A-Senate: First vote for fixed-term membership passes
Editor's Note: This story has been updated to reflect an accurate vote tally percentage of the first A-Senate fixed-term faculty membership vote. The correct number was 67 percent voting in favor of the measure.
Academic senators voted Tuesday in favor of including fixed-term faculty members as permanent fixtures on the governing body.
The proposal, authored in part by fixed-term philosophy and religion instructor Mark Shelton, calls for the allowance of non-tenure track faculty members to participate in all facets of A-Senate, including votes on senator nominations and committee elections. The language of the proposal and its subsequent amendment does, however, exclude potential fixed-term faculty senators from voting on constitutional amendments.
In order for the proposal to become canon, the A-Senate body must vote in favor of the proposal twice with a two-thirds majority on each vote. The second vote is scheduled to take place at the next regularly scheduled A-Senate session.
The vote tallied today passed by a slim margin of 67 percent in favor of the measure.
"I hope this passes in the second vote," Shelton told Central Michigan Life. "This one was right on the razor's edge."
Shelton said this particular vote, however preliminary, was a show of good faith from the A-Senate body. Had they voted it down, it would display A-Senate's true feelings about the inclusion of fixed-term faculty members and would limit the chances for the fixed-term body to get the kind of inclusion they deem as "acceptable."
"There are a few different alternatives that I've discussed with fixed-term faculty members, and they concluded that this proposal was an acceptable one, the best one for this time," he said. "If this got voted down, there would be no such inclusion of fixed-term faculty, and we'd have much different proposal than this one.
"This is the right step for Academic Senate, and we can let the future show what was better from here."
Despite hefty support for the measure within A-Senate, many senators -- over many sessions -- expressed concern with the proposal.
Among their myriad apprehensions, the balance of and potential shift in power between fixed-term to regular faculty members was a sticking point for some A-Senators.
"My department was not opposed to this amendment, but the concern was in the long run, fixed-term might represent a larger portion of the Senate," said Sen. Katrina Piatek-Jimenez, a math instructor. "They have different priorities and concerns compared to regular faculty."
Sen. Christi Brooks, a foreign languages instructor, said changes in membership would create an adversarial relationship between the two parties.
"My department, when looking at this amendment, many people expressed that they are clearly for fixed-term senators," Brooks said. "However, they feel that this amendment pits fixed-term faculty vs. regular faculty, even if that's not the intent."
Sen. David Smith, from the philosophy and religion department, said if the university and the A-Senate body overwhelmingly represented fixed-term faculty, the administration would have a much larger issue on its hands.
"The prospect of the majority eventually being all fixed-term faculty, that just seems highly unlikely," he said. "In that case, the college would have already gone to hell anyway."
Shelton agreed with Smith's assertion.
"That's worthy of discussion because this is so long-overdue," Shelton said. "But I doubt (a fixed-term majority) is possible. And even if it did happen, that majority would still be a representative body. That's all based on how the university is run by the administration and the decisions that they make. It doesn't seem likely that those are the policies this administration will even consider"
