Leaves me a little salty: “College Council discusses travel policy and campus safety

The policy that Pete put in place at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic to help professors navigate during lockdowns has become a nuisance to many professors, according to Chris Bono, professor and former president of the college Council.

“We agreed on a temporary policy on this, which since then, in my opinion, has been abused, and has left me in a slightly salty state,” Bono said. I think this is an example of collaboration being leveraged. The more we communicate with the CFO’s office, and especially the person in charge of this, the less satisfaction I find. Especially because there’s not much listening.”

according to PoliciesThe University Travel Card must be used for all domestic and international travel expenses paid by the university, and trips must be booked through Anthony Travel, the university-wide contracted resource for travel management.

The College Board met on Wednesday to discuss current travel policy, academic freedom and campus safety. Professors, like Abbe De Vallejo, detailed the issues of travel arrangements, including high card fees and a $25 fee to speak with a company representative.

“Another level of bureaucracy for me is the restriction of our freedom,” said de Vallejo, a professor in the department of biology. “So if there is any argument, to me, this policy should be completely repealed. And let’s go back to the previous actions.”

President Robin Kerr listened to the professors’ complaints, including Dana Todorasco, an assistant professor of psychiatry and biostatistics, who said “Anthony Travell is basically useless.” Kerr said she hopes Pete will find at least a temporary solution before revising the policy.

In a survey, Kear asked for the group’s views on maintaining fast card access to buildings during a faculty meeting March meeting. She said she received mixed views in a survey including responses from “card swiping is a threat to academic freedom” to “card swiping provides an extra layer of security/security.”

Kerr said the office of senior vice chancellor for business and operations David DeJong will conduct a public security review this summer of buildings and venues on campus. Some professors at the meeting in March said they felt the current pass-through program could keep campus safe by restricting who has access to Pitt buildings.

Kerr also discussed the topic of counselor Patrick Gallagher advertisement He will step down in the summer of 2023.

“We were surprised to hear that the chancellor will be stepping down in the summer of 2023,” Kerr said. “I really enjoyed working with the advisor.”

De Vallejo spoke on behalf of Tenure and Academic Freedom Committee To discuss the college council’s approval of the upcoming university vice chancellor’s letter on academic freedom. He said the message would be similar to that of the university’s honorary vice chancellor, James Maher letter on academic freedom, but will be updated to reflect current challenges to academic freedom. De Vallejo said that this includes when Lieutenant Governor of Texas Dan Patrick said in February that professors studying critical race theory should be grounds for expulsion.

De Vallejo said: “The committee voted unanimously to ratify this document for the approval of this party.” “Having said that, there are shortcomings. There are a lot of discussions, but we will approach them in many different ways.”

However, some professors feel the historical precedent is too far away from the current semester. Claudia Craig Byers, professor of nursing, said she feels teaching has changed in the past two decades, and therefore academic freedom policies should be stricter.

“Should we say this is what will stay in place?” Craig Byers said. “I’m just concerned that some of what I’ve read doesn’t address what’s happening in 2022.”

De Vallejo said the faculty association is not a forum for discussions about how to improve the discourse and that they will continue to work on that at a later time.

The College Board voted in favor of the speech with 92% voting yes, 3% no and 5% abstaining.

“This is a tentative public statement,” de Vallejo said. “This is not the end of it.”