# Appendix — NLRB v. Yeshiva Univ. > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385006_0032%3A04 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Appendix - **Published:** January 1, 1980 - **Citation:** 444 U.S. 672 ## Text a a “Supreme Court, Us . FILED APPENDIX || uN 5 79 {I Volume II, pp. 391-772 ~%ite CLERK 7 —_ In the Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1978 Nos. 78-857 and 78-997 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and YESHIVA UNIVERSITY FACULTY ASSOCIATION, Petitioners, —v.— YESHIVA UNIVERSITY, Respondent. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT PETITION FOR CERTIORARI IN NO. 78-857 FILED NOVEMBER 27, 1978 PETITION FOR CERTIORARI IN NO. 78-997 FILED DECEMBER 19, 1978 CERTIORARI GRANTED FEBRUARY 21, 1979 ee I ee ee Iu the Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1978 Nos. 78-857 and 78-997 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and YESHIVA UNIVERSITY FACULTY ASSOCIATION, a Se Petitioners, YESHIVA UNIVERSITY, Respondent. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT INDEX Page Chronological List of Relevant Docket Entries ...................... 1 oo Me |, Ea EReees Rene ne RN awn 3 Excerpts from Transcript of Proceedings |.................0...00000000.... 5 Witnesses : Joshua A. Fishman “ SRO FE APNEA SES We OA ve Ae AP ERT SEY eT 6 BLA SIERO He: HON EE. ene Ee ee RR eRe 8&3 SE eae Pee ELF, OCR OCONEE BODES PR ee 116 Sheldon Socol ESR RE PN DRC RL I 116 dh A Pe PII SSW Pee aS oul TO ESR OS SaICR 145 RE SE, ERLE SM 5S) ALTACE Be 152 Martin Miller eas AI ca FE A oY ROO OEE MN BAH any SoS 155 David Mirsky RUNES hs thailg inh tcc hack da Seale chihinks hvedede nesnedbaabadaenowiddnessinlasaubtin 180 ETERS aN cae SORES, Ui ASEH ee Mist Oe SPIRE OANA 223 ITI schcisicihcecunssminetcenltaiesdelactabcdpsnidtsacmonsescindibassanentabenealsigiios 240 ii INDEX Page Excerpts from Transcript of Proceedings—Continued Dr. Isaac Bacon Ap RR tase aay RRP AT Yr er one Bar ou ea OES OM BO 243 MUI, anshih Naat eachoccs cae: casleagisedhds tadieen Sein tlcceabieallicherionahsdinaheorent 285 BARR TRS Set Pig SoA ecard ED Ra aces ML BIOIO 391 (EO aEL ERLE RAL ADL EOE RCT 304, 392 Jacob Rabinowitz EEE RSS LSE ae RAs tl AA? BS ER AL SO a 304 NSE RENOIR SEE EGR i Necse ANT DOL rar Ie cpl Ta 341 PIII rales riecssnissthsn inccadasiaiehcedibatnasdNMNatccenentaniomcamnesesvaaledted 351 IER EERO D EON PM OROROOON > TORT oP yO te EE 352 Rabbi Morris J. Besdin GE a Na SRP eats Rais Ml Ce RM BIER REE Pace 352 RESIS E SAAS RSs ile BURP eet Be ARE SS 366 ALL Aa RTS Oo MONS AECE OER TAT 371 Rabbi Baruch Faivelson ROR EAE nn Per aD OP AS IO AILS. 5 rr 372 a a ee ek ee 388 Rabbi Herbert C. Dobrinsky REL cate LENE LD aa CO RE ODEN PE 443 Dean Arthur Komar EERIE RSS) Res ORAS oh GOO eos RTE OM Re? © 393, 453 ae 469 RU rnceteel Sati iether te 489 a a a oe a ee 494 Solomon H. Green Ea sed IRIS LEP IO tI W Pe ns ey AOE We Ml te 495 Leo Landman EN ES CERT COP i Ste eee PRS Seen eT 540 ERE ene Ra BTN AC POLE ot oe) OE 553 EEDA eevee LIOR a 559 ba PRC ER a Pr, OL ee PART 559, 580 ET ARIES OEE EAL ee EN AT f 591 Zevulum Charlop aed OA Np rade O Pe, BM San FOP LSet tae 562 RII Sceiceutishectalceiaivisshtntntehiak tcepastarntiiabomeninstSdéchalinscsd.sodsb kati. 575 INDEX iii P Excerpts from Transcript of Proceedings—Continued us Joseph Gittler BNI siclnci Ioivaciadtitesiccetnsnecceertaanea oiecsnsdecuubia enseaiema ciaeiuendein aie: 595 MEINE 0. sccieed shineciccedigh odeRtodand tacecenelishiasansaaoniocaswainabeaeaaiaas tents 661 IE aiid. since tncbindctcuddsnckencesaticudcbasbiachinttehsbleaiamiemaseuiael 678 Rear ea Os Sikes eI Pe OR PERAER Fee Ie YS 679 Manfred Weidhorn a cicich inl ss ccs 0 na cettteeccoeaesnapesbedaasindllaetamapammecee 679 ER EREL SON LPN OAL OM LORE AY be PAREN IA YS Pere 697 MIEN oes K.osnscukacirshenntosamrip tists Rosoesalartecaeds ecinleneiioaem 715 Ralph Behrends BINNIE 6 cat. encokscdn tc cceud dp actceatichecadsdtiehadidboetiplabtaswbabeciacaocbatidinash 716 | RE SP es nei Sos No Mary AEB ee, CN Grae POCO Ars. Pa 743 II iin co csunis Siiskeccaaaditaniacabagcgpetiliceasidadsctiabbipediantod: 751 III. iasvieh snsicrniscnniiecpenicibhiesaliatendetadicaeslaeecbentnies Liiutodininndaat 761 Max Lipsicas | WAR TIDE car est RoR art ESS Tense Sateen as SAL 752 Eee Le \ seis pocuhses ai abaaieteiaepilbmaanaeeinateat tea 767 Exhibit Volumes III and IV indexed separately. 391 [3078] ISAAC BACON, being previously sworn, resumed the stand and testified further, as follows: REDIRECT EXAMINATION [3094] A On reconsideration I kust say that I am not very sure and I prefer to check on that. But by defini- tion, my definition, the appointment of an assistant pro- fessor by our own definition, assistant professor means automatically full-time because if it were-—if it were part- time they would not need a visiting assistant professor or visiting professor. And letters—letters that are not for full-time appointments are not written by the presi- dent. MR. SCHECTMAN: Letters of full-time— THE WITNESS: Letters for not full-time appoint- ment are not written by the president. Who are they written by, Dean Bacon, in your [3095] A For part-time people are written by me. And signed by me. Q Now, I’d like to turn now for a moment to the senior member in the speech department. Who is that? A Dr. Tauber, Abraham Tauber. Q You recall, dean Bacon, when you were here last you were asked by Mr. Shectman whether any of the senior members had any reduction in their teaching loads attributable to their being senior members. As I recall the record you said no, except that one was in a gray area. Which one is in the gray area? A The gray area I referred to was Abraham Tauber. Q_ All right. Now would you tell us whether Abraham Tauber has a reduction in teach loads? A The reason why I indicate— Q Does he have a reduction in teaching load? [3096] A I would have to say yes. 392 Q All right. How much is that reduction? A Two hours. Q All right. Now, is this the reduction in teaching load that you described as being within the gray area? A Yes, I did. Q Would you tell us why that is a gray area, Dean Bacon, because the record is not clear on this subject? A Because sometimes he teaches more than the re- quired 12 hours which means he would be getting addi- tional money for it and at that time when I was asked it was not very clear in my mind how to define it. But I think on thinking about it I would have to say that is a reduction of two hours because if it would be teaching 14 hours, let us say, I would pay him compensation for four hours, which means two above— four above the ten and two about the 12 which is con- sidered a full-time appointment. Q In any event, it is a fact, that he does receive— A He does. Q —an hour’s reduction or compensation in lieu thereof on account of his functioning as the senior mem- ber of that department? [3097] A That’s correct. Q That is a fact? A That’s correct. Q That was not in the record previously, was it? A Well, not that clearly, yes. Q To the extent the record does not reflect that from your prior testimony it should be corrected to so re- flect ; is that right? A Yes. RECROSS EXAMINATION [3099] Q (By Mr. Shectman) How many hours is Professor Tauber—I am referring to the Tauber in the Speech Department—currently teaching? A From memory I would have to say 14 hours. Q Each—He is teaching 14 hours? A Yes. Excuse me, 12 hours. Q He is teaching 12 hours? [8100] A 12 hours, plus the two hours compensation. 393 Q And how much compensation is he receiving? A The same as a professor’s rate, whatever the pro- fessor’s rate is. Q So he is receiving then the full-time faculty sal- ary attributable to his seniority in his title; is that correct? A That’s correct. Q On the salary scale which obtains at Yeshiva College? A Right. Q He is receiving no additional salary; is that cor- rect? A I said an additional compensation. Q What is that additional compensation? A The professional rate I think is 13 dollars and some change; I forgot what it is, per hour. Q And what do you—And what duties is he perform- ing for which he is—receiving additional compensation? A As the senior member of the Speech Department. Q I am asking now specifically what duties is he performing for which he is receiving that compensation? A Hs is supervising the Speech Department. * * * * [3107] Whereupon, ARTHUR B. KOMAR, being first duly sworn by the Hearing Officer, testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION Q (By Mr. Kramer) Dean Komar, by whom are you employed? A Yeshiva University. Q Yeshiva University? A Yes. Q What capacity? A Dean of the Belfer Graduate School. Q How long have you been dean of the Belfer Grad- uate School? A Five or six years. Q And prior to the becoming Dean of the Belfer (Graduate School, did you work for Heshiva University? A Yes, sir. 394 Q In what capacity? A I was professor of physics. [3108] Q You were a full professor of physics? A Right. Q How long were you a professor of physics? A Well, I still am, so I have been with Yeshivz 12 years, I think. Q And the other 7 years were as professor of physics; is that correct? A Right. [8109] Q Are you presently teaching at Yeshiva University? A Yes. Q Would you tell us what you teach and hof oten you teach it? In terms of per term— A I teach one course a semester. You want to know which course I am teaching? Q Yes, sir. A This semester I am teaching thermodynamics and statistical mechanics. Last term? That would be previous— In the spring of 1974? Spring of 1974 I taught quantum field therapy. In the spring of 1975? I will be teaching statistical mechanics. Ai these courses taken by graduate students? es. (3110] Q (By Mr. Kramer) Dean Komar, would you tell us the facts and circumstances surrounding your as- suming the office of Dean of the Belfer School? Would you put it in a time frame and then tell us how that came about in your own words, please? A It was in 1968, if I remember correctly. The fac- ulty had grievances against the previous dean, and as- sembled and petitioned the president of the university, President Belkin, for removal of the previous dean. And upon due consideration, it was then done immediately in discussions, I don’t know what else went into it, the previous dean, Dean Geldbar was removed, and then I PO PO PO pO 395 was elected by the faculty as Acting Dean and a search committee was organized to find a full-time dean. The search committee was—one existed—consisted [3111] of a number of members elected by the faculty and a few members appointed by the president. I think the president appointed the vice president Kogel at that time, and he, I think he appointed one alumni member, whose name I don’t recall at the moment. In any case, that committee then functioned—pre- pared a list of names of people to approach to become dean and they went down, they made several offerings—lI mean they—they did not make the offers. They recom- mended to the president to make offers to several people. Those people came down but then decided not to take the position. After approximately a year of this or fairly close to a year the head—the vice president Kogel who was the had of the search committee then recommended to the president that I be given the position as full-time dean. The president approached me, asked me if I was in- terested. I went back to the faculty and asked them if they would approve, and they did, and I was appointed by the president. This was, I suggest, about six years ago or so. [3113] Q Putting aside any limitations that I may have previously placed upon my question and any per- centage characterization is that you have made, would you please just tell us what the grievances were? A It is slowly coming back to me. The final cul- minating act which really provoked the faculty was that the previous dean attempted to rescind an appointment letter of a member of the faculty claiming that there was an error made in its issue. I forget the exact details of the case. 1 just remember that a member of the faculty, I think it was Professor Snyder was—at—initially received an appointment let- ter not stating a termination date and his understanding was, I think it was a three-year appointment, and this dean then sent him a revised letter informing him that 396 it was intended as a brief appointment, either two years or [3114] something like that, and—which was contrary to the understanding of the Chemistry Department or of Professor Snyder when he accepted the position, and the faculty read the—read this correction as an intentional provication to antagonize members of the Chemistry De- partment and get them to resign from the school. I think that was the final issue which precipitated the explosion. Prior to that, there were lots of petty frictions which I can’t even recall, but this, I think, was— Q Was Professor Snyder what we call a new hire? A No. He had been hired, I think—he had been present already a year or two. I think it was quite close to the two-year period when he received this information that essentially he would be out of a job. Q Dean Komar, would you give us some examples of the kind of thing you characterized as petty vrictions without using names? A Petty frictions, with regard to what? Q Prior, Dean. A Oh, not approving payment of certain obligations such as professor travels on university business, I think that was one complaint. Or various allocations of funds. Interference in the appointments or promotions [3115] of faculty members. Q Interference with whom? A I think there was trouble within the Mathematics Department. I don’t recall the exact details. This is six or seven years ago. But I know a number of mathe- matics professors resigned because they objected to the deans’ interfering in their considering for appointments to the Mathematics Department and for promotions with- in the Mathematics Department. I think it would—I think two or three professors of mathematics resigned or left at the end of that year and went elsewhere as a result of this interference and that was regarded as sources of friction, petty friction. 397 [3117] Would it also be fair to state that that de- partment is in the depth of transition? A Yes. Q Would you explain about that, please. A Until this past year, Yeshiva University had sev- eral chemistry departments, depending upon how you count them. Let me just enumerate. There was the Chemistry Department at Belfer Grad- uate School, at Yeshiva College, Stern College, several different chemistry departments at the College of [3118] Medicine, and the State of New York, in its—has sent investigators, I have forgot what they are officially called, sent investigators around to evaluate the doctoral programs in the State of New York. And they had come last year to evaluate the chemistry program. And they submitted a report which was ac- cepted by the State of New York to the effect that the doctoral program at the Belfer School should be dereg- istered, and one of the reasons they gave is ‘ at the program in the Belfer School is too small, it is not at critical size, it has too few faculty members, it does not have enough teaching duties and as such it is not a viable program. They strongly suggested that should the various che® - istry departments of Yeshivan University be unified then it would have a critical size and be a viable pro- gram. The University, therefore, is in the process now of doing this. It has officially announced now that there is a unified chemistry department for the entire uni- versity with the exception of the college of medicine. And that Dr. Pomerantz was chairman of the Belver Department is now department chairman of the Chem- istry Department of the entire university, Department fo College and Medicine. [3119] how much since this has just been promulgated within this within this past semester, we are in a state of transition. The faculty members listed on this list are those who are in the Belfer School. There are now other faculty members who are in the other Chemistry 398 Departments who are in the process of being incorpor ated into the Unified Department. 4 : * * a * Q (By Mr. Kramer) Dean Komar, you told us that the state has deregistered the chemistry doctorate pro- gram; is that correct? A That is correcg. Q Is that now a final decision? A Yes. [3120] Q Approximately how long did it take the State Education Department to reach this decision? A The better part of a year, I would say. ‘ P boning Byes course of that, Dr. Komar, of its de- iberations, did the university send people to Al ir? A Yes, sir, they did. ica cs cea MR. SHECHTMAN: I’m going to object to this line of questioning. -_ & oe & HEARING OFFICER: I ass ing i PP nanan sotivolh ume you are going in a MR. KRAMER: I am going into supervisor status, managerial status of Professor aeons sed 4 the Chairman of the Chemistry Department, and we are not [$121] going to get into the substance of the report as 4 Sila aeeeee at some length I agree FICER: Okay. On that grou: objection is overruled. . eee eee Q (By Mr. Kramer) During the course of the State Education Department’s deliberations on this subject did the university send representatives to Albany to nego- ee nays Ph ec Education Department’s represen- ives and try to convince them i rereaant not to deregister the Yes, they—I do. Q Did you go? A No. Q And you are the dean of th of A Rich? e school; is that right? > ee ee ee Mee 399 Q Who went? A Vice President Sokol, Vice President Fishman, and Professor Pomerantz. Q Did you discuss with Professor Pomerantz what was going on in Albany? A I believe I spoke to him before he left, and I spoke to him some time after he came back. But it was some time after because I was out of the country in the in- tervening period. [3122] Q Did you give Professor Pomerantz any in- structions as to what he should say or do in Albany? A No, no. The discussion consisted of his informing me of what went on. Q Was this a discussion in the regular course of your deanly functions? A Whatever that may be. Q Im the regular course of business is the normal term? A During the business day we had a conversation, let’s put it that way. Q Is is normal for you to have conversations with chairman of your departments? A Yes. Q About their functioning as chairmen? A Yes. Q Would you tell us what Dean Pomerantz reported to you about the chair—what chairman Pomerantz re- ported to you? As best you recall, and in your own words, please. A He told me that he went with the other two officials of the university, and they brought with them—I’m not sure whether it was a letter from President Belfin, but at least the assurances of President Belfin—Belfin that the [3123] university is prepared to make additional in- vestments in the chemistry program, and the unification of the departments, in order to overcome the state’s ob- jections to the present status of the doctoral program. And with these assurances they had hoped that the state would then reconsider their position. He then re- ported that—well, when he was therek of course, they took it under advisement. 400 _ Subsequently a letter was received by President Bel- kin from Commissioner Nyquist to the effect that he would not overrule the decision at this time, at least. Q This is the same Professor Pomerantz who is Chairman of the university-wide Chemistry Department; is that right? : A Right. The university proceeded to carry through the pro- — in any event. I mean sir, of unifying the depart- ment. * * * * (3135] Q (By Mr. Kramer) Dean Komar, I show you a document marked as Employer’s Exhibit 131 for identification and a document of eight pages entitled on the first page “Constitution, Belfer Graduate School of Science, Yeshiva University.” Are you familiar with this document? A Yes. Q What is it? A It is the document—it is the constitution which tells the organization of the faculty of the Belfer School. Q You also made reference in your previous testi+ mony a minute ago to bylaws. Does this document also contain the bylaws of the Belfer governing— A Yes. Towards the back of the document; yes. Q That would be on page 5 and pages thereafter? A Yes. ; Q Would you tell us, Dean Komar, how this constitu- tion and bylaws came into being? 18196) A t the time, in 1968, when there wa i turmoil in the school due to the previous thes os ao 5 arms — up a subcommittee to prepare ch a document for the for izati Saciie. ormal organization of the The document was prepared and approved faculty and submitted to the president of the ae And the president sent, sometime thereafter, some type of letter, saying he accepts this document. 401 Q The document was promulgated at the initiative of the faculty? A Yes. It was written by the faculty and promul- gated at their initiative—I mean—yes. And ratified by the president of the university. Q Now, the constitution, Dean Komar, at page 2, makes reference to a faculty council. Q That would be in the first textual line on page 2? A Right. Q Is there in fact a faculty council at your school? A Yes. What is the faculty council? A It is the entire faculty of the school. I mean as written in the constitution it is the full-time professors, the assistant—the associate dean, the dean, and the president [3137] of the university is technically a mem- ber also. Q And— A By the way, let me say, there is no associate dean at the moment. At the time it was written there was one. * * * * [3138] Q Now, in addition to the faculty council, do you also have a faculty committee at Belfer? A Yes. —Q And that committee is described, is it not, in the constitution? A Itis. Q It states there, Dean Iomar, that the faculty com- mittee shall consist of the president of the university, the dean of the school, and the faculty committeemen selected with due regard to representation of various departments as specified in current bylaws. A Right. Q Does the president of the university in fact par- ticipate in the faculty committee meetings? A He never has. Q Atnotime? A At no time has he ever. Q Otherwise, the representation is as stated in the constitution on page 2? A Yes. 402 Q Now, lets turn to page 5 of this document, par- ticularly Roman Numeral I, which states, and I won’t read it all by any means, that the faculty committee shall consist [3139] of, and then it describes under that the complement. A Right. Q Putting aside the president, who has not partici- pated at any time, are the members of the committee made up as specified on that page? Yes. Q They are designated as specified there? A Right. Q How frequently does the faculty committee meet? A There are two statutory meetings each academic year and they may meet on other occasions. So at a minimum of twice a year and could be three, four times a year, depending upon whether there is busi- ness for them. Q What has been the actual practice? A Two to three times a year. Q Does the faculty council meet? A Yes. | Q How frequently does that take place as a matter of actual practice? A About the same. Maybe slightly less, in other words, two times a year. Q Are there in addition to the faculty committee other faculty committees? A Yes, there are. Q Would you tell us about those? A Well, there is a library committee, there is a [3140] computer committee, I imagine there are other ad hoe committees. I think credentials committee, welfare committee. Q I did not hear that. A I think there’s a credentials committee, welfare committee, but I don’t recall the meeting in recent years, Since its function was to review the credentials of new appointments and we don’t have new appointments— MR. SHECTMAN: Did the witness refer to another commiteee after the credentials committee? 403 THE WITNESS: Yes. Welfare. Q Dean Komar, turning to the faculty council itself, what is the function of that faculty council? How does it fit into the goverance of your school? A Well, it is the principal governing body in the sense that the—that it constitutes all the faculty. Any subject of interest or relevance to the faculty can be faised there and discussed and voted upon. Q What kind of subjects have been discussed there in the last two years? A Everything from curriculum to welfare benefits, fringe benefit program has been discussed, occasional ap- pointments, policy or—In other words, sizes of depart- ments, formation of new departments or new [3141] programs or anything of that nature can be raised there. Sometimes the financial status of the school, the wage policy of the school, anything that is on the feculty members’ mind can be traced and is in order fe* dis- cussion. Q What other type of items that are taken up in the faculty committee? A Same. Exactly the same. It is just that the faculty committee is a more—sir—is a smaller body. It is more like an executive or presidium body because it is just un- wieldly to have literally everyone present all the time when you want to discuss things. The faculty committee also has additional functions as given in the bylaws such as if a department elects a department chairman, it has to be approved by the faculty committee. So that is a function of the faculty committee which the faculty council does not have. Q_ Let’s turn to the library committee, for a moment. Would you tell us what that committee does? A The library committee consists of several faculty members of the various departments. They determine the priority of ordering of books and journals. They make a recommendation to the librarian as to how much money they would need for books and journals, within the con- text of the budget given to the librarian then they would [3142] set the priorities of which should be ordered be- fore which. 404 Since it has generally happened, you cannot order every- thing that is generally desired. Q_ All right. A They also make recommendations with regard to the hours of the library or the staffing of the library, when it should be opened, how many days, and so forth. Q Are the recommendations of the library committee generally accepted? A On priorities they are always accepted. On hours it is subject to staffing problems which become a financial consideration. In other words, it is taken into consideration, but the amount of money involved becomes a relevant factor. Q Now, Dean Komar, let us turn to the appointment of new faculty members. A Right. That is covered, is it not, on page 6 of Employee’s Exhibit 113? A Yes. Q Now would you tell us, Dean Komar, how new faculty members are hired at your school? And I’d like you to start at the beginning and describe the process as it typically takes place. A Okay. [3143] Q We will assume that someone has left and there is a vacancy to be filled. A Due to the financial exigency of the past few years there had been a slight change in the policy but now we have reverted back to the old system. Now we have authority from the president that when someone leaves he may be replaced and so we don’t have . go to the president to request permission to fill the slot. In other words, when someone leaves then the de- partment—when they know someone is going to leave the department involved starts soliciting names of people who might—they might want to hire to replace him. They write to friends and call colleagues and so forth. When they compile preliminary list of names, they re- assemble in a departmental meeting and they go over the list of names and the credentials. oe eee ee 405 As they zoom in one one or two people they generally would invite them down to give a talk, a colloquy. Once these preliminaries are over, they would typically vote in the departmental meeting as to who to approach first or who to approach. And once that is decided upon, the department chair- man would come to me with the department’s recom- mendation that they want to make an offer to so and so, and I discuss with the chairman at what salary [3144] level to make the offer at, and it has—basically it is within a—a number of factors come to play there. What is he making elsewhere. What is the likely salary at which we could get him to come here and is it within the normal range of salaries within the university. Q These are questions that you ask the chairman? A Right. I would ask him typically what do you think he is earning there. What do you think we would have to offer him to get him to come here. And he would give me his recommendation of salary, and assuming that it is not something wild and out of the usual range of what we are paying professors cur- rently employed with us, if it is within that range, then the letter is written at that— Q You have no salary schedule, do you? A No. We don’t have a salary schedule. We have de facto range of salaries. Q The highest to the lowest? A Right. As long as the highs were in that range then no problem arises. If it has to lie outside of the lowest range, of course there would be no problem either. Outside of the highest range I suppose I would have to clear it with the president. Does the— [3145] A Although that has never happened. Q Does the chairman normally recommend a figure to you? ‘A Yes. Q Do you generally accept the figure recommended by the chairman? A Yes. 406 Q Po you conduct salary negotiations or discussions in a typical situation with the faculty member being hired? A I never have. Q Is it the chairman who conducts those negotiations? Yes. Q And brings the recommendation to you in the typical situation? A In a typical situation the chairman would make the contact and speak to the person; yes. Q The recommendation that he makes is generally accepted by you in the typical situation? A Yes. Q Now, Dean Kome2r, have you ever refused to make an appointment that was recommended to you by the chairman of the department? A No. MR. SHECTMAN: I object to the question. The prior testimony is the recommendations came from the [3146] departments, not from the department chairman. MR. KRAMER: The question was not bearing on the earlier testimony. I will rephrase the question. HEARING OFFICER: Thank you. Q (By Mr. Kramer) I take it you receive a recom- mendation from the departmental members and for that matter from the chairman with respect to an appoint- ment; is that right, sir? A Right. ’ Q_ And that is a typical case? A Yes. ~Q Have you, during your sojourn as dean, refused to make the appointment recommended? A No. Q At no time? A Atnotime. Q Now, Dean Komar, one function of the eppoint- ment is salary. Another is length of appointment? A Right. Q How is that determined, Dean Komar? A Again, the department discusses and decides what kind of appointment they want to make, whether they 407 want to make it for two year appointment or one year or three year or open-ended or—whatever the depart- partmental recommendation is, that is what usually hap- pens. The one qualification is if the departments [3147] wants to recommend tenure in the appointment that can only be granted by the president of the university. They can recommend it and they would have to for- ward it to the president for his consideration. Q Putting aside tenure recommendation for a moment, is it a fact then that in the typical situation it is the department, including its chairman, that would recom- mend the length of the appointment to you? A Always; always. Q Is it your testimony that that has been regularly accepted by you? A Yes. Q Without exception. Q Have you ever negotiated in a typical situation, have you negotiated with new faculty people as to the length of their appointments? A Never. Q Now, let’s turn to the tenure point that you raised. I gather that is not typical for a faculty member to be hired with tenure; is that correct? A Very rare. Q When is the last time that happened in your school? A If I look through the list—I can’t think offhand anytime. It may have. MR. SHECTMAN: Show him the exhibit. [8148] THE WITNESS: Offhand I can’t think of any case. No. There is nobody on this list, no. It has never happened. Q (By Mr. Kramer) Dean Komar, do you have the atuhority to make appointments on your own without— - A You mean to initiate appointments? Q To initiate appointments without consultation or recommendation without faculty committee or— A Definitely not. 408 Q Now, Dean Iomar, you have told us that several things are recommended by the department, the person to be hired, the salary—strike that. You told us that you receive recommendations con- cerning the person to be hired, the salary and the term of appointment; is that correct? A Right. Q Now, whose recommendation is it that you are re- ceiving with respect to who should be hired? A Im receiving the department’s recommendation to hire the particular faculty member. Q By the “department” you mean a consensus of the members of that department. Is that correct? A That’s correct. Q Now—Let’s focus on salary for a moment. With respect to the salary to be paid, whose recommendation are you receiving? Is it the recommendation of the [3149] department consensus or is it the recommenda- tion of its chairman? A Itis the chairman’s recommendation. Q It is the recommendation that you generally ac- cept? A Right. Q Now, let us turn to the question of length of ap- pointment. And I would like you to tell me, you get a recommendation on that, too, that’s part of this package so to speak, is it not? A Right. Q Is that the recommendation of the department by consensus or is that the recommendatio:. of the chairman individually? A That fluctuates. Q Would you tell us about that? A I would say generally the department discusses how long the appointment should be for. On certain oc- casions it may happen that the department simply has not discussed it or did not consider it and the chairman may have his opinions and make the recommendation directly. I can’t think of specific cases. I would say more often than not the department does discuss that. Tall Pte eee 409 Q By “department” you mean by consensus? A By consensus, yes, I would say that is the general [3150] rule. Q Now, you belong to the Physics Department, don’t you? A Yes. Q Do you participate in meetings of the Physica De- partment as a member of that department? A ‘Jes. Q Do you participate as a member of the Physica Department in the hiring process? A Yes. Q Do you participate as a dean or as any other pro- fessor would? A Just as any other member of the department. Q Now, Dean Komar, do you have the authority to disapprove the recommendation of a new appointment? A I don’t really know. It’s never—since it has never happened, and it does not—in the constitution it makes no statement about it. What I could say is how I view my authority. That’s about the best— Q Why don’t you tell us about that? A I view my position as sort of first. among equals. In other words, I could put in—excuse me—I can cause a lot of friction, namely, if the recommendation is—if a recommendation were made which I strongly disagreed with, I could get, say, the ear of the president of the university [8151] to put in my point of view. However, the department chairman or members of the department can and on occasions have gone directly to the president to get their point of view heard and then the president has to weigh one man against the department or one man against a senior member of the department. And then it is the president’s decision. But whether I have the authority to say no, I don’t think I do. And I know of occasions not specifically with regard to appointments but where individual faculty members simply went di- rectly to the president and they have the authority to do that any time they want. \ 410 In other words, I don’t have any constitutional au- thority to oppose an appointment. I can just recommend against it. [3152] Q (By Mr. Kramer) Would you tell us, Dean Komar, how—strike that. Would you tell us how the chairmen are selected? A It is stated in the bylaws. They are elected by the faculty with respect to faculty members for three year interval and have to be approved by the faculty com- mittee. Q Idid not hear that last— A And have to be approved by the faculty committee. Q Is the actual appointment made by the president? A According to the bylaws it says the chairmen of the departments are appointed by the president on recom- mendation by the department, recommendation by the faculty committee and approval of the dean. In practice, I don’t know whether any of them have ever received a letter of appointment from the president. Q_ In practice— A In practice they are elected by the faculty mem- bers, chairman, unless the faculty committee chooses to [3153] reject such a recommendation. @ Now, approximately how many chairmen have been selected during your time as dean? A Well, every three years, and four departments and so in the six-year period on the average twice, it would have come up twice in each department, offhand. So eight plus or minus one or two. Q Out of these approximately eight appointments have oo approved all of them? 0. Q Would you tell us about that, please? A One—At one time the Chemistry Department elected one person to be department chairman, and I was opposed to it. I took—So when the case came before the faculty committee for approval, which it has to in any event, I brought my position why I was against this to the faculty committee, and they sustained me on this, in other words, they refused to approve this particular i tl ca a aca mal a 411 election, and it was sent back to the—in this case it was the Chemistry Department. Q As dean of the school, Doctor Komar, do you view the choice of the department chairmen in each of the de- partments as a significant thing? A Oh, yes. Q Why is that so? A They have to represent their members in other [3154] university bodies. In other words, both within the school and outside the school. And who they chose as their representative, it creates an image for the school and for the department. Q Now, you opposed a particular choice in the Chem- istry Department? A Right. Q What were the kind of reasons that motivated you to do that? A Very simple. I thought tempermentally he would not have—he was a very excitable person, and would frequently become hysterical and have tanreuma and I thought that that would not be a proper image to project outside of the school or the department, for that matter. Q That would not have been useful in the negotia- tion with the state, would it have? A With the state or with the rest of the university, for that matter. Q Would it be fair to state that the chairmen take part on—in the management of the school? A That is so. Q And inthe management of the university in broader perspective? A Toa lesser extent. Yes. [3155] A Yes. Q Let’s turn to the curriculum. Dean Komar, who decides what the schools curriculum is going to be? A The faculty. Q I assume the curriculum is what you are offering to your graduate students apart from research; is that right? A Right. 412 Q That is the merchandise the school has to display? A Exactly. Q And would you tell us how curriculum is set in your school? A It is set individually within each department. The faculty of the department decides what courses: to offer and what curriculum, whether to revise the curriculum and who should teach each course and which semesters it should be given or given—whether to be given at all, whether it should be revised. All of that is discussed within the departmental meet- ings, and settled there upon consensus. Q Do you get yourself involved out— A Only in the Physics Department, only my own de- partment. I never show up at a faculty meeting [3156] except at—at each departmental meeting. I have never attended any meeting, except that of the Physics De- partment, of which I am a faculty member. Q Do you tell the Chemistry Department people what to offer or what not to offer? A Never. Q Do you tell the mathematics people what to offer or not to offer? A No. Q That is a faculty decision, I take it? A Right; their prerogative. Q Does both the quality of the courses and the num- ber and type of course have an affect on people coming to your school? [3157] A I would hope so. Q On the number of people coming to your school? A I would hope so. * * * a Q (By Mr. Kramer) And on the quality of people coming to your school? A Yes. Q Now, is the level of tuition paid by students taking courses in math and science education departments rele- vant and important to you? A The actual tuition they pay? 7 & & 413 A Yes. Q Does the tuition level have an effect on the num- ber of students who would participate in such courses? A Very definitely. Q Now— A There’s strong competition in the city for such— Q Why is there such strong competition, Dean Komar? A This is basically an in-service training type of program for high school teachers. As they get a certain number [3158] of credits, their salaries go up; and, if they get a master’s, they get a corresponding increment in salaries. As such, they have an economic interest in obtaining these credits. Therefore, there are quite a few schools in the New York City area who run such programs. We are one of them. NYU runs one. I think Fordham runs one. City University, and so forth. So, it’s quite a competitive enterprise. Q Now, turning to last academic year, that. time frame, Dr. Komar, was the subject of a tuition increase for students in that department dealt with in your school? A Yes. Q Would you give us all the facts and surrounding circumstances, please? A In general, due to the inflation, it was proposed t’ the tuition be increased in the various schools tl..cughout the university. Q Who made that proposal, Dean Komar? A I don’t really know. It was again—much of this is done by consensus. There is someone directly in charge of questions of tuition. I don’t recall his name. MR. SHECTMAN: Is the witness now referring to persons at the Belfer School or— THE WITNESS: No. Just, again, in the university [3159] administration there are people concerned with tuition and students and so forth. And there was a recommendation made that the tuition at the various col- leges of the university be increased by a certain amount next year and then by a certain amount the year after, and so forth. 414 Q Now, was that recommendation put in effect at your school for the math— A For this department, no. The department chairman objected, pointing out the competitive nature of the program, and the chairman felt that, should the tuition rise in this program, they would lose a substantial fraction of their students. And therefore, for this particular department, there was no increase in tuition. . Q Did the chairman make a recommendation to you? A Yes. Q What did he say to you? A Well, it’s a woman. She said— Q She. A Yes. She simply pointed out what I just said: that, if we raised the tuition, it would—it may undermine the stu- dent—the number of students that would come. And so I forwarded this statement of hers—well, [3160] among others, I forwarded to vice president, and so forth, who is the vice president of business affairs. I don’t recall whether I did it directly to him or whether I a it first to the other person whose name I can’t re- call. Q Was this recommendation of the chairman accepted and the tuition rise cancelled? A Yes. Let’s turn to salary treatment, Dean Komar, for the 1973-74 school year and the 1972-73 school year. What role, if any, did the department chairman play in determining the salary increases to be received by the various members of their departments? A At the time when I have to start considering the budget for the following year, the department chairmen come to me with their recommendations for salaries. And they come to me on a piece of paper; it could be scratch paper or—just listing all the faculty members’ names and their recommendations for what the salary should be for the following year. Q Now, you say it comes to you on a piece of scratch paper. 415 A Well, they come to see me, and they may write it on the back of an envelope or piece of paper, whatever is available. Q And they make a recommendation as to the salary in- [3161] crease for each of the members of their de- partment? A For each of the members of their department, right. Q Is that their recommendation? A Yes. Q Is there any question in your mind that this is not the product of a vote or consensus? A No. This is their own recommendation. Q Now, we’re focusing on ’72-73 and ’73-74. Were those recommendations generally accepted? A No. Q_ All right. Would you explain? A The actual dollar amount couldn’t be accepted be- cause there is—there was a budgetary freeze; the over- all budget of the school had to be kept within bounds, and all increases in salaries had to be absorbed by making cuts in other areas of the school. So the actual dollar amount could not be fully accepted. However— Q Which year was this? A Both years. Q Go ahead. A But the ordering and the orders of magnitude were accepted. In other words, the priority sequence of the faculty members and the rough order of magnitude of the recom- mendations were accepted. [3162] What I mean by that, they may have been shaved $100 or $300 off or even $500 from what was recommended, but the sequence of who gets the most and who gets the next most and so forth, that sequence was left intact. Q Now, did the determination of the priority of who would get the most, the largest increase, and who would get the next largest increase, and so on down the line, 416 was that a function of independent judgment on the part of the chairmen? A Yes. Q That required him to appraise the function of the members of his department? A Yes. Q Now, in your discussions with the chairmen, did you discuss his view of how the members of his depart- ment were functioning? A Yes. Q Just so that I’m clear, Dean Komar, in each in- stance the chairmen provided a list of names of the members of their department; is that correct—of his department; is that correct? A Right. Q_ All right. A Each instance is a very precise statement. Perhaps there were—on occasion they may have [3163] been done verbally; in other words, it may not have al- ways been a written list. But they would come—they would discuss each name individually, and generally write it down on paper. On occasion they may say remember this, remember that, remember the other thing; in other words, without writ- ing it down. They expect me to remember it while they’re talking. Q And he would recommend an increase, or she, for each member of the department? A Yes. Yes. Q An increase of a particular amount? A Right. Q And these increases would have a relationship one to the other within the department? A Yes. Q And it is a fact, as you have testified, that, while on—you may not have been able to grant all of the money proposed because of budgetary considerations, you may have granted less, but you nevertheless kept the priority order and relationship; is that correct? A Yes. ne nn ee 417 [3165] Q (By Mr. Kramer) Now, Dean Komar, after you received the recommendations that you’ve just described—strike that. In the last instance, Dean Komar, are the increases given in a particular year subject to approval by the vice president for financiai affairs? A In what we were just speaking about, you mean? Q Yes. A Yes, subject to the approval of the vice president for business affairs. Q Once the increases have been adjusted in the fash- ion that you’ve described, is that approval routine or not routine, once there has been a reduction as you have described it? A Yes. As I recall, I was never questioned—I mean, _ it was routinely done. Q To your knowledge, any time you were dean, has the vice president of financial affairs—for that matter, anyone at central administration-—interfered with the priority of the department chairmen’s rating, the rank- ing, so to speak, of this annual review that you’ve talked about? [3166] A Individual faculty members at times have gone to the president directly over my head and his head and have gotten adjustments— Q Apart from that? A Apart from that, no. Q Is that a frequent occurrence? A No, it’s not a frequent occurrence, but it does happen. Q On occasion? A Yes. Q Now, you told us there was a salary freeze at the university. I think you’ve made some reference to that. A Yes, about three years ago, was it, or about four years ago. Q You told us about 1972-73 and ’73-74. Prior to 1972-73 were the salaries of the Belfer fac- ulty frozen? A Yes. 418 , ., Do you recall for how many years that was in ef- ect? A Two. . Q Now, in 1974-75 has Belfer received a salary in- crease? A Yes. Q And what type of increase was that? A It was uniform across the board. There was no input at ali from the faculty members, chairmen, or myself. It [3167] was just a universal— Q That was the first tine, was it not, that such an increase was implemented? A Right. Q Was there a reason for this across-the-board in- crease treatment, as opposed to the—I use the word merit” treatment previously afforded? A Yes. Q Would you tell us? A Yes. It was due to these hearings. On advice of counsel, it was deemed that, if anyone were discriminated against, either by getting more than someone e'se or less than someone else, the union rep- resentative might claim that it was an unfair labor practice. Q That’s your understanding— A That was my understanding of the reason why this was done. 3 _ did not, however, discuss that with me? 0. Q So that, when you’re referring to counsel— A This is the understanding that I was given. It was not given by a lawyer. NY All right. oe let’s turn to the nonrenewal of faculty appoint- [3168] Who makes the decision not to renew a f appointment? How is that decided? er A The department. The department. Q How do they—How does the department in a typical case go about deciding that? - ee ee eae 419 A Well, obviously that would be a member who doesn’t already have tenure, so he—when his term of appointment is coming up for reconsideration, the de- partment assembles, without his presence, and he is dis- cussed as to whether one wants to renew the appoint- ment or have him leave and have him be replaced by someone else, or whether we would want him as a ten- ured member or not. I mean, that’s all discussed within the department. And then the department decides what recommenda- tion to make; basically on a consensus basis. To my knowledge, there has never been a vote on this subject. Q Dr. Komar, do you have the right, your view of your rights, to require the retention of a faculty mem- ber whom the department choses not to renew? A Definitely not. Q Now, let’s turn to tenure. What is the procedure utilized in your school for the determination whether a faculty member is to be recommended for tenure? [3169] A It’s quite similar to just reappointment. The department again meets to decide whether they want that particular faculty member to be granted tenure. Should they so agree, they pass that recommendation on to me, and I then forward that recommendation either directly to the president or to the vice president Fish- man, who then forwards it to the president. In the end, tenure can only be granted by the president of the uni- versity, though. Q Dr. Komar, have you ever disapproved a faculty recommendation for tenure? A No. Q Have you ever disapproved a recommendation against tenure? A That—no. Q In your view of your authority, Dean Komar, do you have the authority to disapprove such a recommen- dation? A No. 420 [3170] Q Now, how are standards for admissions set at your [3171] school? A By the department—respective departments. They review applicants, their credentials, their letters of rec- ommendation, their transcripts, and then the students are discussed at a departmental meeting. MR. SHECTMAN: At a what meeting? THE WITNESS: At a departmental meeting. Q Now, do the departments determine—strike that. What role, if any, do the departments have in deter- mining whether financial aid, apart from tuition remis- sion, will be granted to entering students or students who have matriculated and are proceeding to a degree? A There are two kinds of funds above tuition remis- sion, above subsistence remission to the student, two sources of funds. ’ One is a grant given to individual faculty member or, in some rare cases, to a department or, in fact, to the school when there were trainingship grounds some years ago available from the government. Each department, or the chairmen certainly of each department, and the department as a whole knew how much money was available from these various sources. I repeat, the government, perhaps private foundations and the university. ; Within the context of the money available, the de- [3172] partment would meet and decide which students should be granted money, and how the part should be divided up among them. Q What other sources are available? A Well, each department had a different—had its different policies, which are their own. In the physics department, for example, the general poe pe oo when there is money available from re- search grants, it is pooled and is- tributed in that fashion. hoardings With a certain few exceptions. Some professors take issue with that and insist that the money available on their grant can only be used for students of their choice who are working on their grounds. ——— 421 In the chemistry department, that exceptional case turns out to be the rule. The chemists refuse to pool their money and insist that only students which meet with their approval and are working on their grants can be paid out of their budgets. Q These are predoctoral students? A Yes. Q When they work on a grant, they’re called research assistants; is that correct? : A That’s correct. They are not called research associates, however? [3173] A No. Q Does the availability of research assistantships have an effect on the number of students and the quality of students you are able to attract? A Very much so. Q Now, Dean Komar, would you tell us what process you employ in determining or having determined, as the case may be, the budget for your school? A Well, basically I look at the previous year’s budget, and there are certain increments which I have no con- trol over: namely, increments that—for secretarial staff and technicians which are predetermined through other agreements outside of the school with the university, and I have to simply absorb those increments. Then there are the faculty increments, which I’ve already discussed how that takes places. And, finally, there are supplies and—where I just try to get some input from the various people in the school, individual faculty members, department chairmen, lab management, in what ballpark of figures they would need for supplies, and whether there are any other expenses one should—one will have to anticipate, such as purchase of new equipment or servicing of old equipment, and put in an estimate of what that might come to in the next year. And all of this—when all of these recommendations [3174] are assembled, they’re all put into a preliminary budget and totalled. The total typically exceeds the previous year’s bud- get, and I am under instructions not to exceed the pre- 422 vious year’s budget. And so then I have to find out what can be cut out to come down to the previous year’s budget. : And there again it’s subject to discussions and nego- tiations, up and back, whether a secretary can be dropped or moved over to a grant, or whether a technician is really necessary who is being paid for from university funds, or whether he is working for a grant and can be charged for grant funds. It goes up and down, until finally I come back with somewhat reduced budget, which then exceeds the previ- ous year’s budget, and then I throw up my hands and present it to the vice president. Q What role do the—What role, if any, do the de- partment chairmen play in this budgeting process? A Very essential one. They’re the ones who make the estimates of what they will need in the nature of sup- plies and services, equipment, and what have you. They’re the ones that present me the estimates of what will be required. I have no way of knowing what they will need. Q Do they get that on some kind of vote or con- sensus—. A It’s a consensus. They talk to their faculty mem- bers. [8175] They know what’s doing in their acauh ment. They know what was spent last year in those cate- gories. And, as a result, they reach some sort of consensual estimate. Q Dean Komar, who decides whether students are performing adequately in your school? A The department. The faculty members in the de- partment. Q Who sets the standards for adequacy? A The faculty members of the department. Q And do the faculty members have it within their province to flunk students out of your school? A Yes. Q In the math and science education department does the chairman teach one less course than the regular load? A Yes. MR. SHECTMAN: That’s one department? ote ——_/! 423 MR. KRAMER: Math and science education depart- ment, which is one department. Q Is that to offset the administrative functions of the chairman? A Yes. Q Now, the other chairman, chemistry, math and physics, teach how many courses on an average? A An average they teach the same as the other mem- bers [3176] of the department. Q Which would be again? A Two courses a semester. Q Can it sometimes be even less than that? A It can be less. However, other faculty members sometimes also teach less. Q I understand that. And they receive no other stipend or further re- duction in course load as a result of their being chair- men? A That’s right. * * & [3179] Q Do the department chairmen play a larger role in the selection of part-time faculty members than they do in the selection of full-time faculty members? A If by a larger role do you mean am I less in- volved, the answer would be yes. But, I mean, they would do it again in censensus with their department. I mean, they would not do it without taking—getting the agreement of their department. Q You are even less involved in the part-time hiring than you are in the full-time hiring? A Right, if it’s possible to be less involved. Q Dean Komar, in addition to your administrative chores as dean, do you get involved in research? A Yes. Q@ You have an academic function in the research area? A Yes. Q And you also teach? A Right. 424 [3183] Q Now, you have an assistant dean, do you Yes. Q What’s his name? A Charles Patt. Q Is he a member of the faculty? A Yes. Q What is his rank? : A He’s an assistant professor in the mathematics department. Q How many courses a term or a year, as the case may be, does he teach? A One course each semester generally. I’m trying to recall whether he’s not teaching two courses this semester. I vaguely remember, but I’m not [3184] positive. He generally teaches one course per semester : sq does he presently have a research grant? 0. Q Has he had a research grant in the last three years, to the best of your recollection? A He’s never had a research grant. Q Never at any time to your recollection? A He does no research. Q So that I am correct—Am I correct that Professor Patt teaches only one course each term? Right. = four courses each term? 0. Now, if you can recall—And he does no research? Right. Can you recall Professor Patt’s salary? It’s in the low twenties, over $20,000 a year. Would you doublecheck that figure for me for the Bae hearing, please? Make a note of that. assume we’re going to finish t : A wey g oday and we’ll be HEARING OFFICER: We might. 3 I think it’s 23,000. Would you just check it just so th ici ten j o the record has a {3185] A Okay. OPOPO POP 425 Q Would you tell us as best you can, Dean Komar— strike that. Does Professor Patt have tenure? A Yes. Q He’s eligible for Blue Cross-Blue Shield major med- ical? A Yes. Q And life insurance? A Right. Q He teaches only one course each term? A Right. Q And does no research? A Right. Q What else does he do, Dr. Komar? Would you go sowly and try to get all the various duties? A He’s assistant dean, and as such he has respon- sibility for innumerable things. He is in charge of grant ‘accounting, preparation of grant proposals, charging and billing to grants, expenditures. He’s in charge of keeping track that the correct re- ports are made concerning hours taught, faculty work- loads. He’s in charge of seeing that curriculum require- ments on the part of students are fulfilled. [3186] He provides liaison with the registrar’s office and with the student admissions office concerning new applicants to—applicants for degrees, that they have fulfilled the appropriate credit hours and requirements, language requirements. Let me see. He’s in charge of measuring the various schedules of classes and assignments of rooms and hours to see that there are no conflicts in assignments of courses and hours and credits, what have you. He would have to—he frequently has to negotiate with the individual faculty members to see to it that the uni- versity’s interests are protected in writing budgets for grant proposals, that the appropriate categories are placed in the budgets, such as appropriate amount for secretarial services, for overhead, for supplies. He sees to it that they don’t overspend in these cate- gories or that, if they want to make a transfer from 426 one category to another, it’s permissible if the faculty member claims it’s permissible and there’s a disagree- ment. He frequently has to call Washington and check the agency and obtain written approval to find out whether it is permissible: or not. I mean, all questions of this sort are done by Patt. * * * * (3187] Q (By Mr. Kramer) Now, you’ve told us, Dean Komar, that Professor Patt—Mr. Patt is involved in grant accounting? A Right. Q Tell us what that entails. I’m not presupposing here a great detailed knowledge of the procedures, but I’d like you to tell the reader of the record something more than what you’ve just said to give him a feel, and us a feel, of what’s involved in that. A Principal investigator has a grant with a budget. The budget is—has to be approved by the agency, the federal agency giving the grant. : Once the budget is approved by the federal agency, then the principal investigator proceeds to make charges against that budget for supplies, for bringing in col- leagues, assistants, associates, consultants. They take trips, they [3188] charge it to their account, and so forth. Then there are categories in the budget which they use but which the university bills them; for example, secretarial services or overhead or supplies—computer time or use of the xerox machine, all this is billed against categories in the grant. Now, Dr. Patt has to keep track of these charges to see that none of the categories are overspent. Q In other words, the money is the university’s money; is that correct? A The money is given to the university by the fed- “a ai" nd it is represented by a grant; is t ight? yeh yag hat right Q It’s Patt’s function, in the first instance, to make sure that the faculty members in your school do not overspend their grants? A Right. oo 6 eT Sr Se hoe otal a a 427 Do not—for personnel? For personnel. Or for overhead? Right. Or for equipment? Right. That’s his function, one of his functions? [3189] A Yes. Let me give an example how they could overspend on overhead. It sounds rather odd. Q I prefer at this point to go on. A It’s a source of conflict between Patt and faculty members. Q You know, witnesses of this intellectual quality, counsel will bend. Go ahead, Dean Komar. I don’t have very many experts in general relativity testifying. A Personally I’m not lecturing on general relativity at the time. A frequent source of conflict between Patt and the prin- cipal investigator is when the principal investigator at- tempts to transfer funds from a supply item to a salary item. The reason why is that overhead is computed only on salaries, not on supplies. So, if he takes $1,000 out of supplies and puts it into salaries, he would like to spend $1,000 on salaries of hiring personnel. But he cannot, because as soon as it’s put into the salary column, 50 percent of that has to go as over- head to the university. So, if he wishes to, for example, spend $1,000 on salary, he would have to transfer $1,500 out of supplies. And that’s a frequent source of friction. [3190] Q And under these circumstances, you say it’s a source of friction. Does Patt—Patt has, I would assume, authority in the first instance in this situation; is that correct? A Yes. To simply refuse—I mean to simply insist that, if he wants to spend $1,000 on salaries, he has to transfer $1,500 from supplies, yes. Q Now, you’ve told us that Patt has a role in grant preparation and the charging and billing to accounts. A Right. OPO PO PO 428 Q Without duplicating your prior testimony, would you tell us what this is all about? A When a grant proposal is prepared, the principal investigator prepares the scientific part of the proposal in its entirety. The budget he will give to Dr. Patt, his estimates of what it is he wants to include in the bud- get and how much he proposes to request in funds. Patt then has to prepare it in the proper format to see that the other cost factors of the university are in- cluded within the budget, such as the overhead, such as secretarial services, such as fringe benefits. All of that the principal investigator generally forgets about when preparing a budget. Q Is there—I know the reader—the reader of the record of course can’t get the inflection in the voice. [3191] When you say he generally forgets about it, and smile, which you’ve just done, what do you mean by that? I gather there’s a secondary meaning within what you’re saying. A Yes. Very frequently he chooses to forget about it be- cause he feels that the granting agency has a limited amount of funds to give him, and he wants the funds spent exclusively on the research part of the proposal and is reluctant to have a large portion of that fund spent on the mandated items. Q Are faculty members generally required to put in the grant application to include the university’s share of expenses? A They’re requested to. Q And do they do so in most instances? A Fifty-fifty. I mean, they—it depends on the—it depends on the faculty member. Sometimes they do; sometimes they refuse. Q And I assume it is Patt’s role to make sure that the grants go in properly? A Yes. Q Regardless of whether the faculty member has put it in or not? A Well, he—it’s his role to do that, yes, to insist [3192] on that. a 429 Q Is that a scurce of friction between Patt and the faculty members as well? A Yes, very frequently. Q Now, you’ve told us that Dr. Patt corrects re- ports—I’m not using your exact words but, as close as my notes will show, corrects reports about the hours taught by the faculty and faculty workloads. A Yes. Q Would you tell us what is involved in that, Dr. Komar? A Well, there are two parts involved. One is that the university requires information as to who is teach- ing which courses for which hours, what semester; that the university requires. Patt has the duties to assemble this and provide it to the university. However, there is a new feature—new, that is— required by the government for people working on grants. The government, basically the NIH, who does the prin- cipal monitoring for Yeshiva University, their aduitors require that the—that each principal investigator cer- tify the hours that he put in on his grant each month, and the hours that are put in by any person employed on his grant each day. And he—and the principal in- vestigator has to certify this for the federal agencies. [3193] And Patt has to check on—to assemble this, col- late it, to check that it’s really being done properly, and forward it on to the business office. Q Do you check that it’s really being done? A No. Q Does the president of the institution check that it’s really being done? A No. Does the vice president of financial affairs check that it’s really being done? A No. Q It’s Patt that checks that it’s really being done; that’s a fact, is it not? A He is the—he is the first line of—in the administra- tive tier that checks what is being done. 430 9 oly up to him— e extent to which he does it I’ i wie, s it I’m not going to Q He has the responsibility +s see— A He has the responsibility. Q And the authority to do it? A To check? Oh, yes. Q Now, is it a fact that Professor Patt gives faculty their room assignments? A Yes. 3194] Q And that he also gives them their course assignments as to when the course will be taught? A That less so, That—it’s generally the faculty mem- ber expresses a preference, and he then will mediate aT ae if there are conflicts. ow, I want to stick with the i for amoment. That he does? she i ig 7) ae that he does. _ Now, with respect to times he seek i conflicts between faculty members? 2a eciasta A Right. If there are conflicts in schedules i » yes. 2 ay Dean Komar, you’ve told us that you teach? Q_ And you do research? A Yes. Q 7 you’re also an active dean of the school? Q Were Mr. Patt not available—or, P , Profes not available to do the administrative chores that are oe — would they fall to you to do? ey would be my re ibili i hin in ta y responsibility to see to it that Q When—how often a Pe SE sasoa re you away from the school, A You mean all totalled in a vear , [3195] not quite sure how you mis it. ap ence si Q oa it to me both ways. ell, most weeks I am generally there four days, but I can be away for blocks of time like evi weeks or in fact a month or two at a time. 431 Q Several weeks or a month or two while the school is functioning? A Well, the month or two would be more often in the summer. But the school functions in the summer. The teaching doesn’t go on, but the school is open, and there’s research going on and laboratories. There’s just no classes given in the summer. The libraries are open in the summer. When you’re away from the school, would it be fair to say that Mr. Patt is in charge? A Yes, definitely, yes. Q_ Dr. Komar, you know Professor Musher? A Yes. Q Is Professor Musher currently in the employ of the university? A No. He died. Q When did he pass away? A Last October, I think it was. Q When you say last October— A ‘Previous October. [3196] Q October 1974? A Right. I think it was in October. Q In other words, long after the start of the initial proceedings in this matter. A Yes. MR. KRAMER: By “initial proceedings,” I mean what we call the first case, which is represented by Board Exhibit 2 and the many exhibits appended thereto. HEARING OFFICER: Yes, I understand. Q And who replaced Professor Musher? A Professor Beck. Q@ When did Professor Beck first come to work in your school? A I think summer of 1974. Summer or fall, that I’m not positive. Q But it was prior to the death of Professor Musher? A Yes. Q Did Professor Beck work on Professor Musher’s research grant? A Yes. Q That’s a fact, I take it? A Yes. 432 Q Now, he didn’t come to the university, did he, until the summer of ’74? A Right. [3197] Q Now, do you know a Professor Malliavan? I’m going— A Malliavan. Q Malliavan, M-a-double l-i-a-v-a-n? A Yes. Q Does he teach as your school? A I don’t recall whether he gives a course or a semi- nar. But I guess you would say he teaches. It may not be a course listed in the catalogue; it may just be an advanced seminar. Q_ In other words, you have some courses that aren’t listed in the catalogue? A Oh, yes. Q_ And he teaches at your school. Does he also during the course of an academic year teach at some other school? A Yes. Q Would you tell us about that, please? A He’s very prominent member of the faculty of the Sorbonne in Paris. Q Would you explain how this prominent faculty member at the Sorbonne comes to teach at your school and also at the Sorbonne during one year—each year? A Well, for one semester each year for the past two or three years, I guess, Professor Ehrenpreis of the mathe- [8198] matics department has a grant and invites him to come, essentially hires him to come here. One doesn’t call it hiring at this level; it’s called inviting. Q Now, Dean Komar, is Professor Malliavan a mem- ber of the faculty of the Belfer School, or is he a full- time faculty member or part-time faculty member? A He’s a visting faculty member, I guess you would call it, full-time when he’s here. He’s visiting full-time. Q One semester a year? A Right. Right. Q And is he on the payroll of the university? A Yes. PT PR Sn 433 Q And he draws the money—the money to pay him is drawn from Professor Ehrenpreis’ grant; is that right? A Right. 7 Q And is Professor Ehrenpreis he who invites him to come? A Yes. Q Who chooses him to come? A Yes. Q Selects him to come? A That’s — ee With this—strike that. eit Now, I show you Employer’s Exhibit 62, which is ap- pended to Employer’s—Board Exhibit 2, which is in evi- d C." . . . . [3199] Did you prepare this exhibit (handing to wit- ness) ? A It was prepared at my request, yes. Q But did you prepare it? A Personally, no. + Q So that you did not prepare this exhibit? A No. MR. KRAMER: I will stipulate with counsel that this exhibit was introduced on June 27, 1974. MR.SHECTMAN: So stipulated. [3200] Q This exhibit does not detail any fact that took place after June 27, 1974. A Right. Q In fact, Dean Komar, have additional grants been granted to members of your faculty since June 27, 1974? A Yes. And have some grants been completed since June 27, 1974? A Yes. Q By the way, you don’t handle the grant accounting, do you? ere. A Nor the completion dates, termination dates, or any of that. That’s handled by Dr. Patt. —_ Q You are generally aware of the grant situation in— A Yes. 434 Q_ In fact, you sign—normally sign each of the grants? A Yes. Q Before they’re sent in to the government for processing? A Yes. Q_ By that, I mean the grant application. A The application I sign, not when they’re granted by the government, just the application. Q I see Professor Musher is listed on the first page of this exhibit, Musher, J. [8201] A _ Right. ; wt That is the professor who passed away since June A That’s right. Q And Professor Beck, who you referred to in your testimony, is not listed; is that correct? A That’s right. Q That would be because he came afterwards? A That’s right. MR. SHECTMAN: Is counsel implying that Profes- sor Beck is a member of the Belfer full-time faculty and is a principal investigator to which this exhibit is di- rected? MR. KRAMER: Professor Beck is whatever the wit- ness testified he was. I believe the witness testified that he’s a full-time member of the faculty. THE WITNESS: That’s right. MR. KRAMER: And he’s taken Musher’s place on that grant. And he has— MR. SHECTMAN: I don’t think this witness has testified to that. THE WITNESS: No, I haven’t. MR. KRAMER: All right. Strike that. He’s testified that Professor Beck was working on that grant during the summer; that it’s not reflected on this exhibit because the exhibit came in June 27. THE WITNESS: Right. [8202] Q (By Mr. Kramer) Who has replaced Pro- fessor Musher on his grant, if anyone? A Professor Beck. ee 435 Q That grant, I take it, is one of those grants con- tinuing; is that so? A It is continuing. Now, I see Professor Malliavan’s name on page 2 of this exhibit. Is that the Professor Malliavan that you’ve just dis- cussed? A Yes. Q By the way, is he the only visiting professor who is listed on this exhibit? . We’re only referring now to your school. There are two schools covered by that exhibit. A The only visiting professor listed on this exhibit, yes—no. I see Bergman is listed. And—well, he’s part- time. Q He’s part-time. A You mean visiting? Q. Exactly. A Oh, visiting. I guess it’s only—I only see Mulliavan’s name listed in that category. And Mulliavan was listed under the heading involv- ing [3203] other full-time faculty under grant? A Right. Q If Professor Mulliavan is not ultimately considered a full-time faculty member, he would not belong in that column; is that correct? A That’s correct. Q He would belong in a column visiting faculty? A Visiting faculty. Q Or visiting full-time faculty, as the case may be? A Right. Q Now, although this exhibit—lI’m not asking you now to update the exhibit, but, although this exhibit clearly states one visiting faculty member who partici- pated in grants or under grants or worked under grants during 1972-73 and ’73-74, in fact were there other visiting professors who worked under grants during 1972- 73 and ’73-’74? A Yes. Q Now, could you give us an idea of how many such visiting professors were employed on the grants? And we’re asking only for an approximation. 436 About a dozen. For 1973-74? Yes. How about 1972-73? About the same. [8204] Q Now, for 1978-74, could you give us some idea of the amount of time—I don’t mean now research hours, but how long these visiting professors stayed at your school to do work under these research grants? A Some would come for several weeks; some for a month or two; some for a few days. It varied all sorts of possibilities. Some for a whole semester. Q You told us that Professor Mulliavan came for a whole semester. A Right. Q Are there any others you can recall by name who came for a whole semester the last academic year? If you can. A I can’t recall, no. I can think of some who came for extended periods, but I just don’t recall how long the extended periods were. Q Can you tell us who came for extended periods? A Oliver Penrose—what’s his name?—Oscar Lan- ford, L-a-n-f-o-r-d, Elliot Leel, L-e-e-l. There were others. I can picture their faces. It takes a while to recall their names. There were quite a few others. I can’t recall the names at the moment. Q You told us about Professor Mulliavan. He taught last year too, did he not, for a semester? A Yes. Q Who established his salary? [8205] A Professor Ehrenpreis. Q You didn’t negotiate the— A_ I don’t even recall what it is. Q Now, who selected the visiting professors that worked at your school during 1973-74, the people you’ve named, the dozen or so you’ve named? A The principal investigator. Q In each instance? A In each instance. PO POP as — 437 Did he also establish the salary? Yes, For each of the vising professors? Yes. Did these visiting professors engage in research? Yes. Do they teach some classes? Some did; some didn’t. Did they engage in colloquia? Some did; some didn’t. Who decided what they would do? The principal investigator. In each instance? In each instance. You didn’t decide, did you? No. 6] Q Professor Patt didn’t decide, did he? No. The president of the university didn’t decide? No. Just the principal investigator? Right. In each instance? In each instance. Was that also so in 1972-73? Yes. Does that situation exist today, Professor Komar? Yes. You have visiting professors at this school for 1974-75? A Right. Q On the same basis that you had them for ’73-’74? A Yes. Q These visiting professors that were’re talking about, when they visit, in essence, act like full-time employees, I would take it? A Yes. om Q To that extent they’re different than the visiting part-time professors that have been talked about in this proceeding? PO pO [3 OPOPO PO PO POPPY PO PO PO PO PO PO 438 A They’re different. I wouldn’t say that they’re more [3207] or less similar to the full-time. I mean, they’re just different. They are different in the sense if they teach a course or if they give a seminar or whatever they do is not determined by the department by consensus but by the principal investigator exclusively. In that sense, they’re quite different from the others. Q Now, when these visiting professors are at the university—I’m talking about the ones at Belfer— A Right. Q -—the ones that you’ve just testified about, are they employees of the university? A Yes. Q They draw a paycheck from the university? A Some are paid by a paycheck; some are paid by a check, a university check, but it’s out of funds—it’s not out of salary funds, but, say, out of consulting— Q They get a university paycheck? A Yes. | Q Regardless of the source of the funds. A Right. Q And there is withholding taken from that pay- check? A For the Americans, yes; not for the foreigners. Q For the Americans? A Yes. [3208] Q They’re covered by the university’s work- men’s compensation? A I wouldn’t know. I assume so, but I don’t know. Q There’s no question in your mind that they’re not employees of the principal investigator? A No. No. Q Therefore, they’re employees of the university? A Right. Q Selected by the principal investigator? A Yes. Q And, if a principal investigator is happy with the functioning of the visiting professor, it’s within his au- thority to invite that professor back the following year? A Yes. Ne ee ee 439 Q And this is exemplified by the Ehrenpreis- Mulliavan situation, right? : A Yes. Q If he’s not, it's within his power not to invite him back? A Yes. Q Returning to this exhibit, Dr. Komar, I see a term “predoctoral fellow.” Is that the same as a research assistant? A Yes. [3209] Q You’ve used that term in defining research assistant for us before; is that correct? A That is correct. Q I see the term “faculty associate.” A Right. Q Is that—Does that term have any different mean- ing from the term “research associate’’? A No. It’s the same thing. Q So the fact that there are different names does not imply a different meaning? A No. Q I see a reference to a “full-time fellow” on page two. A Yes. Q Is that in reference to Professor Mulliavan? A Yes. Q Would that more properly be called a visiting pro- fessor? A Yes. Q To the extent that he’s called a full-time fellow in this exhibit, full-time fellow, the e..hibit should be cor- rected? A That’s right. Q Now, remember we’re dealing with the time pe- riod from June 27 back to the beginning of the 1972— ’73-’74 school year and before when we talk of this exhibit. [3210] A _ Right. Q On the third page of the exhibit there’s a Pro- fessor Raccah, correct? A Right. 440 Q Now, next to his name there is no listing of full- time faculty working under the grant, no listing in col- umn four. A Right. Q Is that correct? A That’s correct. MR. SHECTMAN: You are referring, are you, now, Mr. Kramer, to the fourth page? MR. KRAMER: I stand corrected, Mr. Shectman. It is the fourth page. Q To the best of your recollection, Dean Komar, prior to June 27, 1974, were there in fact full-time faculty working under Professor Raccah grants? A Yes. Q Who were those faculty, as best you recall? A Professor Halpern, Professor Bell and Professor Pollack. Q These are not listed on these exhibits? A Right. Q To the extent they’re not listed, this exhibit is in error, I take it? [3211] A_ I guess so. @ vo should be corrected by adding those names? es. Q Now, I show you Employer’s Exhibit 129, Dean Komar. Professor Halpern’s name does not appear on that exhibit; is that correct? A That’s correct. Q Was he inadvertently left off? A No. Q Is he working for the university? A He’s no longer employed with the university. Q Will you tell us the facts and circumstances of how Professor Halpern, whom I think you’ve identified as a research professor in your prior testimony— A Right. Q —is no longer working for the university? ; A Professor Raccah decided to dispense with his serv- ices. Q Had his services previously been dispensed with by any other principal investigator? at te 441 A He was previously employed under a national sci- ence foundation departmental development grant under the direction of Professor Liebowitz. He was then, when he—Professor—I don’t recall whether the funds ran out in that category or whatever, but Professor Liebowitz decided to have him go off that [3212] grant, and Professor Raccah then employed him under one of his research grants. Q Did Professor Liebowitz’s decision to either hire or terminate the services of Professor Halpern under the grant require your approval? No. Q Did it require any financial officer’s approval? A No. Q Did it require approval of the president of the institution? A He was not invoived, no. Q It was Professor Liebowitz, wasn’t it? A Yes. In the case of the hiring of Halpern, I don’t know who was consulted. But, in the case of terminating him, no one was consulted. Perhaps Raccah was, but I don’t really know. I was not involved. Q Who decided to place Halpern on Liebowitz’s grant? A Liebowitz. Q By “hiring,” that’s what I mean. It was Liebowitz who decided to take him on? A Yes. Q It was Raccah who decided to hire him, or assign Professor Halpern to his grant? A Right. [3213] Q And it was Raccah who decided to dispense with his services and terminate him? A Right. Q Asa result of that termination, Professor Halpern left the employ of the school; is that right? A Right. Q I mean of Yeshiva University. A That’s right. Q No other principal investigator, I take it, was will- ing to hire him? A No. 442 Q Or utilize his services? A No. Q Have there been other situations like that from time to time? A Yes. Q Would you tell us about that, Professor Komar? A Well, there are dozens of people who come and go in this capacity, and I don’t keep track of them at all. It never even crosses my desk. You mean--I mean occasionally I see their names. If I wanted to, I could look up the charges and find out who they are. But basically there are names—in antici- pation of this hearing, I looked through some of the files, and I found names that I had never even heard of before. {8214] Q These are research professors of the type we’re talking about? A Yes. Q I’m not talking about research associates. A No. These are professors, PhDs, and they’re not typically research associates. ® 2 * * [3220] HEARING OFFICER: On the record. In the off the record discussion, the parties reached agreement on a number of points, stipulations, which I will read into the record and ask for the parties agree- ment to them. The first stipulation has to do with the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theologic Seminary, referred to in the prior testimony as RIETS, R-I-E-T-S. For purposes of this hearing, RIETS shall not be con- sidered a part or division of Yeshiva University, and any services performed at RIETS shall not be considered [8221] in determining full time or parttime status of the individual at the University. Further, the Community Service Division referred to earlier as CSD, and the Cantorial Training Institute, referred to here in as CTI, are divisions of RIETS, and therefore services performed at CSD, or at CTI, shall not be considered in determining the full time or part- time status of individuals at Yeshiva University. i ies wk BS ii RL Ro 443 The final part of the stipulation has to do with Yeshiva University High School, which the parties agree is not a part or division of Yeshiva University, and therefore such services performed at the Yeshiva University High School shall not be used in determining full time or part- time status at Yeshiva University. Do the parties agree to the stipulations as stated in the record? Mr. Bodner? MR. BODNER: Yes, Mr. Hearing Officer, with the understanding that some individuals associated with RIETS and or CSD, and or CTI, and or Yeshiva High Schools, may have teaching responsibilities in Yeshiva University as herein before referred to, so that the stip- ulation is intended to exclude only that part of their service for the respective entities previously referred to, namely RIETS and or CSD and or CTI, and or the Yeshiva High Schools. [3222] HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Shectman, do you agree to the stipulation that I read into the record? MR. SHECTMAN: Yes, I accept that stipulation. So stipulated. * * * * RABBI HERBERT C. DORINSKY was called as a witness, having been first duly sworn by the Hearing Officer, was examined and testified as fol- lows: [3223] HEARING OFFICER: Go ahead, Mr. sodner. DIRECT EXAMINATION Q (By Mr. Bodner) Rabbi Dobrinsky, will you tell us what your position is at Yeshiva University? A I am the executive assistant to the president. Q To the president of the University, Dr. Samuel Belkin? A Yes. Q How long have you held that position? A Since July 16, 1973. 444 Q Did you previously hold any other positions at the University? A Yes. I was the associate director of the Com munity Service Division. Q Okay. A CSD, at RIETS. MR. BODNER: I would just note, Mr. Hearing Of- ficer, that the CSD just referred to by Rabbi Dobrnsky, is the subject of a stipulation that was previously entered into the record, and I will not further inquire as to its nature. Q (By Mr. Bodner) Rabbi Dobrinsky, when was the Sephardic Studies Program formed at Yeshiva Uni- versity? A In 1946. Q Would you describe for us the nature of the Sep- hardic Studies Program? [3224] A The Sephardic Studies Program was found- ed by Dr. Samuel Belkin, president of Yeshiva University, and the Haham, H-a-h-a-m, Rabbi Dr. Solomon Gaon, G-a-o-n, Chief Rabbi of Sephardic Jews of the British Commonwealth, who came to Yeshiva University at that time as a visiting lecturer. The other program founded at the same time was the Sephardic Community Activities Programs—Program, which is located under the aegis of CSD. I was appointed as director of Sephardic Community Activities, at that time, and have for the past ten years, continued to direct that particular program. Q Would you briefly describe for us, Rabbi Dobrin- sky, what you mean by Sephardic Community Activities? A The Sephardic Community Activities Program in- cludes all programs relating to the Sephardic community in America, and by that I mean the United States and Canada, Latin America, in particular the more than seventy Sephardic congregations which exist in North America, by providing a program of synagogue leader- ship conferences, cultural activities, such as the annual Sephardic cultural festival, hosting the American Society of Sephardic Studies, which is an autonomous group of academicians, of all faiths interested in Sephardic studies, i ' 445 who meet each year at Yeshiva University, placing of Rabbis, Hazzinim, (Cantors). [83225] MR. SHECTMAN: If the Witness will pardon me for interrupting at this time, if I may, Mr. Bodner, the testimony indicates that the Sephardic Community Activities Program is under CSD. I think it’s generally understood already the nature of this program, and rather than extend the record, I think we can—I would move or ask that we limit testimony in this regard. MR. BODNER: Yes. I had only inquired as to the nature of the activities to clarify that the Community Actvities Program, the Sephardic Activities Program, is a part of one of the affiliates, and I take it that is correct, Rabbi Dobrinsky? THE WITNESS: Correct. MR. BODNER: So it is clear for the record, we are distinguishing between the Sephardic Studies Program and the Sephardic Community Actvities Program, and as to the latter, namely the Sephardic Community Ac- tivities Program, it is correct, I take it, Rabbi Dobrinsky, that this is a part of the Community—this is a part of the Community Service Division? THE WITNESS: Correct. MR. BODNER: This is a part of the Community Service Division, which was the subject of a previous stipulation of exclusion. [3226] So that I will not go into any further details as to the Sephardic Community Activities Program. I will continue my testimony of Rabbi Dobrinsky as to the other element, and that is the Sephardic Studies Pro- gram. Q (By Mr. Bodner) Rabbi Dobrinsky, with regard to the Sephardic Studies Program, just so that it is clear for the record, does the Sephardic Studies Program offer degrees of its own? That is, can you receive a degree from the Sephardic Studies Program, a Bachelor’s or Masters degree? A Not a degree of its own. Q Okay. Does it offer course credits of its own? 446 That is, can one receive credit listed as being from the Sephardic Studies Program or a degree? ; A No. Q Or— A No. One can major in Sephardic Studies, as a part of the Erna Michael College program, but the degree ‘will be the regular Bachelor of Arts degree, Hebraic Studies diploma, or the Bachelor of Science d : Teachers’ diploma. egree or the Hebrew Q I see. Of the Erna Michael College. But it is not spe- cifically [8227] and exclusivel a pier a y a degree for Sephardic Q So that the Sephardic Studies Program is not a school or degree granting institute unto itself, is that correct? Q That is correct. And it does not issue transcripts of it ? ° That is correct. ‘ sucess Rabbi Dobrinsky, you mentioned the Sephardi Studies major in Erna Michael College. eer hi = you describe that for us, please? Q. Or I should say affiliated with Erna Michael Col- ege? A The Erna Michael College curriculum i , provides for a Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of dues dino and students may also qualify for Hebraic Studies di- ploma or Hebrew Teachers’ diploma. Under the Bachelor of Arts program, a student may persue a secondary concentration in Sephardic studies op oro for a position in the Jewish community an educator in general, and in particul _— of Sephardic schools. sPiowen sabato tng ‘Major in Sephardic studies is offered in the pr leading to the Bachelor of Science degree, he Siacale Studies diploma, or the Hebrew Teachers’ diploma. [3228] Now, the requirements for this particular major are that all of the courses in the Erna Michael College catalog, in all disciplines numbered 70-79, while open to all students, are designed for those who wish to con- centrate in Sephardic studies, TRE ed 447 They are listed in a document that I can present to you, if you wish, or I can stipulate them as Education 77-78, History 5.1, 6.1, and 4 of the following courses. 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76. Those are all history courses. Q Can I just interrupt for one moment? MR. BODNER: Off the record. HEARING OFFICER: Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) HEARING OFFICER: On the record. MR. BODNER: Rabbi Dobrinsky, you were referring in your testimony to a document that you were holding, and I will offer this document for identification as Em- ployer’s Exhibit 132, the document being entitled Erna Michael College of Hebraic Studies, Yeshiva University, Sephardic Studies Major. (Whereupon, the above-mentioned document was re- ceived as Employer’s Exhibit No. 132 for identifi- cation.) MR. BODNER: I will simultaneously offer for identi- fication as Employer’s Exhibit 133, a document entitled [3229] An In-Department Report on the Progress of Yeshiva University’s Sephardic Studies Program, and Sephardic Community Activities Program, with the ad- ditional designation on it, September 1971-September 1972. I would note that the document marked for identifica- tion as 132 is—constitutes an update of a significant part of the Sephardic Studies Program, namely that part involved in the Erna Michael major in Sephardic Studies, and while Employer Exhibit 132 has not been formally adopted by the University, Rabbi Dobrinsky has read through it and will indicate any parts of it as to which there is still some uncertainty as to its final adoption. (Whereup, the above-mentioned document was re- ceived as Employer’s Exhibit No. 133 for identifi- cation. ) Q (By Mr. Bodner) Rabbi Dobrinsky, would you just identify for us on what page of the document marked 448 for identification as Employer Exhibit 132 there is a listing of those courses offering in the Erna Michael College that are part of the Sephardic Studies Program. A Pages 2,3 and 4. That is Erna Michael. The bottom portion of page 4 we have graduate level Sephardic Studies courses, and the reason that that’s in- cluded here is because some selected upper classmen may, with the approval of the dean of Erna Michael, and the dean [3230] of the University’s Bernard Revel Graduate “.) take graduate courses for undergraduate credit. see. A And the instructors for these courses are drawn from the faculty of the Bernard Revel Graduate School, and on page 5 there’s a listing of, and on page 6, there are listings of those courses that would be considered as graduate courses which may be taken by Erna Michael students for undergraduate credit. Q_I notice, Rabbi Dobrinsky, in Employer’s Exhibit 133 for identification, there was also contained a list of courses of the Sephardic Studies Program at Erna Michael College, on pages 1 and 2 thereof, and is it correct to assume that the courses listed in Employer Exhibit 132, referring to Erna Michael College, essential- ly are an update of the courses listed in 133? A That is correct. There are some courses listed in this Exhibit 132, which are not listed in Exhibit 133. Q Now, in addition you referred to Sephardic Studies Program courses in the Bernard Revel School. Would you briefly describe whether credit is given for those in the Bernard Revel School, and that consti- tutes the courses of the Sephardic Studies Program in the Revel School? [8231] A The formal major in Sephardic Studies is currently available only in Erna Michael College. However, there is a study presently under way in the Bernard Revel Graduate School, by faculty and—asking for the suggestions of our visiting Professor of Sephardic Studies, who serves in the Bernard Revel Graduate School, as well as in the Erna Michael College, a pro- gram of Sephardic major is being formulated in the Naiett eee 449 Bernard Revel Graduate School. At the present time, there are many courses of Sep- hardic interest in the Bernard Revel Graduate School, which have attracted a number of Sephardic students, but the program is not formalized as a Sephardic major in the same way, yet, as it is in Erna Michael. MR. BODNER: I will not go into the courses that are not part of the Sephardic Studies Program, though they may be of interest to Sephardic students. _ Q (By Mr. Bodner) I would ask you, Rabbi Dobrin- sky, if there are Sephardic program study courses In any other schools, other than Erna Michael and Bernard Revel, the schools you previously described? A There is a course, Jews Under Islam, offered in Eastern College. ne Q This is ae to in Employer’s Exhibit 133 for identification, on page 3 thereof? [3232] A That’s correct. And there are other courses offered in Eastern College for women as well. I do not know which courses are being offered this semester. Okay. In Jewish College there is a course on Ladina, Judao-Spanish, which is to be offered this semester, de- pending upon the number of students that enroll. Other courses are in the affiliate schools, such as RIETS, Cantorial Training Institute, which provides two different courses in Sephardic Liturgy or Hazzanut back- ground, teaching both the Oriental, Eastern and the Oxi- denta!, Western, Sephardic Nusach, N-u-s-a-c-h, (Cantil- lation of Liturgy). MR. BODNER: I will just note for the record that I will not go into further detail as to Sephardic Studies Programs courses offered in any of the entities which were part of the stipulation of exclusion. I would just also note that there is reference in Em- ployer’s 133 to courses in the Cantorial Training Insti- tute, at page 2 and 3 thereof, and as to this, as well, since it was the subject of a stipulation of exclusion, we will not go into any further detail. 450 (By Mr. Bodner) Rabbi Dobrinsky, the courses to which [3233] you have referred that are presently taught in various schools of Yeshiva University, the faculty who teach these courses is the next subject of my inquiry. Are any of these courses taught by an individual who holds a Chair in Sephardic Studies? A Yes. Dr. Hayyim, H-a-y-y-i-m, J. Cohen, is the first professor to hold the Chair in Sephardic Studies at Yeshiva University, and he is teaching two courses in Erna Michael College for Hebraic Studies, and two courses in the Bernard Revel Graduate School. Q So that his total combined course offering is four courses? A Considered to be full time, in terms of the course load, because in addition he also has to handle disserta- tion work, in that he’s a consultant for, and overseeing the dissertation, right now, of at least one student that I’m aware of. Q And this is a student in which school? A Bernard Revel Graduate School. Q I see. A And he’s also available as a resource for research information to the University, so that he’s teaching four courses and in addition, he is required to be available for additional time for consultation, and for research in- formation. ody MR. KRAMER: I propose the following stipu- ation. Page 3108, line 16, duties should read degrees. Page 3109 Professor Behrings name is B-e-h-r-i-n-d-s. HEARING OFFICER: How about the bottom of 3108, where we have theoresical physics? MR. KRAMER: I’m not going to try to correct the typist. There are so many. HEARING OFFICER: I see what you mean. MR. KRAMER: Page 3116— [3249] HEARING OFFICER: I don’t have that page I’m sorry. Aan fos Pa» 451 MR. KRAMER: Line 23, should read math and sci- ence education department. Page 3117, line 10, Belfer should read Ferkauf. Line 16 of that same page, the words, “the depth, should be replaced with the words “a state”. On page 3119, line one, the line should read “now since much of this has just been promulgated within this, as opposed to what it reads now. On page 3118, line 24, after word university, should be inserted, “except for the”. HEARING OFFICER: Except for what? MR. KRAMER: The department of the, should be after “of College of Medicine”. That line should read, to correct it by stipulation, line 24 of page 3118, “department of the entire University, except for the department at the College.” Page 3128, line 16 and 17, should read as follows: “Tf we had television for the reader of the record, if he saw the smiles in the room, he”. Page 3130, line 4, striard, should read striar, s-t-r-i-a-r. The paragraph beginning at line 5 and ending at line 12 should read. However, as I recall the record, putting that aside, all witnesses have testified basically that the [3250] University load is 12 hours or four courses. As I recall Dr. Fishman saying, it is the requirement of 12 hours or the equivalent of that, I do not recall, putting aside those two witnesses which I cannot comment on, because I haven’t read their testimony, that the record is not to that effect.” Page 3132 line 8, the word the should be replaced with the word each. 3135, line 18, the word governing should be replaced with the word governance. 8137 line 6, the word natural should be replaced by the word actual. Page 3138 line 10 and thereafter, where ever this errow may appear, the words Dean Iomar, I-o-m-a-r, the I is incorrect, it should be Komar, K-o-m-a-r. HEARING OFFICER: Excuse me, before you go on, Mr. Kramer. 3136, what line did you see natural on? 452 MR. KRAMER: Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) HEARING OFFICER: On the record. Phare KRAMER: 3140, line 6, the word the shouid be em. 3143, line 18 should read as they zoom in on one or two people, they. [3251] And on line 20, “colloquy” should be colloquium. 3171, line 18, the word trainingship grounds, should changed to training grants. I stand corrected. Those words should be traineeship, t-r-a-i-n-e-e-s-h-i-p grants, instead of training grants. HEARING OFFICER: Anything else, Mr. Kramer? MR. KRAMER: No, sir. That is my stipulation. HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Shectman, do you agree to the stipulation? MR. SHECTMAN: I’m in agreement with the stipu- lation. [8253] A The ranges of new employees, or in general? Q_ In general? A I think I testified to that last time. Full professors run, well, it’s changed since my last —— because there have been so promotions, I ink. Q Your testimony reflects a range of from 12 to 40 thousand. It makes no differentiations? A That’s right. It’s in that range, yes. Q No, no. For each rank now, Dean Komar, approxi- mately. A Okay. Approximately. Let’s say full professors I’d say run from approximately 19,000 to somewhat under 40,000 on a nine month basis. Q Yes. A Academic salary. Associate professors run, I’m trying to think, I would say from 14 to about 23, and 453 assistants—Well, sought or—no, no assistants, I’m sorry, run from 13 to 23. Associates—do we have any associates? Oh, some- where an—say between 15 and 25 would be safe. Some- where in that ball park. I don’t know off hand. [3254] Q You have told us that the salaries in the range you have just described apply to the academic year, or nine month year, is that correct? A Yes. Q Do your faculty members, however, work only a nine month year? A No. Many of them work a 12 month year. Q Where does the—correction, strike that. - What is the source of the additional three months em- ployment, or the sources of the additional three months employment, as the case may be. A Generally, their additional income is derived from research grants. They’re permitted to earn a third more over the nine month salary, if they have grant support. Q Grant support, however, Dean Komar, is not limit- ed simply to the summer, is it? A No. [DEAN ARTHUR KOMAR— DIRECT EXAMINATION, RESUMED] « x * * Q (By Mr. Kramer) In preparation for your testi- mony today, Dr. Komar, at my request did I ask you to prepare an updated list of current grants and pending grants, and I’m referring to research grants, in your school? [8255] A Yes. Q Did you have such a list prepared by someone un- der your overall supervision and control? A Yes. Q Who was that, Dean Komar? A My secretary. Q Did you check the list that she prepared against your own recollection? A Yes, I did. Q To the best of your knowledge, is that list correct? A Yes. 454 Q Now, in preparing this list, did I ask you to limit your self to faculty type personnel, as opposed to tech- nicians, secretaries, and research assistants? A That’s correct. Q I show you Employer’s Exhibit 134 marked for identification, a document entitled Belfer Graduate School of Science, Yeshiva University, current grants, in the right hand corner, updated 1-17-75. Is this the document I asked you to have prepared for us? A Yes. Q The document has certain names underlined in blue, and certain names underlined in red. Would you tell us, Dean Komar, what the blue [3256] underlining stands for? A The blue underlined name is the principal investi- gator. Q And the red underlined names are other doctorial faculty members who are on the grants in varying ca- pacities, depending upon the grant. Q You have not included, have you, research assist- ants? A No. Q Those would be pre-doctoral people? A Those would be pre-doctoral people. Q Let’s turn to the second page of this Exhibit. To the first grant on that page. I’d like you to number the page at the bottom in pencil, please, if you would, as page 2. Would you number each of the pages thereafter, too? (Witnesse complies. ) Q Looking to the first grant on that page, to the name Dr. h. Choi, C-h-o-i— A Right. Q Is that the Dr. Choi that you referred to previously in your testimony? A Yes. Now, iet’s turn to the second grant on that page, to Donald Beck. Is that the Donald Beck to whom you referred previously? [8257] A Yes. | oe aT OT. 455 Q Next to his name is Ian Cooper. Who is lan Cooper? A Well, I never met him personally. He was hired by Professor Musher. He is professor at another uni- versity, I don’t recall which one. I don’t recall which one. He was hired by Musher to work on his grant for some period of time. Q Now, did he in fact work on that grant? A Yes. Q Was he paid by the University for that work? A Yes. Q Let’s turn to the next name, Dita, Hellwinkel, H-e-]-]-w-i-n -k-e-]. A Dita Hellwinkel. He was a professor from Ger- many. He is I—I think his regular post is at a German university if I remember correctly. He again was hired by Professor Musher to work on that particular grant. I have never met him. Q Did he in fact work at Yeshiva University? A Yes. Q Was he an employee of the University, when he worked there? A Yes. Q Now, Jeremy Musher, you have told us, has passed away? [8258] A Correct. Q Has been replaced by Donald Beck, is that so? A That’s correct. Q Let’s turn to the fourth name on the second grant, page 2 of the Exhibit 134, and to the name Dr. V. B-o-n-a-c-i-c, K-o-u-t-e-c-k-y. Would you tell us what his status is? A It’s a woman. Q Her status is? A She is a chemist, doctoral chemist, I believe from Romania, and she was employed at that time by Pro- fessor Musher, to work on that grant for him. Q Does she have a full time appointment as a member of the faculty at Belfer School of Science? A She did at that time. She did during some period during the lifetime of the grant which ran from 1971 to 456 1975. She’s no longer employed. She left. She’s now in Germany. Q Who was she hired by? A Professor Musher. Q As a result of that hiring, she became a full time faculty member of the school? A Yes. Q She’s now no longer with the school, I take it? A Right. Q Now let’s turn to the third grand on page 2 of the [3259] Employer’s Exhibit 134. I see there the principal investigator is Jeremy Musher. He’s passed away. Has a replacement been selected? A Iam not sure. If so, it would be probably Profes- sor Beck, but the—that’s not a government grant, that’s a grant from the American Chemical Society, and it’s a litle more freewheeling in discretion. Q Donald Beck appears as a faculty associate on that grant? A Correct. Q You told us how Dr. Beck came to be employed in the University. A He was hired by Professor Musher, initially. Q That was last summer? A Yes. Q_ Let’s turn to the second name on that third grant on page two, H. Nakatsuji. Would you tell us what Professor Nakatsuji’s status is? A He is—I really don’t know him at all. I have never seen him. I never, in fact, was aware of the name until we were preparing this list. However, he was hired by Professor Musher, he is a post-doctoral person, to work on his grant, to aid Musher in the research being performed on the grant. [8260] Q While he worked on the research on the grant with his post doctoral degree, he was an employee of the University? A Correct. Q Doing scholarly work, Dr. Komar? A That’s correct. 457 Q Now, let’s turn to page 3 of the Employer’s Ex- hibit 1384. The second grant on the page. That grant, principal investigator is Louis Coburn, is that correct? A That’s correct. Q A full time faculty member of your school, is that right? A That’s right. Q Under his name are two co-principal investigators, Charles Berger and Arnold Lebow. Are they both faculty members, holding full time appointments at your school? A Yes. Q Now, let’s turn to a fourth name on—under the grant, also underlined in red, together with Berger and Lebow, an §. Anastasio, faculty associate. What is his status or her status on that grant? A He is a post-doctoral person who was hired by them to work on that grant. I don’t know who he is. There again, I was not familiar with that name until we went through the records to prepare this list. [8261] Q That hiring was made by whom? A By Professor Coburn. Q Did Mr. Anastasio, or Ms. Anastasio, engage in scholarly work under that grant? A I presume so. The grant is a research grant, and this is a post-doctoral person. Q Let’s turn to the third grant on page three of Employer’s Exhibit 134, and I note there the name, un- derscored in red, next to the appellation visiting faculty associate, Paul Malliavin, M-a-l-l-i-a-y-i-n. Is that the same gentleman to whom you referred in your prior testimony? A That’s correct. Q Now, let’s turn to the fourth grant on page three, the principal investigator on that grant appears to be an Adam Koranyi, correct? A Correct. Q He is a fuli time faculty member at your school? A Yes. Q Holding a base appointment in your school? A Yes, 458 Q On that same grant is the name Robert Putts next to the title faculty associate? A That’s right. Q Do you know Robert Putts? A Yes. [3262] Q What is his status, Dean Komar? A He is a post-doctoral, I think he’s an assistant professor, if I remember—either an instructor or assist- ant professor in the mathematics department. A full time faculty member in the mathematics department. Q Who hired him for that grant? A Professor Koranyi, K-o-r-a-n-y-i. Q Now let’s turn to the fourth pafe of Employer’s Exhibit 134, to the first grant thereon. That grant shows a principal investigator a G. W. Cameron, is that correct? A Correct. Q Full time faculty member at your school? A Yes. Q_ By the way, all the principal investigators on this list a full time faculty members at your school, are they not? A Yes. Professor Cameron is on leave of absence without pay, for the past few years, but he still administers the grant in our school. Q Does he draw salary from that grant? A I don’t—he did at one time. For the current year, I don’t believe so, hut I’m not sure. Q He’s on leave of absence, but still administers the [3263] grant? A Correct. Q He’s still an employee, is he not, of Yeshiva Uni- versity? A Yes. Q Though on leave of absence? A Yes. Q Now, who are the four—there are four—strike that. There are four names underlined in red on that grant? A Yes. } ys Bene en ee A eS am 459 Q Let’s take the first one, R. Buchler. Do you know who R. Buchler is, B-u-c-h-l-e-r? A He was a, I think assistant professor was his range, in the physics department. Full time? Full time. Base appointment in your school? Yes, Hired by whom, orto this grant? By Professor Cameron. The next name is L. Landovitz, La-n-d-o-v-i-t-z. Do you know who L. Landovitz is? A Yes. He’s a full professor of physics in the physics department. [8264] Q Who selected him to work on this grant? A Professor Cameron. Q Let’s look at the next name, J. Littleton. Do you know who J. Littleton is? A Not really. He was hired by Professor Cameron. OPO PO PO I don’t believe I have ever met him. But he’s a post- doctoral person doing research with Professor Cameron. Q Selected by Professor Cameron? A Yes. Q When he did hs research as the case of all post- doctoral fellows— A Yes— Q —he was an employee of Yeshiva University? A Yes. Q Engaged in scholarly work? A Yes. Q TurntoJ. Truran. A Yes. Q Do you know J. Truran? A Yes. Q Would you tell us his status at Yeshiva University? A Since he left us this passed year, or was it two years ago, but he was, I believe a full professor of physics in the physics department, regular appointment. And he has since resigned his appointment. [3265] Q Who secured his assignment on that grant? A Professor Cameron. 460 Let’s turn to the third grant on page four of Em- ployer’s Exhibit 134. A Right. Q I see there the principal investigator is a Joel L. Lebowitz, is that correct? A Correct. Q What’s Mr. or Professor Lebowitz’ position? A He’s chairman of the physics department. Q Now, underneath his name, next to the title visit- ing faculty associates, are three names. The first is O. E. Lanford III. Are you aware of his status? A He has visited Professor Lebowitz for an extended period of time, and was supported by Professor Lebowitz’ grant. How long the period of time was, I don’t re- call, but it was in excess of a week, because the list for Professor Lebowitz was extremely long, and it would fill several pages, if we didn’t have some cut off in who we were to include. Q In other words, just so that we are clear on this, Professor Komar, you have not listed under Professor Lebowitz’ grant, number AFOSR73-2430B, on page four of Employer’s Exhibit 134, all of the visiting faculty associates, is that [3266] correct? A No. No. Q What was the cut off that you used? A In excess of a week, during this present academic year. Q I assume there were many shorter than a week? A During this year, and many longer than a week during previous years. Q Those longer than a week during previous years, are not listed at all, is that correct? A Not on this list, no. Some of them may have ap- peared on the earlier list. Q By that you mean Employer’s Exhibit 62, appended to Board Exhibit 2, is that correct? A That’s right. Q Now, let’s turn to QO. Penrose. That’s the second name next to that third grant on page four. 461 Is that the name O. Penrose that you referred to in your previous testimony? A That’s right. Q Finally, there’s an L. K. Runnels, R-u-n-n-e-l-s. Un- derlined in red, next to that title, visiting faculty asso- ciate on that third grant on page four of Employer’s Exhibit 134. Do you know his status? A I don’t know who he is. I just know from the records [3267] that he visited us during the present aca- demic year, for a period in excess of a week. But I have no idea who he is. He’s a post-doctoral person, from another university. But where, I don’t know. Q Is it a fact, Dean Komar, that Messrs. Lanford, Penrose and Runnels, were all employees of the Uni- versity? Yes, All paid by the University? Yes. Ail did scholarly work at the University? Correct. All on Professor Lebowitz’ grant? Yes. All hired by Professor Lebowitz? Right. There are additional faculty members—correction. Additional visiting faculty members this year, who v.zited for less than a week? A Yes. Q Who were selected an hired by Professor Lebowitz? A That’s right. Q Is it also a fact that there were faculty members during the 1973-1974 term, visiting faculty members, who were not—who were hired by Professor Lebowitz, who are not shown at all on this Exhibit? ([3268] A That’s correct. Q That’s so whether they worked a week or more? A Right. Let’s turn to the fourth grant on page four of Employer’s Exhibit 134, a grant of Paul M. Raccah, R-a-c-c-a-h, listing two faculty associates, T. Halpern and F. Pollack. OPO PO PO POY 462 Is the T. Halpern the gentleman about whom you tes- tified last time? A That’s correct. Q Let’s turn to the name of F. Pollack. Will you tell us what Mr. Pollack’s status is? A Professor Pollack is a professor of physics in the physics department. I’m just trying to recall now whether—I think he’s a full professor. Either associate or full, I just don’t recall. But he’s a regular faculty member. [3269] Q Was Mr. Pollack hired for this grant, by Professor Raccah? A Yes. Q Let’s turn to the next grant right under that, a grant of $148,840.00 to—through a principal investiga- tor, Paul M. Raccah. Is that the same Progessor Raccah? A Yes. Q This grant shows three faculty associates, an M. Bell, A. T. Halpern, and an F. Pollack. Is that the same Halpern and Pollack you’ve referred to previously? ; A Yes. Q Would your answers with respect to Halpern and Pollack be the same for this grant, as they were for the previous grant that I questioned you about? A Yes. Q Let’s turn to the name, M. Bell. Would you tell us what the status of M. Bell is? A M. Bell, Professor Bell is an assistant professor in the Physics Department. Q [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385006_0032%3A04. Public record. Not legal advice.