February 25, 1982

Executive Committee of the American Institute of Physics

Minutes of Meeting

1. Convene – Roll Call

The meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m., 25 February 1982, by Chairman Ramsey. He first introduced nonvoting participants present: Sayre (ACA) and Wright (AAPM).

Executive Committee Members Present

Norman F. Ramsey, Chairman of AIP; Robert T. Beyer, ASA; Peter B. Boyce, AAS; Joseph A. Burton, APS; Charles B. Duke, AVS; Jenny P. Glusker, MAL; William H. Kelly, AAPT; H. William Koch, Director

Nonvoting Participants

David Sayre (ACA); Ann E. Wright (AAPM)

AIP Staff Present

Gerald F. Gilbert, Treasurer; Robert H. Marks, Associate Director for Publishing; Lewis Slack, Associate Director for Educational Services; Lawrence T. Merrill, Assistant to the Director; Nathalie A. Davis, Assistant to the Secretary

For clarity in presentation with reference to the printed agenda, events recorded here are not necessarily in the same chronological order in which they occurred.

1. Death of John C. Johnson, AIP Secretary

   Ramsey announced the death of the AIP Secretary, Dr. John C. Johnson, on 20 February 1982 at his home in Boalsburg, PA. Koch reported that he had attended the funeral on 24 February; the fact that AIP had sent flowers and was represented was important to Mrs. Johnson and the family. Beyer, a close friend and colleague, commented on Johnson's career, brief illness, and death. Ramsey asked for a moment of silence in his honor.

   Koch suggested having an appropriate resolution prepared, to be sent to Johnson's family. After discussion, initiated by Kelly, it was agreed to have one resolution initiated by the Executive Committee and passed on to the Governing Board for their approval.

   The following motion was made by Kelly, seconded by Burton, and unanimously carried.

   MOVED that an appropriate resolution be prepared on behalf of the Executive Committee, to be sent to the family of Dr. Johnson.

2. Minutes of Executive Committee Meeting of 15-16 December 1981

The minutes of the meeting were, with minor corrections, approved by acclamation.

3. Review of Secondary Services Program

1. Introduction: Fundamentals and Proposed Policies

   Koch presented material that outlined the characteristics of primary and secondary literature services in physics according to the classification categories first used by E. Purcell, who segregated all sciences about our universe into: 1) Inert Materials, including chemistry; 2) Living Materials, including biology; 3) Natural Structures, including earth and geological sciences; and 4) Manmade Structures, including engineering sciences. These categories are useful in organizing the relationships between primary publishers that are scientific and engineering societies and secondary publishers that are abstracting and indexing services.

   Koch used the slides to suggest the following: a) Chemistry is much more data-oriented than physics and requires comprehensive coverage of the literature. That coverage is adequately provided by abstracts taken from the literature. b) Physics is much more conceptually-oriented than chemistry, so full-text articles are more frequently required for in-depth coverage of the literature. Further, physicists can fill their information needs often by focusing on that core literature which is quite concentrated in a small number of primary journals. For example, it has been shown that 100 journals in physics cover about 85% of the journal literature of physics. Hence, also, the journals published by AIP and its Member Societies comprise a good fraction of the significant world literature in physics.

   Koch pointed out, however, that the share of AIP and Society coverage is decreasing with time as foreign competition increases. Whereas we used to represent about one-third of the world’s journal literature in physics, our journals now represent about one-fifth.

   Duke questioned Koch’s conclusion on the basis of the data of a shift away from U.S. literature, but commented that it was an excellent analysis. He asked how the commercial journals will be affected in the future. Koch felt that they will be hurt badly by Society publications because libraries recognize that the price per page and per word for commercial publications is substantially higher than for Society publications. Commercial publications generally have not done as good a job of refereeing and so the quality is not as high. Page charges have been useful for Society publications in this regard. We need to watch member subscriptions; as non-member prices keep rising and the member rate rises, the member subscriptions are more likely to drop off. If AIP can supply search tools through timely secondary services, we will be more effective in selling single copies of articles and can help to make up the gap in subscriptions.

   Duke mentioned that journal publication is at a critical point; the physicist will go the library and copy the article cheaper than can be obtained through the European plan of $4.00 per 10-page article. He thinks that the economics don't indicate that secondary services will take the place of this. The things which will happen are those which are more economically feasible. He thinks of the paper products as the masters, and thus copying fees are vital. He would think that a relatively small percentage of sales would be from secondary services and the larger percentage from journals as master copies. He thinks the economic basis for this may well be a high price for master copies.

   Koch noted that changes will take place over the next 10 years, but planning needs to start now, as there will be need for additional on-demand publications services. He has recently visited Georgia Tech, which has the largest library in that area. It is now contracting to put the whole campus put on a cable network and is evolving a concept with other Georgia institutions, which will ultimately result in having an information utility available to every citizen of Georgia.

   Ramsey agreed there are various reasons for subscriptions to diminish, but there is a need to pick out a viable direction in which to move to counter this loss. Boyce asked if the problem would not get worse when such state university systems are in place. Koch noted that this discussion points up the need for a five-year plan on electronic publishing.

   Ramsey noted that the need for the complete article is much greater in physics than in chemistry; the Institute’s need is to see what is the most important route to follow in these developments.

   Duke commented that this involves a different concept in how one pays for the literature. It is more difficult for organizations to get the material in the traditional way due to economic problems. This will require education of the physics community; a major hurdle is getting people prepared to accept these technological changes.

   Koch mentioned other services. Lockheed Dialog was up for sale but has been withdrawn for the present; their middleman operation has been very profitable. Engineering Index and Chemical Abstract Service are both heavily involved in online service.

2. AIP Secondary Service Activities

   Marks referred the Committee to Attachment B, which lists AIP’s secondary service activities, the nature of each service, and the gross revenue from each service in 1981. It was presented to give the Executive Committee a fuller picture of the broad spectrum of activities that comes under the heading of secondary activities. Included are primary journal indexes, advance abstracts, Current Physics Index, SPIN, DOE contract, FIZ contract, marketing of Physics Briefs, Society membership directories, and Reference to Contemporary Papers in Acoustics.

3. Finances of Secondary Services

   Marks discussed the material in Attachment C, which was a summary of Publishing Policy Committee discussions regarding the finances of secondary services, together with background material that formed the basis for their discussions. The Committee felt that the proposed price increases for the FIZ and DOE contracts were appropriate. He also summarized his letter of 9 February 1982 to Union Carbide which requested an extension of AIP’s contract with the Department of Energy for 1982 at a price increase of 42% (the contract is presently below cost). He made particular note of the detailed cost analysis included in this Attachment which gives the actual cost per article for Heads Composition, Programming, and Indexing in 1980 and what the approximate corresponding cost would have been if there had been no contracts with DOE and FIZ. A summary of the gross income from the sale of abstracts to FIZ and DOE in 1980, 1981 and 1982 (projected) is given. Marks pointed out that we developed interest in and a market for these computerized abstracts with low charges and now the prices can be raised.

   He then discussed the summary statement of secondary services and contracts, giving projection 1981 and budget 1982, followed by the breakout of the costs. In 1980 and 1981, the additional expense of keyboarding any non-AIP published journals continued to be charged directly to the contracts. The contracts also picked up 20% of the cost of keyboarding AIP published journal heads on the basis that the cost of the article heads database would be shared by five users. The contracts and other secondary service products are each maintained as a separate cost center with the net income or loss charged to AIP. The price increases that are a part of the DOE and FIZ contracts for 1982 will enable these contracts to pick up a greater share of each AIP published journal’s composition cost.

   Boyce asked what these changes mean for 1982. Marks replied that these will not make a change in the budget; they were taken into account in the projections for 1981. In response to a question from Duke, Marks answered that these figures detail the justification for indexing charges as being based on the work done. The whole program is to encourage authors to do more so the in-house indexing staff can be reduced.

4. Recommendations of Publishing Policy Committee

Marks discussed the two recommendations made by this Committee to the Executive Committee. The first was concerning the possibility of an arrangement with North-Holland, with AIP Management to report back to the Committee with further details. Burton noted that this recommendation was for exploratory purposes only.

The second recommendation concerned subscriptions to the six AIP archival journals on microfiche. A research proposal from Loweth Associates to determine demand for this service was considered, but this Committee felt that the study was not needed because AIP could break even with only a small number of subscriptions; the breakeven cost for microfiche is very low.

A joint motion covering both recommendations was made by Duke, seconded by Boyce, and unanimously carried.

MOVED that AIP Management should explore the possibility of making an arrangement with North-Holland Publishing Company for purchasing AIP Datapoint software for producing “heads” and establishing a cooperation for a joint AIP-North-Holland database. AIP Management is to report back to the Publishing Policy Committee with further details.

MOVED that beginning in 1983, AIP Management should offer subscriptions to the six AIP archival journals on microfiche at the same member and non-member prices as the hard copy, without the proposed study’s being made.

5. Prorations Discussion with APS

Marks stated that it was decided that the adjustments in prorated in-house costs should be made for 1980 as well as for 1981. It is not possible to reopen the books once the year is closed, but it was felt that the logic of the case called for handling the 1980 charges as part of the 1981 revenue.

Burton said that this arrangement is satisfactory to APS, everything is sorted, and he thanked Marks and his staff for working this out. He had communicated this in a 15 December 1981 letter to AIP. The adjustment will take place in the variances. He commented in relation to Attachment C(A): Statement of Expense for Composition Section B, that although it states that this is the average cost per article, it is actually the average charge, not the cost. This is an important difference, because the FIZ average cost is arbitrary. Marks agreed, noting that there has to be a way of prorating costs, which then show up as charges to the contracts or to the Member Society. All of these prorations are part of the annual audit. He confirmed Duke’s statement that the charges to the contracts more than recover the incremental costs. The DOE and FIZ contracts serve to reduce costs to the journals.

6. Voluntary Member-Assessment Contribution from APS

Koch read the action taken at the last Executive Committee meeting regarding the investigation of an increased member assessment and referred to Attachment E requesting a voluntary contribution in the interim. The APS Council meeting of 24 January 1982 had approved a voluntary contribution of $32,000 and suggested donating what they considered to be an overcharge for Indexing and Programming for 1980 to AIP as their voluntary contribution. Koch thought this should be discussed in this meeting before taking the matter to the other Member Societies.

Burton clarified that this idea was proposed before an agreement was reached on prorations. He suggested that AIP inform APS of the variance statement for 1981 and then APS would send AIP their check for $32,000. Sayre asked Koch to review this additional request for moneys from the Member Societies. Koch replied that AIP must meet inflation and maintain its services and that this is the total direct contribution from the Societies. He feels AIP also needs to remove the fixed charges from the Constitution. Burton added that it is the only income from Societies which is not attached to something else, such as services rendered.

Kelly asked how soon Koch planned to convey this request to the Member Societies, as AAPT would be meeting at the end of February. Koch said that he would write to them on the following day.

7. Two Sets of Discussions About a Communications Network

Koch noted that these were included in the Agenda, Attachments F and G, to keep the Societies informed on developments in communications networks.

1. Science and Technology Network

   The presentation at the December Executive Committee meeting in December was felt to be too nebulous to justify any action yet. Joyce Goodwin is attending a meeting of a study group in Boyce’s place and will report on it.

2. Technical Knowledge Foundation

   Koch reported that this proposal, prepared by R. L. Minter of TeleOperator Systems Corporation, is even more nebulous. He mentioned that the Polytechnic Institute has also made a proposal, and the Metropolitan Communications Center has proposed selling its building in Manhattan and moving to Brooklyn. He noted that AIP’s interest in this development is more remote than that of the Engineering Societies. If a communications network is developed, perhaps we could have a node in it, but from AIP headquarters.

8. Progress Reports

1. 1981 Audit

   Gilbert distributed a handout which summarized the recent 1981 Audit Meeting and reviewed developments. Progress was being made on meeting the year-end closing and was in fact running a little ahead of the projected timetable. The general ledger for 1981 is now being analyzed and he will be able to report on it in March. It is hoped to have the audit completed by the end of April. Ramsey offered congratulations on the great progress in this area.

2. Accounting Systems Improvement Plan

   Dolowich distributed a handout which showed the schedule for implementing the various changes and improvements in this area, noting that he was commenting only on those areas which had been updated since the last progress report. The revision of the collection procedure is ahead of schedule, the MCI system for long-distance phone calls is in use, and a tremendous amount of collections have been cleaned up.

   The conversion of the Pubs and Reprints Fee Schedule is going on; this is a great effort. All balances should be available by the middle of March.

   In the Personnel area, an ADP package is now being utilized for personnel records as well as for payroll. The goal for getting these records up to date has been moved from February to 1 April.

   Dolowich also reported that bills are now being paid once a week rather than twice a week, as this is more efficient. Problems in the area of Fixed Assets have been solved, using previously written programs. He intends to have the staff write a fixed assets program. The general ledger was moved to April to dovetail with the reporting for the first quarter.

   Ramsey commented that it was very good to see many of the items completed on the projected schedule.

3. Dues and Subscription Fulfillment System

   Dolowich distributed a handout (copy attached) showing the vendors who received the RFP for the new computer and their responses. The deadline for reply to the RFP was extended to 31 January 1982. There appeared to be three software vendors capable of doing the job: Digital Systems House (Chicago), Aztech Corporation (DC), and Grenier (NY). These represent two computer (hardward) companies; Digital Equipment (VACS) and Data General (MV8000). These vendors have met the majority of the requirements; face-to-face meetings are now being held with the vendors. The present goals are: 1) to clarify the hardware, 2) to review the exception list, and 3) to determine how AIP would approve of the design of the system. Vendors are being asked to demonstrate the techniques they would use. The timetable will enable the staff to make a written recommendation by 26 March to the Management Committee. Koch noted, however, that 26 March is the Governing Board meeting.

   Gilbert said that he and Dolowich had had a conference call with Quinn and had asked him to arrange a meeting with the ad hoc Committee on Computer Needs. The necessary documents will be in the hands of this Committee at least one week prior to the meeting. This would be a decision-making meeting, to consider the staff recommendations.

   Burton asked if it would be advantageous to have another meeting. Gilbert replied that Quinn was satisfied with the data received so far, and he would be consulting with the staff.

   Koch reviewed the guidelines for purchase of the new computer system; if the price is below $700,000, the Executive Committee is authorized to approve it. Quinn had noted that this may well require calling a special meeting of the Executive Committee for approval. It is now felt that the spring of 1982 is a more realistic goal for implementation of the computer than the date previously set, as this is a major undertaking.

9. Personnel Administration

1. New Organization Plan

   Koch presented this plan, put into effect the previous week, and reviewed the motivation for it, as given in Attachment H: the need for adjustments and revisions due to operating AIP at two facilities. Everything in Woodbury will be responsible to Marks and everything in New York responsible to Koch; whenever Koch is out Gilbert will be in charge of headquarters. Terry Scott (now head of Publishing Services Branch I) will be the deputy manager of the Woodbury staff and operations. New branches have been created in Woodbury, with some staff in Woodbury elevated to branch level. New York will remain approximately the same. The Management Committee (the five empowered to sign checks) would have the same functions. The Personnel Committee is being enlarged to take in all branch managers which would add Scott, Mitchell V. Koch and Dolowich to help determine salaries for their branches. It is still being chaired by Gilbert with Braun as Secretary.

   Burton commented that he thinks the plan is good. Boyce asked why Dolowich was listed in two places. Koch said that there were geographical considerations. Marks noted that he is moving his office and secretary to Woodbury, which is a logical step.

2. Employee Handbook

   Gilbert referred to the new Handbook which had been distributed to the Executive Committee. Much had been learned from the union problems and from the new law firm which had been retained. Management had wanted to get a Handbook out as soon as possible; however, we are surveying sister organizations and expect to come out with a more complete Handbook based on what we learn. It will certainly benefit from continued involvement with the labor law firm. He noted that Johnson had sent Ramsey suggestions concerning a retirement package. Merrill and Braun have gotten material from Grumman and other sources.

3. Retirement of Audrey Likely

   Koch said some of the Executive Committee may have had the impression that Likely was being treated unfairly. In fact she and her husband are setting up a public relations business and are working out the details. Further she has stated that she is pleased with the new arrangement to serve AIP as a consultant for special tasks. Ramsey reported receiving an expression of appreciation from her for the consideration given her. In response to Kelly's question about replacement, Koch reported that David Kalson, from the Office of Public Information, and who has been responsible for the TV film reports, will be the Acting Manager of the Division; this decision is favorable to the other employees in the Office of Public Information. [A staff reception was held for Likely following the meeting to which the Executive Committee was invited; those who could do so attended.]

   Koch noted that the funding support for the programs of this office is a serious issue. The $1.00 member assessment charge is clearly inadequate to the task. We need to examine seriously both the other sources of support and the continuation of the member assessment charge at this level.

4. Status of Negotiations with Labor Union

   Koch reported that the union which had tried to unionize AIP at Woodbury is small and, accordingly, does not have large resources. They had informally offered a deal through our law firm whereby AIP would provide job protection for the six professionals who had voted to join the union, and those who were actively involved in the campaign. In addition, they would be given extra salary increases. In return for this the union would drop all challenges and leave AIP alone. Koch also noted that the legal bill for January alone was $32,000; the law firm is not cheap. AIP’s object is to see that the union does not get in; the situation, like those elsewhere, is full of subtleties and, also like elsewhere, is structured against management. Management will meet with the attorney again on 1 March and will report to them the feeling of the Executive Committee.

   Duke, Beyer, and Burton cautioned against any document which, whether favorable or not, could be damaging to AIP in the event of a court case.

   Burton asked if any of the people active on behalf of the union have been discharged. Marks replied that none have been discharged for that reason. One was let go with cause, and was kept longer than the person should have been; this has been documented. The others are good workers and are being treated fairly.

   Duke said that Xerox has published a set of procedures, wherein fairness is determined by certain documents, and due process can be demonstrated. It is necessary to spell everything out. Ramsey, in response to Duke’s question, said that Fermi Lab has a systematic analysis of raises and grievance procedures. He noted two problems: overfavoritism and undertreating employees.

   Gilbert commented that before any Personnel meeting, Management goes over the items with the attorney. Marks added that in the event of an inquiry, AIP can document why and when raises are given or not given.

   Ramsey asked if there was any justification for the complaints of the union to the NLRB. Koch replied that Management has tried to pinpoint causes of these charges. One stems from the definition of a supervisor. The definition which came from Donovan (AIP’s former attorney) was whether the employee has discretionary authority for hiring and firing. Eight of the twenty-six challenged names, according to the present attorney, can be construed as supervisors, but AIP has not admitted this. Koch added that the union problem came up very fast, AIP did not have good legal advice at that time, and has since changed to a highly qualified specialist firm for labor work. He added that in the case of working supervisors, the definition of a supervisor is dependent on the degree to which a supervisor’s time is spent doing work which is the same as that of the staff under him or her and what fraction is spent administering and supervising. Making it known in writing who are supervisors and what the lines of authority are is important. Many of the supervisors at Woodbury were new and did not understand the best ways of dealing with some of the problems.

   Koch also reported that the date of the next hearing had not been set; our legal advice was to delay as long as possible. Koch added that he, Marks, Gilbert, and Braun went to a one-day seminar organized by the American Association of Publishers on Personnel Relations. The program included a scenario which paralleled AIP’s experience. There they also learned that District 65, another union affiliated with the UAW, has a fund targeted for the publishing industry and is going after publishers. This union is very well-heeled and aggressive. We hope that AIP’s having been through involvement with the Newsday union will give us some breathing space.

10. Nominating Committee Procedures and Recommendations

Koch reported on the Nominating Committee meeting held on 16 February and the procedures which they followed. They will identify subcommittees and, if there is to be a committee or subcommittee dealing with a major issue, they intend to recommend the composition of the group and that it should be under the Governing Board rather than under any present committee. They have made nominations for the composition of various committees, including the Executive Committee. He noted that Management had made recommendations for all committees; the Nominating Committee also has received recommendations from Member Societies and considered them all very carefully.

Koch gave the proposed names for the Executive Committee and discussed the history of representation. Some felt that APS deserved again to have two representatives; this had been an issue at the March 1981 Governing Board meeting. Ramsey reported that he had had a conversation with Shaw, the Chairman of the Nominating Committee, and felt that they did a very conscientious job. He felt that one way of resolving the matter of the Executive Committee would be to increase the number on the Committee to nine. Boyce voiced concern about the heavy turnover. Ramsey noted that the Executive Committee needs both representation and rotation and that this issue deserves detailed consideration by the Constitution and Bylaws Committee.

Wright reported, as a member of the Nominating Committee, that she had spoken to Shaw very recently. She said all of the proposed Chairmen have been contacted and have agreed to serve if appointed. She reported that great thought had been given to representation on the Executive Committee. The bylaws rigidly specify the number on the Executive Committee at the present time, so representation has to be shared. Koch noted that the mechanism of inviting nonvoting participants affords representation of all Societies at the meetings even if not a vote.

(The meeting recessed for lunch at 12:30 p.m. and resumed at 1:25 p.m.)

1. Special Nominating Committee for AIP Secretary

   Koch had been in touch with the Nominating Committee concerning the possibility of their making a nomination for this position; however, a letter from Shaw reported the consensus of the Nominating Committee that they should not undertake the task of finding a permanent successor for Johnson, but rather that an interim appointment should be made without delay; that a special Search Committee be appointed for this task, and that it report to the Governing Board at its March meeting. The letter, which Koch read to those present, also outlined their thoughts on the role of the Secretary and suggestions for proceeding with the search. Ramsey advised that the decision not be rushed.

   Wright commented that in her discussion with Shaw about the responsibilities of the position, they agreed that it would be very useful to get input from people who know the job and to determine how much time needs to be devoted to it.

   Ramsey reported the suggestions of the Nominating Committee for the Search Committee. There was agreement to proceed.

   The following motion was made by Burton, seconded by Duke, and carried unanimously.

   MOVED that the Executive Committee request that Ramsey be Chairman of the Search Committee.

   The consensus was that the Committee should consist of Burton, Boyce, Glusker, Quinn, and Strassenburg. [N.B. Glusker was eliminated after the meeting as she is presently out of the country.]

11. Appointment of Chairman of Corporate Associates Advisory Committee

Koch pointed out the need for this Chairman to be named as early as possible, as recommended by Schmitt the retiring Chairman. The Committee is scheduled to meet on 15 March, but Governing Board approval will normally not be given until the end of March . As background, Koch noted that it has been proposed that the next meeting of the Corporate Associates be at Sandia National Labs on 14-15 October. Clogston, who is retiring from Bell Labs and moving to that area, will be a consultant at Sandia and he is willing and able to serve as Chairman.

Since the Governing Board at their October 1981 meeting had authorized the Executive Committee to move on this appointment, the following motion was made by Duke, seconded by Kelly, and unanimously carried.

MOVED that Ramsey appoint the Chairman of the Committee on Corporate Associates prior to the Governing Board meeting to facilitate planning for the next Corporate Associates meeting.

12. Membership Request from American Geophysical Union

Slack reported that a request had been received from this society for closer affiliation with AIP. They recently ended their affiliation with the American Geophysical Institute. Burton asked if they would want publication services; Slack said that they would not at least, want them in the next year but are interested in this possibility when AIP is in a position to offer them without adversely affecting commitments to Member Societies. Slack further noted that only three of the present Member Societies would be admitted today if all of the admission requirements in connection with the 1975 guidelines were strictly enforced. Beyer asked how many members of the AGU would consider themselves physicists; Slack said he did not know but the Manpower Division could probably obtain statistics.

Burton inquired as to the implications of affiliated membership, which the AGU now has. Koch replied that their members may subscribe to Physics Today at a reduced rate, and several hundred do.

The following motion was made by Beyer, seconded by Duke, and carried unanimously.

MOVED that the Executive Committee view with interest and encouragement the interest of the American Geophysical Union in becoming a Member Society.

1. Membership Considerations Regarding AAPT

   Koch introduced the discussion by distributing copies of AAPT’s letter of 17 February 1982 (copy attached), noting that there are a number of questions to be considered as a result of AAPT’s decision to pull out the membership fulfillment work from AIP, especially the practical operational matter of how to get, on a monthly basis, names of AAPT members who are not members of other AIP Societies. When the AAPT membership fulfillment is part of the AIP operation, it is simple to avoid duplicate mailings.

   Kelly stated that AAPT had pulled out the membership fulfillment because they felt on the basis of their nonmember experience and their available computer capacity that they could reduce costs in this way. They recognized that, as Ramsey had pointed out, with the high overlap of their membership with that of other Societies there would be problems and extra costs by having their data separate from the MHRF (member history record file) and that AIP should not be subsidizing AAPT subscriptions to PT any more than it does for other Societies.

   Ramsey further observed that what is really needed in the long run is a better understanding of all costs and prorations so that Society officers can be more comfortable with and more clear about arrangements for services provided, both directly and indirectly, by AIP. Maintenance of the membership lists, Physics Today, financial handling, and the member assessment charge are the most obvious direct ones and important elements of any discussion of minimum obligations of and to members or criteria for membership.

   Burton emphasized another aspect, namely the need for the Computer Needs Committee to assess the effect of this or any Society's decision to do its own fulfillment. He also noted that we should assess the implications of whether AIP's costs are low.

   When Boyce suggested the possibility of a larger charge to AAPT for Physics Today, Koch noted that the $1.00 is not a charge for PT and that there could be an extra handling charge. Kelly suggested that AAPT could supply a tape and recognized that it would be reasonable for AAPT to bear the costs of making it possible to do so.

   Duke stated that although this was an unusual situation politically it could be treated less divisively by regarding it as a matter of economics and letting the administrative details work themselves out.

   Following Wright's rhetorical question on how the Executive Committee would view AGU's application for full membership if AIP were neither to handle fulfillment nor to provide major publishing services as will be the case for AAPT. Ramsey noted that perhaps there should be a policy for minimum involvement for Member Societies, asubject that has long been before AIP - at least ever since it was formally raised by the Seitz committee. This perhaps is something to be considered by the Committee on Constitution and Bylaws which will, perforce, deal with such basic long-range matters.

   The consensus was that the AIP staff should proceed with correspondence with AAPT.

13. Initiation of Litigation on NYC Real Estate Tax

Gilbert noted that at the last meeting the hiring of a new law firm for tax matters was discussed. Koch and Gilbert have spoken with several firms and felt that Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler would be excellent. This firm handles a number of 501(c)(3) organizations and is familiar with these problems from their other dealings. He distributed an 18 January 1982 letter from Richard D. Parsons of this firm concerning their handling of the NYC tax matter and his response asking them to represent AIP (copies attached).

Gilbert thinks there is a good chance of having our real estate tax exemption restored. The courts have begun to chip away at the lower court decision on the Swedonborg case. Indications are that, if we do not get the exemption, in ten years we would have paid more than $1 million in real estate taxes. The payments are presently being made under protest; if the status is changed we can recover the payments with interest.

Since it was necessary to start litigation by 31 January in order to file an Article 78 proceeding, Gilbert signed the papers on 28 January.

Gilbert noted that Koch had proposed that Parsons be a speaker at the Assembly of Society Officers if there is sufficient interest.

Koch noted that Management, although it still may use the old law firm, has already used specialists for several matters: copyright, IRS matters, and labor problems. There are at present no new issues to bring to the old law firm and nothing is pending. Windels, Marx, Davies & Ives have informed him that if we sever our ties with them we may exercise discretion about where the back files (going back to the 1930's) would go.

Ramsey commented that it was regrettable that so much is spent on legal fees, and Koch agreed that these situations largely represent a waste of effort and resources.

14. Status of Plans for Upcoming Meetings

1. Executive Committee: 6 p.m. 25 March 1982.

2. Assembly of Society Officers: 9:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m., 26 March 1982.

3. Annual Corporation Meeting: 4:45 p.m. – 5:15 p.m., 26 March 1982.

4. Governing Board Meeting: 6:00 p.m., 26 March – 4:00 p.m., 27 March 1982.

Koch distributed two handouts in regard to the Assembly talks. One was an article from Business Week, 25 January 1982, on computers, which mentioned two people who are possibilities as speakers: Frank D. Drake and Frederick Plotkin. Rustum Roy of Penn State suggests a need for closer coupling of universities with applied science; he could be asked to speak on that as discussed in his editorial in Science, 18 December 1981.

Koch reviewed the items and speakers suggested in Attachment K and asked for comments.

There was discussion of the Plenum National Employment File which is to be available on Lockheed. Sayre noted that ACA devotes time to bringing jobs and people together and thought this could be interesting. Koch commented that the AIP Placement Service is considering using a minicomputer for listing jobs now that space remaining in existing equipment is nearly exhausted, but had not yet made a decision. Slack commented that the Plenum idea could be of interest to AIP Manpower. Marks said the service was just announced one month ago; it is a novel idea and might have application to physics.

Koch said if there was enough interest we could have the two lawyers on the tentative schedule to discuss the items denoted. Burton felt the discussion by the lawyers would be more useful at the Governing Board than in the Assembly.

Kelly felt it was important to discuss the national problems of science and engineering education.

15. Status of Plans for Corporate Associates Meeting

Koch spoke about the 15 March meeting of the Committee on Corporate Associates, at which the October meeting at Sandia National Labs will be discussed. He and Merrill traveled to Albuquerque for site visits. The auditorium which will be used accommodates only 200 people, which Koch thought adequate. The facilities could be useful for teleconferencing on the role of the national laboratories and the role of universities and graduate students. He noted that for those coming from the East Coast, plane schedules would necessitate arriving the day before the meetings, and leaving the day after, in order to take full advantage of all the sessions scheduled. It is hoped to make an arrangement with the airlines to cut costs.

In response to Boyce’s suggestion that the head of the Physics Department of the University of Mexico be contacted in order to involve him in some way, Burton suggested that Clogston could do this on the local level.

Merrill gave highlights of the report he had prepared on the Corporate Associates program: membership in 1981 went from 105 to 118. In 1982, 102 have renewed so far, with no cancellations. Nine unsolicited inquiries have resulted in three applications for membership: 1) Sargent Welch (IL), $250; 2) Elsevier-North-Holland (NY office), $500; and 3) Physics International (CA), $2000. Burton's query about the last mentioned company was answered by Marks who reported that they advertise in Physics Today; Sayre added that he thought they deal largely in instruments for plasma physics; Gilbert said that they are a highly regarded instrument company.

The following motion was made by Kelly, seconded by Burton, and carried unanimously.

MOVED that Sargent Welch, Elsevier-North-Holland (NY office), and Physics International be accepted as Corporate Associates.

Ramsey asked about the matter of free journals for Corporate Associates and its effect on costs; Koch said that the Committee had been asked to look into this and that he looks forward to a report by the next meeting of the Executive Committee. In this connection, the last increase in dues was in 1962, and some kind of increase of the rate would probably been order. He is working with Marks and Gilbert on a new dues structure to discuss with the Committee.

16. Other Business

1. Nonmember Subscriptions

   Gilbert distributed a handout which showed the nonmember subscriptions for January 1982 and comparable figures for January 1981, and noted that the comparison is surprisingly favorable. The deposits for the nonmember billing for 1982 were accelerated in order to take full advantage of high interest rates. Therefore, in November and December, after copying the checks for the large amounts from agencies (70% of nonmember subscriptions come from agencies), the checks were deposited in order to take immediate advantage of high interest rates. The funds were then allocated when the work load slackened. The Member Societies are now being paid the interest on these deposits. Figures indicate that the large nonmember subscription price increase will not cause a precipitous drop in subscriptions. However, this is an early sampling; it will be necessary to compare with 1981 after the first quarter of 1982. Kelly noted that institutions may take time to decide if they want to continue after this year.

The Committee adjourned for Executive Session at 2:30 p.m.

18. Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m., following the Executive Session.