Arthurs-Lorimer Report on Trent's Administration: Document Index
Index of Documents
relating to the
Final Report of the External Review of the Administration of Trent University
a.k.a
THE ARTHURS LORIMER REPORT
(March 20, 1997)
Here is the document collection. Items originally published on Trent's web site but no longer available are in italics. The documents have been reformatted for this site. Any errors or omissions from the original text are accidental. The official copies should be regarded as authoritative.
- Index of the Administrative Review listing all documents
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/adminrev.html). - The Final Report (opens in new window) which also notes that "copies of this report can be picked up at the Communications Office, located in Blackburn Hall"
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/memo5.html). - Open Letter from Chair Board of Governors - March 3, 1997
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/memo4.html). - Interim Report
of the External Advisory Committee - February 27, 1997
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/memo3.html). - Explanation of Review
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/aboutadr.html). - An Open Letter to the Trent Community
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/openlett.html). - Terms of Reference for an Advisory Committee on Administration at Trent University
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/termsaca.html). - Dates of Open Meetings with Students, Staff & Faculty
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/omdates.html). - A Message to the Trent Community - January 29, 1997
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/memo2.html) - Open Meetings and Contact Methods - January 22, 1997
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/memo1.html) - Message from Board Chair, - March 25, 1997
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/memo6.html) - Appendix 1 - unfortunately not available for posting on www.ourtrent.com
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/append1.html) - Appendix 2 - unfortunately not available for posting on www.ourtrent.com
(http://www.trentu.ca/adreview/append2.html) - OPSEU Local 365's Submission to the External Review Committee
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
- FINAL REPORT OF THE EXTERNAL REVIEW of the Administration - March 20, 1997
- Open Letter from Chair, Board of Governors - March 3, 1997
- Interim Report of the External Advisory Committee - Feb. 27, 1997
- Explanation of Review
- Open Letter
- Terms of Reference for an Advisory Committee on Administration
- Dates of Open Meetings with Students, Staff & Faculty
- Memo, January 29 A Message to the Trent Community
- Memo, January 22 re: Open Meetings and Contact Methods
- Message from Board Chair, March 25, 1997
- OPSEU Local 365's Submission to the External Review Committee
Return to top of this document
Open Letter from Chair, Board of Governors
March 3, 1997
To Members of the University Community,
Re: External Review of Administration at Trent
I am pleased to be writing to you on behalf of the Board of Governors to provide you with an update about the external review of administration at Trent. Professors Harry Arthurs and Joyce Lorimer have advised me that they anticipate that they will complete the main body of their review project on schedule. At the request of the Board of Governors, the reviewers have agreed to present their findings and recommendations to the Board and to all interested members of the University community at an open meeting on Thursday, March 20, 1997 at 3:30 p.m. in the Great Hall, Champlain College. The intent of this meeting will be to provide the community with the fullest possible information about the process the reviewers followed, their findings and the rationale for their recommendations.
The written report of the external review will be released for the first time to those attending the presentation. Copies will also be delivered that afternoon to the porter's lodge in each residential college, the main floor of the Bata Library, the front foyer of Blackburn Hall, the ESB rotunda, the Trent Bookstore and the Trent office at Durham College, and will be available from the Communications Office and from the University Secretariat.
The Board of Governors anticipates that there will be a number of recommendations in the report about which individuals and groups in the University community will have views and opinions. With this in mind, the Board will meet on March 21 to develop a timetable for considering the Arthurs/Lorimer recommendations. This timetable will provide opportunities for members of the University community and its constituent groups and organizations to share their perspectives with the Board in an orderly fashion; it will be posted on the website and published in the Arthur and Fortnightly early in April.
Last Friday, the Board of Governors received an unexpected interim report from Professors Arthurs and Lorimer which, in essence, recommended that a transition team of at least an Acting President and an Acting Vice-President (Academic) be put in place on July 1, 1997. The Board has approved this recommendation and the need for an abbreviated and assisted search process to effect it. The full text of the interim report is available on the Trent website (www.trentu.ca/adreview/memo3.html) or from the University Secretariat (748-1387). I shall be contacting leaders of the constituent groups later this week to invite involvement in the search process.
I would like to take this opportunity to invite members of the University community to provide the Board with advice about the transition team. Please send nominations, applications and suggestions in confidence to the Transition Team Search Committee c/o the University Secretariat, Bata Library. It is our hope that the Board will be able to make these acting appointments sometime in April.
I hope to see you at the open meeting on March 20 and look forward to receiving some very constructive ideas from our external reviewers.
Yours sincerely,
Jalynn Bennett
Chair
Board of Governors
Return to top of this document
Interim Report of the External Advisory Committee
February 27, 1997
Advice Concerning the Transition Period 1997-98
During the next academic year, the University will be in a transitional period, during which it must deal with a very difficult challenge: it must continue to pursue its academic mission with its customary distinction and diligence, while it undertakes a search for at least three senior administrative officers and, at the same time, initiates a process to restore mutual confidence amongst all of the university's stakeholders and governance bodies. For the University to meet this challenge, it must have a transitional leadership of a very particular kind. Given the imminent departure of Vice President Campbell and Acting Dean Syrett, and President Conolly's expressed wish to leave office as soon as possible, we feel it is essential to address as a separate matter the issue of Trent's administrative leadership for the academic year 1997-98.
Consideration of this issue, in our judgment, should not be postponed, even a few weeks, until we have issued a final report. Implementation of recommendations for the transition period requires very speedy action, given that they are to have effect from July 1, 1997. Individuals affected by the recommendations also have to rearrange their lives as from that date. For all concerned, the sooner the issues of transition are addressed, the better. And, we believe, it would be best if the community were able to address the many longer-term recommendations we will be making in our final report without having at the same time to address issues which are limited to the 1997-98 transition year.
For all of these reasons, we recommend that a transition team should be put in place as of July 1, 1997 to hold office through June 30, 1998. This team should comprise at least two new acting officers: an Acting President and an Acting Vice-President Academic. If in their judgment, it is necessary to appoint an Acting Dean of Arts and Sciences as well, they should be permitted to do so, on the understanding that the Acting Dean will hold office for the same period of time.
While it will be necessary for the transition team to attend to the normal administrative business of the University, and while its members should be fully empowered to do what is necessary to ensure the morale, fiscal well-being and academic reputation of the University, it is not anticipated that they will undertake major initiatives with long-term implications. Their focus should be to help to prepare the ground for their permanent successors.
In order to assist the University in pursuing this recommendation, we believe that two senior acting appointments should be made in accordance with the following guildelines (or some revised version thereof) which should be publicized to and clearly understood by the Trent community, its governance bodies and the individuals concerned.
1. Acting President
Functions: The Acting President should have two main responsibilities: to represent Trent externally and to put its case effectively to friends and alumni, to the general community and to government; and to establish a climate of civility and calm in which all elements of the university community can conduct a reasoned and informed debate about its future.
Qualities: The Acting President should above all be someone whose reputation for integrity and common sense will enable him or her to discharge the functions indicated, and especially to win the trust and respect of students, staff, faculty and outside parties. Advocacy skills would be a definite asset, as well as the capacity to quickly gain an understanding of the issues confronting Ontario's universities in general, and Trent in particular. It would be an advantage if the individual appointed were someone known to, and knowledgeable about, Trent. However, even if no such person is available, it is crucially important that the position be filled by someone with the personal qualities mentioned above. The Acting President should not be, or consider themselves to be, a candidate for the presidency.
2. Acting Vice-President (Academic)
Functions: In addition to normal functions of academic coordination and oversight, the Acting Vice President (Academic) will be expected to be an active participant and positive contributor to the process of restoring harmony and mutual confidence to the processes of administration and collegial governance. This will involve support for, and animation of, whatever academic agenda this process may identify. In view of the volatile external climate which may well confront the University in 1997-98, the Acting Vice President (Academic) will also bear special responsibility for ensuring that the University does whatever is necessary in order to maintain the highest possible quality of teaching, research, and student support.
Qualities: The Acting Vice-President (Academic) should be someone of considerable energy, with the high standards, knowledge of academic affairs and practical administrative skills which will enable her or him to perform the functions indicated. It is crucial that the appointee be a team player, willing and able to support and complement the Acting President and to function as a member of an harmonious and effective transition team. The range of functions to be performed almost certainly implies an internal appointment. However, if the right person cannot be found internally, the University should attempt to find an external appointee rather than appoint an unqualified person. The Acting Vice President Academic would not be precluded from applying for any of the permanent administrative appointments then being filled.
We do not believe that it will be possible for the University to pursue normal search processes in connection with the appointment of a transition team. Time is of the essence; the University community needs reassurance that there will be no hiatus in the senior administration; and the tenure of the transition team will be brief. There is no question that the Board has a statutory responsibility to appoint an Acting President and Acting Vice President (Academic), and we recommend that it does so forthwith.
We further recommend that in order to ensure confidence in this process, the Board set in place an arrangement for consultation which engages the constituencies which would be represented in a regular Presidential search. These consituencies - the Faculty Council, the full-time and part-time undergraduate and graduate student organizations, the unionized and non-unionized non-academic staff, and the Alumni Association - should be invited at an early date to designate or appoint representatives to meet with ourselves and representatives of the Board to offer advice on the transition team appointments.
We also suggest that the Board use us as advisors during the actual selection process for the transition team. At the same time, we ask the community to accept us as guarantors of the selection process during this transition period, in lieu of normal arrangements.
We will be proposing other procedures for the appointment of the senior administrators who will take office as of July 1, 1998.
Joyce Lorimer
Harry Arthurs
Board of Governors
Return to top of this document
External Review
Trent University's Board of Governors has launched an external review of the university's administration following president Leonard Conolly's decision to leave office by June 1998.
"Although we regret President Conolly's decision to leave office early, the board thanks him for his accomplishments and continuing commitment to Trent,"
said board chair Jalynn Bennett.
"Trent faces some difficult and serious decisions in the near future and the board is confident that the external review will produce constructive and forward-looking recommendations."
The board has asked external reviewers Harry Arthurs and Joyce Lorimer to prepare a report by March 15. After consulting with the Trent community, they will advise the board on the senior administrative structure, the appointment of the next president and ways to enhance relationships among university constituencies. Their report will be made public.
Arthurs teaches law and political science at York University. He is former dean of Osgoode Hall Law School and president emeritus of York. Lorimer teaches history at Wilfrid Laurier University and is a past president of the Canadian Association of University Teachers.
Return to top of this document
An Open Letter to the Trent Community
January 15, 1997
We have been asked by the Board of Governors to serve as an External Advisory Committee on Administration at Trent University. Both of us accepted this challenge because of our recognition of the excellence of the Trent Academic Community and its unique contribution to the Ontario university system. We were greatly encouraged by the Board¹s publicly expressed commitment to the two goals of ensuring that Trent¹s administration meets standards of best practice, and of building more constructive and harmonious structures of collegial governance.
Our report can only contribute to these very desirable objectives if it is based on a broad consultation with individuals and constituencies within the Trent community. We are currently reviewing background documents on the administrative and governance structures of the University. We plan to visit the campus to meet with individuals and groups February 5-8 and February 12-14. Kathleen Bain, Director of Communications, has been assigned to assist us in making arrangements for these visits. We have asked her to set up for us three open meetings with Faculty, Support Staff and Students as the leading priority for our first visit to campus, as well as meetings with the Senate Executive, the Faculty Board and Steering Committee of the Faculty Council, the Faculty Council committee reviewing governance issues and the TUFA Executive. In the course of our first or second visits we also plan to interview individual officers and groups within the administration, the executives of the Board, of the various support staff associations, of student government, and of part-time faculty. We will, however, be happy to meet with any of the above individuals or groups in Toronto, should they prefer it, or if time and logistics make it more desirable to do so. We will be pleased to receive any written submissions. These should be submitted to Kathleen Bain for forwarding to us.
We will be working to complete our report, as required, by March 15. It is clearly in the best interests of the university to begin the process of reconstituting its senior administration as quickly as possible and we hope that our efforts will be of assistance to the process. Given the time constraints, we will do our best to canvass as broad a cross section of views as possible and to make sure that we have contacted representatives of all concerned constituencies. We should add that we see our report as only the beginning of the process of thinking about the structure of administration and its relationship to collegial governance at Trent. We will, in our report, identify issues which we feel should be further addressed and suggest a process by which the appropriate bodies of the Trent community can engage in the consideration of them.
Harry Arthurs - York University
Joyce Lorimer - Wilfrid Laurier University
Return to top of this document
on
Administration at Trent University
1. In light of President Conolly's announcement that he will not be completing his full term of office, and in light of recent changes, and anticipated future changes, amongst Trent's senior administrative officers, the Board of Governors has resolved that the best interests of the University require a prompt and careful study of its administration. The Board views reconstitution of the University's senior administration as an immediate and inescapable responsibility and challenge. However, the larger and longer-term challenge confronting Trent is to find a way to make it possible for all university constituencies to work together more harmoniously and productively.
2. The Board has therefore appointed an Advisory Committee to address two matters:
- how to ensure that Trent's administration meets the standard of best practice within the Canadian university community, and
- how to initiate a process which will over the long term promote constructive relations amongst students, staff, faculty, administration, the Board and other bodies concerned with the governance of the University.
3. The Board of Governors is committed to ensuring that the administration has the capacity to:
- protect, reinforce and promote Trent's many academic achievements
- provide leadership in addressing the difficult academic, political and budgetary challenges confronting the University
- develop and energize University planning procedures, support policy development by authorized bodies, and undertake appropriate and effective implementation measures
- discharge its responsibilities, and be accountable, to the Senate and Board of Governors of the University
- represent the University in its dealings with students, unions and other employee groups, friends and supporters, parents, alumni, government, funding agencies, national and provincial associations of universities, the media and local communities served by the University.
and, in general, that the administration conducts the affairs of the University effectively and efficiently, in accordance with its statutory obligations (including the Trent University Act, labour legislation and other pertinent statutes), with full awareness of the implications for the University of government higher education policy and current financial realities, and with a deep commitment to the academic values which must guide the University in the years ahead.
4. The Board therefore wishes to receive advice concerning in particular:
- the appointment, tenure, authority and responsibilities of the President and Vice Chancellor
- the adequacy and appropriate organization of the University's senior administrative offices, the powers assigned and support provided to them, the procedures by which they are filled and the means of ensuring their effectiveness and accountability
- the administration's role in developing financial forecasts, implementing budget strategies and otherwise ensuring the financial stability of the University, and
- the relationship of the administration to the governance structures of the University.
5. Having regard to the matters included in its mandate, the Advisory Committee may:
- invite and consider the views of interested groups and individual members of the University community
- meet confidentially or in public with any such groups or individuals
- review all pertinent documents and inform itself of pertinent facts in any way it deems appropriate
- meet with serving and former members of the University's administration, its advisors, the Board of Governors and other persons with first-hand knowledge of the administration.
6. The Advisory Committee shall, by no later than March 15, 1997:
- deliver a report to the Board concerning the administration of the University and provide the Board with advice concerning the establishment of a process designed to promote more harmonious and productive relations amongst Trent's faculty, staff, students, administration and governance bodies
7. The Advisory Committee's report shall be made public.
8. The members of the Advisory Committee shall be:
- Prof. Joyce Lorimer of Wilfrid Laurier University
- Prof. Harry Arthurs of York University
9. The Secretariat of the University will provide logistical and other necessary assistance to the Advisory Committee.
Jan. 6, 1997
Return to top of this document
Schedule of Open Meetings with External Reviewers:
Student Open Meeting - Feb. 5, 7:30-9:30 p.m., Lady Eaton College Dining Hall
Faculty Open Meeting - Feb. 6, 7-10 p.m., Otonabee College Dining Hall
Staff Open Meeting - Feb. 7, 11:30 a.m. - 1:30 p.m., Bata Library Film Theatre
Dates are in 1997.
Return to top of this document
A Message to the Trent Community from the External Advisory Committee
January 29, 1997
We shall be on campus for several days during the next few weeks. Notice has already been circulated of the times of the open meetings for Faculty, Staff and Students. We have also established a full schedule of interviews with representative groups and individuals. Since we are required to report by March 15, our time is short and we cannot hope to speak directly to every person in the Trent community. We have tried to compensate for this, however, by inviting written submissions, in paper or electronic form. Any such submissions will be forwarded directly to us and will not be open to view by any third party.
The January 22 notice which publicized the times of the open meetings also described our Terms of Reference. We felt that it was useful to do this since we are anxious to put our time on campus to the best possible use. We do not have a general mandate to consider every aspect of life at Trent. As our terms of reference indicate, we have been appointed because the senior administration of the university has encountered an unusual degree of turbulence, because much of it is going to have to be replaced over a relatively short period of time, and because it is in everyone's interests that the jobs done by the administration should be done efficiently, to a high standard, and in accordance with the Trent University Act, other relevant legislation and best practice.
We are therefore interested to hear the community's views on:
- how the senior administration is organized,
- how work is distributed among its members,
- whether changes in organizational structure might improve performance and accountability,
- whether the appointment procedures for senior administrators meet best practice standards,
- and whether the nature of the responsibilities of the senior administration vis a vis those of the various collegial governance bodies and student and employee groups are clearly and properly defined.
Obviously the Trent community has just come through a difficult period. We, however, have not been appointed to review the rights and wrongs of past labour and political disputes, or to judge the behaviour or ability of particular individuals. It would be tremendously helpful to us if those who wish to speak to us could think about the issues we have outlined above and give us their considered, constructive advice upon them. We, for our part, promise to listen carefully and to consider all points of view in the light of our own experience and what we know of the broader university community.
In the end, it is Trent's governing bodies -- not ourselves -- which will have to decide what changes to make and how to make them. However, we do hope to make recommendations about a process which will help the Trent community think constructively about how it ought to be administered and governed.
Harry Arthurs and Joyce Lorimer,
from York University and Wilfrid Laurier University.
Return to top of this document
Open Meetings and Contact Methods
To: Trent University Community Date: January 22, 1997 Re: SCHEDULE OF OPEN MEETINGS WITH EXTERNAL REVIEWERS As outlined in their letter of January 15, 1997, Professors Lorimer and Arthurs invite you to attend one of the following Open Meetings: Student Open Meeting - February 5, 7:30 - 9:30 p.m., Lady Eaton College Dining Hall These meetings, and the interviews which they will conduct, will focus on the matters set out in the Terms of Reference for the Advisory Committee on Administration:
Written submissions are welcome. They may be sent to - Kathleen Bain, Director If marked CONFIDENTIAL, they will be sent on to the committee unopened. The committee's secure Email address - extreview@trentu.ca The committee has asked me to indicate that because they are going to have to submit their report by March 15, they regret that they will not be able to interview many people who have kindly agreed to make themselves available. The committee will also not be able to consider matters which are outside its mandate. The committee will be providing further information about its agenda and mandate early next week. Please contact me for further details. |
Return to top of this document
Message from Board Chair
March 25, 1997
Following a first discussion of the external reviewers' report released on March 20, the Board of Governors has expressed its support for the spirit of the report and its desire to begin discussions with the University community. While recognizing that the community will need time to reflect on the many recommendations contained in the report, as a first step, the Board Chair will be contacting constituency groups in the near future to invite them to participate in a special meeting to discuss the desirability of forming a University Consultative Committee as outlined on pp. 32-33 of the Arthurs/Lorimer report.
Copies of the report may be obtained from the Communications office or the University Secretariat. The report is also available on Trent's web site under "Administrative Review".
Return to top of this document
OPSEU Local 365's Submission to the External Review Committee
PREAMBLE:
OPSEU Local 365 would like to extend our welcome to the members of the External Review Committee and thank you both for the opportunity to address the committee.
It should now be apparent, as a result of the open OPSEU staff meeting, that there are problems in labour relations, problems with senior administration's ability to coordinate decision making processes and problems in middle management.
OPSEU Local 365 represents over 300 support staff at Trent University. We provide academic, technical, maintenance, clerical, library, and ancillary support for every college, department and program in the institution except for Human Resources and Riverside Offices.
OPSEU members were previously represented by the Trent University Staff Association and chose to become unionized in 1993. Several issues contributed to the desire of support staff to opt for the protection of a larger union; among them the constant attack, by government, on University funding which resulted in downsizing of staff (1991) in the form of non-negotiated early retirement and career change incentive programs, inequitable negotiated settlements following the faculty strike in 1991 and the University's intention to withhold progression through the grid increments in 1993. (see letter Nancy Sullivan)
The Trent University Act 1962-63 states in its article 3 that "The objects and purposes of the University are: (a) the advancement of learning and the dissemination of knowledge; and (b) the intellectual, social, moral and physical development of its members and the betterment of society.
Our Mission Statement further expands the above with a Statement of Goals which includes a commitment: "To encourage intellectual and cultural sensibility, adaptability, leadership, mutual respect, an ethical conscience, global (or international) perspectives and environmental sensitivity among all members of the Trent community.", and Institutional Goals which includes a commitment to: "create and sustain an environment (intellectual, physical, fiscal and social) that advances learning through quality teaching and research while encouraging respect, tolerance and sensitivity."
Trent University strives to be Canada's outstanding small University. The institution's reputation for academic excellence provincially, nationally and internationally indicates that Trent is well on its way to achieving that aspect of its mandate.
During the recent past, however, there has been considerable concern that our senior administration is failing to contribute to the overall success of the university and may, perhaps, be an impediment to the university's continued well-being. Certainly some of the administrative decisions of the past two years, (i.e. University Priorities Document, Budget Strategy Paper, filing for conciliation so quickly during the bargaining process with two of the three major unions on campus, increasing the Senior Administration complement, $1000.00 bonus, etc.), leads the constituents of the University community to question the ability of the "seniors" to make decisions which support the objects and purposes as defined in the Trent Act and the Mission Statement. From the perspective of OPSEU members, senior administration has not demonstrated "respect, tolerance and sensitivity" toward all constituents of the Trent community in a fair and equitable manner sufficient to achieve the objects, purposes, and mission of Trent.
In order to suggest to the External Review Committee what OPSEU Members consider to be an appropriate course of action and direction to institute change, we feel it may be useful for the members of the Committee to understand how our membership views the senior administration as it is currently constituted.
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
President Conolly arrived at Trent in January of 1994 having been selected through a search committee process which included an outside consultant and representatives from faculty, staff, and students. The Staff member on the search committee was appointed by administration. The presidential candidates are short listed by the committee members. Ultimately a successful candidate is selected by the Board.
With all due respect to President Conolly, he did begin his tenure at Trent in difficult financial times, which have never been properly addressed by government funding formulae or financial improvements.
Conolly has maintained a very low profile within the university, rarely being seen interacting with staff on campus outside of a meeting room. His office area represented a tangible metaphor for his inaccessibility as President and projected an unapproachable appearance with a frequently closed door and darkened lighting. Many of OPSEU's members report that they have never seen the President personally. The President's attendance at two meetings of OPSEU's local executive committee during the first year of his tenure focused on lively discussion around staff morale. No clear plan of action resulted from these discussions.
Staff began to feel increasingly frustrated with an administrative approach, demonstrated through the Department of Human Resources and endorsed by the President and the Chair of the Board of Governors, which seemed to encourage adversity rather than respect and tolerance. The President seemed, to OPSEU staff, to have abdicated all administrative responsibility for staff relations to the Director of Human Resources without putting in place appropriate guidelines and controls.
All future presidents of Trent must have administrative leadership abilities and a desire to recognize and accept the responsibilities of the position. Without becoming involved in micro-managing, the President needs to become more involved in the day to day life of the university. All other senior administrators should be required to report to the President who would then report to the Board of Governors . The President must have the responsibility to consider the institution as a whole without being unduly influenced by any individual sector. The President must, therefore, have the administrative skill to bring together all groups in an atmosphere of collegiality while demonstrating respect and recognition for collective bargaining and collective agreements.
Standards of best practice may be achieved if the role of President is considered to be the position which provides balance between the academic and non-academic sectors of the University.
The President should be appointed based on the recommendation of a democratically elected search committee. The search committee shall have representation from all constituencies to whom the position of President must be accountable. This would include members of the community, students groups, unionized staff, faculty, administration, the BOG, and alumni.
Performance indicators have become a popular measure to express standards of achievement in a desire to demonstrate more accountability to those groups and individuals who have an interest in the institution's success. Faculty and staff are subject to annual review. Faculty are reviewed by their peers and students, staff performances are evaluated by their supervisors. OPSEU feels that the President should be subject to broader performance evaluation, with input gathered from OPSEU, TUFA, CUPE, exempt employees and student associations. The benefit of having to "take stock" each year would increase communication opportunities and assist administration and constituency groups in identifying areas of concern.
The objectivity required in the position of President could best be achieved if the individual who fulfills that role does not have the ability to automatically revert to a secure teaching position if regular performance evaluation does not support such a reward.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Governors create clearly defined duties and responsibilities for the Office of the President which includes a regular and broad based evaluation of performance. The process of evaluation shall include input from each union, student association, and exempt staff.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION
The Trent Act assigns the "Power of Board" as ... the government, conduct, management and control of the University and of its property, revenues, expenditures, business... with restrictions based upon the Power of Senate and Council of the Faculties and President and Vice Chancellor (in respect to the appointment of a "dean of any faculty..." or the prompt removal of a "dean of any faculty...").
Senior administration is currently divided into subgroups under the jurisdiction of the various Vice-Presidents and the University Secretary. The University's organizational flow chart identifies the position of University Secretary at the same level as other Vice-Presidents. This is inappropriate for a position which has no clearly defined administrative authority or the ensuing accountability public, students, staff or faculty which should naturally flow from being in a publicly recognized position of responsibility.
Leonard Conolly's memorandum to Members of the Trent University Community on reorganization of the Senior Administration and search for Vice-President dated 26 July 1996 informs us that the "current responsibilities of the Provost and Dean of Arts and Science will be divided between two positions: Vice President Academic and Dean of Arts and Science." The President goes on to name the individuals who will assume those positions but fails to notify members of the community of their respective duties and responsibilities.
The President's memo further informs us of the division in the portfolio of Vice-President Administration and University Services, again without defining the duties and responsibilities or providing any rationale other than to state that "the impact on workload and the health of senior colleagues has been exacting" and "difficult.... to devote adequate time to planning." This memo was distributed shortly after OPSEU members took a strike vote which passed with a resounding majority. To cite heavy workload and health concerns as the reason for the creation of an additional two administrators when OPSEU staff are with less for several years, including increased workloads, repetitive stress injuries in an increasingly automated work environment, illness due to the accompanying stress of trying to cope with these challenges and the financial constraints of a 5 year wage freeze, is demonstrative of the administration's insensitivity to staff concerns and their inability to communicate decisions effectively. The reorganization created a large hierarchy which distances the various constituency groups, staff, faculty, and students, from those in leadership roles and imposed a top down corporate model of governance on the institution.
Trent University needs a senior administration willing to take a more active role in the day to day issues facing the members of the community. Communication is the key to understanding and is best achieved in close association with all parties. OPSEU is happy to note that Vice-President Earnshaw has indicated a willingness to attend Joint Committee meetings which take place between the Union and the Department of Human Resources. We look forward to his participation and the opportunity to discuss our concerns with him directly. This is a positive change which we hope will be included in the mandate of his successor.
Formal avenues of communication clearly defined for the promotion of dialogue among all constituency groups and senior administration will serve to enhance and improve relationships among the members of the Trent community.
In light of last year, the role of the LRC of the Board of Governors (BOG) needs to be publicly defined. Their members should be well known and visible in the community and their responsibilities clearly understood by all. This committee should have a very clearly defined role in the bargaining process. The University should choose negotiators who will not eventually benefit from any collective agreements which they bargain on behalf of the University.
RECOMMENDATION:That the Board of Governors develop clearly defined duties and responsibilities for all Senior Administrative posts which includes a reporting and communication structure capable of providing members of the Trent Community the transparency necessary to feel confident in the leadership of the institution. It is further recommended that the Board of Governors communicate the role of its Labour Relations Committee and its membership in the management of the University and include an ability for unions and other constituency groups to communicate with the members of that Committee.
COMMITTEE STRUCTURE
In spite of the Mission Statement's commitment to "employ and retain excellent academic and administrative support staff and ensure adequate opportunities for their professional development", staff feel they are far from a priority. The President's University Priorities Document of 10 October 1995 distributed to the Trent University community, alienated OPSEU members by failing to mention staff in any way except to: "Identify and maintain those student and administrative services that provide essential support for the priorities of the University." The President's office and the administration have, since the organization of support staff under OPSEU, created a more hierarchical structure which further marginalized staff and removes the President from all constituents in the university. Middle management numbers have been increased based on a belief that it is inappropriate for OPSEU to report directly to a Senior Administrator.
During the recent bargaining and labour dispute with OPSEU and TUFA, it became apparent that the Labour Relations Committee of the Board of Governors plays a primary role in the negotiation process. Unfortunately the Chair of the Labour Relations Committee, (LRC), the President, or other Senior Administrators were not willing to accept responsibility for the administration's decisions during the bargaining process. At a public meeting hosted by the BOG and Senior Administration during the TUFA strike, a meeting attended by students, their parents, staff, and striking professors, a question was asked inquiring as to who had made the decision to file for conciliation on May 8 & 9, 1996 in bargaining with OPSEU and TUFA and what was the rationale. Joy Rishor (Chair LRC) sank into her coat, John Earnshaw (Acting VP) reminded everyone that the other Vice-President was gone and he was not involved in bargaining. John Syrett (Acting Dean) said the administration relied on the "advice of lawyers", while Jalynn Bennett and Leonard Conolly said nothing. No one in administration was willing to accept responsibility for decision making. It was an extremely embarrassing moment in Trent's history, underlining the complete lack of leadership in the institution.
There is a great need for transparency in the decision making process. The President's Council meets each Tuesday morning. If Trent is to be a collegial institution, that Council should include members of all constituent groups and their official organizations: TUFA, OPSEU, CUPE, JBCSA, GSA, TCSA, as well as members of the exempt group. University committees would provide an excellent base for the President's council, assuming collegiality is arrived at through a process which involves decision making on a consensus basis from the bottom up rather than the top down. It is in no way contradictory to believe that official recognition of union groups and associations through all levels of the committee structure would serve the processes of collegial governance well. This could very well improve each groups' understanding of each other.
President's Council brings representatives from each senior administrative subgroup together on a weekly basis. There are numerous Senate, University and Presidential advisory committees whose terms of reference often exclude OPSEU representatives (Senate Executive for example has no OPSEU member). TUFA and CUPE both have voting privileges on Senate. OPSEU and the exempt staff are excluded from voting, although members of each group work closely with academic functions of the University. There is one generic staff voting member on Senate. In most committees, where support staff are allowed, staff participation is consistently limited to one generic staff representative. OPSEU is seldom granted official recognition except on a handful of constituency based committees such as Special Needs and the Pension Committee as mandated by law. There is a strong sense among OPSEU members that the committee structure function is to lend credence to an appearance of collegiality while decisions, if made, are developed outside the committee structure and brought to the various committee members as a formality. This lack of faith in ability of University committees to function in a truly collegial manner, with consensus style decision making following an open dialogue and debate of the issues, has added to the frustration of OPSEU members. It points to the inability of our current administrative bodies to bring all members of the University together in a meaningful way. If the University is to operate with a collegial system of governance, then that system must be applied equitably.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Governors undertake a review of the current committee structure of the University based upon a commitment to collegial governance and democratic processes. This review should examine the equitability of representation, the role of committees in the decision making process, appropriateness of committees to deal with issues as captured in their terms of reference, duplication of effort and transparent communication with the Trent Community.
BUDGET
Trent University's operating budget revenues are derived from tuition fees, government transfer payments based on prescribed formulae, and government grants targeted for specific purposes. Senate Budget Committee (SBC) as a subcommittee of Senate is an advisory committee only. Its purpose is to make recommendations to Senior Administration on budget matters. However, Senior Administration is under no obligation to accept the recommendations of SBC. SBC reports to Senate not the Board.
While there is no doubt that Senior Administration should be responsible for setting the budget of the institution, the development of budget strategy must be done in a manner which is seen to be fair, equitable, and honest in its treatment of all employee groups. Planning must also take into consideration the costs of abiding by the various collective agreements agreed to by administration and the unions.
In February 1996, Senior administration created a Budget Strategy Paper which was presented to the members of SBC. The President opened his presentation of the paper with the reminder that SBC does not have the authority to set or approve the Budget. There was considerable discussion of the strategy document with SBC members making several suggestions and recommendations. Those recommendations were not incorporated into the body of the Budget Strategy Paper but was attached for members of the Board as an addendum. The concerns identified by SBC members were not distributed to the University community with the Paper. The Paper identified among other cost saving measures a $1.2 million cut in negotiated settlements, a value equal to Trent's social contract reduction. This paper, published in advance of the bargaining process, was viewed by union groups as an attempt to bargain with individuals and set the stage for an adversarial tone in bargaining. The decision to file for conciliation early in the process added to union perceptions that the University was not interested in bargaining in good faith. To accept the conditions of the social contract as a view for the future demonstrated a lack of will and creativity in our Senior Administration and underlined once more their inability to make decisions. It has been more than difficult to obtain complete and accurate budget figures. Access to accurate figures, whether they relate to the staff portion of the operating budget or figures on pension matters, are not readily available. Where they are available, they are suspect.
Budget planning needs to be done by experienced administrators taking into consideration the teaching, research, and community obligations of the University. Teaching, research, and community service goals cannot be achieved successfully if the appropriate and necessary support for those goals is not provided. It is essential for middle management to receive the necessary training required to fulfil their duties as department budget managers with responsible fiscal policies to rely upon. Budget planning must, therefore, include, as a priority, provisions for the maintenance of physical facilities, academic and library support, scientific support, etc., and a recognition that these services are essential to the University's ability to fulfil its mission. This being achieved may well dissolve some of the contentious, punitive budgetary approaches and the resultant waste and inefficiencies which flow from middle managers feeling they must spend by year end to protect their financial "turf".
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Governors, in defining the duties and responsibilities of the Vice-President Administration and Finance ensure that the person fulfilling that role has the necessary qualifications and experience to provide the University with long-term budget planning and an ability to work closely with the senior academic officer. It is further recommended that budget planning processes include full and open disclosure of information to Union and Student leaders and that middle management personnel be provided with appropriate training to allow them to handle their budgetary responsibilities effectively, without waste and inefficiency.
ADMINISTRATION AND GOVERNANCE
Trent aspires to operate its governing structures on a collegial basis. We are a relatively small University. Our size is a matter of pride in promoting the institution as one offering an intimate atmosphere with an emphasis on small group teaching. For a small institution we have a very well defined hierarchy at the administrative level with some five levels of reporting under the senior administrators. The Board of Governors are granted in the Trent Act full responsibility for the University; however, this body is comprised of a majority of external individuals who volunteer their time to the University. The Board meets once a month during the academic year. The members are not in a position to assume full responsibility for the day to day administration of the University. They should see as their duty an obligation to assist the University in creating broad general policies which support the mission of the University. The President and senior administration are responsible for the day to day running of the institution but should also be responsible for long-term planning and implementation of that planning.
Currently the President has four areas which should be reporting directly to him. Those areas are VP Administration and Finance, VP Academic, VP Development and University Secretary. There is confusion as to what are the duties and responsibilities of each of these positions. For example, the Vice-President Academic sent out a memo last fall on a future major fundraising campaign. Does this imply that the Vice-President Development will report to the Vice-President Academic? The Vice-President Development has responsibility for Conferences and the Communication and Design Office. The Vice-President Administration and Finance has seen several different people filling the position in recent years. We now have an Associate Vice-President for Student Services. Frequent juggling of duties has created problems in communications, and morale among members of the community. Accountability among our senior administration is clearly lacking. Coordination among the various groups seems to take place on an ad hoc basis. Several non-academic directors fall under the umbrella of the Vice-President Administration but no reporting structure is defined nor does there appear to be a supervisory process in place to aid the Vice-President in overseeing the work of the middle management. College heads report to the Vice-President Administration, even though many are academics fulfilling an administrative function.
Vice-President Academic is responsible for the Deans, Associate Deans, Academic Chairs, Computing and Telecommunication Services and the Library. There is no formal system in place defining how these two very important positions are to coordinate their work and avoid the expense of duplication. The two Vice-Presidents are physically separated, being housed in separate buildings. The Vice-President Administration and Finance is located in the Riverside offices near to the President while the most senior Academic Administrators are situated in Lady Eaton College. This physical separation may contribute to the lack of coordination and of these two functions. There is a sense that administration and finance does not appreciate and understand academics while administration and finance may feel that academics do not understand the fiscal realities of the day.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Governors ensure that there are clearly defined processes in place for the effective coordination of senior administrative posts. It is further recommended that reporting processes be developed for middle management personnel to ensure Senior Administration adequately fulfills their supervisory role for their areas of responsibility. This is especially important to the promotion of positive labour relations.
CONCLUSION
Many of the members of OPSEU Local 365 are pursing a course of study, are graduates of Trent or are long service employees. New employees in the bargaining unit consistently praise the University as a great place to work. Our commitment, affection and dedication to our University is very strong. OPSEU Local 365 is committed to Trent University and its Mission Statement.
Since the recent upheaval in labour relations during bargaining in 1996, there has been a demonstrated effort on the part of the University, through the Director of Human Resources, to work cooperatively with the Union. It is our hope that this improvement will continue on its present course. OPSEU will make every reasonable effort to attempt to resolve differences between the University and the Union through mutually agreeable settlements videnced by our initiative to bring all outstanding grievances to the bargaining table last year. We are also committed to the establishment of positive labour relations as a means of providing the stability necessary for the future well-being of the University environment.
OPSEU members, all members of the Trent Community recognize that this External Review process provides an opportunity for hope for the future success of the University. In order to ensure that this hope is not in vain, it is necessary that the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Senior Administration of Trent University be implemented within an atmosphere of cooperation and a will to achieve positive change. The Board of Governors will need to include all constituency groups in developing the processes necessary to promote inclusiveness and truly collegial governance.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Governors make a commitment to all constituency groups by including democratically selected representatives from the community, unions, student groups, and administration in the implementation of the Advisory Committee's recommendations.
We believe the recommendations captured here will assist the University in addressing the difficulties in labour relations, in the coordination of decision making processes within senior administration, and in the problems found in middle management which we have identified as the challenges which face the University.
