months or longer as the circumstances of a dispute changed over time.  Often the consultation process involves a number of conversations before the faculty member can fully explain the situation and I can provide appropriate information.  Faculty members who are in the midst of a dispute are in distress and often it can take some time to determine the precise nature of a dispute.  I also remind faculty members about the University’s Employee Assistance Program (EAP) which provides confidential counseling assistance to faculty.

In several instances, a faculty member filed more than one grievance complaint over the course of several months as a dispute continued to develop.  One grievant had filed complaints under the prior policy and under the current policy over the course of two years.


Other Grievance-Related Issues

There are some issues that have arisen in the current cases.  One issue is a misunderstanding by some Type 1 grievants about whether an attempt at informal dispute resolution is required before a grievance complaint can be filed with the FGO.  This has been clarified with the Ombuds Office and the particular grievant who raised the issue.  Redbook, Section 4.4.5.A.1 preserves the choice to the faculty member of whether or not to participate in any of the options for dispute resolution proposed by the Ombuds.   In my experience, faculty members who consult with me have tried informal dispute resolution either on their own or with the assistance of the Ombuds.

A number of grievances have been terminated when the faculty member ended employment with the University, either as a term faculty member at the end of a contract or due to retirement.  Delays in the adjudication of grievances continue often due to scheduling issues with all of the parties to a dispute.  A faculty member faces the risk that  his or her employment will be terminated with the University and, as a result, the grievance process will end before the resolution of their dispute.  In other grievances the University has argued a complaint is moot when a dean or administrator leaves the University (or their position) while a grievance is pending, thereby requiring a faculty member to refile the grievance complaint against the new dean or administrator.   As noted last year, another looming Redbook interpretation issue is whether all aspects of a dispute leading to the termination of a probationary or term faculty contract are considered part of a Type 2 dispute or whether Type 2 disputes are limited only to the actual termination decision which may be related, in part, to these earlier aspects.



Respectfully submitted,


Enid Trucios-Haynes

University Faculty Grievance Officer

January 15, 2014


Statistics Chart Attached



# of New Consultations

# of New Grievances Filed

Grievances Concluded from Prior Year


Grievances Pending From Prior Year

# Resolved Informally

Other Resolutions

A & S








1 - Referral to Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs


4 – Referral to Ombuds





2 Concluded - New

1 Concluded - Old

1 Resolved*


1  - Resolved*


2 – Referral to Ombuds







1 Information Requested & Referral to Ombuds






1 Information Requested & Referral to Ombuds







2 – Referral to Ombuds






2 Pending - Old Process











2 Concluded in Jan 2014


5 Concluded

2 Pending – Old Process


1 Resolved*

9 Referrals to Ombuds

1 Other


3 Grievances Pending as of 1/30/14





1 New Process

3 Old Process

2 Concluded




Known to FGO


2 Grievances Pending as of 6-30-12




12 Resolved

2 Pending

2 - unknown resolution

2 Pending as of 6-30-2011






11 Pending as of 6-30-2010






12 Pending as of 6-2009








*  Resolved outside of the university grievance process