|
| |
Caption: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1972 This is a reduced-resolution page image for fast online browsing.
![](https://uihistories.library.illinois.edu/REPOSITORYCACHE/50/OBs6DuoIW70tdQ0M3dhBoe6I6b06wif0XR4LXG3Ah6dJ4TpoiEJ6v7da6648Sv8t7wxrVHb3MtGbyuLY74tB6K03gtwuzIysFN7yjX63p4dx6_801-443.jpg)
EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:
434 BOARD OF TRUSTEES [October 20 Health and the University could withdraw its request for funds with which to plan a new structure for that School. The structure, which is in excellent condition, contains 18,838 net assignable square feet and is adaptable to the space requirements of the new School of Public Health particularly in its developmental stages. T h e site might accommodate a one- or two-phase addition to meet the expanding space requirements of the School. Options by which the University might acquire the property include: 1. Place the purchase as a high priority item in the F Y 1973 capital budget and seek assurance from the Governor that the funding of the project would be approved once t h e General Assembly appropriates the funds. 2. Request the Medical Center Commission to include in its F Y 1973 budget sufficient funds to purchase the property and transfer it to the University of Illinois at the Medical Center. 3. With the concurrence of the staff of the Board of Higher Education, Bureau of the Budget, and the Governor in a delayed acquisition, negotiate a leasepurchase agreement with the Board of Trustees of the Chicago Foundlings Home. 4. Purchase of the property by the University of Illinois Foundation, with the understanding that a state appropriation would be sought by the University or by the Medical Center Commission for acquisition of the property from the Foundation. The Chancellor at the Medical Center and the Executive Vice President and Provost recommend that acquisition of the property be authorized under one of the options outlined above or under some other acceptable plan. I concur. O n m o t i o n of M r . S w a i n , t h i s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n w a s a p p r o v e d b y the following vote: Aye, M r . Forsyth, M r . H a h n , M r . H o w a r d , M r . H u g h e s , M r . Neal, M r . Pogue, M r . S w a i n ; no, n o n e ; absent, Dr. Bakalis, M r . G r i m e s , G o v e r n o r Ogilvie, M r . Steger. S E T T L E M E N T O F P E N D I N G LITIGATION (26) In December 1970 fourteen University nonacademic employees in the classification of "janitress" filed suit against the University in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Illinois (Civil Action CV 70-233-D). The suit seeks recovery under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 of compensation alleged to have been "wrongfully withheld" by the University on the basis of the plaintiffs' sex and asks judgment in the amount of $80,000. Each plaintiff-janitress alleges the University failed to pay her "the same compensation as was paid to male employees of defendant, University, for doing equal work requiring equal skill, effort, and responsibility and which was performed under similar working conditions." Discussions have resulted in an offer from the plaintiffs to settle the case for a total of $10,000. T h e evidence with respect to the possible liability of the University is ambiguous and conflicting in certain important respects. Substantial additional expenses will be incurred if the matter is litigated to final disposition. While the University Counsel and special counsel employed to assist him are of the opinion the University may sustain its defense in the case, the outcome cannot be assured and must be considered as uncertain. In view of the uncertainty and the prospective expenses of defending the suit, they have advised that acceptance of the settlement offer would be economically desirable. Accordingly, the Vice President and Comptroller, with the concurrence of the appropriate campus officers, recommends that the settlement be approved by the Board of Trustees and that authority be given to execute and deliver all documents and vouchers necessary to effect the settlement and to secure dismissal of the suit with prejudice. I concur. On motion of Mr. Howard, this recommendation was approved by the following vote: Aye, Mr. Forsyth, Mr. Hahn, Mr. Howard, Mr.
| |