A group of faculty representing AAUP and the Senate have been meeting
weekly for the past month and have tried to articulate some collective
concerns. The following document was agreed on today and I was asked to
send it out to the entire faculty. The group also voted unanimously to
present the document to the University Senate to ask that it be placed
on the agenda for the meeting on December 8th.

General
An overarching problem is the lack of communication between the
administration and the faculty. We agreed that many fears could be
resolved in honest, open, face-to-face communication.

The University Senate should meet at its regular place and time in
December. (December 8, 3:30pm, Multimedia I, Monroe Library)
As members of the Senate, the President and Provost should attend.

While the Faculty Handbook is a guiding document for the faculty during
regular times, it is most important in times of crisis. In
conversations with the faculty about these important issues, the
administration should reference it and reflect having read it.

It seems apparent that budget cuts are already taking place. The
faculty is concerned that all cuts must be mission driven. It would be
helpful if these cuts were discussed in advance and if guiding documents
such as the Goals and Character and Commitment Statement, the Mission
and Vision statements and the Faculty Handbook were referenced by
administrators as part of the discussion. "Across the board" cuts do
not reflect mission.

The faculty is in direct contact with our students. We are in a good
position to help plan the immediate academic future, yet no ordinary
faculty member present felt consulted about Spring II. Individually,
our experiences provide only anecdotal evidence, but collectively we
have identified trends and patterns that indicate low interest from our
advisees in the "Spring II" semester.

Questions (in no particular order)
What is our university crisis management plan and what role does the
faculty play in it?

What will be in the Blueprint document that has been prepared for the
Board? When will the faculty be given a copy of it and have input into
its final draft?

We seem to have cut our Academic Affairs budgets by at least 10%. What
specifically has been cut?

What have the Deans been asked to do in terms of budget reductions
(including faculty/staff reductions) during this crisis period and have
their proposals been reviewed and approved by the administration?

What cuts have been made from other areas of the university? While it's
certainly true that a smaller number of students require a smaller
faculty, it is equally true that they require a smaller administration
and smaller budgets in other parts of the university. It is also true
that if you want the students to come back, there must be a faculty
present. Everything else at the university is less essential than this,
yet this seems to be the only place cuts have been made.

Many expensive practices have been recently implemented that are not
central to our mission. Examples include a scholarship athletic
program, promotions associated with reorganization in Business and
Finance and Student Affairs, and the Memorandum of Understanding with
the Law School. The President has the power to suspend or revoke any
and all of these practices. What plans does he have in this regard?

Standard Extraordinary Faculty contracts do not contain any
"contingency" clauses. The faculty would like to hear the justification
for breaking them in the middle of their terms.

We have heard various evolutions of the Federal Financial Aid
requirements. We would like to see the written policy and discuss the
official university position. Since an early version of the financial
aid policy seemed to be the only justification for the Spring II
session, what justification remains? What is the salary and compensation
status of the faculty, staff and administrators for the "Spring II"
semester?

How is the expressed commitment of the administration to shared
governance being incorporated in all of these issues?

Shared Governance
In their November 4, 2005, letter to the faculty, the President and
Provost said that they

value the participation and advice offered by all members of the
university community in the care and operation of the university. In
matters of curriculum and faculty hiring and tenure decisions, the
Faculty play a primary role, and we honor that role. While faculty
advice is valued in other areas, such as budget and facilities, the
President, his staff, and the Board of Trustees are responsible for the
administration and fiscal operations of the university, and the unique
circumstances in which the University finds itself may require immediate
decision-making in these areas.

Custom and tradition at this Loyola, for at least 30 years, have bound
faculty and administrators to the guiding documents mentioned above.
These documents have been written and approved by faculty, students,
administrators and the Board of Trustees. Current administrators must
honor them as their predecessors have, and as the faculty must as well.

Externally, the Statement on the Government of Colleges and Universities
was jointly formulated by the American Association of University
Professors, the American Council on Education (ACE), and the Association
of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB) in 1966.

The document stresses the importance of shared governance because
"regard for the welfare of the institution remains important despite the
mobility and interchange of scholars." It states that "a college or
university in which all the components are aware of their
interdependence, of the usefulness of communication among themselves,
and of the force of joint action will enjoy increased capacity to solve
educational problems."

Areas of joint responsibility include:

"The framing and execution of long-range plans, one of the most
important aspects of institutional responsibility, should be a central
and continuing concern in the academic community.

Effective planning demands that the broadest possible exchange of
information and opinion should be the rule for communication among the
components of a college or university. The channels of communication
should be established and maintained by joint endeavor. Distinction
should be observed between the institutional system of communication and
the system of responsibility for the making of decisions.

A second area calling for joint effort in internal operation is that of
decisions regarding existing or prospective physical resources. The
board, president, and faculty should all seek agreement on basic
decisions regarding buildings and other facilities to be used in the
educational work of the institution.

A third area is budgeting. The allocation of resources among competing
demands is central in the formal responsibility of the governing board,
in the administrative authority of the president, and in the educational
function of the faculty. Each component should therefore have a voice in
the determination of short- and long-range priorities, and each should
receive appropriate analyses of past budgetary experience, reports on
current budgets and expenditures, and short- and long-range budgetary
projections. The function of each component in budgetary matters should
be understood by all; the allocation of authority will determine the
flow of information and the scope of participation in decisions."

In the spirit of shared governance and mutual commitment to the mission
and vision of Loyola University New Orleans, we respectfully request
that normal governing structures be reactivated, including
representation on Handbook and Board committees and that regular
meetings of those committees be held. Because of the interrelationship
between financial affairs and "matters of curriculum and faculty hiring
and tenure" we further ask for an open, transparent discussion of the
extent of our financial situation.

Mary Blue