Showing posts with label no confidence resolution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label no confidence resolution. Show all posts

Saturday, October 24, 2009

SWC Classified Employees Union (CSEA) Vote of No Confidence

SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE CALIFORNIA SCHOOL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, CHAPTER 524



Date: May 27, 2009

Authored by: California School Employees Association (CSEA), Chapter 524



Title: Vote of No Confidence in Superintendent/President Raj K. Chopra





WHEREAS, CSEA Chapter 524, of Southwestern College, the exclusive bargaining representative for classified employees, fundamentally disagrees with many of the decisions and priorities of the current Superintendent/President, and



WHEREAS, CSEA members are joined with our Academic Senate colleagues and Council of Chairs and wholly support their recent collective comments and actions, and



WHEREAS, due to recent actions taken by the Superintendent/President to reorganize the Southwestern College campus with a complete lack of regard for Southwestern College’s standing commitment to its own Shared Governance Guidelines adopted by the District on January 8, 1997, which in part state as follows:

Shared Governance is the act of District employees participating collegially in the decision-making process of the college. The goal of shared governance is to include, within the decision-making process, representatives of all college constituencies affected by these decisions… To ensure that governance is shared, all groups shall operate within the shared governance processes. Mutual trust and support are essential for the success of shared governance. These result from a demonstration by each group involved that they first seek to improve the college and strengthen its ability to carry out the college’s mission of educating our constituent populations…; and


WHEREAS, CSEA members take great exception to the process by which the Superintendent/President makes decisions. After promising collaboration on the proposed reorganization, no input from CSEA leadership was requested prior to the presentation of the completed plan to the Governing Board. Thus CSEA Chapter 524 expresses no confidence in the
leadership of the Superintendent/President Raj K. Chopra, now therefore



BE IT RESOLVED, that Southwestern College CSEA Chapter 524 unites with our academic colleagues and solemnly votes no confidence in Superintendent/President Raj K. Chopra, and



BE IT RESOLVED, that CSEA Chapter 524 urges the Southwestern College District Governing Board to take swift, direct and deliberate action to address CSEA concerns as expressed clearly by the vote of no confidence at the May 27, 2009 resolution vote.



BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that CSEA urges the Southwestern Community College District Governing Board to open dialogue formally with the faculty and CSEA leadership prior to June 15, 2009 for purposes of addressing concerns, and



BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that CSEA respectfully requests that the Southwestern Community College District Governing Board provide a written response to this resolution by June 15, 2009 detailing the Governing Board’s plan to improve the relationship between the Superintendent/President, the faculty and the classified staff of Southwestern College, and to ensure true shared governance at Southwestern College as defined by: Education Code Sections 70902(b) (7), Title 5 Sections 53200 et seq, 51023.5 and 51023.7; and Accreditation Standards IV A.2. and IV.A.5, as we are gravely concerned that allowing this issue to go unresolved could adversely affect accreditation and have other long-term negative consequences.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

No Confidence in Chopra from Department Chairs

SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE COUNCIL OF CHAIRS
RESOLUTION


Date: 07 May 2009
Authored by: The Council of Chairs

Title: Vote of No Confidence in Superintendent/President Raj K. Chopra

WHEREAS, The Council of Chairs, as the faculty leaders of departments and programs within the academic schools and centers at Southwestern College in all academic matters, fundamentally disagrees with many of the decisions and priorities of the current Superintendent/President, and

WHEREAS, due to recent actions taken by the Superintendent/President to reorganize the Southwestern College campus with a total lack of regard or consideration for the immediate and long term effect on academic programs and services and the students that they serve, and

WHEREAS, the Council of Chairs takes exception to the decision to eliminate institutional capability to pursue and maintain grant and other critical outside funding sources for present and future innovative and relevant programs, and

WHEREAS, there has been a lack of transparency in the budget process and a public misrepresentation of the budget, and

WHEREAS, the Council of Chairs takes great exception to the process by which the Superintendent/President makes decisions without adhering to the tenets of shared governance and with an apparent lack of understanding of academics, and thus expressed in a vote of no confidence in the leadership of the Superintendent/President Raj K. Chopra, now therefore

BE IT RESOLVED, that the Southwestern College Council of Chairs solemnly votes no confidence in Superintendent/President Raj K. Chopra, and

BE IT RESOLVED, that the Southwestern College Council of Chairs urges the Southwestern College District Governing Board to take swift, direct and deliberate action to address concerns of the chairs and their departments as expressed clearly by the vote of no confidence at the April 30, 2009 Council of Chairs meeting, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Southwestern College Council of Chairs urges the Southwestern Community College District Governing Board to investigate the process by which decisions directly affecting academic programs and their students are made, and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Southwestern College Council of Chairs respectfully requests that the Southwestern Community College District Governing Board provide a written response to this resolution by June 15, 2009 detailing the Governing Board’s plan to provide direction to Superintendent/President Chopra to ensure that shared governance be adhered to and funding for innovative and relevant programs that provide opportunities for our college and students are actively pursued.

Friday, October 2, 2009

No Confidence in Chopra Cover Letter

May 5, 2009

From: Academic Senate of Southwestern College

RE: Vote of No Confidence Resolution

Attached you will find documents that provide a chronology of events that lead up to our vote of no confidence on April 28, 2009 by our Southwestern College Academic Senate. Our Senate has been cut off from meaningful dialogue with our Governing Board and Superintendent President during both our accreditation process and two different reorganizations of our campus within one year. Here is the chronology and order in which we recommend you read the documents to get a clear overview of our situation.
1. Union Tribune article, March 1, 2008
2. Overview of Academic Senate Shared Governance Policy as seen in “10+1” document
3. Academic Senate Resolution: Shared Governance, March 2008 in response to first Reorganization of campus
4. Statewide Shared Governance Anniversary Release, Fall 2008
5. Academic Senate Resolution: Budget Crisis, December 2008
6. Governing Board Oral Presentation regarding second Reorganization April 2009
7. Budget Information April 2009
8. Statewide Senate Rostrum Article with Southwestern College dialogue, April 28, 2009
9. Academic Senate Resolution: No Confidence, April 29, 2009

Our faculty have expended countless hours to collegially participate in campus processes to have input into planning and budget development activities. Instead of participation there has been a progressive and now increased deterioration in our opportunity to have meaningful communication campus on matters that impact our students directly. Our goal in this resolution asks the Governing Board to open dialogue with our Senate and Superintendent/President so we can have our concerns addressed in a collaborative manner.

Examples of decision making that have negatively impacted our students include:
1. Blanket elimination of course sections without time to consider data.
2. Movement to electronic class schedule and registration processes for su 09 and fa 09 without a transition plan for students.
3. Elimination of Performing Arts Classified position that organized, implemented, and over saw all performing arts events on campus (75 in 08/09).
4. Elimination of our Outreach Office with no communication of a plan for transition.
5. Movement of technical programs to a site at the border that is isolated and far removed from practicum sites causing hardships for students.

We are interested in your support for our students, faculty, staff, and our recent Senate action as we work to improve communication and shared governance processes on our campus. I look forward to discussing this with you.

Respectfully,
Academic Senate of Southwestern College

8. Statewide Senate Rostrum Article with Southwestern College dialogue, April 28, 2009

Rostrum Article on “no Confidence”: 9/03

“So, You’re Thinking about a Vote of NO CONFIDENCE”
10+ Questions to Ask

Jane Patton

(Patricia Flores-Charter’s Responses to questions posed and considered by the Senate. Responses are organized on behalf of the Senate Executive Board in Bold/Italics in preparation for Academic Senate meeting, April 28, 2009)

Has your local senate considered taking a vote of no confidence on an administrator? At some colleges, there have been ongoing issues with long-standing administrators. At other colleges, new problems have arisen as a result of the budgetary constraints in the last year. At times of fiscal hardship, typically there are more instances in which local senates find their rights and responsibilities have been curtailed, so the discussions about a no confidence vote have increased. For example, it is easier and faster for some administrators to make decisions alone about budget processes or curricular offerings and bypass a college’s normal shared-governance processes. Before a local senate decides to take a vote no confidence on an administrator to their local Board of Trustees, senate members must carefully consider the justification and potential effects of such a vote. Below are some questions to stimulate local senate discussions about whether or not to take such an important vote of no confidence.

1.What is your goal or purpose? Open dialogue with the Governing Board and Superintendent President to address faculty concerns. What do you want accomplished by this vote? Speak with one collective voice as a faculty as to the seriousness of the concerns. Consider whether or not you expect a specific action to be taken after the vote. From whom do you expect an action and by when? We request action by the Governing Board by June 15, 2009. How will you know when the action is completed? The Senate Executive Board will receive a written response by June 15, 2009.

2. What might the overall results be of such a vote? We have explored all the pros/cons and exhausted all our options, time, and energy. Morale is at an all time low. Sometimes the effects are right on target; sometimes there can be unexpected consequences. Effects may be immediate, or it may take time to see a change. Explore all the pros/cons; examine the advantages and disadvantages of any proposed action. Consider how different groups may react: other administrators, trustees, staff, the community, etc.

3. Are your concerns about academic issues? (as opposed to union issues). Refer to the 10+1 areas of Senate responsibilities, to other areas of responsibility in the law, as well as at local board policies that are relevant in your situation. Academic Senate standing committees can not function in a cost effective and collegial manner under current conditions. Numerous violations of the 10+1 have occurred in the last 1 ½ years despite our attempts at collegial consultation to prevent or resolve them.

4. Are the issues compelling enough? Our faculty and academic committees do not have administrative support or input into planning and budget to function effectively. Have other avenues of recourse been exhausted? The Senate President no longer has access to the President. Collegial attempts at collaboration on planning, budget, and committee support have failed. Keep in mind that the Board of Trustees hired this administrator, and therefore will be inclined to support him or her. A vote of no confidence probably should be done as a last resort.

5. Is it best to take a vote as the Senate? This is an academic and professional matter relating to the 10+1. As the union? The union will address any contract and work issues. Both? A vote of all faculty, if you have a representative senate? As in past precedence Senate Representatives have asked for a vote of their constituents and will represent that vote in the Senate meeting. You could do all or any of these and the sequence could be varied. What are the pros & cons of each choice? What’s the union-senate relationship? Our relationship is united. Are the bodies in accord? Both bodies work together collegially. In opposition? Will the action of one group divide the faculty or unite them? This will unite them.

6. In a multi-college district, consider the ramifications of one college’s unilateral action. Should discussions or a vote be conducted by your District Senate, if you have one?

7. Discuss the issues widely across the campus, and consider first adopting a resolution laying out the concerns and calling for a vote. Since fall 2007 our Senate has been compelled to speak with one voice with a Resolution on Shared Governance and Collegial Consultation(approved April 22, 2008) and a Budget Crisis Resolution (approved December 9, 2008). Where is there resistance? The resistance is from Dr. Chopra. Have you explored the opposition’s perspective? A concerted effort was spent this past 1 ½ years to work with our Superintendent/President. Might they be right? With every new decision we have worked to see the rationale and logic of the decision making process. The Senate has worked to understand and support decisions. You could do a temperature check in advance of a vote, to see where people stand. Is there widespread concern or buy-in? Will the faculty support the senate?

8. What is the perspective of the classified staff? We are in communication with the classified staff. What’s their position? Should you work with them, either formally or informally? Can you incorporate their concerns into a statement of your own, demonstrating the administrator’s failure, for example, to adhere to principles of participatory governance?

9. After a vote is taken what will occur during the next six months or year? Our goal is to open constructive dialogue with our Governing Board and Superintendent/President to turn around this situation. Our commitment to our students and community keeps us focused on improvement of this relationship.

10. Are all discussions professional and focused on issues and behaviors and not on personalities? Yes, we have worked hard to not respond in kind to hostile and adversarial treatment.

11. Who else would be affected by a vote? Will other relationships the faculty have be damaged? How will the community react? Our students and community are at the heart of our issues. Should constructive outcomes not occur, we will reach out to our students and community for their support and help in solutions for our next steps.


A primary role of the local academic senate in the case of a “no confidence” vote is the same as its role the rest of the time: ensuring that the laws, regulations and policies established by the state and by local boards relative to the senate are upheld. When those are violated, the local senate needs to take action, making certain its own actions are above reproach.

9. Academic Senate Resolution: No Confidence, April 29, 2009

SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE ACADEMIC SENATE
RESOLUTION


Date: 28 April 2009
Authored by: Academic Senate Executive Committee, by direction


Title: Vote of No Confidence in Superintendent/President Raj K. Chopra


WHEREAS, The Academic Senate, as the legal representative of the faculty of
Southwestern College in all academic and professional matters, fundamentally disagrees with many of the decisions and priorities of the current Superintendent/President, and


WHEREAS, due to recent actions taken by the Superintendent/President to reorganize the Southwestern College campus with a total lack of regard for Southwestern College’s standing commitment to its own Shared Governance Guidelines adopted by the District on January 8, 1997, which in part state as follows:

Shared Governance is the act of District employees participating collegially in the decision-making process of the college. The goal of shared governance is to include, within the decision-making process, representatives of all college constituencies affected by these decisions. . . To ensure that governance is shared, all groups shall operate within the shared governance processes. Mutual trust and support are essential for the success of shared governance. These result from a demonstration by each group involved that they first seek to improve the college and strengthen its ability to carry out the college’s mission of educating our constituent populations…; and

WHEREAS, the Academic Senate takes great exception to the process by which the
Superintendent/President makes decisions, and thus expressed in a 26 to 1 vote of no confidence in the leadership of the Superintendent/President Raj K. Chopra, now therefore

BE IT RESOLVED, that the Southwestern College Academic Senate solemnly votes no confidence in Superintendent/President Raj K. Chopra, and

BE IT RESOLVED, that the Southwestern College Academic Senate urges the
Southwestern College District Governing Board to take swift, direct and deliberate action to address concerns of the faculty as expressed clearly by the vote of no confidence at the April 28, 2009 Academic Senate meeting.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Southwestern College Academic Senate urges
the Southwestern Community College District Governing Board to open dialogue formally with the faculty prior to June 15, 2009 for purposes of addressing concerns expressed by all members of the Academic Senate in its vote of no confidence, and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Southwestern College Academic Senate
respectfully requests that the Southwestern Community College District Governing Board provide a written response to this resolution by June 15, 2009 detailing the Governing Board’s plan to improve the relationship between the Superintendent/President and the faculty of Southwestern College, and to ensure true shared governance at Southwestern College as defined by: Education Code Sections 70902(b) (7), Title 5 Sections 53200 et seq, 51023.5 and 51023.7; and Accreditation Standards IV A.2. and IV.A.5.

Sunday, September 27, 2009

If No News Is Good News . . .

Here's some bad news (but good reporting!). The following articles appeared in Southwestern's award-winning college newspaper The Sun:


Controversy has followed Chopra
http://bit.ly/IBCV9

Issue date: 5/8/09 Section: News
By: Vanessa K. Nevarez

Chopra's unilateral reorganization is the last straw, he must resign

http://bit.ly/ZILbt

Issue date: 5/8/09 Section: Viewpoints

By: Sun Editorial Staff



SWC students, employees speak out about reorganization
http://bit.ly/2prH36


Issue date:
5/8/09 Section: News
By: Sean Campbell and Lindsay Leonelli



Faculty votes No Confidence in Chopra
http://bit.ly/2nsxEu

Issue date: 5/8/09 Section: News
By: Sean Campbell



SWC Foundation runs dry after consecutive fund raisers cancelled
http://bit.ly/2ejMwp

Issue date: 5/8/09 Section: News
By: Albert H. Fulcher



Five employees laid off as part of campus reorganization
http://bit.ly/L8Fcy

Issue date: 5/8/09 Section: News
By: Lyndsay Leonelli



College leadership, faculty worlds apart
http://bit.ly/ICLPS

Issue date: 12/25/08 Section: Viewpoints

By: Sun Editorial Staff

CSEA rally criticizes raise for president

Classified employees insist timing is bad during financial crisis
http://bit.ly/Wg3rH

Issue date: 12/25/08 Section: News


By: Gabriel Orendain-Necochea

Raising hackles

Faculty, students rip governing board for raising president's pay while cutting academics
http://bit.ly/1mTQl

Issue date: 12/25/08 Section: News
By: Vanessa K. Nevarez

Board extends Chopra's contract

Deal gives president another year, 7.9 percent raise
http://bit.ly/3s2qNh


Issue date:
12/5/08 Section: News
By: Sean Campbell and Vanessa K. Nevarez



In his own words
http://bit.ly/3dPLmH


Issue date:
12/5/08 Section: News

Southwestern College President Dr. Raj K. Chopra expressed surprise and anger that faculty and employees were criticizing his 7.9 percent, $14,931 a year raise and one-year contract extension. Following are excerpts from a brief but lively interview with Chopra on Nov. 25.

President denies plagiarism

Chopra apologizes for newsletter 'miscommunication'
http://bit.ly/10FpTy

Issue date: 12/5/08 Section: News
By: Lauren Manary



Employees express disapproval of Chopra's raise
http://bit.ly/hgyS4

Issue date: 12/5/08 Section: News
By: Gabriel Orendain-Necochea



High noon on Otay Lakes Road
http://bit.ly/mcuZ0

Issue date: 3/7/08 Section: Viewpoints

By: Sun Editorial Staff