Minnesota State meet and confer minutes
Sept. 7, 2018
Minnesota State Statewide Meet and Confer Minutes
Date: Sept 7, 2018
Time: 10 AM
Location: Minnesota State Office - Wells Fargo Building, St. Paul
Attendees: Davinder Malhotra, Sue Applequist, Chris Dale, Jeff Wade, James Jorstad, Aaron Bouschor, Betsy Thompson, Anne Maile, Laura King, Derek Hughes, Trent Janezich, Kari CampbellMarcia Beukelman, Barb Gosch, Clay Passick, Nicole Hamilton, Jerry Jeffries, Dave Kamper, Heidi Vidor, Terry Nelson , Dave Kamper
Next Meeting: November 9, 2018
1) Spirit of Meet and Confer and Meeting Protocol
- MAPE handed out the Meet and Confer Protocol.
- There has been some changeover in personnel on both sides, we just wanted to revisit. We wanted to make sure we distinguish between what the Meet and Confer process is vs the Labor Relations Process. We want to make sure we incorporate both the MAPE perspectives and Management perspectives.
- Davinder has looked through the Meet and Confer document that we previously handed out. He said that clarity is always a good thing to have whether its regarding new people or people who are continuing. It makes good sense to treat each other with respect and civility. They gave us their handout. The basic purpose is that we should be talking to each other, and have mutual respect. (SEE DOCUMENT)
2) Allocation Framework MAPE - We are thinking of the next phase of the biennial request, and how can we help contribute to this? Is the percentage that the System Office allocation been discussed? We are hearing a lot from campuses about how stretched their budget is. Wwe are just curious if there has been conversation around this.
- All of the Framework allocation is on the Finance website to read a description. The board approved the redesign. As part of the redesign, we didn't talk about how much money is used to take up for the System Office. We don't have the ability to raise the allocation to the system office. We've been absorbing costs since 2012. Campus have seen $120 million in state funds over those 6 years b/c we've been successful at the Legislator. As we think about the request, we don?t bring into the thought the allocation framework, because that's a board decision. We just talk about how to get more money to get to the campuses. We are not talking about changes in the money to the System office we are also wanting to drive as much money to the campuses as we can. Correction - the allocation isn't 5% to the system office it's 4%. We get federal grants, contracts, there is no tuition. 2% of our total system.
- Devinder -- because of the freeze, it limits our ability to provide support and coordination to our Colleges and universities. We?d like to do more, but we are limited.
- System office used to pay for IT software for Statewide, and there is less of that. This may become a future talking point where we may need MAPE support.
- MAPE does support Minnesota State - we will continue to support.
3) FY2020-2021 Biennial Budget Request MAPE
- We are interested in whatever MAPE has to say. We?ll be in front of the board next week, would love to hear what MAPE has to say. The window is closing, we want to be able to reflect as much as we can from all of the bargaining units. We?ve heard from some, but not all. We?ve heard from student groups and would love to add you to the list. Final decision in a few weeks.
- We are hearing about affordability. We care about academic program development, tuition. Changes to statewide financial aid program (MOHE), Students United (leg strategy package, philosophical framework) IFO encouraged to dream , support of Next Gen, have aspirations. More conceptual ideas. MUSAF also had some suggestions to look at other states, for retention. etc.
- MAPE we will get you something.
4) Reimagining Higher Education MAPE and Minnesota State
- Do you have anything specific since we've shared the document with you? The forums will be over the next year. The current timeline ends in March or April. Then we'll look internally at the information. It's about understanding clarity of purpose and organization vitality rather than coming up with a plan. Do we have the organizational mindset and capacity to adjust? Where are there areas to shore up? Other areas of economy been successful to that type of change? Lessons learned ? May have to learn and re-imagine again to fit into higher ed. Some approaches, recommendations about things to do over the long haul, not looking for a plan or a specific initiative for each college to undertake. At the end of the day all innovations occurs at the colleges and university. We facilitate and coordinate. We will think of new and better ways, for advocacy and innovation, but the actual work, educating and supporting students, those already occur at colleges and universities. How we approach one, might be different than how we approach another one. Not looking for a specific set of initiatives.
- Some campus admins have been saying, we'll take a another year to look at our plan, and then another year for implementation. Is the correct message being disseminated? It won't be like Charting the future, where activities came out of that. I would hope some colleges would spend some time rethinking about what is working well, and where can we tweek, etc. We will do the same thing at the SO level.
5) NextGen ERP Update MAPE
- What's going on? we have some issues with the new product that continuing ed uses that doesn't work with ISRS, will we end up with a product that won't integrate?
- Next Gen PowerPoint was handed out. Page 3 is the timeline of project. Current state reviews are done. Thank you we had terrific participation and work product. Work artifacts are on the Next Gen site. We are moving into future state planning. Slide 4 - upcoming business process reviews, student, HR, reviews, IT Tech talk, etc. The change management initiative is starting to launch. Oct- regional reviews, page 5 for introduction. The presidents got invitations from the NExt Gen steering committee (aug 22) to introduce the regional review format and asked Presidents to review a few things. 3 ways to participate; 1. virtually, 2. in person. 3. online and enter comments and questions into nextGen site. Future state meetings are scheduled - and communicated. (page 6) You can find location for those regional meetings on the next gen website. Please bookmark and get to know; we'll communicate in the upcoming months.
- Future state review process over the next from Aug - to Jan. Discussion with leadership about the timing for RFP. Another chance for Vendor review from RFP, then onto planning. That point we'll start to match up what the product offers that can replace what we have as a separate system. We have 60 sub systems that feed ISRS in some capacity. We will analyze all of them, what's in them and what would we need to interface with.
- 60 subsystems is a light count - for the ISRS - there is an inventory going on now.
- Future state visits, if employees want to attend- we can arrange with their supervisors. There is also a registration process.
- Has there been any discussion on how to pay for it?
o 50/50 sharing with internal resources with us and campuses, and legislative money get for other half. SO welcomes MAPES input on any proposals.
6) Private Sector Vacation Accrual Process MAPE
- Pulse on how this is going at the campuses? Jeff- it varies from campus to campus. We have heard that some are not going to do it at all. Some say that have limited it to 10 or 5 years. It varies greatly. In Labor Relations- we contacted MMB, and talked to Carolyn Trevis. She said it's discretionary, so if they say no, then it's no. We are leaving it totally at the discretion of the institutions. We have preached consistency. If you do 5 years, then that?s the limit for everyone. If no is no-- then no to anyone. We've not given any orders to any college or university.
- That is a tough pill for our members to swallow. We hear why are some campuses doing it and some not. The colleges and universities are a separate appointing authority, as it relates to this benefit, we are not a system. Some things we are a system and some things we are very independent of each other.
- We wouldn?t encourage the Chancellor to put the hammer down, and Jeff doesn't think he will. Chancellor says, only thing we can do, is bring concern to attention of presidents. Some colleges tell MAPE that the SO says that they can't do it. We have not told any institution that they cannot do this! The campus that doesn't want to do it have the reason is budget, or market factors. We haven?t heard from all of them. There is one institutions that said they're just not having difficulty hiring people with what they've offered. MAPE is a Victim of your own success?..... we have tuition waiver- we have nice benefits. There is also advantage in giving colleges and universities their own space to make their own decisions to hire what they feel is best.
- This is one of the primary arguments that MAPE used to MMB - retention, recruiting factor? they said they're not having trouble with retention or recruitment, we aren't having problems. This might change in the future, and in the future they may change their minds. Some colleges have said they'd consider doing it for recruiting, but not for retention --- for new employee coming in but won't do it for continuing employees.
- We've just stressed to be consistent and make sure the institutions have a basis for why you've done it.
- If we have a current employee, and they've been on the job for 5 year. Then they hired a new employee and say they get 15 hours. What message does that send? That you don't care? Not necessarily; maybe circumstances have changed. Maybe that's what we needed at that time to recruit. Is that fair to the current employees? Maybe not. We all do stuff that's not fair to everyone all the time.
- Given that there should be consistency, and we hear there is inconsistency, what should we tell our members to do? Address locally, ultimately, it is a benefit that's outline in collective bargaining agreement. they could file a grievance. Someone could contact Labor Relations and ask them to look into it. It's important to know that we're looking for consistency, but it doesn't necessarily mean that if a campus is going to do it. Doesn't mean that everyone who has worked in private sector, is going to get the experience. If the college is granting and some aren't getting it because they don't meet the qualifications- doesn't mean that the college is not being inconsistent.
7) Professional Development
- There is a form available. The only reason for the form is the tuition waiver module can't track this. We needed some way to track the requests so we can manually enter into the system. The form was put together and sent out draft for comment. That form got out to members in draft form, and so we told our HR offices that was a draft. Jeff and Joe sent out a final form to be used. If colleges wanted to use their own form, they were asked to send it to Jeff and make sure it had the stuff we needed on there; if they did it would be ok. Otherwise, they could use our form. Jeff has gotten a form from 3 different colleges, and have looked at them. They were fine. That's what is out there now. Sue added - we have limited IT resources that need to be dedicated to tech enhancements and to make the HR TSM successful. Over summer we had a delay to make changes to faculty contracts and got behind. Trying to move to phase 2 in HR TSM and have not had time to give to this. Pilot for Phase 2 has started, and we have to be ready. Limited Resources and have had to prioritize.
- Jeff could you send Jerry the latest form? We want to make sure we have that available. When did the final form go out? Two weeks ago.
- Some people had been denied because colleges said they weren't sure if it would be effective this semester. No that?s not the case, Jeff discussed it would be Fall of this year. Immediately sent that out to institutions.
- We had a conference call, with our members. we clarified that people could get the benefit for Fall. They were told it was not available to them for upcoming term. We heard they were told it can't be for Fall. it's strange - that it's inconsistency
- it is a discretionary benefit, as a result, the consistency would be internal at that institution. We are hearing that they aren't getting the benefit b/c the SO didn't tell us they were ready.
8) Customized Training Workforce Development Service Model
- Received 2 documents. 1 is regional map. Strategic clarification around the document and this is what we?re asking you to do in each region.
- Over the winter, we worked with leadership, and the steering committee to create standard business practices and getting regional advisory council to get president more engaged.
- We asked regions to put together implementation plan Sept. 1 and we received 7 of 8 on time.
- As we move forward this year, we'll be implementing. We hope next Gen will be a solution for RSchoolToday and salesforce CRM.
- On the document in East Metro Region - Metro State University has an *. Is that a typo? Metro State had an interest in working in both east and west region. They have one staff on the team that works in one region.
- 2014 we reported to chancellor- we are happy to see this development for all concerned. What are the roles of the universities? Is there a vision for going forward? Expanding the role? How do we see that? Devinder said CECT was always a big thing at 2 year institutions. Metro had it in a different shape and form. The focus is different on what types of activities they would focus on.
- Trent and Dave met with other state agencies to discuss ways to offer professional development out of MN State. It would be nice if MN State was a place to go for continued education, and the opportunities we have to grow our customized training.
9) Talent Management Committee MAPE - Will talk offline
10) Human Resources Transactional Service Model (HR-TSM)
- Update: project manager - Kari Campbell. Driving our work, is the audit. 6 areas - to improve project and get back on track. Highlight: Governance. We have CFO's, CHRO's, Advising professionals on the team now so we can have a cross-functional approach. We are also rethinking transition plan for phase 2 - non faculty. We are starting with a small group - to test how that transition will go and find out any issues, resolve and fix.
- Cost - hearing lots of people worried about cost. Mankato, asked Leadership how it was going. They were concerned, it cost them $400,000 they had to hire 4 more employees. We don't have the numbers in front of us. Phase 1 was $167,000. Sue said they didn't have to pay for phase 1. Kari sent out costs for phase 2 to the presidents. They were able to keep it at $155.00 per headcount - based on FY 2017 average. Also let them know that we anticipate to maintain price structure in FY 20. Trying to keep cost as low as possible, and have the appropriate staffing to to do the work. Pay as you go? they are only paying for the people that are there. In FY 2017 there was NO COST to the campuses.
- DCTC hub is handing south centrals ? payroll. Why? There was a payroll hub at MCTC, and staff left. As clients have wanted to move to payroll, they've moved to the east hub b/c that's staffed. It's important to know HR transactions are very separate than payroll. Payroll hasn't had a specific track for when the move will be; it can happen anytime between Oct 2018 to June 2020. We wanted campuses to move when they were ready. If some campuses wanted to move earlier, we wanted to allow them to do that.
- Could we get a copy of the letter that was sent out to campuses? Yes.
11) Systemic Issues with CHRO's MAPE- we'll talk offline --
12. Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Update MAPE
- academic advisors- we adopted a method we can use the academic exemption. Many PDs have been submitted and approved. Only 1 of the 25 was a MAPE and only it was approved. Stems back to full scale review, for MAPE PDs.
- Continue to review mixed classes- see if it still makes sense.
- We've seen lots of ITS 3s and 4s switched to non-exempt. Will that be going out to the campuses as well? All campus need to submit PD's to SO by Oct 1st. By 12/31/18 the SO will respond to all of those request..exempt and non exempt requests. Wrapping up at the end of the calendar year.
- In theory, if SO switching to non-exempt, we might see the campus switch to this as well.
- At the federal level, in Sept, there will be some listening sessions regarding changing the overtime laws, but we don?t see this being fast tracked.
- November 9, 2018
- February 22, 2019
- May 3, 2019
Meeting adjourned 11:26am
The Minnesota State Board of Trustee's had their annual retreat this past week. They will be asking the legislator for a total of $246 million for this next biennium. For FY2020 $18.5 million for ISRS Next Gen, $59 million for campus support, $14 million for Strengthen Access for students attending our campuses in the form of grants and $5 million for workforce challenges. ISRS Next Gen and campus support money would be added to Minnesota State's base budget. This will be the largest request in Minnesota State?s history. If fully funded there would be no need for tuition increase over the next two years.
Educating Minnesota's Talent -$246 million in new funding over the biennium
$37 million to support ISRS Next Gen, a mission-critical, multi-year technology infrastructure project to replace our out-of-date enterprise technology system and substantially improve the student experience
$169 million to provide high quality programs and fund inflationary costs at three percent each year of the biennium
$25 million in targeted financial support to strengthen access and help our students advance and succeed, especially diverse student groups
$15 million to address the workforce gap through innovative career, technical and professional programming serving business and industry
Biennial Budget and Tuition Outlook
ISRS NextGen Information
Reimaging Minnesota State
Enterprise Rick Management