UPDATED: March 24, 2016 at 4:01 p.m.

A University Senate committee is joining a chorus of groups calling for the establishment of an office for students, faculty and staff to voice their concerns confidentially.

The proposal recommends Syracuse University to create an Ombuds Office, where SU community members can meet with an ombudsman to confidentially discuss issues, according to the report issued by the Senate Committee on Women’s Concerns.

The ombudsman would be a neutral party who, while reporting to the chancellor, would act independently from the university and help with conflict resolution. The office would be confidential in that all records collected by the ombudsman would be destroyed and inaccessible by anyone in the SU community.

An Ombuds Office would help mitigate feelings of uncertainty and stress in the SU community, according to the proposal, which was presented at Wednesday’s University Senate meeting. Those feelings stem from recent structural changes at SU, such as new leadership, the Strategic Plan component of the Fast Forward initiative and the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program, the report states.

Chancellor Kent Syverud plans to meet with the committee to discuss how to move forward with creating the office, said Lori Brown, who is chair of the committee.

If the office is created, SU would join a long list of universities that already have an Ombuds Office. Ten out of the 15 schools in the ACC conference have ombudsman, according to the report.

The average salary for an ombudsman at a university is about $59,000 per year, according to simplyhired.com. An ombudsman’s salary may vary depending on the size of the institution they work for, said Vicky Wang, a graduate student at SU who answered questions about the proposal at the meeting.

The Committee on Women’s Concern is not the first body to suggest an Ombuds Office. At least five organizations in the last several years have recommended doing so — including the Chancellor’s Workgroup on Diversity and Inclusion in a report issued Monday, the Graduate Student Organization in 2014, Committee on Academic Integrity in 2007 and the Academic Strategic Plan’s Student and Faculty-Centered Operations Working Group in February.

While analyzing the culture on campus, SU’s report from consulting firm Bain & Company noted that the university needs “enhanced feedback mechanisms” and greater transparency and communication.

The committee started exploring the option of an Ombuds Office over two years ago. For more than a decade, the committee was used as a “safe space” to talk about issues of “grave concern” — sexual harassment, abuse of power, bullying in the workplace, inconsistent use of judicial and staff complaints, among others.

“… Our experience has revealed that people who turn to us for help do so because they believe there is no other safe place on campus for them to go. Our experience also points to what we see as a long-standing campus culture that causes many community members … to believe that their University neither cares about them nor wants to protect them,” the committee report reads.

As a result, university-offered support services are sometimes purposely avoided, according to the committee report.

An Ombuds Office would encourage people to use a university service, while providing a “confidential, off-the-record, and safe place” where people can discuss issues without fear of backlash, according to the committee report.

Several senators were concerned that an ombudsman would take their suggestions and reports directly to the chancellor, giving the university community little involvement in any decisions that are made. Brown reassured the senators that the ombudsman would have his or her own authority, but several people in Maxwell Auditorium groaned in disagreement.

To this, Syverud said the goal of an ombudsman is to resolve things within the university community, and if that doesn’t happen, then the records are destroyed and other avenues can be pursued.

“The purpose of the role is to take disputes that could well become huge, time-consuming, anxiety-producing things that don’t have to be and get people to actually talk to people,” Syverud said.

In discussing a perceived lack of transparency and communication at SU, the proposal mentions the closing of the Advocacy Center, as well as the 18-day sit-in held in Crouse-Hinds Hall by THE General Body in 2014. While THE General Body was protesting, it served as a “safe space” for students to discuss their grievances — much like an Ombuds Office would function, the committee report states.

“Indeed, as the events of Fall 2014 and their aftermath have revealed, there is no greater need for, and no better time, for Syracuse University to establish an Ombuds Office,” the committee report states.

Published on March 23, 2016 at 11:10 pm

Contact Annie: apalme05@syr.edu