June 6, 1977

Executive Committee of the American Institute of Physics

Minutes of Meeting

The Executive Committee met on the evening Of June 6, at The Biltmore Hotel, and on June 7 at AIP Headquarters.

Members Present: Philip M. Morse – Chairman, W. A. Fowler, Laurence W. Fredrick, W. W. Havens, Jr., H. W. Koch, Sidney Millman, Melba Phillips, Jarus W. Quinn

Absent: Robert T. Beyer

Nonvoting Participants: Joseph A. Burton (APS), Richard W. Hoffman (AVS)

Guest: *Ronald Peierls, Chairman of the AIP Manpower Commission

AIP Staff Present: H. William Koch, Director; Sidney Millman, Secretary; G. F. Gilbert, Treasurer; Robert H. Marks, Associate Director for Publishing; Lewis Slack, Associate Director for General Activities; Mary M. Johnson, Assistant to the Secretary; Daphne Doelger, Secretary to the Director; *David W. Kraft, Director of the Placement Division; *Beverly F. Porter, Director of the Manpower Division

*Present during the morning session on June 7 only.

Following dinner on June 6, Chairman Morse called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.

1. Minutes

Upon motion made and passed without dissent, the draft minutes of the Executive Committee meeting of March 31, 1977, were approved.

2. Introductory Comments on Present Status of AIP

In his introductory comments, Koch noted that AIP is entering a critical period in its operation principally because of (a) the changes required to implement the new copyright law, (b) the rapid developments in computerized composition of full-text journal pages and (c) the various implementation steps needed to effect the move to the newly-acquired Woodbury building and the consolidation of the New York City location. He felt that the staff is prepared for the impending changes. He pointed particularly to the anticipated large net income to be disclosed in the audit for 1976, which, when added to the net income of the previous two years, will put AIP in a good position to finance the cost of the move. Moreover the availability of a good labor market in Long Island and the use of our new and improved computer facilities puts AIP in a good position to provide improved services at reduced cost after two years of transition. He looked forward to continued support by the nine Member Societies and their representatives on the Governing Board and Executive Committee.

3. Center for the History of Physics

1. Encouragement of Other AIP Member Societies to Solicit Voluntary Contributions for the Center

   Slack reported that, as the result of action by its Council, the American Physical Society has included in its current dues billing a line for people to designate a special contribution to the Center for the History of Physics in addition to the voluntary contribution for that Society's special projects. It has been suggested that other Societies might be interested in doing something similar in the billings to their respective members.

   Fowler noted that about 28% of the APS dues bills have been returned so far with about $6,000 contributed to the Center. The other voluntary contributions by APS members amount to about $30,000. He estimated that the total APS contributions for the Center would reach $20,000. Burton expressed the belief that the contributions to the Center will not decrease the other voluntary contributions. Fowler proposed that, at the appropriate time, Slack, or some other AIP officer, should send a letter to the other Societies informing them of the APS action and the results achieved. In a polite way, one could indicate that it would be nice if other Societies in the physics community would consider a similar course of action.

   Quinn asked why it is considered better to add the request for contributions to the Center to the other items in the dues bill than to send a separate mailing. Burton replied because the subscriber has his checkbook handy at that time. Fredrick added that the experience of the Astronomical Society has been that you have to put all the bills in one package. It would also help if someone dedicated to that enterprise would write a personal letter for inclusion.

   Fowler stated that, as the new Vice Chairman of the Council of Friends, he would suggest that someone should draw up a plan, not so much on the program, but about the physical facilities envisaged for the Center. He thought that it is difficult to get contributors enthusiastic about operating programs. We should state what we are going to do with the money in terms of bringing the physical facilities of the Center up to some decent standards. Millman added that the brochure from the Center for the History of Physics didn’t state how much we can do with the money that is available in the regular AIP budget and what we can do if we have more money. Morse thought that one could say, for example, that the space will be doubled without having to be specific about how many square feet are involved. Fowler suggested that we ask Spencer Weart to put down what he could do if the facilities were to be expanded. He added that it would be nice if the Center were in some more visible place, such as on the main floor of the headquarters building. He noted also that we might explore such a gimmick as having contributors’ funds matched. Cal Tech does that. Koch noted that, if there was some special publicity connected with it, we might be able to arrange something at the time of the meeting of the Corporate Associates. Morse suggested that we have a report on it at the September meeting.

2. Establishment of an Endowment Fund for the Center for the History of Physics

   Slack reported that our auditor, Sheldon Greenberg, pointed out that there has been no formal action so far to establish an endowment fund, either for general or specific purposes. Monies in support of the Center have been sought and received for both current expenses and endowment purposes with the knowledge and encouragement of the Board and Executive Committee although no formal resolution was passed. Money from the normal Friends billing goes into the operating fund, while money collected in response to Piore’s request for an endowment goes into the endowment fund. In the APS billing, there was no mention about an endowment fund. It was pointed out that unrestricted funds can also be put into the endowment fund. Greenberg has recommended that a resolution be passed to formally establish an endowment fund, the income from which is to support the work of the Center. This resolution should provide that funds already contributed for that purpose be deposited in that fund.

   The following motion was then made by Quinn, seconded by Fowler, and passed without dissent:

   MOVED that AIP establish an endowment fund for the Center for the History of Physics as a repository for funds previously raised and funds, to be raised which are specifically earmarked as endowment contributions to the Center, the income of which is to support the work of the Center for the History of Physics.

   Fowler expressed interest in being kept informed as to other contributions from the Friends as well. He would particularly like to know whether the latter decreased as a result of the APS appeal. A report on that at the September meeting would perhaps be appropriate.

   Slack reported that Greenberg also recommended that a resolution be developed, in consultation with our attorney, to establish an endowment fund for general purposes. It was the consensus that such an endowment fund should be unrestricted.

4. Morse’s Letter re Tax Reform Act of 1976

Koch reported that, as a follow-up on the concerns expressed by Branscomb at the April 2 meeting of the Governing Board (Page 8 of the minutes of that meeting) about the restrictions imposed by the Tax Reform Act of 1976 on attendance at scientific meetings held outside the United States, Morse wrote a letter on April 27 to Congressman Al Ullman, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. Morse urged that a differentiation be made between bona fide scientific conferences and pseudo conferences that are, in effect, excuses for vacations abroad for U.S. citizens. A copy of Morse's letter, together with Koch's memorandum to Morse dated April 22, was distributed to members of the Executive Committee prior to the meeting and is attached to the official minutes of this meeting. There has been no response to Morse's letter.

5. Enabling Action with Respect to Interim Committee Appointments

Millman reported that soon after the April 1-2 Governing Board meeting, an occasion arose which made it necessary to appoint two additional members to the Advisory Committee on Physics Today – Philip M. Solomon and Harold F. Webster. He noted that, in the past, there had been enabling action included along with approval of the roster of advisory committees by the Governing Board. He requested that such an enabling resolution be passed by the Executive Committee at this time which will be in force until the spring 1978 Governing Board meeting. The following motion was then passed without dissent:

MOVED that the appointment of Philip M. Solomon and Harold F. Webster to the Advisory Committee on Physics Today be approved, and that the Chairman and Director be authorized to make any necessary appointments in the interim between meetings of the Governing Board.

1. Replacement of Phillips on the Executive Committee by A. A. Strassenburg, Effective August 1, 1977

   Phillips informed the Executive Committee that, following up on previous plans, she intends to resign effective August 1, 1977, as a member of the Governing Board, the Executive Committee, the Fiscal Policy Committee and the Committee on Society Services. She also noted that AAPT has already designated A. A. Strassenburg as a member of the Board effective the same date. She recommended that Strassenburg be appointed to the Fiscal Policy Committee and to the Committee on Society Services. She also recommended that the Executive Committee recommend to the Governing Board that Strassenburg be appointed a member of the Executive Committee. The following motion was then passed without dissent:

   MOVED that the Executive Committee recommend to the Governing Board the appointment of A. A. Strassenburg to the Executive Committee, effective August 1, 1977, and that a letter ballot of the Board on this recommendation be authorized.

   (The appointment of Strassenburg to the Executive Committee was subsequently approved by the Board as a result of the mail ballot.)

6. Proposal to Offer Physics Today to Members of the Turkish Physical Society at Reduced Rates

Marks reported that AIP has received a letter from the Turkish Physical Society requesting that we make Physics Today available to their members at a reduced rate. We have granted this privilege for certain of our journals, including PT, to the Canadian Physical Society, the European Physical Society, and the Australian Institute of Physics, usually at the member rates. He recommended that we grant the same privilege to members of the Turkish Physical Society. The following motion, introduced by Havens, was passed without dissent:

MOVED that Physics Today be offered to members of the Turkish Physical Society at the member rate.

7. Corporate Associates Activities

1. Approval of Proposed Conditions for Award

   Koch reported that the Prize Committee appointed at the April 2 meeting of the Governing Board, consisting of Frank E. Jamerson – Chairman, R. W. Landauer, F. J. Darnell, W. W. Havens Jr., and H. W. Koch-ex officio, met on April 27 and drew up conditions for the new AIP Prize for Industrial Applications for Physics. (Copies of the Prize Committee's report were distributed prior to the meeting, and a copy is attached to these minutes as Exhibit A.) He recommended that these conditions be approved. He noted that the closing date for applications is October 15 (subsequently changed to October 1). There would be a meeting of the Prize Committee immediately after that to select the first prize winner, and the announcement of this action could be made at the time of the Corporate Associates meeting in San Jose. The prize could be presented at the next meeting of the Member Society that was particularly appropriate for technical contributions made by the recipient.

   The following motion was made and passed without dissent:

   MOVED that the conditions for the Prize for Industrial Applications of Physics as proposed by the Prize Committee be approved.

   It was agreed that this Prize Committee would also serve as the first award committee. Havens noted that the quality of the winners of the first two prizes will establish the prestige of the award.

2. Perkin-Elmer Proposal for a Van Zandt Williams Award

   Koch reported that James Baker of The Perkin-Elmer Corp. had previously proposed that an award, which would serve as a memorial to Van Zandt Williams, the Director of the Institute 1967-68, be established and be given to someone from industry, without specifying further the conditions of this proposed award. A recent letter from Baker indicated that Mrs. William G. Zehnder, formerly Mrs. Van Zandt Williams, is not enthusiastic about such a proposal. Koch felt that no action is called for at present unless we hear more about the funding and other conditions. Havens thought that AIP should not shut it off at the present time but perhaps indicate under what conditions we would accept money for a prize. Koch said he will go back to Baker with a description of the Prize for Industrial Applications of Physics that AIP is currently establishing, indicating interest in exploring Perkin-Elmer’s view of this new prize and what specific proposal they would like to make complementing the current prize program. There were no objections.

3. Candidates for National Medal of Science

   Koch stated that AIP asks the Advisory Committee on Corporate Associates each year to propose candidates for the National Medal of Science. The Committee suggested three candidates: Peter Sorokin, Lawrence W. Hafstad, and Donald W. Kerst. He thought that AIP should submit a fourth name and proposed Philip Morse, noting that he was being proposed by several others and had been proposed last year by AIP. There was no objection to submitting the four candidates that Koch proposed.

8. Woodbury Move

1. Schedule

   Marks distributed copies of a schedule prepared by WDM Planning Inc. This schedule calls for the design development to be completed by July l, 1977, technical drawings to be available for submission to bidding by July 15, demolition and renovation to start August 1, and space to be ready for occupancy by the Metaxas group on November 1, by Data Processing on January 31, 1978, and the balance of the space to be ready for occupancy by July 1, 1978. There appears to be enough space for approximately 200 people in the building. This will house Data Processing and data input, Subscription Fulfillment–member and nonmember, back numbers, and cashiering, as well as the Metaxas composition unit, which can compose 50,000 to 60,000 pages annually – almost double what is being done now – on one shift. The space set aside for the computer is about three times the size of our present computer room. We are planning for a cafeteria with vending machines but no hot meals.

   The fourth floor at headquarters and half of the second floor would be vacated and into that space we would put Manpower Statistics, Advertising, and Physics Today from 304 East 45th Street, and from 800 Second Avenue editorial mechanics – about 60 people. Composition now being done at 800 Second Avenue will disappear, and that production will be moved to Weber & Stevens. Under that new setup, this leaves about 160 people in the headquarters building. Currently, space at headquarters is used very inefficiently. We would have to do a completely new space layout which we expect to prepare by the fall.

2. Financing

   Marks noted that there have been no new developments on the financing of the Woodbury building since the last meeting. The bank has not contacted us as yet concerning the existing mortgage.

3. Personnel Policies

   Marks reported that we have had meetings with IEEE people about their experience with the move to Piscataway. They had no staff out there at all to begin with. We have a big plus in that we have a large staff already on Long Island. We have to develop some very definite policies with respect to termination pay for those who do not elect to move, allowances for those who do, and supervisors who will not come with us but will spend a few months training new staff. We are getting very close to a recommendation on what the policy will be, taking into account all our present policies. No snags are foreseen at the moment. We will probably lose all clerical help but will keep key people.

9. Report of the Ad Hoc Search Committee for Placement Director

Koch reported that AIP now has a new Placement Director, David W. Kraft. He will be working during the summer as a consultant and will take on full-time employment as of September 1. Koch called attention to the report of the Search Committee which was previously distributed. The following motion was passed without dissent:

MOVED that the report of the ad hoc Search Committee for a Placement Director be received with thanks.

On a related item, Fowler suggested that we should publish in Physics Today an updated story on the University of Miami program that turns Ph.D. physicists into M.D.’s in two years, highlighting the flexibility of physicists and the type of education they receive in our universities.

10. 1978 Page Charges and Subscription Prices for AIP Journals

Marks noted that, despite inflation, journal production costs have been kept below figures budgeted and, accordingly, he recommended that page charges remain at present levels and that subscription rates also be maintained at 1977 levels with two exceptions, as follows:

	Member Price		Nonmember Price
	From	To	From	To
Journal of Applied Physics	$23.00	$24.50	$105.00	$112.00
Soviet Journal of Plasma Physics	—	—	145.00	180.00

The proposed increase in the JAP prices is due to the plan to have the Proceedings of the Magnetism Conference published as a 13th issue and is conditional on approval to be asked for later in the agenda for the publication of the next Magnetism Conference Proceedings in JAP. Upon motion made and passed without dissent, page charges and AIP journal subscription rates for 1978 will remain at 1977 levels with the two exceptions listed above.

The meeting was recessed at 8:40 p.m., and reconvened at AIP headquarters on June 7 at 9:00 a.m.

11. APS Proposal for Short-term Investment Allocations

Secretary’s Note: In order to help the reader to follow the discussion of this item, we reproduce here the relevant sentences on this subject from the AIP Constitution and the contract (Memorandum of Agreement) between the Institute and Societies served.

From the Constitution: Article XII – Services and Charges

1. Member Societies. The Institute shall perform such services for its Member Societies as are requested by the Societies and authorized by the Governing Board. Such services are to be performed at cost under terms and conditions which shall be established by contract between the Institute and the organization served.

From the Memorandum of Agreement: III – Periodic Reports and Settlement of Account

1. At the end of each month, the Institute shall furnish the Society a statement of dues collected from Society members and a statement of money collected from Society members for subscriptions to Society-owned journals and the money collected for such dues and subscriptions shall be paid by the Institute to the Society monthly.

2. At the end of each quarter-year, income and expense accounts for each journal or other publication published for the Society by the Institute shall be totaled and submitted in detail by the Institute to the Society. On the basis of this statement, quarterly payments shall be made to the Institute by the Society or vice versa to balance the account.

3. At the end of each quarter-year, the Institute shall furnish the Society a statement of expense for such other services as clerical assistance, office space and facilities, and billing and collection of dues from members. On the basis of this statement, payments shall be made as provided in Paragraph 2 of this Article.

4. One quarter of the annual dues payable to the Institute in accordance with Article XI of the Institute’s Constitution shall be included in each quarterly statement rendered to the Society by the Institute.

In his introductory comments, Koch called attention to Attachment C to the agenda dealing with correspondence between Burton and Gilbert (copy attached as Exhibit B) and noted that money has always been withheld by AIP on nonmember subscriptions to Society journals in order for AIP to have funds to pay Society bills as, for example, to defray the cost of the composition of journal pages, generally covered by page charges that are collected from an author's institution much later. In general, funds withheld just about equal funds advanced. Until August 1975 it was not possible to get any interest on these funds for less than 30 days. Since then, we have been generating income on a daily basis but most of the income thus acquired belongs to AIP. He raised the question as to whether any new system we develop can or should be made retroactive. Any decision to change our method of handling Society accounts would mean a change in our contracts with the Societies.

Gilbert added that short term investment income emanates from idle funds available for investment because they are being held to pay bills not yet received or not yet put into the Investment Advisory Account. We have comingled funds because the contract between the Institute and Member Societies does not require our maintaining a large number of different funds. The problem is to calculate how much of our income was generated by Society money and how much by Institute funds. The amount of any funds handled in the course of a year is a factual figure that can be taken from the audit. This is the money that would have gone into separate accounts if we had had them. The big problem is to determine the average time that a given Society's money was held by the Institute. In prior years it was never thought that we would generate so much money from nonmember subscription income, the accounts for which are settled quarterly. We now have more money that we have to pay out for Society bills.

Gilbert agreed that this money belongs to the Societies but would like to have a specific method devised for calculating this income so that all Societies are treated alike. He raised the question whether we should charge interest to a Society for a service where the AIP expenditures are incurred before money is collected. He thought that once AIP gets its accounting computerized, such calculations will be easy to come by. He noted that there is a great disparity between the Societies. He wants AIP to be in a position to respond to any question raised by an auditor, having on hand legal opinions as to why we are doing what we are doing.

Burton expressed his belief that no change in the Agreements with the Member Societies is necessary since the Institute is required by the Constitution to perform services at cost. He referred to two different estimates of interest income on APS money derived in the 1975 calendar year by himself and by Koch, and stated that the amounts of APS money invested can be gotten from the 1975 audit but the discrepancy arises from the estimate of the average time held by AIP. Cash was not transferred in 1975 on the nominal date of the statement but very much later. The Burton figure for the amount of interest income on APS money is about $42,000 and the Koch figure is about $8,000.

Havens thought that there were two problems to be resolved: one of the past and one of the future. He agreed with the general principle that we should operate on a different basis in the future and that investment income generated by any Society funds belongs to that Society. We can set some boundary conditions for how we should operate in the future. He would like to see the Executive Committee discuss what boundary conditions ought to be set up for the future, and wait on more information and agreement between Burton and Gilbert on the settlement for the past.

Morse raised the question whether the computerized system we are planning to set up will be able to perform all the functions desired. He thought that several of these questions ought to go to the Fiscal Policy Committee for a recommendation to the Executive Committee and from there, a recommendation to the Governing Board next fall.

Following the introductory comments by Koch, and the statements by Gilbert, Burton, and Havens, Quinn introduced the following motion which was seconded by Fredrick:

MOVED, that the following additions and modifications to the accounting methods of the American Institute of Physics be adopted, such additions and modifications to be effective as soon as possible, but no later than necessary to apply to dues and subscriptions for 1978 and journals published within the 1978 volume year.

1. The Institute shall develop a set of itemized charges for services rendered or contracted on behalf of the Member Societies. These charges shall represent the actual cost to the Institute to the extent practical. Charges are also to be as uniform as possible. These charges are to be assembled in a catalog and distributed to all Member Societies. Initial issuance of the catalog of charges shall be subject to approval of the Executive Committee. Modifications shall be approved at the meeting of the Executive Committee following introduction of the changes. The cost of services applicable to a single Society shall not be subject to the approval process, but shall be communicated to the Member Societies by issuance of appendices to the catalog.

2. Income received and expenses incurred on behalf of the Societies shall be reported to the Societies on a cash basis each month. Settlement of these accounts shall also be made monthly except that in cases where the net income or expense due can reasonably be expected to exceed $50,000, semimonthly settlement shall be made. Though monthly statements shall be based on actual income collected and expenses incurred, a statement of receivables will also be included e.g. page charges billed but not collected. Statements shall indicate the applicable fiscal year for all income and expense items e.g. dues year, year of journal issue, year in which services are performed.

3. Fixed charges for member dues to the Institute, dues collections, maintenance of member history record, and the financial handling charge shall be billed to the Societies at the convenience of the Institute. Monthly settlement is preferred. Net income to the Institute from the rental of Society mailing lists shall be credited to the Society on the monthly statement.

4. Current memoranda agreements between the Institute and the Societies specify that certain Income and expense accounts shall be submitted to the Societies on a quarterly basis. It shall be the option of any Member Society to choose quarterly settlement instead of the monthly settlement specified in this motion. However, statements, whether monthly or quarterly, shall be on a cash basis: income collected and expenses incurred within the reporting period.

BE IT FURTHER MOVED, that the Fiscal Policy Committee be requested to examine the assets of the Institute in order to determine the Institute's long range fiscal requirements and that the Committee be requested to recommend to the Executive Committee appropriate goals for reserve funds and a timetable for establishment of the funds.

Quinn commented that his motion was stimulated by the exchange of correspondence between Burton and Gilbert. He noted that, since the original contracts were written, the business of both organizations has grown to such an extent that simple-minded statements are subject to various interpretations. In Item No. 1 of the motion, two accounting systems are asked for. It is easy to do the accounting system on the basis of actual costs, but the prorations will render the system unnecessarily complicated. He doubted whether they can ever be computerized. All AIP has to do is tell the Societies what the charges for various services are with no prorations and no variances. The quoted prices should become the fixed prices with provisions for modifications in case, for example, higher printing costs are incurred or postal rates are increased.

Gilbert agreed about the suggested system and the type of statements to be given to the Societies but pointed to the tremendous shortcomings we have with the burdensome manual accounting system right now. The provisions of the motion should be regarded as theoretical for the present. It is going to happen eventually but not before we get computerized. AIP has a 3 ½ million-dollar-a-year payroll, a large part of which is applicable to in-house operations for the Societies. We have an accrual system of accounting right now. The audit for 1976 is just finished and we can now start computerizing our accounting. He noted further that our experience with the quoted prices and very small variances has been so good because it is based on past experience. He was concerned that in the move to Woodbury we might encounter many unknowns in the cost of operations.

Havens thought the executive Committee should make up the timetable for the computerization of accounting according to what it thinks should be done, and then ask AIP management what resources it needs to meet that timetable. Koch suggested that we have a joint meeting of the Executive Committee and the Fiscal Policy Committee in September.

The following motion, made by Quinn, seconded by Fredrick, and amended by Fowler, was passed without dissent:

MOVED that consideration of the previous Quinn motion (recorded on the preceding two pages of these minutes) be delayed until the September meeting and that AIP be authorized to expend the necessary sum of money, up to $20,000, in order to hire a systems consultant who can provide, at that September meeting, a timetable for appropriate computer programming necessary to implement the financial interface between AIP and its Member Societies as outlined in that motion. Moreover, the Executive Committee would look favorably upon management’s adding staff to the computer programming group if it is deemed desirable for the setting up of the appropriate computerized accounting system.

The following motion, introduced by Havens and seconded by Fredrick, was also passed without dissent:

MOVED that the Fiscal Policy Committee be requested to examine the short-term investment income and make recommendations to the Executive Committee on two bases: (1) what should happen about the past, and (2) what should be done with respect to change in contracts and arrangements for the future on this question.

Fowler suggested that Koch reply to George Pake’s letter on this subject within the next few days delineating some of the actions taken by this Executive Committee. (Subsequently, Koch wrote a memorandum as suggested by Fowler and discussed it with Pake and others at the APS Shelter Island meeting on June 14.)

12. Review of Manpower Statistics Activities

Slack introduced this subject by noting that ten years ago there was a single Education and Manpower Division which was split into two separate divisions, with R. W. Sears becoming head of all the Manpower activities. Last year, when Sears retired, the Manpower Division was further split into Manpower Statistics and Manpower Placement. The total budget of the Manpower Statistics Division, headed by Beverly Porter, this year is of the order of $190,000 and the staff comprises about seven people. About 10% is devoted to special projects in conjunction with APS. The Executive Committee might want to keep in mind the appropriateness of the work being done by the Division, and whether part or all of the work should be done by the Societies themselves, and whether or not available resources are adequate or whether base programs are sufficiently broad for the future needs of the physics community. Mrs. Porter will review the activities of the Division and Ronald Peierls, Chairman of the AIP Advisory Committee on Manpower, will make some comments on the Manpower Statistics program and prospects for the program.

Porter stated that she had arranged her review on the activities of the Manpower Statistics Division under the following four sub-topics:

1. What does the Division do?
2. How it does it.
3. The rationale for undertaking certain projects.
4. Future support needs.

1. Under A, What does the Division do?, she cited the following: It conducts studies, carried out on yearly enrollments and degrees, and graduate student surveys by questionnaires to the graduate students in both physics and astronomy. Questions cover type of job offers they are receiving, initial salaries, type of subfields. She noted that there has been an increasing number of bachelors going into graduate studies other than physics, and these have been the subject of a separate scrutiny. It was found that a number are going to graduate school in engineering, to medical schools, and to law schools. Some, because of the job market in physics which did not look particularly good, and others because they had never intended to go on in physics–they had always been interested in being a lawyer, for example, but decided as undergraduates to take what would be a difficult and challenging discipline to major in.

   She noted that the 1973 Register was an expensive project. We still get inquiries as to when we intend to repeat such a Register.

   The Manpower Statistics Division is working closely with the APS Panel on Manpower, having sent out two questionnaires: (a) One questionnaire was directed to professors who did not receive tenure. Of these, the individuals who have gone on to the other top schools are the most satisfied of the group while those who went on to the lowest-rated schools tended to be much less satisfied. However, those who went into industry tend to be the most satisfied. (b) The second questionnaire was aimed at projecting future demand for physicists.

   The Division is in the midst of conducting an industrial projections survey and has got almost a 50% return. These questionnaires were sent to the Corporate Associates and members of the Industrial Research Institute. At a quick glance at the returns, it looks like slow increments. Some groups are responding, in effect, "Physicists need not apply."

2. Under the second topic, Porter discussed how the Division does its work. Susanne Ellis is carrying on educational surveys. The physics community itself cooperates with us to a large extent and a lot of data are thereby generated. The Division makes use of outside computer facilities. She would like to be able to do it all in-house. It is not expensive but it is limited in flexibility and availability for quick analysis of some data.

3. Under the third topic, Porter discussed the reasons for doing the studies: first is her own interest in knowing what is happening within the physics community. Some of the students had no idea of what was coming up in the years ahead and AIP should be able to look ahead somewhat and supply needed information. To monitor and evaluate what the situation is and what other people are doing. To plan – what are the expected enrollments; what kinds of patterns are occurring? The schools need to know these trends for budgetary purposes. Salary data have become more and more popular. Career opportunities for women in the past year. Inquiries are coming from academic and Government sources and, increasingly, from a science-interested public.

4. Finally, Porter tried to project what may be the needs for the future. The Division has extensive files which would provide a considerable amount of useful information if they could be linked. This cannot be done until we can have in-house computer facilities. The most difficult input category to analyze and keep track of is the group which comes into physics from other fields.

   She did not think that AIP can afford to have a complete Register, but thought that some variation of it on a smaller scale is called for. It would be nice every four or five years to be able to answer some of these basic questions. If we limit ourselves to ten questions, we could include such questionnaires with the dues bill.

   Millman asked whether it is important to include all of the physicists or whether it could be limited by age, selecting those within ten years of graduation. Porter felt that it should not be truncated on the basis of age – rather, she would make a sampling of it for all ages if we want to handle fewer names.

   Peierls commented that his Advisory Committee did make a report in March. He noted that whenever one has contact with other fields, the record and stature of the AIP Manpower work is extraordinarily high. It has not been clear to the physics community what kinds of questions can be answered and how quickly. He could not emphasize too strongly this question of computerization in order to be able to respond promptly to a variety of inquiries. Porter agreed that, when we can have direct access to a computer, it would make life much easier and the results would get out to the community much faster. Financial details are being explored now to try to find out how much it would cost. Packaged programs are available now so a programmer is not required, but a committed staff is essential. Peierls noted also that the Advisory Committee recommended that Placement information should also be computerized and meshed in with Manpower Statistics.

13. Report of Publishing Policy Committee Meeting of June 2, 1977

1. Publication of Proceedings of Magnetism Conference in JAP

   Marks reported that the editor of the Journal of Applied Physics feels that the loss of the Proceedings of the annual Magnetism Conference has harmed the journal. The Publishing Policy Committee recommended that it be returned to JAP under the conditions outlined in a June 1 memorandum from H. C. Wolfe, as follows:

   1. Authors will prepare camera-ready copy and will pay a $35 page charge. AIP will provide 100 free reprints. They will also pay an article charge of $20 per paper.

   2. The Conference will pay $10 per copy for each registrant with a guaranteed minimum of $5,500.

   3. AIP will raise the non-member subscription price by $7.00 and the member subscription price by $1.50 to account for the 13th issue of JAP.

   4. The back number price of the special Magnetism issue will be $12.00 in accordance with existing practice.

   The Conference Proceedings series by itself is now well established and can survive this loss. In addition, Marks thought that the Conference will leave AIP unless the Proceedings are published in JAP. The library community has also said they would prefer the suggested arrangement.

   Havens thought it depends very strongly on the review procedure and the quality of the papers. It is very difficult to reject, particularly, invited papers. That is what led APS to drop conference proceedings in Reviews of Modern Physics. If one can insure that the quality of the papers presented at the Conference is comparable to that of those normally published in JAP, it should be a good arrangement. Marks replied that the editor of JAP feels that papers in the Magnetism Conference are even above the quality of papers regularly published in JAP.

   The following motion was made by Havens, seconded by Fredrick, and passed without dissent:

   MOVED that the Executive Committee accept the recommendation of the Publishing Policy Committee that the Proceedings of the Magnetism Conference be published in the Journal of Applied Physics in accordance with the arrangements outlined above.

2. Copyright Wordings

   Marks reminded the Executive Committee that at the April 1-2 meeting of the Governing Board, a committee consisting of J. A. Krumhansl (chairman), Lester Guttman, R. H. Marks, and A. W. K. Metzner, was appointed to draft statements of AIP copyright policy as approved in principle by the Board at that time. The report of this committee was presented to the Publishing Policy Committee and the three forms of copyright wordings, as approved by that Committee, were distributed (copy attached as Exhibit C). Koch added that the Publishing Policy Committee suggested that this issue be brought before the Executive Committee to determine whether it would be possible, by mail ballot of the Governing Board, to get full implementation of these statements before the next Board meeting in October.

   Havens noted that the proposed action applies to AIP-owned journals only, although the Institute would like the Societies to adopt the same wordings for their respective journals. Marks added that this procedure will not change anything we have been doing already–it just makes it legal under the new Copyright Law.

   Havens made the following motion, which was seconded by Quinn, and passed without dissent:

   MOVED that the Executive Committee recommend to the Governing Board that the copyright wordings decided on by the Publishing Policy Committee be accepted; that a mail ballot to members of the Board be authorized so that the actions can be implemented as soon as approval by two-thirds of the Board members is received, and that serious objections in writing will be placed on the agenda for consideration at the Governing Board meeting scheduled to be held in October.

   Koch stated that he will recommend publication of an editorial on this in the September issue of Physics Today explaining our new policy and the need for it, and a news story, possibly in the August issue, containing the three component elements and reporting the status of the copyright procedure as of that time.

The meeting was recessed for luncheon at 12:25 p.m. and reconvened at 1:00 p.m.

3. Establishing Copy Fees

   Marks distributed copies of his two-page document on this subject (copy attached as Exhibit D) and asked for approval of the proposed copying fees for individual articles in AIP journals published after 1 January 1978. A motion to approve the proposed copying fees was made by Quinn, seconded by Fredrick, and passed without dissent.

14. Appointment of Search Committee for an Associate Editor of RSI

Koch reported that J. B. Horner Kuper has definitely expressed his desire to be relieved as editor of The Review of Scientific Instruments as soon as a replacement for him can be found. He thought it would be desirable to appoint a search committee and, accordingly, Morse appointed the following as members of the Search Committee for an Associate Editor of RSI:

• Sidney Abrahams, Chairman
• C. S. Borkowski
• E. L. Goldwasser
• F. Goulding
• J. E. Leiss

15. Topics for the September Meeting

 

Morse expressed the opinion that there are enough topics for a 3-day meeting, and suggested September 8, 9, and 10, the tentative dates previously proposed. (Subsequent discussions between Koch and those in charge of arrangements for the Oceanographic Institute at Woods Hole confirmed that the meeting will be held there on the stated dates. There will also be a meeting of the Fiscal Policy Committee immediately before the Executive Committee meeting so that the recommendations of the former can be presented and acted on during the early part of the Executive Committee meeting.)

16. 1976 Audit

Gilbert reported that the final audit figures show we made over a million dollars from our 1976 operations. The final 1976 net income is about $962,000 ($1,010,000 less adjustment of $48,000 for Reserve for Quoted Price Variance). He stated that this unexpected and unusually high income can be traced to three areas. Firstly, a high increase in investment income resulting from a more rapid processing of subscriptions and the use of an additional six months subscription income from the translation journals. Secondly, we experienced a windfall from the translation journals in switching from a fiscal year to a calendar year (income and expense recognized in 1976 includes issues which would normally have been published over a period of 18 months.) Thirdly, we experienced a decrease in archival journal expense, since we published about 1,000 fewer pages than budgeted; moreover, we experienced a very favorable Quoted Price Variance on the archival journals.

Quinn suggested that, because we changed the translation journal subscription year from a fiscal (June to July) to a calendar year basis and, since this contributed substantially to the large net income for 1976, it might be a good time to delay closing on the translation journals ("slip" them) for one year, subject to approval by the AIP auditor, and a motion to that effect was passed. (Subsequent investigation by Gilbert indicated that it was too late to accomplish this and, in a telephone conversation, Quinn agreed to dismiss the idea.)

Gilbert stated that, when the recommended additional appropriations from Accumulated Income to reserves have been determined, a telephone ballot of the Executive Committee should be taken to secure approval. A motion authorizing this telephone ballot was made and passed without dissent. (A telephone ballot of the Executive Committee was conducted subsequent to the meeting and approval was obtained for the following additional apportionment of 1976 income to reserves: Equipment Reserve $525,000, Publications Reserve $150,000, General Reserve $200,000.)

The meeting was adjourned at 1:30 p.m.