Meeting 5/2003 of the Committee of Deans was held at 2.15pm on Tuesday, 15 July, 2003 in the Sir George Lush Room, ground floor, University Offices Building 3a, Clayton campus.

Members having a direct commercial or financial interest in any item before this meeting must declare that interest to the Chair via the Committee Secretary prior to consideration of the item, and must not take part in a vote on any matter concerning it.

Professor Peter Darvall, Vice-Chancellor

Professor Alan Lindsay, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic & Planning)

Ms Alison Crook, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Resources)

Professor Gary Bouma, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research & Development)

Professor Stephen Parker, Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Dean, Faculty of Law

Professor Brian Mackenzie, Pro Vice-Chancellor, Gippsland Campus

Professor John Redmond, Dean, Faculty of Art and Design

Professor Homer Le Grand, Dean, Faculty of Arts

Professor Gill Palmer, Dean, Faculty of Business & Economics

Professor Sue Willis, Dean, Faculty of Education

Professor Tam Sridhar, Dean, Faculty of Engineering

Professor John Rosenberg, Dean, Faculty of Information Technology

Professor Colin Chapman, Dean, Faculty of Pharmacy

Professor Max King, Director, Research Graduate School and Deputy Dean, Faculty of Business and Economics

Mr Tony Pollock, Executive Director, Office of International Development

Associate Professor Michael Page, Deputy Dean, Faculty of Science

Mr Peter Marshall, Divisional Director, Student and Staff Services for item 4.4.1

Mr John Levine, Divisional Director, Financial Resources Management Division for items 4.3.1, 4.5.1,and 4.5.2.

Mr Reynold Dias, Deputy Director, Financial Resources Management Division for items 4.3.1, 4.5.1,and 4.5.2.

Apologies were received from Professor Rob Norris, Dean, Faculty of Science and Professor Nick Saunders, Dean, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences.

The minutes of meeting 4/2003 of the Committee of Deans, held on 3 June 2003 were confirmed. (Attachment 1)

Noting that further updates on the proposed reform package would be provided to members, Mr Marshall informed members that Monash expected to receive further funding in February under the governments existing formula for workplace reforms.

Documentation was distributed. (Attachment 2)

Mr Pollock introduced the item and informed members that the report was intended to provide an overview of the range of activities and contracts considered by the International Development Group.

In relation to previous discussions between Monash and the Economic Development Board of Singapore, members were advised that the proposal would most likely only progress if a satisfactory equity partner was identified thus reducing the risk exposure to Monash.

In response to a question on the university’s strategy for China, Mr Pollock and Professor Palmer were requested to discuss the issue and for Professor Palmer to provide a paper for discussion at the Deans Discussion Group meeting on 22 August.

Documentation was circulated. (Attachment 3)

Professor Parker informed members that the draft Monash in Europe 2010 – A Strategic Directions Statement had been prepared with the assistance of Mr Pollock and Professors Mackenzie and Le Grand and attempted to set out the rationale for a low cost, low risk way of engagement with Europe.

Noting that the document did not include details of engagement with Scandinavian countries, members were requested to send any further comments to Professor Parker who would, if possible, be incorporate the suggestions into a revised draft document for submission to Academic Board.

Documentation was circulated. (Attachment 4)

Professor Bouma introduced the item noting that the proposal resulted from earlier discussions with Deans where it was agreed that an assessment should be made of the unfunded costs associated with competitive grant funded research.

Members were informed that the proposal would make a contribution towards ameliorating the unfunded cost of ARC and NH&MRC grant research, encourage research activity and should make research a more desirable activity.

Before opening the matter up for discussion, members were advised of several issues relating to the proposal.

These were:

(1) While the cost of chief investigators had been based on a sampling of grant applications, this should have no impact on the unfunded component as it is assumed these costs were met from other sources within the faculty.

(2) Departmental overheads had been applied at set rates as the calculation of individual departmental overheads would necessitate a detailed study being undertaken.

(3) While the level of departmental overheads had been set differentially for faculties, the overheads may be applied differently for departments within a faculty.

(4) The proposal related to ARC and NH&MRC competitive grants only.

During discussions, members raised a number of concerns in relation to the formula components used to determine the funding. These included:

In response to the concerns, members were advised that the proposal introduced an approach that introduced a transparent methodology that provided "earnings" for faculties – not a subsidy – and an approach that could be refined overtime particularly in the areas of "departmental overheads" and any area where double counting may have occurred.

Noting that DEST was going to review the research infrastructure quantum, the Vice-Chancellor recommended the proposal to members.

Mr Marshall introduced the topic noting that while Monash’s current enterprise Bargaining Agreement expired on 30 June 2003, the NTEU had yet to lodge a log of claims with the university however the NTEU was currently conducting meetings of members on most campuses.

Following an outline of claims lodged with several other universities, Mr Marshall provided an overview of the issues that may be introduced into the discussions by either party. These issues included the current redundancy provisions, size of the workforce, targeted support for identified discipline areas, workload and family friendly policies, intellectual property, consultation processes between the university and the NTEU, dismissal clauses, appeal rights in the reclassification process, remuneration and superannuation issues and changed provisions for regional and offshore staff.

Commenting on issues raised by Deans, Mr Marshall tabled two papers that highlighted the different ways institutions approached the implementation of workplace change and the related consultation process.

During discussion members commented on the potential for disruption due to possible industrial action, the need to consolidate old agreements – some dating back to the mergers, student assessment of teaching and the role of unit evaluation.

Mr Marshall informed members that he would provide further updates as required with the first expected to be when the NTEU notifies the university of its claims.

The Vice-Chancellor thanked Mr Marshall for his presentation and noted that the university was hoping for prompt and productive outcome once the bargaining round commenced.

A set of documents was circulated. (Attachment 5)

Ms Crook introduced the item noting that Chart 1 – Monash: Strategic, Operational and Financial Planning had previously been discussed and provided a schematic representation of the overall planning cycle. Paper 1 – SCM: Processes to deliver a whole of University approach provided detail of the processes required to complete the process and Chart 2 – Budget 2004, processes, relationships and timing provided a detailed representation of the entire process. The timeline for completion of process was detailed in the document Budget 2004 – Major timelines and the methodology to be adopted for discussion of support service divisions and departments plans was detailed in the document Central Support Divisions and Department: Discussion around services and costs of central support divisions and departments for 2004.

Ms Crook informed members that a meeting of Deans, Faculty Managers, Divisional Heads and Heads of support departments had been scheduled for 2 September 2003. Major support groups would provide a short presentation whereas others would be present to respond to questions.

4.5.2 Update on Space Policy RMO2002/0928

A set of documents was circulated. (Attachment 6)

Introducing the item, members were advised that following a series of space review workshops, a number of changes had been made to the policy including the creation of three space cost types – low cost, medium cost and high cost, the classification of space quality by floor – previously it was by building, very low quality space would be dealt with on a case-by-case basis and the introduction of 1-25 seating capacity lecture theatre and/or classroom teaching space.

In response to questions, members were advised that "shed level" space would be dealt with on a case-by-case basis and that 5000 square metres had been set aside at the Caulfield redevelopment and any proposals to exceed that level via bidding for space available for external tenants would need to be considered and the funding ramifications smoothed over time. Further, members discussed the process for vacating and refurbishing space and were advised that in order to provide recognition of contributions by faculties to major refurbishments, the process detailed in section nine of the policy would be implemented for 2004.

RMO2002/0928

Documentation was circulated. (Attachment 7)

The Committee of Dean approved the proposal of the Faculty of Education to establish and fill the position of Chair of Education (Psychology).

Documentation was circulated. (Attachment 8)

Members discussed a range of issues and the process relating to the appointment. During the discussion the Vice-Chancellor resolved that:

The next meeting of the Deans Discussion Group will be held at 4.00pm on Tuesday 29 July 2003 in the City Office.

The next meeting of the Committee of Deans will be held at 2.15pm on Tuesday 2 September 2003 in the Sir George Lush Room.