[Vision2020] [Bulk] UI Fails to Meet Living Wage Requirement

[Paul Rumelhart]

Nick,

I work closely with people in HR,  and know that the goal of getting all 
of our employees up to a living wage is an important one there, and has 
been for a while.  The devil, of course, is in the details.  
Specifically, who is going to pay for it.  I don't know where they are 
with that project, but I know it's being actively pursued and I know 
that the people working on it care greatly about it.

Also, the memo states that 80% of the progress has been made adjusting 
our workforce to a living wage.  I take that to mean that of the number 
of employees identified as being below a living wage, 80% of them have 
been moved up to a living wage.  I have no idea if that's true or not, 
but that's how I read it.  Having 20% of our workforce below a living 
wage seems too large of a number to me.  That would be about 500 people, 
since we have somewhere between 2300 and 2500 board-appointed employees 
(I can't remember the exact number, and it changes weekly). 

I can agree that the administration seems to get the best raises.  The 
important question is: are we getting our money's worth?  I have no idea 
how to answer that one.

Paul

nickgier at adelphia.net wrote:
> Greetings:
>
> I was looking for another story for the next issue of "Faculty Advocate," and here it is.  See the memo below from UI Financial VP about not being able to meet Moscow's living wage of $10.75 per hour.
>
> Almost 20 percent of UI employees receive salaries that are under the poverty line, and now many of them will have to wait even longer for their meager crumbs.
>
> Over 25 years UI upper administration salaries went up 274%, while full professor salaries increased 175%.  The Consumer Price Index for that same period was 202.  There were many years when faculty got raises and the staff did not, so I'm sure that staff are even further behind the CPI.
>
> A few years ago Idaho public employees had an opportunity to affiliate with the Service Employees International Union, the most progressive and fastest growing union in the America.  But the words "progressive" and "union" were just to much for a majority of these good folk.
>
> Some of you may remember my recent column on economic inequality.  It is alive and well at the UI.
>
> There is more than enough money in the raises the administration just received to bring staff salaries up to the Moscow City level of $10.75.  That's Walmart's average wage, for God's sake!
>
> Workers of America Arise! You have nothing to lose except your chains!
>
> Nick Gier, President, Higher Education Council, Idaho Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO
>
> Vice Provost Pitman and A-VP Johnson,
>
>  As you know we have made about 80% of the necessary university-wide progress during the last fiscal year to adjust our workforce up to living wage.  A great amount of that success came from internal adjustments as well as from recent pay adjustments from both the State and from the University.
>
> I promised you feedback not later than October of 07 as to if we could finish up the remaining approximate 20% that we have yet to  work and this correspondence is that feedback.  I apologize for being ten days late; however, I wanted to see for sure if we had any viable alternatives and it was worth waiting as long as we could for enrollment figures and any other potential alternative fund streams and so I took an extra few days.
>  
> With the flat enrollment and the overall reduction of our appropriation this last year, from what we received the year before, it is not possible, at this time, to make those final living wage adjustments.  However, we remain committed on this one and a lot of our capability or lack thereof will be predicated off of the Governor’s recommended pay adjustment and any specific constraints that will or perhaps not be tied to it, our own movement on our Health and Benefits and potential cost avoidance (which it is too soon to tell on this right now) and our future enrollment.
>
> I briefed the President today (and later, the Provost) and did recommend at the end of the brief to the President (and it was accepted) for us at University “Central” to do nothing at this stage on our potential remaining living wage adjustments.  We at “central” do not have the appropriated dollars at this time to funnel into this initiative.  He concurred and yet he too is aware of some of the parameters, that if they were to change in a more positive manner and  allow us to entertain this idea again in the near future.  Just today there was an article in the Spokesman paper on the same issue as it will remain a challenge for this part of our Country.  As you know, there is no mandated requirement to afford salaries that attain the living wage; however, it remains a viable objective for us to strive toward accomplishing.  We will continue to monitor and look for viable courses of action on this one.
>
> Not the news you would prefer and I understand that.  We will remain vigilant and aware on this as we move through the rest of the fiscal year.
>
> Lloyd Muse, UI Financial VP
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================