[Vision2020] State Faculty Union Responds to Financial Crisis
Joe Campbell
philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Fri Apr 17 06:24:12 PDT 2009
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
> =======================================================
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list