UO joins state Workshare program 2 months late.

This program has been around for years as a way for employers to reduce hours for a group of employees, rather than layoff a few of them.  Normally it’s a mixed bag – employees have their hours and pay reduced by 20-40%, and then get back about 2/3rds of the pay reduction from the state’s Unemployment Insurance fund. But the CARES act $600 a week UI add on makes it a great deal. An employee earning say $1000 a week could take a 20% furlough. They’d lose $200 in pay, but get back ~$130 in UI, plus $600 from the CARES act supplement. Net, their gross pay increases from $1000 to $1530.

Of course it takes a while to enroll, and the CARES act funding runs out July 25th. Benefits will be retroactive to the time of application, but UO could have done this at the beginning of April. UO would have saved money and their employees would have made money. In this example, the employee lost about $4K because UO started the program 2 months late.

That said, better late than never. Details here:


Senate de-names covid financial planning task force over shared governance theater concerns

The decisions about UO’s financial and academic response to the coronavirus and its long term consequences are being made by Pres Mike Schill, Provost Patrick Phillips, BoT Secretary Angela Wilhems, VPBP Brad Shelton, CAS Dean Bruce Blonigen, and VPFA Jamie Moffitt in secret.

The idea that they would use this joint Senate Admin task force and its confidential meetings as anything more than a vehicle to claim Senate buy-in for whatever changes are coming was a sham, and Senate Pres Elizabeth Skowron and VP Elliot Berkman should have known that and refused to play along. Now, after the threat of a motion from former senate Pres Chris Sinclair and others to require that the meetings be open, and the charge and membership determined by the Senate, they’ve backed down and removed the Senate stamp of approval.

Dear University Senators,

Last week, we announced the formation of a joint task force that will advise the UO president on potential long-term institutional responses presented by the COVID-19 crisis. This task force was formed in response to our recent call for collaborative long-term planning that would bring together the knowledge and experience of UO faculty, staff, and administrators to find new, creative ways to accomplish our mission in the face of significant cuts to our operating budget in the coming months/years. I am writing you today in response to questions raised about how task force members were chosen and attempt to address any confusion about the relationship between the task force and the university senate.

Our goal in proposing this task force is to engage proactively with the administration to advocate for significant representation from the university’s senate and diverse constituencies in this important long-term planning effort. We view the task force as an outstanding opportunity to promote an elusive goal:  academic shared governance in the long-term financial planning of the institution. We are proud of the level of representation on the task force, which is comprised of many individuals who serve in elected, representative positions on campus, including current and former senators, and members of university academic and advisory committees. Further, the task force is comprised of a majority faculty.  Of 15 members, 9 are women.  Three members are senior academic administrators, one is a member of the classified staff, one is an officer of administration, and there will be one student member as well.

Members of the task force were identified and chosen jointly by the Senate President (myself), Senate President-Elect Elliot Berkman, University President Mike Schill, and Provost Patrick Phillips.  Together the Senate President and President-Elect generated a list of prospective members for the Task Force and the President and Provost made some edits and suggestions as well.  Together we finalized a list of candidates. All who were approached recognized the importance of this opportunity and agreed to serve. We sought broad representation from the ranks of TTF and Career Faculty, Classified Staff, and Officers of Administration across campus, with a student representative to be named in the coming weeks.  We sought individuals who would bring diverse expertise and a deep commitment to the institution-as-a-whole, while also keeping the committee manageable in size.

Though the task force members were appointed jointly by the senate leaders and administrators noted above, we want to be clear that the task force cannot speak for the senate nor substitute for consultation with the senate or any senate committees. Further, in no way does the task force replace the important work that will continue in the senate’s various committees in the coming year. On the contrary, the work ahead will intersect with many parts of the academic mission of the university, making it important to engage with these committees throughout the coming year where their expertise is relevant.

In light of concerns that have been raised, we are changing the name of the task force to the “University Task Force on Long-Term Financial Responses to COVID-19”, so as not to confuse matters and make it clear that the members of the task force have not been chosen by the senate, nor have they been formally endorsed by the senate. This name reflects the reality that the whole university will need to be part of our long-term response to the changes brought forth by the pandemic.

In closing, Elliot and I would like to express our gratitude to those of you who have worked with us to clarify the role this task force will play in the coming months. We view this conversation as yet another example of the positive outcomes that result from direct communication, constructive engagement, and shared governance and cooperation between the senate and administration.


Elizabeth A. Skowron, Ph.D.
Professor, Department of Psychology
Center for Translational Neuroscience
UO Senate President
University of Oregon
Eugene, OR 97403


New task force on long-term response to COVID-19

Dear University of Oregon community,

We all recognize the profound impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on both the University of Oregon and the national higher education landscape. The simple truth is that the coronavirus is an invisible disruptor that suddenly and harshly threatened what has been the UO’s foundation for nearly 150 years—the ability to fulfill our mission of excellent teaching, research, and service as a residential campus.

We know there will likely be drops in enrollment and state budget cuts that will create real financial challenges for the UO. It is too soon to know whether it will be a sharp but short-term hurdle that we must find a way to overcome or a systemic recalibration of the way the UO operates. Ultimately, the scope and duration of the financial and operational challenges posed by COVID-19 will be revealed in the coming weeks, months, and years.
To help the UO address the challenges, we are announcing the creation of the Joint UO Senate/Administration Task Force on Long-term Responses to COVID-19. This joint task force, which is advisory to the president, will review data on university operations and revenue projections, engage campus stakeholders, seek input and feedback, and use this information to analyze proposals, develop and consider strategies, and provide advice for long-term planning.

The 16-member task force is broadly representative of units across campus, including faculty, deans, classified staff, officers of administration, and a student. The group will begin meeting in June and be co-chaired by Elliot Berkman, Associate Professor of Psychology and Senate President-elect, and Sabrina Madison-Cannon, Dean of the School of Music and Dance. The full charge and membership of the task force are posted on the president’s website.

What we cannot do is sit idly by and wait for budget cuts or other impacts to happen to us. Ensuring the UO is poised to meet these challenges means we must do all we can now to look around corners, anticipate problems, develop scenario-based solutions, and proactively seek innovation. One thing we all agree on is that the challenges posed by COVID-19 to the University of Oregon are not going to be solved by any one person or group of persons. We must leverage the collective wisdom, creativity, and intellectual horsepower of our entire campus. Our intention is that this joint task force is a step toward doing that.

Thank you.

Michael H. Schill
President and Professor of Law
Patrick Phillips
Provost and Senior Vice President
Elizabeth Skowron
Professor of Psychology and UO Senate President
Elliot Berkman
Associate Professor of Psychology and UO Senate President-elect


Elliot Berkman (co-chair), College of Arts and Sciences, Associate Professor of Psychology; University Senate President-Elect
Sabrina Madison-Cannon (co-chair), School of Music and Dance, Phyllis and Andrew Berwick Dean and Professor of Dance

Bruce Blonigen, College of Arts and Sciences, Dean and Professor of Economics
Liska Chan, College of Design, Associate Professor of Landscape Architecture; Clark Honors College, Associate Dean for Faculty
Robin Clement, Lundquist College of Business, Director, Master of Accounting Program; Academic Director, Sports Product Management; Robert and Lois Braddock Distinguished Senior Instructor
Nicole Dahmen, School of Journalism and Communication, Associate Professor, Honors Program Coordinator
Judith Eisen, College of Arts and Sciences, Professor of Biology
Larissa Ennis, University Advancement, Government and Community Relations, Associate Director of Sponsorships and Community Relations
Kent McIntosh, College of Education, Philip H. Knight Chair and Professor of Special Education and Clinical Sciences
Terry McQuilkin, School of Music and Dance, Instructor of Composition; University Libraries, Music Services Department, Access Services Specialist
Michael Price, College of Arts and Sciences, Senior Instructor of Mathematics, Assistant Department Head
Gerardo Sandoval, College of Design, Planning, Public Policy and Management, Associate Professor
Doneka Scott, Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education and Student Success
Melissa (Lisa) Redford, College of Arts and Sciences, Professor of Linguistics, Department Head
Jennifer (Jen) Reynolds, School of Law, Associate Professor; Faculty Director, Appropriate Dispute Resolution (ADR) Center

A student will also be part of the task force but has yet to be chosen. More information will be available for students, undergraduate or graduate, interested in serving on the task force.

Chief Resilience Officer’s email on Lane County re-opening

Dear University of Oregon community,

As many of you are no doubt aware, Gov. Kate Brown this morning approved Lane County’s plan to allow some local businesses to start operating as early as tomorrow through a controlled and phased reopening strategy. The county moving into a Phase 1 reopening stance is certainly good news, because it means that Lane County has not seen a significant growth in COVID-19 cases and that the local testing and contact-tracing infrastructure is beginning to take shape.

While a Phase 1 opening in Lane County will allow restaurants, some retailers, and certain service providers to reopen, it does not change the University of Oregon’s operational status. There are two reasons for this:

  1. Oregon’s universities are subject to an executive order from Gov. Kate Brown that suspends in-person instructional activities and limits campus operations through June 13. We cannot make changes until it is lifted.
  2. We are awaiting guidance specific to higher education from the Oregon Health Authority. That guidance, which we expect to be delivered in the next few weeks, will be the foundation for helping us develop plans for a safe and responsible reopening at the UO.

In the meantime, the university is taking proactive steps to prepare for a methodical and phased return to in-person work over the course of the summer and into the beginning of fall term. We have teams across campus that are currently developing mitigation strategies that will be needed for reopening, such as physical distancing protocols, a robust campus testing and contact-tracing program, recommendations for the use of face coverings, and more. We have already started and will continue to engage subject-matter experts from across campus. And we will seek input on these and other potential mitigation strategies from employee groups and various campus stakeholders through direct conversations, online surveys, and other feedback opportunities.

Next week, we’ll add a detailed reopening section to UO’s COVID-19 website, and we will continue to update FAQs with specifics about reopening plans and guidance as they become available. We will also continue to communicate the latest news and information about next steps and campus impacts as quickly and transparently as possible. Your input is always welcome. Diverse perspectives are vital when tackling complicated issues. If you have questions, ideas, or potential solutions related to our resumption plans, we want to hear from you. Please use the COVID-19 web form to submit your thoughts using the “Resumption Planning” category.

Finally, let’s remember that, even though it won’t be easy, we’re all in this together. Each new phase will require all of us to learn new habits and attempt different ways of doing things, which I appreciate can be unsettling and uncomfortable. I have great faith in the thoughtfulness and ingenuity of the UO community. In the last few months we’ve seen many examples of creative problem solving, and that flexibility, compassion, and can-do attitude are what will carry us through the upcoming phases of this collective challenge.

Thank you.

André Le Duc
Chief Resilience Officer and Associate Vice President
Safety and Risk Services

Contest for best “why I would like to work remotely during a pandemic” request

5/6/2020 update:

The latest email from HR is here. It gives the faculty a 6 day extension on the demand for requests for remote teaching. I clicked on the Remote Work Request Form link in the email. I was surprised to learn that there’s a university policy requiring all employees to demonstrate honesty in communication & conduct. I guess there’s an exemption for JH administrators.

In any case I’ve got a fifth of Laphroaig for whoever submits the best reason in the comments for wanting to work remotely. In keeping with UO policy, all entries must start with “Honestly, ”

5/5/2020: HR gives faculty til Friday to get BMI up to 40 & request opt-out from in-person teaching

Continue reading

UO Fall Term Planning–Concerns about the Safety of In-Person and On-Campus Instruction

A letter to campus from one of our our Italian correspondents. Page down for her op-ed in today’s Oregonian:

From: Melissa Graboyes <graboyes@uoregon.edu>
Subject: UO Fall Term Planning–Concerns about the Safety of In-Person and On-Campus Instruction
Date: May 6, 2020 at 6:54:09 AM PDT
To: Andre Le Duc <leduc@uoregon.edu>
Cc: Bruce Blonigen <bruceb@uoregon.edu>, Karen Ford <fordk@uoregon.edu>, “Carol Stabile” <cstabile@uoregon.edu>, Philip Scher <pscher@uoregon.edu>, “President Michael Schill” <pres@uoregon.edu>, Provost <provost@uoregon.edu>, “Gabe Paquette” <paquette@uoregon.edu>, Dennis Galvan <dgalvan@uoregon.edu>, “H Leslie Steeves” <lsteeves@uoregon.edu>, Juan-Carlos Molleda <jmolleda@uoregon.edu>, Laura Vandenburgh <lkvanden@uoregon.edu>, “VP for Equity and Inclusion” <vpinclusion@uoregon.edu>, Sabrina Madison-Cannon <smadison@uoregon.edu>, Hal Sadofsky <sadofsky@uoregon.edu>, Sarah Nutter <snutter@uoregon.edu>, Lee Rumbarger <leona@uoregon.edu>, Sierra Dawson <sdawson@uoregon.edu>, Ron Bramhall <rcb@uoregon.edu>, Randy Kamphaus <randyk@uoregon.edu>, Kate Mondloch <mondloch@uoregon.edu>, Marcilynn Burke <maburke@uoregon.edu>

Dear Mr. Le Duc and UO Leadership,

I am writing to share my deep concerns about the current plans for the UO to open for in-person and on-campus instruction during fall term. I write as someone with professional training and expertise in the area of public health, as someone who is witnessing the Italian government’s response to the outbreak in the north, and as a committed faculty member. There are many reasons I am worried about fall plans, and believe that many of my concerns are shared by others in the UO community. I recognize that many talented people are working very hard on this issue, and I appreciate those efforts. However, I still believe that this decision about fall term is the wrong one, and that there are significant problems with the process being used to make decisions about the university’s Covid-19 response.

To that end, I respectfully request:
1. Greater transparency about current plans for fall term, including the specifics of how testing, tracking, and isolation systems would be built and function. The UO also ought to share information about who is part of the Incident Management Team (IMT) that is making such important decisions for our campus and for our wider community. There needs to be more communication about what this group is doing and how decisions are being made.

2. Greater faculty involvement in determining what is safe and acceptable risk for fall term and in gathering ideas and input from across the university community. Feedback from across campus should be gathered, compiled, and shared publicly so the community knows the range of concerns and opinions. This could be done through a university wiki or qualtrics survey with public results. Having people send individual emails or phone calls is not enough, and does not allow faculty, staff, or students to know whether their concerns are shared by a few other people, dozens of others, or hundreds across campus. Part of an effective public health response is about maintaining trust. This is a critical moment when trust can be quickly lost, or, ideally, sowed through open sharing of information and vigorous public discussion about what is best for our whole community.

3. Greater faculty involvement through the creation of an Expert Advisory Committee made up of roughly a dozen faculty to advise the Incident Management Team on the changing science, international public health best practices, and to allow the UO to make decisions that are not only based on finances and campus logistics. This group would leverage the UO’s knowledge bank of talented scientists and public health experts and allow for our campus to make more nuanced decisions and more realistic plans. In the past three months, there have been multiple times when agencies such as the World Health Organization (WHO), the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) have been slow to respond to changing scientific data, or have chosen not to fully embrace methods that have been shown to be effective in other parts of the world. Two examples of this are around the dangers of asymptomatic transmission and the benefits of masking in reducing transmission. In both of these areas, all three of the agencies the UO turns to as official sources of information were weeks behind the scientific consensus, and still remain behind the curve in mandating masking in public. This Advisory Committee should also be public in that it’s members are known, and meetings and discussions should be as public as possible.

4. Greater sharing from the UO to the wider community about how effective measures could be taken on campus to keep the wider Eugene and Lane County community safe

I have shared these concerns in an open letter to colleagues (pasted below) and in an article running in today’s Oregonian: https://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2020/05/opinion-to-stay-safe-university-of-oregon-must-stay-the-course-on-remote-learning.html

Thank you for your attention,


Melissa Graboyes, Ph.D., MPH
Associate Professor, Medical History & African History
Clark Honors College
University of Oregon


To stay safe, University of Oregon must stay the course on remote-learning

Melissa Graboyes

Graboyes is an associate professor of medical history and African history at the University of Oregon. She is currently living in northern Italy with her family while on research leave and writes about the Covid-19 outbreak at www.coronaviruschronicles.com

University of Oregon President Michael Schill recently sent a note outlining his commitment to an in-person and on-campus fall term. But considering how much of his note focused on the university’s financial picture, it’s worth questioning whether that or sound public health policy is driving that decision. As a UO faculty member, a trained public health professional, and someone who has directly experienced the COVID-19 outbreak in northern Italy, I feel strongly that the university’s current plan to open in the fall for in-person, on-campus teaching is unsafe. Reconvening tens of thousands of students from across the globe to live in close quarters with each other could jumpstart COVID-19 transmission on campus and spread into the wider community. For the safety of everyone, the UO ought to continue remote-learning for fall term.

In theory, I’m not opposed to the idea of the UO fully opening in fall, but it would require a heroic public health effort. Experts agree that safely having together thousands of people in contact—as would happen in dormitories, dining facilities, libraries, classrooms and labs—would require a robust plan for regular testing on campus, quickly tracking contacts of positive cases, and having facilities to isolate those who test positive. To effectively test, track, and isolate would require the UO to build a complex public health infrastructure that has eluded US states and rich European countries alike. When I see the wealthiest area in Italy still unable to roll out sufficient testing, when I see the EU unable to figure out a viable digital contact tracking strategy, and most countries unable to humanely isolate those who are positive, forgive me for saying I don’t think the UO can develop these systems independently in four months.

President Schill hasn’t provided any convincing information that suggests testing, tracking, or isolating protocols could be ready by September. In his note, there is a single sentence describing how the university’s Incident Management Team will “explore a variety of methods to safeguard our community” that include reducing density in offices, residence halls, and dining facilities; intensive cleaning of all facilities; and testing and contact tracing for students and employees. But how will that testing possibly be done at adequate levels, especially knowing that as many as 60% of positive cases are asymptomatic? The U.S., Oregon, and Lane County have all been unable to scale up testing to anywhere near reasonable levels. Veneto Province in northern Italy, where I am located, has spent millions of euros on tests and has the highest testing per capita in Italy; but it still remains below what experts say is necessary to catch and prevent a second wave of infection.

The news is not much better for building out contact tracing and isolation systems. Not a single U.S. state has put in place a convincing contact tracing program, though Massachusetts has a promising effort. Italy is trying to scale up tracing via apps and human workers but has run into legal challenges around privacy and resistance to using the apps. Finally, stopping an outbreak on campus would require places where people who test positive can recover without infecting others. Neither the United States nor Europe has set up effective out-of-home isolation facilities such as those used in China and South Korea. So, please forgive me (again) if I remain deeply skeptical that the university could complete all of these steps and have them ready in four months. The UO is a special place filled with talented and hardworking people whom I am lucky to call my colleagues and friends—but these are unreasonable expectations.

We can’t lose sight of the fact that the decision about fall term isn’t just about the university’s fiscal health—it’s about people’s actual health and actual lives. Oregon has been lightly hit so far, but we are not done with COVID-19. Witnessing the COVID-19 outbreak and response in Italy, I’ve seen what happens when an area gets the full brunt of a coronavirus outbreak and when health systems are overwhelmed. One of the ways our community can minimize risk is by acknowledging it is unrealistic and unsafe to have tens of thousands of students back on campus. To protect our community’s health, the UO needs to remain remote in fall.

Senate’s Academic Council updates rules for teaching w/ closed campus


The Academic Council met 4-22-20 to discuss academic continuity planning for the duration of the COVID-19 disruption. The Academic Continuity Plan approved by the Academic Council on March 4, 2020 (https://senate.uoregon.edu/2020/03/05/academic-continuity-plan-for-the-coronavirus-health-emergency/) remains in effect until the academic disruption is declared over by the Academic Council except as modified below. The modifications and new expectations below are in effect beginning Summer 2020 and until the Academic Council declares the end of the Academic Disruption or approves new modifications.

(Note: “Instructor” is used in this document to indicate “Instructor of Record”, which may be instructors or GEs.)

Assumptions Guiding These Changes

  • Changes made to Winter and Spring had to consider the fact that we had less time to plan, and were changing expectations for students and instructors that they had not accounted for
  • We know how summer term will operate and have time to plan for that
  • We will know more about how fall term will operate and will have time to plan for that
  • We have policies governing student engagement and contact hours and should follow those as closely as possible
  • Students will be able to make choices about summer and fall courses that account for their specific situation, so we need fewer accommodations and we will insist on our high expectations for courses
  • Some students will still be in less than ideal situations for summer and beyond, and Instructors should try to accommodate them  where reasonable
  • In a non-pandemic scenario, instructors of courses would have been expected to deliver content and engage with students during scheduled class times
  • In a scenario where all or some courses are remote, some instructors will be in less than ideal situations in terms of workspaces, teaching materials, and technology.

Modifications to Current Expectations

The following expectation from the March 4th Academic Continuity Plan is modified by the Academic Council as indicated below:

  • March 4, 2020 language: Requires instructors with attendance or participation polices to modify those such that attendance is not counted in grades and participation points could be made up or waived.
  • April 29, 2020 update: Instructors may count attendance and participation as part of the grade provided they have reasonable ways for students to complete make-up assignments for missed class sessions or participation points without loss of credit. Instructors must communicate these policies in their syllabi. Instructors who are unsure whether they are making reasonable accommodations should confer with their unit heads for guidance.

Continuation of Grading Policy Adjustments

The following grading policy adjustments approved by the Academic Council on March 25, 2020 for Spring term are continued by the Academic Council until modified or disruption is declared over. These adjustments are in effect for undergraduate and graduate courses except for graduate courses offered in the JD and LLM programs in the Law School, which are under a different policy passed by the Law School.

  • The deadline to change grade-optional courses from graded to P/N (pass/no pass) will be extended 30 days after the date that final grades are posted for that term.
  • The option to change from graded to P/N will be available for all courses that are designated as graded only and for grade optional courses.
  • Courses that are designated as P/N only will remain as they are. There will be no additional options for these courses.
  • Any course grade of P will be counted as a P* grade for the purposes of the policies below. This means that courses taken as P/N can count toward graduation requirements. Credits earned in courses offered only as P/N will use the P* designation.
    • Undergraduate: “Students must earn 168 transfer or University of Oregon credits with grades of A, B, C, D, or P*.”
    • Graduate Master’s degrees: “A minimum of 24 credits must be University of Oregon graded (not pass/no pass) credits.”
  • Instructors of record shall maintain letter grades throughout the term and record final course grades for students in all courses).
  • If a student chooses P/N by the deadline, grades will be recorded as follows:
    • Undergraduate: a P grade for a C- or above, and an N grade for a D+ or below.
    • Graduate: a P grade for a B- or above, and an N grade for a C+ or below.
    • Law: a P grade for a D- or above, and an N grade for an F.
  • Departments are asked to waive any requirements that (a) limit how P/N courses count toward the major; that (b) require specific grades for courses that count toward the major; or that (c) serve as prerequisites for other courses. This is especially important for cases where the lack of such a waiver will require students to enroll in an additional term or delay graduation for students. Departments are to report how they want P/N grades from any term during the disruption to count toward requirements to the Registrar’s Office by May 6, 2020. The Registrar’s Office will send a link to a webform for reporting this information. The Registrar’s Office will reach out to departments directly regarding prerequisites.

New Expectations

The following new expectations are approved by the Academic Council as of April 29, 2020 and effective beginning Summer 2020. These expectations follow two principles: first, that we have policies on student engagement and contact hours that instructors should follow, and, second, that we have time for students and instructors to plan for new expectations that will improve remote education in Summer 2020 and beyond.

  • Courses that were originally scheduled for online and coded with “V” (for virtual) shall be taught as planned.
  • It is expected that non-WEB courses shall provide live engagement during the scheduled meeting times as defined by the Student Engagement Inventory for the course. Instructors may make the following adjustments for courses that have to be offered remotely or partially remotely (some face-to-face and some remote):
    • Live engagement can take many different forms. For example, it might include a mix of content delivery, facilitated discussions on Zoom, facilitated discussion board discussions, breakout sessions for students on Zoom, group project time with the instructor available for guidance. The following are not suitable replacements for contact under current policy:
      • Posting of supplemental content materials
      • Announcements
      • Assignments
      • Office hours, online or otherwise
    • Whatever the mix, at least 50% of the live engagement should include planned and structured content delivery or discussion.
    • Where appropriate and possible, instructors should create opportunities for student-student interaction.
    • Whatever the mix, instructors should be available to students during each scheduled class period. If instructors are not going to be available during a scheduled class period, they should treat that as a “cancelled” class meeting and handle that as they would during a regular, non-remote term with appropriate notifications to students and anyone else as required by the department, and appropriate replacement of that instructional time.
  • Instructors should schedule and be available to meet during office hours outside the scheduled class time in accordance with department and/or school/college policies on office hours.

Technology Tools and Software
It is required that Canvas be used for all courses during the academic disruption. Instructors shall publish their Canvas sites and use them to post materials, collect assignments, provide alternatives to lectures/discussions for students who are absent from class, and post grades. Students and Instructors are required by university policy to use their Uoregon accounts for university business including instruction, and must not share their credentials with anyone.

Instructors may use other FERPA-compliant software to supplement Canvas use. These include the UO licensed versions of Office 365, which includes One Drive and Teams, Zoom and Dropbox. You can find out more about acceptable technology tools and software here: https://is.uoregon.edu/remote.

Another carefully scripted town hall to promote illusion of shared governance

From Around the 0, of course:

University of Oregon students, faculty members and staff are invited to attend a virtual town hall meeting at 12:30 p.m. Thursday, May 7, to discuss planning for in-person, on campus instruction for fall term.

President Michael H. Schill announced the intent for fall term, including the engagement of the UO’s Incident Management Team to plan for and facilitate the steps needed to open campus.

As planning gets underway, members of the campus community have questions about what an on-campus fall term will look like. In a message to faculty and staff members, Patrick Phillips, provost and senior vice president, highlighted concerns and potential solutions, as well as the UO’s participation in a consortium of West Coast campuses “working together to understand how to employ best practices from a public health perspective to provide a safe environment for our faculty, staff, and students.”

The virtual town hall will include Schill; André Le Duc, associate vice president and chief resilience officer; and other UO administrators. The event is available via livestream. Campus community members are encouraged to submit questions in advance through an anonymous web form. Email questions in advance or during the live event to townhall@uoregon.edu.

Pres Schill offers faculty union a pay cut proposal and a threat: take it or suffer the consequences

The short version, from the union:

Executive Summary
The administration wants faculty to agree to a wage cut plan in the event of revenue loss. United Academics leadership has concerns about the proposal and would like to bargain the plan. If UA does not agree to the wage cut plan, the administration intends to either non-renew all 211 Career faculty who are up for renewal this spring or offer them only 0.1 FTE contracts. In order for a wage cut plan for faculty to go into effect, the membership of United Academics would have to vote in favor of the plan.

In a nutshell this plan would put the full cost of any tuition losses or state funding cuts on the faculty and OAs. There is no discussion of an offset for increases in federal funding, such as the $16m UO is getting from the CARES act. There is no discussion of cuts for Johnson Hall’s pet projects.

There is no accountability for the administration’s past decisions to spend down UO’s reserves on an Athlete’s Village for the 2021 Track & Field championships, on utility connections for Hayward field, on the Law School, on continued hidden athletic subsidies, etc, which led to the decrease in reserves and the increase in bond debt.

There is no provision for shared governance oversight of future spending.

The scheme is barely progressive – the cuts start at a very low $40K, and the top rate peaks at $200K, meaning those making say $400K pay the same percentage as those making $200K.

Amusingly, or perhaps I should say incompetently, whoever cooked this scheme up does not understand the difference between average and marginal – so after these cuts, an AVP now making say $199,999 would end up with a higher salary than one making $200,001. Under the middle scenario, the new salaries would be $178,819 and $176,000, or a $2,820 bigger cut for the poor soul who started out $2 ahead. This does not inspire confidence in our VPFA and VPBP’s ability to run our university’s finance and budgeting without supervision.

Here’s the schedule, with 5 scenarios and corresponding cuts, as calculated by the Administration:

The Administration’s full draft proposal is here. The Faculty Union’s full response is below.

Continue reading

UO lays off 282 classified & OA’s, income doubles under UI for lowest paid

(Note: updated with info from an always well informed commenter, who also points out that this blog and its commenters sometimes come across as uncaring about the staff and OA’s who keep the university running. She is right, and for my part I resolve to try and do better on that.)

They will still get health benefits – thanks to work by HR. Assuming an average salary of $30,000, this will save UO about $2.2M a quarter, or 1/6 of a Jumbotron. It will be a windfall for the employees (except perhaps the most recent hires and the highest paid). For full-time workers at $15 an hour, instead of $500 or so a week take home, they will get ~$400 in regular unemployment benefits, plus the $600 per week CARES act add-on. Part time workers will do even better in percentage terms.

Of course first Oregon’s Employment Division needs to figure out how to get the checks out. Their COBOL system crashed again this weekend. For context, back on March 6th 1933, the day after his inauguration, FDR closed the entire U.S. banking system in response to bank runs. That week he had the Federal Reserve fly bags of freshly printed currency to banks across the country, and almost all banks were reopened and cashing paychecks by March 15.

President Schill’s message below the break:

Continue reading

Oregonian reports on Pres Schill and AD Mullens’s sacrifices

Reporter James Crepea here, with a simple recitation of the facts and numbers:

EUGENE — Oregon athletic director Rob Mullens and UO president Michael Schill are among a group of the university’s top administrators taking voluntary pay cuts for at least the next six months — and possibly through the 2020-21 school year — and the school has instituted a hiring freeze due to the coronavirus.

Schill announced the measures, including a 12 percent reduction in his pay and 10 percent reduction for Mullens and 10 UO vice presidents, during a virtual town hall meeting for faculty members, staff and graduate employees on Thursday.

“Simply put, we are all going to have to make sacrifices,” Schill said.

… Mullens, who in under contract through June 2025, earns $717,500 salary plus deferred compensation, performance and retention bonuses. He is due a $200,000 retention bonus at the end of June.

Schill, who received a $100,000 bonus in December, is earning $720,000 in salary in the second of a five-year contract through June 2023 and is due $738,000 next year. He can earn annual bonuses up to $200,000 and also receives a $50,000 annual retirement contribution, vehicle stipend and is due a $200,000 retention bonus if he remains president until Sept. 30, 2021.

You can support the Oregonian’s reporting with a $10 a month digital subscription, here.

Or you can read the free Around the O’s version of events, by a former journalist now held in captivity by VP Kyle Henley in the bowels of Johnson Hall, here. A cry for help from Virtual Town – our common future:

As it turns out Mullens’s salary was actually $780K last year, plus a $100K retention bonus, plus some other bonuses and perks like a car and country club dues:

Here’s his 2015 contract, for some reason his new one is not posted at https://publicrecords.uoregon.edu/documents

Mullens 2015