Kendall School Of Design

KENDALL SCHOOL OF DESIGN David Walcott Kendall Memorial School a/k/a Ken- dall School of Design and Kendall Faculty As- sociation, MEA/NEA. Case 7-UC-226 14 April 1986 DECISION ON REVIEW AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN DOTSON AND MEMBERS JOHANSEN AND BABSON On 28 December 1982 the Regional Director for Region 7 issued the attached Decision and Order in this proceeding in which he ordered that the peti- tion be dismissed. Thereafter, in accordance with Section 102.67 of the Board's Rules and Regula- tions, the Employer-Petitioner filed a timely re- quest for review of the Regional Director's deci- sion on the grounds, inter alia, that the Regional Director erred in finding that the Employer-Peti- tioner's faculty members are not managerial em- ployees. By telegraphic order dated 14 June 1983 the Board granted the Employer-Petitioner's request for review with respect to the alleged managerial status of the faculty, but denied the request in all other respects. The National Labor Relations Board has delegat- ed its authority in this proceeding to a three- member panel. The Board has reviewed the record in this pro- ceeding and has affirmed the Regional Director's findings' and conclusions.2 The petition in Case 7-UC-226 is dismissed. i The Regional Director erred in relying on the purported testimony of faculty member Ron Riksen in making his findings concerning the Em- ployer-Petitioner's long range planning committee Riksen did not testify at the hearing This error, however, does not require a different result because the testimony of witnesses who did appear at the hearing support the Regional Director's findings regarding the committee We also correct certain inadvertent errors in the attached Regional Di- rector's decision as follows (1) fn 6 is corrected to state that as of 1981, only 12 candidates had been rejected in 2 years, (2) the text accompany- ing fn 9 is corrected to indicate that the annual budget of each depart- ment was $1000 except for the Furniture and Interior Design Depart. ments, (3) in the section headed, "NEH Committee ," the third sentence is corrected to indicate that the person who chose Dr Lee Hall to act as advisor to the committee, Constance Phillips, was not dean at that time but was a faculty member who became dean later , (4) in the last sentence of fn 14, the word "rolled" is corrected to read "polled", and (5) in the section headed, "Priorities Task Force Committee (Retreat)," the third sentence is corrected to indicate that the year in which the retreat was held was 1979 2 In agreeing with the Regional Director that the Employer-Petition- er's faculty are not managerial employees , we disavow his reliance on findings that the board of trustees has final approval of all matters con- cerning the operation of the school , and that ideas which have their source in collective-bargaining negotiations tend "to negate the manageri- al status of the faculty "ORDER APPENDIX 281 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Chet Byerly, Jr., Hearing Officer of the National Labor Relations Board. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. The parties have filed briefs and supple- mental briefs, which I have carefully considered. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to the undersigned. Upon the entire record in this case, I find: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the purpose of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. Through the medium of this petition, the Employer seeks to have its faculity declared to be managerial em- ployees. STATEMENT OF THE CASE On May 6, 1980, Employer Kendall School of Design, located in Grand Rapids, Michigan, withdrew recogni- tion from the Kendall Faculty Association, MEA/NEA (otherwise referred to as the Union), on the ground that the faculty members included in the bargaining unit were managerial as that term was defined by the United States Supreme Court in NLRB v. Yeshiva University, 444 U.S. 672 (1980). Following the withdrawal of recognition, the Union filed charges with the Board and a complaint was issued in Cases 7-CA-17837, 17983, 18068, 18542, and 18974. Thereafter, these cases were set for hearing on October 5, 1981, before Administrative Law Judge Lowell Goer- lich. On the day set for hearing, prior to its commence- ment, the parties agreed that a unit clarification petition would more expeditiously resolve the controversy. The Administrative Law Judge subsequently adjourned the hearing sine die, and the instant UC petition was subse- quently filed by the Employer on October 9, 1981. The hearing thereon took place commencing November 12, 1981 and ending on January 6, 1982, at which time I issued and had served upon the parties an order transfer- ring the case to the Board for decision, pursuant to Sec- tion 102.67(h). On April 30, 1982, the Board issued five decisions applying the Yeshiva doctrine to particular fac- tual setting. See Duquesne University of the Holy Ghost, 261 NLRB 587; Thiel College, 261 NLRB 580; Ithaca College, 261 NLRB 569; Montefiore Hospital and Medical Center, 261 NLRB 577; and Bradford College, 261 NLRB 565. Accordingly, since the issues were no longer novel, at the informal invitation of the Board on June 8, 1982, I issued an order which transferred the case back to me for decision. Thereafter, on June 18, 1982, the Employer filed a Request for Reconsideration of the June 8, 1982 Order which was denied. Also, on August 6, 1982, the Board denied the Employer's Petition for Special Per- 279 NLRB No. 42 282 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD mission to Appeal from the Regional Director's Order of June 8, 1982. STATEMENT OF FACTS History of Kendall College Accordingly to the testimony, Kendall College, locat- ed in Grand Rapids, Michigan, opened in 1931 with ap- proximately 35 students. By early 1970, it had developed into a trade school offering a certificate after the comple- tion of a three year program. In the mid-1970's, the school underwent a period of transition which resulted in its being transformed into a four year college of approxi- mately 500 students with authority to grant Associate and Bachelor of Fine Arts degrees and with accredition by the North Central Association (NCA), Foundation for Interior Design Education Research (FIDER), and candidacy status by the National Association of Schools of Art (NASA), as of late 1981, when the hearing took place. The source of these changes lies indirectly in the 1974 recognition of the Union as the collective bargaining rep- resentative of the faculty members. The Union thereafter entered into a series of contracts with the Board of Trustees until recognition was withdrawn on May 6, 1980. Since July 1976, under the leadership of Dr. Phyl- lis Danielson, its president, the school has undergone academic changes, and expanded its physical facilities. Amongst the changes are alleged alterations in the facul- ty's tasks and responsibilities. The issues in this case arise out of these alleged changes. The school employed at the time of the hearing ap- proximately 23 full-time and 20 adjunct facility members, who taught in five departments: Foundation, Visual Communication, Furniture Design, Interior Design, and Enviromental Design. Key personnel, other than faculty, include the President, Academic Dean, Director of Stu- dent Services, Librarians, Business Manager, and Regis- trar. PERSONNEL-ADMINISTRATION AND STAFF A. Board of Trustees-Kendall College policy is set by its Board of Trustees (hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Trustee" or "Board"), which has increased in size since 1976 to a complement of 16 members at the time of the hearing. The Board, which is a self-perpetuating body, meets approximately nine times a year , although there have been times when they have met more fre- quently to deal with business exigencies . The Board is subdivided into a number of active standing committees: Academic and Student Affairs , Business Investments and Endowments, Developments, Membership, and Person- nel. The Trustees act as a body of the whole and through these standing committees, as well as through ad hoc committees which may be established from time to time. In about July 1978, the Trustees set up three new trustee committees to facilitate the envisioned changes in the school : Friends of Kendall/Alumni Programs, Cor- porate Programs, and Annual Development Programs. Some committees established by the Trustees, generally its ad hoc committees, may have non-trustee members as well. Trustee meetings are generally attended by the Presi- dent and less frequently by other administrators and staff. The faculty members have on rare occasions been per- mitted to give presentations prior to a meeting but have never been allowed to attend, despite requests to do so. The faculty members also have no access to the minutes of Board meetings and thus lack knowledge of its actions and processes. Although faculty committees and depart- ments have recently been required by the administration to make written annual reports , administrators, for some time, have orally given annual reports directly to the Board at its regular meetings . Outside consultants, hired by the Board of Trustees to assess the status of the school, stated in their February 1978 report ("Allen- Blaich Report") that "The role of the Board is perhaps understandably an enigma to faculty and students." They reported further that the faculty viewed the Trustees as the rubber stamp of the administration and felt that the Trustees and President were moving too fast in direc- tions which were unclear to the faculty. Among actions which have been taken by the Trustees without faculty participation has been the hiring of out- side consultants on several occasions during the 1976 to 1981 period. The Board has acted on such matters as set- ting tuition, with participation and recommendations coming from the President and Business Manager but without any faculty involvement. It has formulated board policy decisions, such as the seeking of degree- granting status, as well as approving concomitant deci- sions, such as the school's establishing a basic liberal arts program, strengthening faculty credentials , and increas- ing library holdings. To this end, it has, pursuant to the efforts of its Academic Affairs Committee, on July 30, 1981, determined to implement a new curriculum by Jan- uary 1982. It is the Trustees also who have given final approval for the establishment and implementation of new programs, such as joint degree programs. The Board, in cooperation with the President, untima- tely entered into collective-bargaining agreements with the Union as well as engaging in continuing negotiations during the terms of the contracts, as provided therein. It has also acted pursuant to faculty requests outside the context of collective-bargaining, either approving of turning down such requests. I The evidence also indicates that the Board has, at times, acted on its own initiative, as when it set residency requirements or instituted its own policy on student absences. Most recently, the Board has played an important role in enhancing the status of the school through fund rais- ing activities and through direct negotiations leading up to the purchase of a new edifice for the school. As a follow up to these actions, the Board hired an architect, upon the unanimous advice of its ad hoc architectural committee, which narrowed the field. The Trustees later approved the architect's renovation plan prior to its rev- elation or submission to the faculty. The Board plays a more mundane role in the day-to- day operations of the school, in approving the hiring of ' An example is a request by faculty to grant an honorary AFA degree during upcoming graduation ceremonies This was denied KENDALL SCHOOL OF DESIGN new faculty and staff, and setting faculty salaries and benefits.2 The Trustees also appoint their own members, although, according to the Allen-Blaich Report, men- tioned earlier, they wished to do their own recruiting, rather than leaving this task to the President. In sum, the Board plays an important role in setting policy and in formulating and approving plans to imple- ment policy decisions. The record establishes, though, that it most often acts upon matters brought to its atten- tion by the President or her staff. B. President-President Danielson undoubtedly has been the catalyst in the transformation of Kendall Col- lege. Since President Danielson 's installation, in a re- markably short time, she has led the school to upgrade itself and has set in motion the actions which have im- proved the personnel and the physical setting of the school . She maintains close oversight of its day -to-day operations. It is she who serves as the link between the school and the Board, taking to the latter those matters which require or can benefit from its consideration. She is assisted in her duties by the Director's Council, con- sisting of the President, Dean, Director of Student Serv- ices, and Business Manager, which meets irregularly to discuss institutional policies. During her tenure, the president has unilaterally pro- moted faculty members to positions, such as Dean or De- partment Chair, and those promotions have always been approved by the Trustees. The President also directly hires faculty members, who must then be approved by the Trustees. More recently, she has undertaken these tasks aided by Dean or Chair search committees, which under the careful guidance of the administration, have helped to narrow the field of applicants. The President has been instrumental in securing needed grants for the college. She has at times asked var- ious faculty members to prepare grant proposals , relying on their expertise to assess needs , but she has also care- fully scrutinized those proposals and either had them re- written or rewritten them herself before submission, in order to assure their meeting her requirements. The President had also sought out suggestions from many sources. She has, for example, relied on advisory com- mittees made up of citizens of the community, having in- terests in the subjects taught at the school, as a source of ideas. Shortly after her installation as president, she asked faculty and departments to prepare "wish lists," five-year plans, which were then used as a format for freewheeling and discussion, and after many permuta- tions, became an outline of goals for the school. She also made creative use of the 1974 written reports of ad hoc committees established pursuant to collective bargaining. Although these reports and their proposals had been pre- viously ignored, President Danielson utilized them as a means of generating reforms in many areas. During her administration, President Danielson has been active in promoting two retreats and several more informal meetings of all members of Kendall's academic community-not excluding students-to "brainstorm" improvements for the school. The fruits of these sessions 2 The Allen-Blaich Report pointed out that the Trustees are generally unfamiliar with the faculty members 283 have then been used as a "case for Kendall " to approach the community in fundraising efforts . The President is an ex officio member of several study committees and has actively served on others, officially or unofficially. Presi- dent Danielson has engaged in eliciting and making cre- ative use of these suggestions for a number of reasons. First, certain aspects of the school curriculum involve the teachings of specialized subjects falling outside her areas of knowledge. She is thus required to seek out indi- viduals having expertise in those areas in order to deter- mine what the needs of those studies are. Second, as noted in the Allen-Blaich report, the school has general- ly operated on a very tight staffing budget. It has thus been necessary to press members of its faculty into vol- untary service, expanding the requests made of them, in order to maintain the school at its current level and to achieve improvements. Thus, some faculty members were sought out to prepare grant proposals for equip- ment or to do legwork and research as a basis for im- provements in the curriculum and faculty. Others have donated their talents to the school by redesigning the catalog, a new diploma, a school seal, or other items, thus saving the school the expense of paying additionally for these services. The President communicates with the faculty members through announcements she places in the periodic "Gen- eral Announcements" informing them of changes being effected, actions being undertaken, and events taking place.3 Faculty have thus been informed of visits of can- didates for employment, the decision to purchase a new site for the school, or the appointment of new staff mem- bers. Faculty members are not entitled to uncensored access to General Announcements . The President also meets with faculty and staff two times a semester to present to them items on her agenda. No votes on any item are taken at these meetings, but the President takes into consideration evidence of strong opposition by the faculty. She testified that if requested for a vote to be taken on any issue, she would permit it, but no such re- quest has ever been made. C. Academic Dean-The Academic Dean, who was the Employer's chief witness, plays a very active role in the day-to-day running of the school. As a result of un- filled vacancies of several department chairs she was re- quired to carry out their duties during the time of the hearing. In addition, the Dean appoints members of com- mittees, as well as committee chairs, and is a member of a number of the school's committees. During the only time when a faculty chair search committee was in exist- ence, in 1981, the Dean actively engaged in the oversight of the committee's work by, for example, rechecking ref- erences and changing application deadlines set by the committee. She played such an intrusive role that its nominal chair resigned, feeling that he has accomplished nothing. In 1981, the Dean unilaterally promulgated guidelines for the internal operation of committees, al- lowing some, for the first time, to select their chairper- sons. 9 The "General Announcements" consists of occasional informational bulletins dessbmmated to the staff 284 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD One of the more important committees , which the Dean chairs, is the Curriculum Committee . This commit- tee has been engaged in generating proposals to the Board of Trustees ranging from the pedestrian, as in ap- proving the textbooks which individual faculty members are permitted to use in their courses , to the significant, as in restructuring the entire curriculum to meet the needs and requirements of the new Kendall . The Dean was the key to the latter major curriculum revision proposals, which at the time of the hearing had not yet been passed on by the Board of Trustees. In fact, despite an estimated eight to ten major revisions which the President had called for at the time the committee passed on the revi- sions, only the broad outlines had been presented to its members. They were thus required by the Dean to vote up or down on the entire package of revisions as present- ed in generalized form without ever seeing them in final form. In addition to her involvement on committees, the Dean meets weekly with the Department chairpersons, who, together with her constitute the Dean 's (or Chairs') Council. The function of this council was described as being a liason between administration and faculty, to communicate administration decisions to the faculty. Ap- parently there has also been some discussion in this coun- cil of recommendations to be passed onto the Board of Trustees. For example, it was this council which was active in drafting the evaluation forms for the faculty. They also participated in the enactment of residency re- quirements by the Trustees and in the setting of a proba- tionary policy. Although the council discussed at length the use to be made of the Dean's $5000 discretionary fund, no final position was ever reached. In the mean- time, the Dean and President, perceiving the importance of department chairpersons attending an academic con- ference, decided to pay their conference expenses from the fund . The Dean's Council also makes decisions in particular areas of concern if no committee established for that purpose exists. Various faculty requests and personnel matters are processed through the Dean . She has the final word on the faculty schedules and has changed them whenever she has deemed it appropriate . The Dean approves trans- fer credits, and consults with the appropriate chairper- son, when expertise on studio work is required. The Dean must approve any field trips , class cancellations, or teacher substitution. Where procedures she has set up4 have not been followed, faculty members have been sub- ject to reprimand and discipline by her; an example is when two teachers who traded classes without clearance from her were docked pay for those classes . She also, in about 1981, unilaterally raised the contact hours required of the faculty. At faculty meetings, either the President or the Dean presides. Both also are invariable involved in interviews of candidates for positions at the school. The Dean has also in the past created staff positions, such as area coordinator, and then appointed individuals to fill those positions. ' The faculty handbook and its revisions were unilaterally promulgated by the Dean It consists of policies which were not established by the faculty but by the administration D. Business Manager-The business manager oversees the school finances on a day-to-day basis , as opposed to the broader superintending role played by the Board of Trustees in this area. She processes purchase order, checking that the requested items has been approved and that there is sufficient money in the budget to pay for the items. On one occasion, she informed the President that an item she desired could not be paid for, since there were insufficient funds remaining to cover it. The business manager also applies the approximately $2000 to $5000 of scholarship money available each year to the accounts of students who have been awarded scholarships. E. Director of Student Services-The Director of Stu- dent Services carries out several functions, he acts as the admissions officer. 5 In making admission decisions, he makes use of rankings by faculty members on the portfo- lio review committee of the applicants' five-piece portfo- lios, as well as relying on test scores and grades. At the time of the hearing, the school had essentially an open- door policy on admissions,e but it hopes that it can become more selective in the future . The portfolio review committee, has no access to transcripts or scores, never meets as a committee, and plays no further role in the admission process . The Director can overrule the committee's rating of a student. At the time of the hear- ing, there was an ongoing discussion about the elimina- tion of the portfolio requirement. This matter was sub- mitted to the Curriculum Committee over the objection of the portfolio Review Committee. The Director of Student Service is trained as a coun- selor and performs that task as well as the recruitment of students . He has made certain policy recommendations to his superiors which have been approved, such as the probation policy mentioned previously. F. Librarians-The school employs two full time li- brarians, one of whom is head librarian and the other is in charge of slides . There is also a part time aide who helps with circulation. The head librarian orders books and magazines, catalogs, and provides reference services. In early 1979, the head librarian proposed in "General Announcements" the creation of a learning resources center of library committee. The stated purpose of the committee was to discuss solutions to problems placed before it by the library staff and to elicit faculty views. A library committee was subsequently formed at her re- quest. G. Miscellaneous-The school also employs various clericals, part time student aids, custodians , financial aids officer, registrars, and a director of development. As mentioned, it has engaged in the services of consultants as the President and Board of Trustees has deemed ap- propriate and necessary. PERSONNEL-FACULTY A. Department Chairs-Department chairpersons, who have been covered by the collective bargaining contracts 5 In academic year 1981 -1982 the school also employed an admissions officer 6 As of 1981, only 12 candidates had been rejected in 12 years KENDALL SCHOOL OF DESIGN insofar as they carry out teaching duties, have been ex- cluded to the extent of their duties as department heads.' In addition to departmental and teaching duties, chairs also operate in the total school setting through the Dean's Council, discussed above. They are members as well of the Curriculum Committee. Chairpersons evaluate faculty members, but it is un- clear what use is made of these evaluations. They are in- volved in the process of hiring faculty members, but, ac- cording to the Employer, the whole faculty is so in- volved. Decisions to discharge have been made without the chairpersons participating, and no evidence of such a recommendation on the part of a chairperson was intro- duced. Chairpersons are paid the same as other faculty mem- bers but are provided release time to perform their de- partmental duties. Department Chairs, in the past, have been selected by the administration alone without faculty participation. According to the Employer, an enlarged search or greater faculty role has not been necessary since there is typically only one nominee seeking the po- sition and departmental sentiment coalesces in support of the sole contender. Whether this is actuality is open to question, as, after one such appointment, in 1979, when more than one person was known to be interested in the position, the president of the Union voiced her disagree- ment with the administration's failure to post the opening and to elicit faculty sentiment. Faculty members, gener- ally, have not interviewed candidates; however, an- nouncements of openings have since that time appeared in "General Announcements." In the summer of 1981, the first and only chair search committees came into ex- istence. s The President appointments have invariably been ap- proved by the Trustees. In at least one such situation, the candidate for proposed chairperson had not been inter- viewed by any faculty member. 2. Budgets-Departmental chairpersons, who testified at the hearing, prepared their departmental budgets, to- talling approximately $500.00 a year eache with virtually no faculty participation. They had, in some cases, asked, faculty members if they were aware of any needs and had, in some cases, posted the prepared budgets for the information of the faculty. They were not submitted to the faculty for discussion or approval. At most, then, fac- ulty input into the budgetary process is minimal, with the greatest part of the responsibility resting on the chairper- sons. Following its preparation in the department, the budget is then submitted to the Dean and President for approval. Budgets have not always been approved as The historic basis for this exclusion is not articulated in the record The Dean's establishment of this committee was revised in several respects by the president when the President learned of its existence She then rewrote the advertisement for the position , which was to appear na- tionwide Thereafter, the Dean kept a close watch on the committee processes, rechecking references, appropriating files, and changing the application date set by the committee The degree of involvement in overseeing the work of the committee was so intensive , as already noted, the chair of the committee eventually resigned 9 At one time, it was recommended by the Union that departmental budgets be $1000, with $2000 for foundation as the largest department It is not known how the current figures were arrived at 285 submitted, nor have suggested relevant changes, such as in fees, been generally approved. For example, at one time a department chair suggested that the fee paid to models be raised substantially since Kendall was having great difficulty finding and retaining models with its fees so far below that of competing institutions. After making a comparison of fees charged by other institutions, the Dean did decide to raise the fee by 25$ an hour, less than the recommended figures. Even after a department's budget passes muster, pur- chases orders must subsequently be assented to. There have been instances in which that subsequent acceptance has been withheld by the administration from an item al- ready approved. The overall school budget is never sub- mitted to the faculty for its approval or consideration. A substantial source of income for departments in the years just prior to the hearing was various grants, both federal and local. In some instances , the President has so- licited faculty to prepare grant applications and propos- als under her direction . When such a grant was pro- cured, the faculty member's services were used to solicit bids from contractors, which were then submitted to the President for ultimate consideration. 3. Schedules-Departmental schedules are initially pre- pared by the chairpersons, who first ascertains if and when faculty will be available to teach courses in the coming term. A very high percentage of Kendall faculty teach only part time, pursuing their own work endeavors or businesses as a principal source of income. Scheduling therefore must accommodate these needs. The schedules, which are then submitted to the Dean, may or may not be altered. The Dean has instructed chairpersons to whom they are to give certain hours, has with the Presi- dent denied certain faculty members the right to teach courses they had previously taught, and has permitted faculty members to teach in departments in which they do not normally teach. 4. Department Meetings-Department meetings take place, principally for transmitting to the teachers the action of which the chairpersons have been informed in the Dean's Council meetings. There have also been intra- departmental meetings in the Foundation Department, which is the largest department, led by area coordina- tors. These are used as opportunities for faculty to dis- cuss their particularized approaches to teaching method- ology. No substantive actions, are, however, taken at these meetings. 5. Annual Reports-Vanous department chairpersons testified concerning the preparation of annual reports for their departments. These were an innovation of the ad- ministration, apparently to principally serve as a self- study for the purpose of accreditation. The chairpersons were provided with a model for the preparation of the annual reports, to which they adhered. They were not told of the objective of the report and learned only after the fact that they would be used for the self-study. Fac- ulty members were asked by their chairpersons to submit information which might be pertinent to the reports, but the chairpersons encountered difficulty in getting any feedback. Thus, the reports were the product of the De- partment Chairpersons and were never later submitted to 286 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD or consented to by the faculty for any purpose other than information 's sake. B. Faculty-Kendall College's student body of ap- proximately 500 students, in 1981, is being instructed by a faculty composed of twenty to twenty-three full-time and twenty adjunct academicians. The faculty serve in the Foundation, Furniture Design, Visual Communica- tion, Environmental Design, or Interior Design depart- ments. Students pursue their first year after matriculation in the Foundation department acquiring the basics of their art and design education. They then elect a major, the course for which may or may not be all within one department. At the time of the hearing, the school was in the process of combining existing courses in order to create new majors and in adding minors. In the Founda- tion Department three faculty members serve as areas coordinators. There may take an active role in meeting with faculty members to discuss their philosophies as to teaching, and to assure that certain teachers are in fact meeting classes . In general, they are supposed to aid the departmental chairperson in facilitating the flow of com- munication. 1. Personnel Policies-Faculty salaries and benefits are unilaterally set by the Administration and Board of Trustees. Formerly the Union negotiated concerning fac- ulty teaching load requirements. Following withdrawal of recognition, these were unilaterally changed, ostensi- bly in response to requirements for accreditation. The Union had also negotiated concerning faculty evalua- tions. These too were altered unilaterally by the adminis- tration following withdrawal of recognition with new forms being created, which included evaluations by the professor involved, department chair, and students.' ° Al- though the Union has tried on several occasions to nego- tiate for a sabbatical leave policy, it was unsuccessful. In lieu of a sabbatical , the administration set up a profes- sional development policy which permits faculty to take three personal leave days a year. Tenure does not exist; faculty contracts are renewed on an annual basis. Following the withdrawal of recognition, the adminis- tration transformed all full time faculty members into professors with the rank of assistant professor. The part time faculty became adjunct professors. No provisions for promotions were effected, at least as of the time of the hearing. Personnel policies, which formerly were, in part, a creature of Union negotiations, have more recently been set out in the faculty handbook, which is an administra- tion produced compilation of policies concerning faculty and students. The faculty did not participate in drawing it up. The handbook provides that faculty are required to ask permission to cancel or modify a class to take a field trip. They are required to attend faculty meetings, grad- uation, open house at year's end, and perform committee work. Faculty members, who have not complied have received verbal or written reprimands from the Dean or even demotion. Faculty members do not have separate offices, but work about seven to a room, sharing one telephone and 10 No evidence was presented as to what use would be made of the evaluation a half-time secretary among them. Kendall professors do not choose text they will use in their classes. Despite re- quests they cannot take a Kendall class tuition free. 2. Hiring-Faculty members are hired by the Board following interviews with the Dean and President. An- nouncements of candidates' visits appear in "General An- nouncements" and the school presents slides of work of applicants which faculty members may view. Several in- stances were cited in which the recommendations of fac- ulty members as to particular applicants were solicited by the Administration. However, there is no formal process by which these opinions are elicited. Further- more, faculty recommendations have not necessarily been followed even though sought by the Administra- tion. The President described a more therapeutic role for the faculty in the hiring process: "If you are available, please feel free to share in the [interviewing] process. It frequently eases the process for the candidates if faculty can spend time alone with the applicant, visiting, touring the faculty, etc." Faculty learn the identities of the new members at the first faculty and staff meetings of the aca- demic year when they appear. Faculty lack the authority to pass on their own credentials, one faculty member was relieved of his duties in one department, in which he had taught for many years, because the President and Dean decided he was not fit to teach there. 3. Faculty Meetings-As previously stated, faculty and staff meet two times a semester. At those times they are introduced to new faculty members. The agenda of these meetings is not set by the faculty; they are chaired by either the Dean or President. The primary function of the meeting is to inform the assembled faculty members of new policies and developments. Votes are never taken, and the achieved consensus, which she has defined as meaning "no strong opposition." Even the decisions which have most affected the faculty, such as to seek degree granting status and accredition, were not submit- ted to a vote of the faculty, because, as President Daniel- son stated, no one had ever asked her to be allowed to vote. 4. Faculty-Student Relations-Faculty lack access to student's files. They are not informed if special status stu- dents, such as high school students in the school's incen- tive to Learn Programs, are in their classes. Faculty plays no role in setting student related policies, such as tuition, fees, matriculation, graduation, graduation re- quirements, enrollment levels, or class size. Committees-By far the greatest portion of testimony during the hearing concerned the involvement of faculty members in committeework. It is the Employer's position that through membership and work on committees, fac- ulty members virtually run the school. The Union's posi- tion is that although various documents entered into appear to support such a finding, a more in depth prob- ing into the generation of those documents and the actual working of the committees belies this. It is evident that committees, their structuring, and their status at the school have altered over the years. Committees comprised in part with faculty members first came into being about 1974, and were established KENDALL SCHOOL OF DESIGN through collective negotiations. These committees were each to consist of two faculty members and two trustees for the purpose of making recommendations to the Board of Trustees and to "establish dialogue." The fol- lowing committees were thus established: 1. Admissions, tuition and recruitment; 2. Curriculum and program eval- uation; 3. Class size, load, assignments, and policies con- cerning professional development; 4. Fund raising to pur- chase equipment and scholarships; 5. Procedures for the appointment of Chairs; 6. Budgets and allocation of funds; and 7. Sabbatical leave. These committees were formulated during 1974, and, as an aspect of their func- tion, a number of papers were drafted by members of the Union in these areas. Apparently, after these were draft- ed, nothing further on them eventuated. The proposals they contained were not acted upon, and the Union even lost track of the whereabouts of the proposals. President Danielson testified that when she took office approximately two years later, these reports found their way onto her desk. These were entitled: (1) Admission of Students, Student recruitment, Tuition and Fees; (2) Kendall School of Design Faculty Association's Recom- mended Revisions to the present Academic Probation and Suspension Policy and the Revision of the present Behavioral Code; (3) Kendall Faculty Association's rec- ommended Revisions to the Role of the Faculty in Handing of Student Complaints and Feed Back; (4) Ken- dall Faculty Associations' recommended Revisions to the present Absence Policy; (5) Kendall Faculty Associa- tion's Recommendation on the Library; (6) Policies with Respect to the Academic and Professional Development of Faculty; (7) Procedure with respect to the appoint- ment of persons to the position of Department Chairman; and (8) Departmental Budgets. These reports and the committee, within which they were produced, have played a serendipitous role in the school. President Dan- ielson viewed these reports as constituting her "mandate for change from the faculty." They thus became the basis, together with Dr. Danielson's own visions, of what the school should become in the future t t The committees themselves were somewhat mon- bound until they were revived by President Danielson after September 1977. At that time, the only existing committees were the Scholarship and Awards Commit- tee, Graduation Committee, Long Range Planning Com- mittee, Publication and Promotion Committee, and the Birthday Committee. Since that time, a number of com- mittees, both standing and ad hoc, have been created by the administration and Board of Trustees. Committees are generally made up of faculty, staff ad- ministration, trustees, and student members, all with os- tensibly equal authority. More recently, in 1981, these committees have been required by the Dean to structure themselves more formally, and the administration has promulgated procedures which they are to follow. At the same time, the administration has required that com- mittees produce annual reports following a prescribed format. These reports have been written by the commit- tee chairs and were used for accreditation purposes. Al- 11 It was testified that additional reports exist which were not placed in evidence 287 though bearing the names of committee members, they have not been submitted to the latter for approval or even shown to them. Recently all faculty members have been required to serve on one committee, although at one point the Dean required service on two, but then reversed herself. It is not uncommon for faculty to be appointed to a particular committee and subsequently, if necessary, be importuned by the administration to serve on it. Recently a sign-up system was instituted. Committee chairpersons have his- torically been appointed by the administration. Recently the administration has permitted some committees to select their own chairpersons. A former head of the scholarship committee testified that the committeee members did not choose her to be their chairperson and she did not know who designated her. a. Open House Committee-At the close of each aca- demic year, an Open House is held to which the general public is invited. This event has taken the same form for the last ten years. The purpose of the exhibit is twofold: to display the achievements of students for the edifica- tion of the academic community and to promote the school to the public at large. Faculty are responsible for selecting their students' output to be displayed as well as physically setting up the displays. At times, there has been faculty resentment because students have been less than forthcoming in helping set up what is viewed as their show. The preparations for the Open House are a large un- dertaking, requiring "a lot of hard physical work," during a span of as much as four to five days. The Open House committee members coordinate the erection of displays, move furniture, and eventually strike the dis- play. They coordinate parceling out of space and the monitoring duty required of faculty at the show. The Dean recently set up a separate Open House committee for the Foundation Department. In performing this work, faculty have relied on the advice and expertise of the school's head custodian, who has borne the chief responsibility for acquiring the mate- rials needed. Expenses in 1981 were $2565.54. The budget for the committee is not set by it. Prior to the hearing, the committee had requested that it be paid extra for assuming these extra-academic chores. No decision had as yet been rendered by the time of the hearing. b. Graduation Committee-This committee carries out the greater part of its function in the second semester. It makes arrangements for mechanics of graduation, such as the site, the program, speakers, music, and the reception, and pays for these expenses out of the & aduation fees as- sessed the students. In 1977, the committee's expenses were $1404.80. The committee does not determine which students are to graduate; that is the province of the regis- ter. Each graduation exercise has essentially the same format, with the same site, pastor, and sort of refresh- ments utilized each year. In 1978 or 1979, Ralph Allured, then apparently president of the Union, asked that the date of graduation be set a day later so that the Open 288 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD House could run longer. Since it entailed so much work to set it up, and this was done. In addition, the committee handles the essentially cleri- cal tasks of ordering gowns, measuring students, and or- dering diplomas. In academic year 1980 to 1981, one committee member redesigned the diploma. The Presi- dent then requested that the committee undertake the re- design of the school seal. There was apparently no com- pensation by the school for this use of the faculty's artis- tic skills. 3. Catalog Committee-In 1974, the Board of Trustees wanted the Union to handle revisions in the catalog de- scribing the school and its offerings. About that time, two faculty members suggested to the Board of Trustees that they could produce a higher quality catalog than in the past for 50% less cost. They proceeded to prepare that catalog, which has since then been updated on an approximately biannual basis, or as needed. There has been unspecified faculty involvement in this work since that time, but the school had, by the time of the hearing, hired a professional writer for the task. Scholarship Committee-The scholarship committee en- gages in two primary tasks. It has in the past solicited contributions from faculty and staff for a student scholar- ship. It also processes applications for the various schol- arships offered by the school, which have a total value of $2000 to $5000 per year. In some years the committee has decided that a particular scholarship should not be awarded since no one qualified for it, and in some years there was no money available to find a particular schol- arship. The committee also plays a role in drafting the guide- lines of the scholarships which are to be awarded. These are initially determined by the terms of the particular grant. The criteria are then put into a more useful format by Doug Klemm, the Student Services Director, and thereupon the committee discusses them before they are presented to the administration for approval. A list of awardees who can meet these guidelines is then prepared and is forwarded to the administration. The Business Manager must check that the particular grant does not jeopardize other financial aid which a particular student is to receive. The President has veto power over the committee's decisions, but this has never been exercised. Pursuant to President Danielson's suggestion, scholar- ship awards are now announced at graduation. e. Creativity Committee-In 1980 or 1981, two faculty members met to discuss ways of dealing with student's use of photographs in their work. A presentation was made to the Foundation Department, suggesting that cer- tain uses of photographs, particularly in the introductory classes, stifled creativity. This conclusion, however, had no prospective binding effect on the teaching methodolo- gies of individual faculty members. Portfolio Review Committees-The work of this com- mittee was described before in relation to the position context of the Director-of Student Services. The com- mittee injects expertise in evaluating the artistic ability of individuals seeking admission to the school. The require- ment that such an evaluation be made was in response to NASA requirements that a portfolio needs to be submit- ted as a condition for admission. It should be noted that although committee members did not want to submit the possible discontinuance of the portfolio requirement to the curriculum committee for decision, the Director did so on his own, over their objections. The committee never meets as a whole and has no fur- ther involvement in the admissions process other than this assessment exercise. g. NEH Committee-The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Committee involved faculty in a two- fold process with respect to its functioning. First, staff and faculty worked on the preparation of the request for a grant to fund its work. After receipt of the grant, the main task of the committee began, namely preparing for accreditation and the attainment of degree -granting status which required the addition of humanities courses to the curriculum. The committee used its $2500 grant to visit similar art schools to ascertain what humanities courses they offered. The Dean, in addition, with apparently some urging by the President, chose the President of the Rhode Island School of Design, Dr. Lee Hall, to act as principal advisor to the committee . Dr. Hall visited Ken- dall's campus to aid the committee in its deliberations. In addition, committee members reviewed catalogs of other schools and complied therefrom lists of offering. The information amassed by the committee was then included in its report, which, however, was never pre- sented to the committee as a whole for approval. There- after, the number of humanities courses increased, al- though no specific courses had been discussed or recom- mended by the committee. h. Library Committee/Learning Resources Center Com- mittee-In January 1979, the Head Librarian proposed setting up a Library Committee in order to communicate departmental needs and to help the library in establishing priorities. The purpose of the committee was to discuss problems, provide solutions to these, and to elicit faculty viewpoints on various subjects. In her proposal, the li- brarian threw out a number of problems affecting the li- brary which the committee could tackle. The committee which came into existence is composed of several faculty members from various departments, the library staff, and student representatives. It has met from two to three times an semester. In that time, the committee has discussed and made suggestions concern- ing a number of issues presented to them by the librarian. The major problem handled has been the inappropriate use of the library, as when students have engaged in spraypainting there or in mutilating magazines. The com- mittee proposed in response to the first problem that the library staff direct students to vacant rooms where spray painting is more appropriately carved out and, as to the second, successively, that a fine be imposed for magazine mutilation, a student's library privileges be suspended, and finally that magazine circulation be totally suspended for a period. The committee has also proposed the purchase of cer- tain equipment for the library such as a Betamax, Xerox copier, drop box, audio-visual equipment, and typewriter. Some of these items have been purchased, but most have not. KENDALL SCHOOL OF DESIGN The librarians have brought to the committee's atten- tion issues such as use of the library as a location to sell textbooks, maintaining textbooks for the faculty's use, rules for the slide collection , and slide preparation. At first the committee decided that it would be preferable not to sell textbooks in the library, but after the matter was brought up by the President a second time, it was decided that this would be done. The committee decided that the library had no responsibility to provide text- books for the faculty's in class use. The committee also set up procedures and charges for use of the slide collec- tion. These were later altered in part by the slide librari- an, on her own, when she concluded that revision was needed. The library Committee does not participate in the set- ting of the library budget. It does not prepare or partici- pate in the preparation of or approve the committee's annual report of minutes of meetings , and it is not in- volved in the purchase of books for the library. i. Search Committees-Consistent with usual academic community practice, Kendall has periodically established search committees. The history of some of these has al- ready been discussed. There have been search commit- tees for President, Dean, and department chairpersons, but there had not to the date of the hearing been any search committees for faculty, as already discussed. The recruitment and hiring of faculty members remain the perogatives of the President and Dean. After 1974, following the departure of President Larry Mailoux, two interim presidents were appointed for one year terms each, John Beckwith and Curtis Johnson, who also has held other administrative and faculty posi- tions within the college. The faculty did not participate in deliberations that led to these appointments. When the Board decided to hire a permanent presi- dent, it first set up a presidential search committee of its members, with Larry Mailoux as its advisor. The Union president submitted to the Board a list of suggested crite- ria to be used in making a choice. It was testified that this list was, with few modifications, the list which the Board used.12 The Board of Trustees later reconsidered its decision as to the composition of the committee and decided to permit a faculty member to participate, but as a non-voting member . The Union was asked to recom- mend the names of two faculty members, which it did, and the Board chose one of these. That faculty member testified that she did take an active part in the commit- tee's work and was allowed to vote on candidates. The faculty association's (i.e., Union's) representative on the committee did seek input from fellow faculty members, but did not engage in any sort of systematic polling to elicit sentiment as to choice. During the time the committee functioned, candidates met faculty members, and the faculty members discussed their impressions among themselves. No procedure was set up to ensure that their views could be presented to the search committee in any way than informally through the faculty association representative; there is no evidence that the Board of Trustees acted with either 12 There were no Board members presented as witnesses, so evidence on how the Trustees actually carried out its search is secondary 289 any awareness of faculty sentiment or any desire to learn what that sentiment might be. The history of Dean search committees at Kendall has not been consistent . Only one opening for Dean was ever filled throught the medium of a search committee. That committee at first composed of President Daniel- son, Trustee Amberg, and a faculty member was sup- plied with a job description prepared by the President. The committee determined that none of the applicants, all drawn from current faculty, met those qualifications. It thereupon recommended that a search outside the school be made. The President then restructured the committee, with its constituents being three faculty mem- bers, three department chairpersons, and two trustees, and it proceeded to seek out appropriate candidates. That committee split as to its recommended ranking of candidates which it made to the president. The ultimate choice made by the President did come from the three top recommended names of the committee. After that Dean resigned, his successor was appointed by the President, unaided by any type of search commit- tee or any faculty involvement. That person is the cur- rent incumbent. As already discussed supra at page 12, there has been only one department chairperson's search committee, an innovation instituted following the school's withdrawal of recognition of the Union. j. Long Range Planning Committee-On February 14, 1977, a memorandum was issued setting up a long range planning committee "[t]o prepare a report to the Board of Trustees at the September, 1977 meeting outlining a five and ten year projection for Kendall School of Design, including a timetable, priorities and financial needs." This was signed by Trustee Bill Schroeder and faculty member Ron Riksen. According to Riksen, he did not take part in the preparation of that memo. Riksen testified that the committee met two to three times. At the first meeting, Dr. Johnson of Michigan State University appeared, at the invitation of President Danielson, not of the committee, to discuss the meaning of long range planning. The committee members were then asked by Trustee Schroeder to prepare papers on their perceptions of the school's future role. The result- ant papers are nonspecific and even contradictory amongst themselves.13 These papers were then ex- changed and discussed at the next meeting and were then telescoped into a one-page document. No witness could state who specifically had transformed this document into the first draft of the committee's report. This docu- ment passed through various drafts, which are included in the record. There then occurred some minor changes, mostly rewording and repositioning of sections. The record demonstrates that faculty members on the com- mittee had some major points of dispute with the drafts. One important example was the view that the Union's contract should be expressly included in a section con- cerning faculty working conditions. Another dealt with the advisability of seeking degree-granting status. The IZ For example, one paper cautions that a fine arts major should be avoided, while another suggests the addition of such a major to the cur- riculum 290 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD faculty witnesses stated that despite these major out- standing questions, the document was forwarded to the Board of Trustees without their ever having approved any version of it or having been given an opportunity to do so. When they inquired of the President when they would be able to do so, they were told that the commit- tee had been dissolved. The Employer seeks to establish that the draft, which is attached to a memorandum bearing the name of Ron Riksen, is the final committee report presented to the faculty at large. There is some dispute about the author- ship of the final report. Riksen himself states that he had not drafted the memorandum or taken any action to for- ward the report. In any case, a draft was presented to the Board of Trustees at its January 5, 1978 meeting. At that time, the Trustees decided that problems of space and financing were so pressing that no action could be taken at that time on the Long Range Plan. It was decided "that no further definitive action could be taken without further study." From then on, the Board focused its efforts toward ac- quiring a building to house the school to meet the space problems. After this time, further actions were taken concerning space, such as the lease at Michigan Oak in April 1978. Later in 1978 there was renewed solicitation of five year plans in comportance with the decision made at the Trustees' meeting that further study was required on the school's goals. As late as March 1979, the Trust- ees' long range planning committee was still in operation. k. Physical Space/Sites Committee-In 1978, the ad hoc physical space committee was established. This commit- tee, which in 1979 was reconstituted to become the sites committee, was the vehicle by which the school exam- ined and assessed various potential sites for the school to move in to. The faculty committee acting on requests to visit potential sites, made its reports to the Trustees' ad hoc space committee. As stated in its January 17, 1979 report, the faculty committee defined basic physical needs of the school which could be considered by the Trustees, since the faculty lacked the "expertise to devise a definitive plan of action." The Board of Trustees acted pursuant to : "[t]he trustee action last year, based on report given by [Trustee] Daverman, [which] determined the future of Kendall must be away from the current lo- cation." Little was done during 1978; however, at its Decem- ber 18, 1978 meeting, the Trustees decided to refer spe- cific physical needs to the Trustees' space committee. Three months later, the Board of Trustees hired consult- ant Milton Miller "to quantify the five-year plans . . . into an integrated/complimentary space requirement, which, in turn, can be more realistically interpreted by architects and/or realtors." During this period, the sites committee which was then composed half and half of faculty and administra- tion plays one student was asked by the President to look at various sites, but no action was taken. In June 1979, Milton Miller made his report to the Board of Trustees. The information in his report, which set out costs and specific physical requirements of the school, was subsequently used as the basis of the sites committee reports on various locations . In addition, the committee respondent to specific inquiries made by the President and Trustees and, in addition , reported on faculty senti- ment. Not all of the faculty were polled on the sites, and no systematic attempt was made to obtain comprehensive reaction from the faculty. There was also testimony that the site evaluations were not necessarily presented to the committee members by its administrator-chairperson prior to their submission to the Trustee and President. In its January 19, 1981, meeting President Danielson presented the Trustees with the sites committee chairper- son's report. The Board then decided that President Danielson should enter into negotiations to lease space in the site to which the school eventually was to move, Junior College West Building, in exchange for that which the school had leased since 1979. Two months later, the Board appointed a committee composed of three Trustees and the President to negotiate the pur- chase of J.C. West.14 There was no faculty involvement in this decision and these negotiations . Indeed, the facul- ty only learned of the actual purchase in October 1981 by reading the city newspapers, after which they were further informed of it by the school's "General An- nouncements" of October 9, 1981. 1. Architecture Committee-During the pendency of ne- gotiations to obtain J.C. West, the Trustees appointed an ad hoc architecture committee, which was composed of one faculty member, one trustee, the President , one staff person, and a student. Its task was to choose an architect to redesign the J.C. West facility for Kendall's use, this committee reviewed the credentials of several architects presented for their consideration by President Danielson. Its unnanimous choice was them approved by the Board of Trustees . The committee did not negotiate the terms of the architect's contract; the Trustee did. Subsequently the architect met with members of all departments, divi- sions of staff, student body, and administration, to ascer- tain their needs and how they functioned. The architect's final plan was presented to Trustees for approval during the pendency of the hearing in this case, prior to any submission to the faculty or even any sub- mission to the architecture committee. The faculty had not even been informed that this was to be the topic of discussion at a faculty meeting to be held two days after the witness testimony. In fact, faculty involvement with the renovation process was so minimal that the teachers were unaware whether or not they were to have offices in the new site. The President by contrast , was able uni- laterally, to alter the departmental allocation of space at the new site. in. Priorities Task Force Committee (Retreat)-The Allen/Blaich report commissioned by the Trustee recom- mended that a retreat be held in order to prepare a case for Kendall which could be used to solicit financial sup- port for the school. A number of faculty members were appointed by the Trustees and President "to serve on the priorties task force committee to plan the event and the 14 During this time, there were aborted negotiations for another site These negotiations also took place without faculty knowledge, input or approval Most faculty were rolled about and preferred a site other then ] c West KENDALL SCHOOL OF DESIGN 291 mechanics necessary to carry it off." The retreat, held on September 14 and 15, 1982, was described by committee chairperson, Ralph Allured, as a vehicle: "for conveying to the Trustee what our hopes and needs are in a materi- al sense, so that we can proceed with building our re- sources. It seems to me that they are extremely anxious to have our imput as incentive and guideline to what they do in fund raising and in attracting all kinds of sup- port for Kendall." As a basis for "preparing the case for Kendall," the various components of the school, including members of departments, were asked to formulate five year plans, which were also described by the Employer as "wish lists." These were to have been discussed at the retreat and them presented to the Board of Trustees to provide them with expert opinions on Kendall's physical needs. It was variously testified that the department reports were prepared by department chairs with faculty input ranging from none to some discussion of them. At the retreat itself, the only plan discussed was that of student serv- ices. The plans themselves were, nonetheless, forwarded to the Trustees, who subsequently found that they were not useful to them in that form, so the Trustees then commissioned Milton Miller to use then[ as a basis for a study which could be more readily incorporated into the trustees' plans. One year later, it was decided that a second retreat should be held. The report for this second retreat states that the first "was described by President Danielson as a time in which a 'shopping list of wishes' was developed by those who represented the various constituencies of Kendall." The report continued stating that the 1979 re- treat was for the purpose of discussing more specifically the objectives that should be established in the next year in order to meet the goals of the school' s long range plan. It then sets out several paragraphs summarizing the retreat, makes suggestions as to the need to seek out better students and financial resources and notes the need to digest the rapid changes which had occurred. President Danielson hired an outside consultant to make preparations for the second retreat. There is no evidence that any direct action resulted from the faculty involvement in these retreats, although some ideas that were discussed have been utilized. n. Curriculum Committee-A curriculum committee was amongst those established through collective bar- gaining negotiations in about 1974, to carry forward the work of collective bargaining. The current curriculum committee, which was established sometime after the fall of 1977,15 was composed, at the time of the hearing, of the Dean, the Department chairpersons, a number of fac- ulty members, and the President as an ex officio member. Prior to the re-establishment of the curriculum com- mittee, relevant decisions were made by the Trustees, upon presentation by the president, such as the suggested merger of the advertising and illustration departments 16 It was suggested in testimony that certain decisions , such as residen- cy requirements, probably were approved by the reconstituted curncu- into a visual communications department . This change was suggested to the President by a faculty member. i a The record is unclear as to when exactly the curricu- lum committee was re-established. It appears to have oc- curred sometime after the fall of 1977 and before the fall of 1979. No documents, dated prior to 1981, which was generated by the committee and bears its imprint , was in- troduced into the record, so it is difficult to ascertain the committee's functions prior to that time. The evidence in the record indicates that the committee deals with the es- tablishment of new courses, majors and minors, approval of curiculum, textbooks, course discriptions and credit courses, and other academic matters. Its role, however, seems to be irregular. Thus, during the pendency of the hearing, a new major, industrial design, was introduced but it had not been first approved by the curriculum committee. Some important matters which would appear appropriate for action by such a committee do not appear to have passed through its deliberative process, most notably the two joint degree programs which Ken- dall is offering. Certain matters dealt with by the com- mittee, were closely monitored by the President or Dean, such as decisions to alter the textbooks required for courses and curricular revision proposals, which had to be redrafted many times at the urgings of the presi- dent. In certain cases in which there had been strong general faculty sentiment opposed to that of the adminis- tration, as in the desire to prevent the dilution of the core art and design program by requiring more than 120 credits for the bachelors degree, the Administration's po- sition prevailed. During the course of 1981, a number of proposals were presented to the Trustees as emanating from the curriculum committee as part of its annual report, which was prepared by the Dean. Faculty members testified that the report was not approved by them, that they had not even seen it, and that they were required by the Dean to approve or disapprove proposed changes with- out even having been informed of more than their gener- al outline. It was testified further that there were in fact divergent views on some aspects of the report. At the time of the hearing the Board of Trustees had, through its academic affairs committee, apparently not yet taken any definite action on the committee's annual report, al- though it was testified to that certain specific items had nevertheless been implemented. While the Employer claims that the curriculum committee has been the major influence in intiating and carrying through a number of academic innovations, such as the creation of new majors, closer analysis suggests that the creation of the new majors consisted merely of the juggling and rear- ranging of existing courses rather that the adding of new courses of study and the concommitant acquisition of new faculty skills. Likewise, while it is argued that the faculty has played an innovative and key role in the institution of a cooper- ative education program through the offices of the cur- riculum committee, direct testimony establishes that the lum committee , however, the record established through more direct evl- 16 Apparently the creation of an environmental design department was dence that the committee was not in existence at the time these decisions a matter which was supported by the entire academic community The were made and thus could not have acted on those matters process by which it occurred was not set out in any detail. 292 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD crucial decisions were undertaken by the Dean and by Department Chairs. Furthermore, owing to the nature of Kendall's origins as a trade school, there has always ex- isted some sort of cooperative education program, and the one presently existing is a refinment of those previ- ous programs. Similarly, it was suggested that the curriculum com- mittee had denied the Dean's request to institute a full in- dependent study program and had instead set up "partial independent study." The documents submitted, however, actually established that it was the Dean that suggested to the department chairperson and not to the committee, that only rarely would independent study be appropriate. It thus appears that the most that the committee did was to refine the forms to be filled out by a student request- ing independent study. o. Miscellaneous-Some committees, which had been set up, such as student affairs and promotions, had not functioned at the time of the hearing. The President had established the latter committee to propose requirements for faculty promotions after the unilateral institution by the school of rank faculty after the withdrawal of recog- nition. DISCUSSION The evidence adduced at hearing does not support a finding that the faculty members of Kendall School of Design are managerial employees , as defined by Yeshiva. In fact, the faculty as a whole and individually exercise astonishingly little power as best exemplifed by the indi- vidual faculty member's inability to make independently even those decisions basic and necessary to teachng their own classes. These include determining course content, choosing the text, taking field trips, canceling class ses- sions, trading classes or using a substitute teacher. This lack of power, is further carried forward in the commit- tee involvement by faculty members. The Administration retains tight control over committee membership , chairs, procedures, agendas, and final products. See generally Florida Memorial College, 263 NLRB 1248, 1249. By con- trast, faculty on committees have no access to or power to affect the committees' final products and are unaware of what use is being made of the committees' work." Final approval of all matters, including all major cur- riculum changes, rests with the Board of Trustees, aided by the administration. The Trustees, with the administra- tion, set salaries and employment benefits, course load and requirements, faculty policies as set forth in the fac- ulty handbook, matriculation , retention, and graduation requirements, tuition and fees, school calendar , enroll- ment, approval of hiring and firing . Major decisions as to the future role of the school have been made by the ad- ministration, with at most post facto presentation to the faculty of accomplished acts . Among these are the trans- formation of the faculty into ranked faculty, the choice of a new site for the school, remodeling decisions, the 17 The one exception is the operation of the scholarship committee, which appears to work with relatively little administrative interference However, the amount of money over which they exercise control is in- significant Further, one limited area of autonomy does not imbue the entire faculty administration relationship as managerial, when there is no clear evidence that such managerial authority is vested across the Board creation of joint degree programs, and the seeking of ac- creditation and degree granting status . Day-to-day deci- sion, such as firing, hiring, and discipline, the manner in which hiring is to be accomplished, transfers, provisions for days off and use of evaluations are all rendered solely by the administration. See Thiel College, 261 NLRB 587; Ithaca College, 261 NLRB 577, 578, Bradford College, 261 NLRB 565, 566; Philander Smith College, 246 NLRB 499, 504. This is not to gainsay important contributions made by faculty members to the school. First of all, through the Kendall Faculty Association and through its collective bargaining negotiations, proposals for change have been presented, discussed, and either accepted or rejected by management. Some of those which were rejected have resurfaced at a later time and been given their own im- primatur by the administration, as a result of exercise of its discretion and not because they were postulated by the faculty staff acting as collegial equals. That the Union's bargaining proposals may be acted upon , after a number of years, tends to negate the managerial status of the faculty. Ideas which had their source in collective negotiations were miscellaneous proposals concerning admissions, sus- pension and probation policies, student grievance proce- dures, absence policies, improvements of the library, pro- fessional development, posting of open positions and search committees, the budgetary process, class size, con- tact hours, and faculty evaluations. Some of these were accepted, some rejected, and others modified. Some found their way into formal contracts, while others were removed altogether from the collective bargaining arena and used by the Employer for purposes never intended by those who had made the proposals. Cf. College of Os- teopathic Medicine, 265 NLRB 295. A second way in which the faculty has made contribu- tions has arisen as a result of the school's precarious fi- nancial situation, which has not permitted it to have ade- quate staffing. As a result, faculty are pressed into serv- ice to perform talks which are properly characterized as clerical (such as paperwork involved in soliciting bids for work to be done at the school, and taking care of details for graduation) or maintenance (such as setting up and taking down displays for Open House). In addition, the school has directly used the faculty's artistic and design talents for its own, non-teaching needs. These unique tal- ents have been particularly useful during a time of transi- tion. See generally Montefiore Hospital and Medical Center, 261 NLRB 569, 571, 572. The faculty has also been used as one resource for sug- gestions. That is, at various times, it has been asked to submit "wish lists," to ideate, or to discuss existing prob- lems. The administration has then made whatever use of these emerged ideas that it has seem fit. The administra- tion has retained almost complete discretion to structure the manner and setting in which these suggestions are made and as to the uses to which they will be put. The lack of formal, systematic mechanisms for ascer- taining faculty views characterized by the absence of fac- ulty votes epitomizes this lack of power to effect faculty decisions The faculty does not set the agendas for their KENDALL SCHOOL OF DESIGN 293 meetings or their committees. Where faculty views are known to conflict with the Administration's, it is the Tat- ter's views which predominates. If there is a dialectical synthesizing process of oppos- ing views as argued by the Employer to be descriptive of the process involving faculty at Kendall, it is not read- ily evident. The seat of power at Kendall is its top ad- ministrators. This conclusion is not altered by events oc- curring after withdrawal of recognition of the Union. Kendall instituted a number of changes following the withdrawal of recognition which have the appearance of according greater power to the faculty but which ap- pearance is deceptive; 18 moreover, the sweeping nature of the changes, the ease with which the administration instituted them, in spite of substantial faculty doubts and opposition, and the impact they have had on the manner in which decisions are made empirically speaking vitiates any serious contention that these faculty members now or at any time exercised any power tantamount to mana- gerial control. In sum, the faculty of Kendall do not "formulate and effectuate management policies by expressing and making operative the decisions of their employer through taking or recommending discretionary actions that effectively control or implement employer policy." NLRB v. Yeshi- va University, 444 U.S. 672, 682-683 (1980). Accordingly, the Kendall faculty are not managerial employees. SUPER VISOR Y STATUS OF FACULTY Even though not managerial employees, it is possible that the faculty could be supervisors.19 The only poten- tial exercise of supervisory authority on the part of facul- ty would be with regard to the hiring of models for classes and in relation to the secretary. No evidence was presented that faculty exercise any authority to hire, fire, promote, evaluate, discipline, or to do any other act in- dicative of supervisory authority concerning the depart- mental secretaries, who are not in the unit. Adelphi Uni- versity, 195 NLRB 639, 643-644; Florida Memorial Col- lege, supra. Faculty members have been involved in hiring models to pose for drawing classes. As described, the principal responsibility of the job is explaining the nature of the modeling required. Since 1979 scheduling of models has been done by the President's secretary. According to the testimony no discretion is involved in the hiring of models, since the need for them is so much greater than the models available. Also, there is little to "supervise" with respect to the models, as they exercise final author- ity as to how many hours they work for Kendall, and these decisions do not affect subsequent employment op- portunities. The hiring of the non-unit models does not render the faculty members involved supervisory. Florida Memorial College, supra. I find that the faculty members are not supervisors within the meaning of the Act. STATUS OF DEPARTMENTAL CHAIRPERSONS The record demonstrates that Departmental Chairper- sons are given somewhat different treatment than faculty members. They sit on the Dean's Council, which ostensi- bly has the authority to make any decision, which cannot be made in the regular committee structure . In addition, they evaluate faculty members, decide whether teachers from other departments may teach in the chairperson's department, schedule, prepare departmental, budgets, make recommendations on hiring , prepare annual re- ports, approve requests for independent study, and serve on the curriculum committee . The record discloses, how- ever, that recommendations as to budgets , fees, sched- ules, and hiring are only occasionally effective. The de- partmental chairpersons control of their departments is most limited and the time spent in these functions, as compared to their regular faculty tasks , such as teaching, is insignificant. It is unclear what use is made of faculty evaluations, and it appears that chairpersons play no greater role in the curriculum committee's actions vis-a- vis the Dean than do the regular faculty members. Accordingly, department chairpersons, lacking any greater authority than do regular faculty, are not mana- gerial. Furthermore, they lack the indicia of supervisory status and should be included in the unit with other fac- ulty members, with whom they have a community of in- terests. See Bradford College, 261 NLRB 565, 566 (divi- sion chairpersons); Philander Smith College, supra, at 504- 505; Fordham University, 214 NLRB 971. 18 For example , following withdrawal of recognition in May 1980, the school unilaterally chose to purchase J C West and entered into negotia- tions for that building It set up the first departmental chairperson search committee, which was not, however , allowed to function on its own without administration interference . The structure of faculty committees was drastically altered . Annual reports were required , faculty members were ranked , and their evaluation procedure was changed. 19 Although the Employer has stated it would not take a position on this issue, I nevertheless pass on it to obviate any raising of it subsequent- ly ORDER For the reasons stated herein, the Petition for Unit Clarification is dismissed.20 ao Under the provisions of Section 102.67 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, a request for review of this decision may be filed with the board in Washington D C. 20570, with copies being served on all parties, including the Regional Director This request must be received by the Board in Washington, D.C, by January 10, 1983.