Emeriti faculty now constitutes about 18% of Senate membership on the Santa Cruz campus. Most emeriti retired in their late 50s or early 60s in the early 1990s through one of the three VERIP programs. Reflecting their relative youth when they retired, emeriti faculty and librarians published nine books, 46 articles, 23 book chapters, l4 abstracts, and 22 book reviews between July 1, 1997, and June 30, 1999. Only four faculty members have retired since July 1, 1994, and three or four more are likely to retire at the end of this academic year.

At the suggestion of the Senate chair, the Committee on Emeriti Relations began the year with a survey asking about the satisfactions and concerns of the emeriti. A report based on the survey appears as an Appendix to this annual report. In the context of general satisfaction with their situation, the survey revealed there are great variations in how individual emeriti relate to the campus. Some want to focus on research and writing. Some want to teach a course once every year or two. Others find satisfaction in working for their professional associations. Still others are exploring entirely new interests and need little direct contact with the campus.

Although most emeriti are satisfied with their relationship to the campus, there are variations from division to division. Generally speaking, natural scientists have been the most satisfied, followed by social scientists. Relatively speaking, emeriti in the humanities and arts express the most concerns. There are three general issues of concern to emeriti. First, as the survey results show, most emeriti would like to have greater access to the title of ‘Research Professor," which was created by the Office of the President as part of the program to induce faculty to take early retirement. Second, some emeriti in the Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts would like to have the opportunity to teach a course once a year. Third, a few emeriti would like to have greater access to shared temporary office space.

To deal with these three concerns, the Committee on Emeriti Relations believes it is essential for relevant Senate committees to work with the central campus administration to create an emeriti transition program that is equitable for all emeriti. That is, emeriti should not be at the complete mercy of departments and divisions any more than active faculty are. Based on that principle, the Committee on Emeriti Relations has been working with Committee on Academic Personnel and the Executive Vice Chancellor on a proposal to make the title of Research Professor more accessible, and with Committee on Educational Policy and the Executive Vice Chancellor on a proposal to provide teaching opportunities for those who are retired from departments and divisions that do not have the resources for such a program of enrichment.

The Committee also is trying to consult widely to find new ways to accommodate emeriti on the most difficult issue of all, temporary shared office space for those emeriti active in research, writing, or teaching. However, it has not as yet formulated a proposal based on the several ideas that have been suggested to it. The Committee welcomes all suggestions from active faculty and administrators concerning new ways of sharing and cooperation on this issue.

Although it may seem at first glance that emeriti issues are a minor matter and of concern only to emeriti, there are three very good reasons for active faculty and administrators to take an interest in emeriti issues. First, the projected large wave of retirements may not occur at the expected time if emeriti faculty are quickly excluded from access to space and teaching, as has happened in some cases. It made sense for faculty to retire in the early 1990s via one of the VERIP programs because of the added incentives, such as up to five years of teaching opportunities, but the Committee is hearing from a few active faculty that retirement may not be as attractive for them if they will be denied even shared temporary office space and any chance of teaching even one course for a year or two.

Second, as the survey results in the Appendix to this report demonstrate, the emeriti remain a useful resource for the campus in terms of teaching, publication, and financial support.

There is reason to believe on the basis of the experience in some departments that the emeriti as a whole could be deployed far more wisely in the face of the growth in student enrollments and the need to recruit large numbers of new faculty. Third, active faculty and administrators will be emeriti some day, and they will enjoy their emeriti status much more if they know they will not be cut off completely from the life of the campus.

May 17, 2000

A Report by the Committee on Emeriti Relations of the Academic Senate

In September, 1999, Academic Senate Chair Roger Anderson asked the Committee on Emeriti Relations to prepare a report on the situation of emeriti faculty concerning their expectations and needs in regard to their post-retirement relations with the campus. This document is the result of that request. It is based primarily on a survey sent in early October to 76 emeriti faculty age 80 or younger who live in the Santa Cruz area and have a current mailing address on or off campus, but it also includes information provided by staff members on the campus.

Thirty-three of the 76 emeriti responded, a return rate of 43%. Twelve respondents are from the Natural Sciences Division, 11 from the Social Sciences Division, and six from the Arts and Humanities divisions, which are combined as one division on the survey checklist to insure the anonymity of the few emeriti in the arts. Four respondents did not mark their divisional affiliation. The completed surveys are available from the Committee to anyone interested in seeing them.

The findings on several key issues--office space, teaching opportunities, library access via off-campus computers, and appropriate professorial titles—are presented below following a brief presentation of background information. These findings show that most of the 33 respondents seem generally satisfied with their relationship to the campus in terms of office space and teaching opportunities. However, the level of satisfaction is higher in some academic divisions than others, and there are important issues concerning office space, teaching opportunities, and modem/internet access to the library that need to be addressed. In addition, there is an interest on the part of a significant majority of the respondents in the use of a professorial title that conveys their active involvement in scholarly activities. Our recommendations for a general strategy on how appropriate responses to these issues might be developed are presented in a concluding section.

The following information on the role that emeriti faculty play on the Santa Cruz campus provides a context for this report. First, the Santa Cruz Division of the Academic Senate includes 119 emeriti faculty among its 588 members, which is 20% of the total. Nearly half of these emeriti retired on or after July 1, 1994, and the great majority retired in the context of the three VERIP programs that began in 1990.

Second, the emeriti faculty are not only significant in their numbers, but they continue to bring money to the campus as well. According to figures assembled at our request by the Office of Development, emeriti faculty have provided the campus with $l,025,000 since July l, 1994. The bulk of this money, $618,000, came as gifts from emeriti and their spouses, and another $360,000 came through grants from outside funding agencies. The final $47,000 came from gifts-in-kind, such as land or buildings.

Third, many emeriti faculty continue to be productive scholars through publications, creative artistic performances, or presentations at professional meetings. According to the bio-bibliographies compiled for the years 1995-1997 by the systemwide council representing emeriti faculty, Santa Cruz emeriti published 36 books, 142 articles, 45 book chapters, and 92 book reviews during that time period. Six emeriti created or performed works of music, dance, or theater.

Fourth, as reported in more detail in the next section, there are many emeriti who continue to teach courses on the campus. Emeriti served on 39 doctoral committees between 1995 and 1997. There are also emeriti faculty who give workshops and guest lectures at other universities.

In all, then, it seems fair to say that emeriti faculty make a large contribution to the life of the Santa Cruz campus, which is very different from the situation that obtained in the first three decades of its history when the number of emeriti was very small.

Office Space: Our survey first of all asked if the emeriti had office space, or wanted office space if they did not have any. On this issue, there is general satisfaction for emeriti in the natural and social sciences, and for the four emeriti who did not indicate their divisional affiliation. However, the situation is very different for emeriti in the arts and humanities.

Nine of the 12 emeriti in the natural sciences and nine of the 11 emeriti in the social sciences have office space, as do three of the four people who did not indicate their division affiliation. However, several of those who have office space in the natural sciences do so because one expanding department within the division is able to provide space for several members who retired from a department that could not provide space. Of the five emeriti in the natural and social sciences who do not have office space, there is one person in the natural sciences who wishes to have it.

By contrast, only two of the six emeriti in arts and humanities have office space, and one of those reports having been instructed that the space will have to be vacated at the end of the year even though there is empty space where the office space is located. Of the four without office space, three would like to have some, which means that four of the six respondents from arts and humanities need office space for next year. They report they are willing to share office space and that it is not essential that the space be in their former department.

Teaching: As with office space, there is general satisfaction in regard to teaching opportunities for the 12 respondents in the natural sciences and the 11 in the social sciences, as well as for the four who did not indicate a divisional affiliation. Three of the 12 respondents in the natural sciences indicate that they are teaching, and none of the nine who are not teaching express a desire to do so. However, one of those now teaching does so on a voluntary basis, and would like to be paid in the future.

In the social sciences, five of the 11 respondents are teaching; four of five respondents under age 70 continue to teach, and one of six over age 70 continues to teach. Only one of the six not teaching expressed an interest in doing so. However, two of those currently teaching report that they have not been asked to continue teaching next year, even though they have an interest in doing so and continue to have highly positive teaching evaluations. Of the four respondents who did not indicate a divisional affiliation, three are currently teaching, and the fourth would like to teach in the future.

By contrast, only one of the six respondents in the arts and humanities reports teaching a course this year, but the other five are interested in teaching as well. Once again, that is, there is a great difference between the situation for arts and humanities emeriti and all others.

Of those among the 33 respondents who express an interest in teaching in the future, 14 report that they would be willing to consider teaching outside their department, including the possibility of involvement in a freshperson transition program in the colleges. Thus, there is a small reservoir of highly experienced tenured faculty who might serve as a resource for future experiments in the colleges or other settings.

Computer Access to the Library: Thanks to their CATS accounts and support from their divisions, emeriti in the natural and social sciences are able to access the many and expanding services provided by the university library system via their off-campus computers. However, it is our understanding that not all emeriti in the arts and humanities have this access. More recently, CATS has cut off guest access to the campus modem pool, making it more difficult for these emeriti to use even telnet MELVYL. This means that emeriti in the arts and humanities need to have campus office space and hard-wired network access to use the library via computers, but as we already have seen, office space for them is very limited.

Access to Professorial Titles: The survey asked if emeriti are interested in a professorial title that reflects their ongoing involvement in scholarly activity, teaching, or public service.

Sixty percent of the respondents would like to have access to the title "Research Professor," which was created by the Office of the President for faculty who continue to be active in scholarly work. In terms of a special title for teaching or service, 39% and 36% responded affirmatively. There were few or no differences on these issues by academic division.

As the findings clearly suggest, the overall satisfaction expressed by most emeriti on most issues must be balanced against the fact that there is sometimes a mismatch between departmental or divisional resources and the needs of some emeriti. Possible dissatisfaction concerning office space for some emeriti in the natural sciences, for example, was avoided because one of the division’s departments happened to have space for them. However, there was less room for accommodations for emeriti in the arts and humanities, so they are far less likely to have office space.

In addition, there are faculty in all divisions who wish to continue teaching for a stipend, but are unable to do so, most likely because of a lack of resources in their departments. And there are emeriti in the arts and humanities who do not have free access to the library’s vast resources via off-campus computers.

Since both the number of emeriti per department and the resources of each department and division vary widely, the Committee on Emeriti Relations believes that it is necessary in the interest of fairness and equity to adopt a general strategy in which the Academic Senate and the Office of the Chancellor work together to develop campuswide solutions to the few but important problems identified in this report.

In addition, the Committee recommends that relevant Senate committees and the Office of the Chancellor should work together to develop new criteria by which the title "Research Professor" is granted to interested faculty who show evidence of continuing scholarly activity. This would mean adding to the criterion promulgated by the previous administration in 1996, which restricts the title to those few emeriti who apply for outside funding.

The committee also believes that campuswide policies that meet the needs of all emeriti are essential if the Academic Senate and Office of the Chancellor wish to insure that retirements between the ages of 60 and 65 continue to occur as projected. The three VERIP programs were generally very successful in making retirement a positive experience for most faculty members, but in an era when people live longer and there is no mandatory retirement age, it cannot be expected that faculty in their 60s and 70s will retire if they do no feel it is in their interest to do so.

The Committee on Emeriti Relations stands ready to work with other Senate committees and the Office of the Chancellor in dealing with the issues raised in this report.