[Vision2020] State Faculty Union Responds to Financial Crisis

[nickgier at roadrunner.com]

Hi Jennifer,

You are quite correct: many of those who earn more than $100,000 are tenured. All of the deans, for example, have tenured positions in the departments of their discipline.

All faculty undergo an annual review of their performance. With regard to tenure review, there are provisions for this, and the union has called for the review of one tenured faculty member.  The administration refused our request (didn't even give us the courtesy of a reply) and they have also removed the possibility of individual faculty members and department triggering review of tenure.  The administration is also in charge of granting tenure after a 5-7 strenuous probationary period.  That is usually sufficient time to notice whether a professor has what it takes to move through the equally demanding process of being promoted to associate and then full professor.

Thanks for your good questions.

Nick
v
---- Jennifer Ingalls <jennifer at inlandradio.com> wrote: 
> Dr. Gier,
> 
> Thank you for posting this. I am curious about section I. Where it states:
> ". . . savings be taken from those making more than $100,000," it seems to
> be in contradiction to the rest of the section given that most $100K plus
> positions are tenured positions (at least this is true across the liberal
> arts). I do realize that this is a "related decision" and not primary to the
> rest of that section, but it does create and interesting problem, it would
> seem. 
> 
> I hate to see cuts to education in Idaho no matter what (as it is UI faculty
> are underpaid relative to other universities its size, etc.). However, I
> wonder about the value of retaining even some tenured faculty who neither
> produce nor teach effectively . . . I generally resent pay-for-performance
> programs on principle, but where economic downfalls dictate a need for
> review, I'm inclined to think we do need to look that direction. What do you
> think about this? Is it time to review faculty performance?
> 
> Sincerely,
>  
> Jennifer
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
> On Behalf Of nickgier at roadrunner.com
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 1:55 PM
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: [Vision2020] State Faculty Union Responds to Financial Crisis
> 
> IFT HIGHER EDUCATION COUNCIL RESPONDS TO FINANCIAL CRISIS
>  
> On April 15, 2009 the Higher Education Council of the Idaho Federation of
> Teachers, AFT/AFL-CIO met in a phone conference to discuss the financial
> crisis.
>  
> Those present were Valia Tatarova, Idaho State University (physics); Lynn
> Lubamersky, Boise State University (history); Chris Riggs, Lewis-Clark State
> College (history); Lynne Haagensen, University of Idaho (art); Joyce Lider,
> North Idaho College (English); Susan Andrews, IFT Vice-President for Higher
> Education; and Nick Gier, IFT President. 
>  
> I. Salary Reduction Proposal. According to a legal opinion from the AFT
> national office, academic tenure protects base salary. Tenure is a property
> right and at least two court cases have recognized that base salary is part
> of that property. The IFT Higher Education Council voted to oppose any
> salary reductions for tenured faculty.  We join the BSU Faculty Senate
> President in vowing to file a case action suit if tenured faculty are forced
> to take a pay cut.  In a related decision the IFT Higher Education Council
> voted that classified staff, lecturers, and non-tenured faculty be exempt
> from salary reductions and proposed that salary savings be taken from those
> making more than $100,000.
>  
> II. Teaching positions should have priority over administrative positions.
> Nation-wide administrative positions have generally grown at a greater rate
> than teaching positions.  The example of BSU is especially egregious: from
> 2005-2007 BSU had over 100 more administrators than its peers but 191 fewer
> faculty members instructing students than peer institutions.  Administrative
> salaries have also outpaced faculty pay.  Since 1982 the salaries of 11 top
> UI administrative positions have increased 260 percent while full professor
> salaries increased 198 percent.  (CPI for the period was 215.) (For more see
> <www.home.roadrunner.com/~nickgier/salaries.htm>.) The IFT Higher Education
> Council voted to recommend that administrative positions be cut before
> teaching positions.
>  
> III. Appropriated funds are for academics not athletics.  Since 1987 state
> subsidies for athletics at the UI has grown 338 percent while appropriations
> for Idaho higher education has grown 159 percent.  Currently the state
> subsidies for UI and ISU athletics are over $3 million.  Since 1999 private
> contributions to UI athletics rose 246 percent, indicating the potential for
> it to wean itself, as any non-academic program should, from its state
> subsidy. (For more see <www.home.roadrunner.com/~nickgier/athletics.htm>.)
> The IFT Higher Education Council voted to request that state monies for
> athletics on all Idaho campuses be phased out over 4-6 years.  
>  
> IV. Program reduction procedures must be revised.  In 2002 the Idaho State
> Board of Education (SBOE) instituted new procedures for program reduction.
> At that time the IFT objected to a lack of protection for tenured faculty
> and requested that the procedures be revised.  As no revisions have been
> made, IFT president asked  in December 2008 for a legal opinion from the
> national office.  The response was that these procedures undermine tenure
> and do not comply with Idaho law. (For more see
> <www.home.roadrunner.com/~nickgier/ProgramReduction.htm>.) The IFT Higher
> Education Council voted to urge the SBOE to revise these procedures such
> that tenured faculty have the same protection as under the procedures for
> financial exigency.
> 
> =======================================================
>  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
> =======================================================
>