CHAPARRAL

Released Time: Gone but not forgotten

by Mark Maier, Department of Economics

Because of recent cutbacks in Released Time/Extra Pay (RT/EP) positions at the college,  I have been asked to comment on the situation. In the spirit of full-disclosure: one of the cut positions was my work with Writing Across the Curriculum, and I am a Senate appointee to the RT/EP committee, although my comments are as a concerned faculty member, not those of the committee itself.

      The cutbacks are indeed severe, including all lecture series coordinators (humanities/social science, science and women’s history month), the coordinators for cultural diversity, interdisciplinary studies, EEO, research across the curriculum, writing across the curriculum, and several forensics positions. Positions thought necessary for the college to operate remain, including coordinators for accreditation, SLOs, the learning resource center, study abroad, staff development, scholars program, planning and development, program review,  and C&I co-chair, although some were reduced in percentage of time released or stipend offered. In addition, after lobbying, some positions were partially reinstated, including the art gallery and literary magazine coordinators and nursing administrative positions.

     The decision to make these cuts came from the top, and clearly not happily. Vice President for Instruction Dawn Lindsay points out that the positions are on hiatus, not permanently axed, and could be reinstated when the budget situation improves. Nonetheless, this is a good time to review the RT/EP situation at GCC, and clear up some misconceptions that I hear on occasion.

Who makes RT/EP decisions?
      RT/EP positions fall into three general categories: 1) a large number are in our Guild contract, including, most importantly, division chairs; 2) a small number are grant supported, some open for application and others obtained by individuals as principal investigators; and 3) most positions are created and appointments made through the shared governance process.
 
What’s the role of the RT/EP committee?
     The primary function of the committee is to make certain that RT/EP decisions are made in a transparent and fair manner. To this end, the committee monitors a list prepared by Human Resources including position titles, recipient, RT or EP involved, and dates of appointment (see   www.glendale.edu/community/employment/district_release_time_chart.htm). Although imperfect, in large part because supervisors don’t always report in a timely fashion, the list has made the RT/EP far more transparent than when I first came to campus twenty years ago.

     The committee reviews applications for new RT/EP positions to make certain that the time or stipends are appropriate, makes certain that the appointment process is fair (usually involving campus-wide advertisements followed by joint Guild/Senate/administration interviews), and reviews existing positions to make certain that the job is being done.

What doesn’t the RT/EP committee do?
      The committee does not determine if a new position can be funded within current budget constraints. All new positions need to go through the standard joint governance budget process before they can be funded.

     The committee does not make appointments; instead we review the process of appointment to make certain that it is open and fair. The committee did not make the recent cuts. Although at times in the past, the committee has recommended that a position had too much (or too little) released time, or that the current recipient was not adequately fulfilling the job requirements, we did not recommend these cuts.
 
Future of RT/EP
      Dawn Lindsay has asked the RT/EP committee to continue to improve the transparency and fairness of RT/EP appointments by requiring a new form in which position supervisors will report the full cost of each position, including released time or stipends as well as other budget commitments required by the position. The form also will confirm that the position has budgetary approval and document the completion of all RT/EP annual review forms. If all these requirements are not met, funding for the position will not be continued. I support Dawn’s approach because it eliminates the situation faced by the RT/EP committee in which responsible supervisors and recipients faced careful review, while those who neglected to fulfill their reporting responsibility sometimes continued their RT/EP position by default.

     As the budget situation clarifies, I urge the administration to reinstate the positions cut. Compared with the benefits they offer the faculty and staff, these positions are relatively insignificant in the larger budget picture. Far more costly, of course, are the contractually mandated division chair positions. However, elected division chairs, in my view, are the cornerstone of Glendale College’s democratic and participatory environment. As those of us who have taught in schools with a traditional dean structure can attest, elected and frequently-rotated division chairs mean that all faculty take responsibility for academic decisions. Similarly, we should give ourselves a pat on the back for our tradition of opening RT/EP positions to application across the campus, and filling those positions through recommendations by joint governance interview committees. Even if we are temporarily hobbled by the budget crisis, the RT/EP is a GCC tradition about which we should be proud.

back to top