TORRINGTON – How the college administration deals with its own policies and procedures was debated Tuesday by the Eastern Wyoming College Board of Trustees.

EWC President Leslie Travers and the rest of the college administration and board are in the process of reviewing all the policies – totaling more than 100 – that govern how the institution deals with everything from is vision, mission and diversity statement to use of college-owned vehicles and rules governing animals on the campus. On Tuesday, the board again discussed revisions to its Reduction in Force policy which had been debated – and voted down – in May.

“We’d prepared a policy (board attorney David Evans) thought addressed areas of concern,” Board Chairman John Patrick said. “That proposed policy was voted down at the last meeting. Since that time, we’ve worked together to come up with a new reduction in force policy that addresses concerns from those of you who probably voted against that.”

At issue in May was the trustee’s involvement in the decision-making process, once college administration determines reductions must be made. Trustee Marilyn Fisher was concerned the board was “out of the loop” in deciding which personnel would be laid off, should that become necessary in the future.

“Once board of trustees says, ‘Yes, we need reduction in force,’ we’re out of the loop now,” Fisher said during discussions in May. “It’s totally in the hands of the president.”

The Board of Trustees of the college is the first line of appeal for employees who’ve been laid off or fired. 

“Eight heads are better than one,” Fisher said. “I understand we have to stay out (of the RIF process) because might have to hear a grievance.”

Evans spent part of the month since that meeting in discussions with Patrick and other members of the board and administration, as well as reviewing and revising the proposed policy changes defeated in May. He told the board Tuesday a new policy wasn’t completed, but that Travers had reviewed what he’d come up with so far.

The defeated policy stipulated the board would have final approval on if a reduction in force was necessary. But the final decision on individual reductions would be left up to Travers, delineating procedures to determine those individuals, Evans said.

‘Risk to both’

Either option – the board giving final approval or leaving it up to the college president – has risks, Evans said. But he believes resting those final decisions with the president was the “cleaner” solution.

“I’m looking for a clean policy, that can be administered cleanly and can be explained pretty cleanly,” he said. “The cleaner it can be explained, the better we can avoid grievances. But (grievances) are inevitable.

“There’s risks to both having the board make the final approval and, once the board says to the president, go ahead,” Evans said. “The risk without the approval by the board is the president makes a mess of it. I would say that generally does not happen, but it has happened.”

The board making final decisions on reductions opens the door to division among the trustees, which could lead to a different set of problems, he said. The board authorizes hiring of personnel. Keeping the board out of the layoff or firing process in cases of reduction in force greatly reduces the chance for bias, either real or perceived, he said.

“I think there’s less of a chance that a president won’t come forward with a RIF unless it’s been studied very carefully,” Evans said. Grievances “may end up in front of you and you’re clean on a final solution of why they were fired.”

Patrick agreed: “My impression is, if the board says we direct President Travers to implement RIF policy and save the college $600,000 a year and that’s all we do as a board, we haven’t fouled ourselves to not be able to sit on a grievance. But if we say bring us back, tell us who and why, then we’ve clouded the issue on too much involvement in the process.”

Policy review committee discussed

Trustees also discussed proposed changes to its committee policy, specifically regarding forming a new type of committee at the college to spearhead regular review of all policies.

The college now uses three specific types of committees: A college committee, charged with “providing recommendations and guidance on matters of operation;” Departmental committees that “consider matters within or across departments,” and; Advisory committees, comprised of volunteers from the community or employees of the college to advice and support employee groups and programs.

The new language would create a fourth committee type, a Policy Development and Review Committee. Made up of the president, human resources director, vice presidents, executive assistant to the president, trustees and “others, as needed,” the new committee would be responsible for writing and reviewing policy proposals by consideration by the board. Full membership of the committee would be flexible, allowing administrators to reach out into the community for knowledge and advice on specific areas of concern.

“Sometimes, we’ll want someone who has experience in a particular area of the college,” Travers said. “This committee will review, edit and write policies.”