[Vision2020] State Faculty Union Responds to Financial Crisis

[Joe Campbell]

I'm not sure about UI but at WSU tenure is somewhat of a myth. If they  
axe the Philosophy Department, for instance, they can axe me and my  
colleagues.

Joe Campbell

On Apr 16, 2009, at 10:40 PM, <nickgier at roadrunner.com> wrote:

> 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
>> =======================================================
>>
>
> =======================================================
> 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
> =======================================================