MU BOG Faculty Rep Blog

The Greenbook, Marshall University Faculty Handbook: 

http://www.marshall.edu/academic-affairs/The%20Greenbook/May2005GB.pdf

From page 48: Incoming Members of the Faculty 

2. Experience has shown, however, that on certain occasions special problems arise in connection with the determination of academic ranks and salaries of new entrants to the faculty. Such problems usually involve the evaluation of related work experience, private instruction without college credit, and the procurement of faculty in fields of extreme scarcity. If at any time the administration feels that it is advisable to assign rank or salary above that to which a newcomer would be normally entitled under this plan, the recommendation shall come from the department chairperson after he/she has conferred with the members of the department, especially those who hold ranks comparable to or above that of the new member of the department. The Faculty Personnel Committee shall be provided with a written explanation by the Provost or the Vice President for Health Sciences. 

Questions re: point #2:

I had an opportunity to ask our Provost to clarify this statement.  This is a very rare occurrence that Marshall University has not used in recent time—if ever!  The situation described above in point #2 would only be used if we had an extremely unusual appointment. For example- let’s say one day, a Nobel Peace Prize winner with no advanced degrees or experience in higher education, is appointed to be a full professor in English.  Clearly, a salary commensurate with this rank would exceed what this person’s credentials would warrant.  The key word is “entitled.”  MU will not pay individuals above what they are entitled to receive. This policy is not used – faculty will not be appointed above an entitled salary in any department on campus. 

3. Should new faculty members be employed at salaries higher than those being paid to current members of the staff who hold positions with comparable responsibilities and who have equivalent training, experience and competence, the latter will be considered for comparable compensation. The competence is to be determined by the chairperson of the department in consultation with other members of the department with equal or higher rank. 

Question re: point #3:

We are all aware of campus-wide difficulties in recruiting new faculty due to salaries.   Many of us feel that the recruitment of good faculty is a critical element to improving our over-all quality and bringing in fresh new ideas.  Often to be competitive with other institutions, we must pay market or near market salaries to lure new people to MU. 

This creates the salary compression problem for veterans at the same/higher ranks.  Therefore, this policy under point #3 is in place to help departments recruit competitively while addressing salary inequities that result from competitive hires. The key element in this process is the chairperson’s role and responsibilities. The chairperson of a department in which this takes place should be communicating with the faculty re: the process during hiring to initiate the salary discussion among affected individuals at equal or higher rank.  

Then s/he is to communicate with the college dean re: the competence of the individuals s/he deems eligible for consideration for an equity adjustment within the next salary funding cycle. Equity is not automatic– the availability of equity funds depend on 1) the salary pool available to make equity adjustments and 2) the chairperson’s recommendation re: competence which is based on evaluation of faculty and consultation with individuals in the dept. at the same or higher rank.

Clearly, in addition to the availability of funds, open communication among the faculty, chairperson, dean, and provost is essential for this process to be successful. 

Question re: Construction vs. Salaries:

Legislative and Federal funds earmarked for construction projects logically can’t be used for salaries BUT the enhancements provided on campus help to attract more students.  When our student population goes up, we do receive a larger portion of the revenues - - which in-turn CAN be used for salaries. This is a lengthy process and always a calculated risk, but as we improve the campus and resources we provide, we attract and retain more (and better) students who will pay tuition and fees to enhance personnel lines.

As always, fee free to contact me at brooks@marshall.edu or 696-6613 and/or post a question/comment re: current faculty issues here.

The 2007-08 edition of the Chronicle’s Almanac has arrived!  We have placed the hard copy on reserve in the library.  If you have a specific question about any of the following tables, please consult me. 

Faculty & Staff Data:

• Median Salaries of College Administrators, 2006-07
• Average Salaries of Full-time Faculty Members, 2006-07
• Full-time Professors by Racial and Ethnic Group, Fall 2005
• College Employees by Racial and Ethnic Group, Fall 2005
• Average Faculty Salaries by Selected Field & Rank at 4 year Institutions, 2006-07
• Tenure Status of Full-time Faculty Members, 2005-06
• Trends in Faculty Employment
• Profile of Faculty Members, Fall 2003
• Opinions and Attitudes of Full Time Faculty Members, 2004-05
• Profile of College Presidents, 2006
• Chronicle Survey of College Trustees

As with any public list or bulletin board pertaining to the MU community, we will be aware of the MU-IT Council’s Acceptable Use Policy and also follow the Core Rules of Netiquette. The blog administrator reserves the right to remove inflammatory or inappropriate postings.

FYI - I sent this around a while back when this issue came out, but in case you missed the info, here is AAUP’s ”Annual Report On The Economic Status Of The Profession, 2006-07″ from their webpage.  There are several excellent stats and comparisons that might help when you discuss salary issues with your colleagues/dean in your colleges:  http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/comm/rep/Z/ecstatreport2006-07/survey2006-07.htm 

The revision to BOG AA-22 was the most significant issue directly related to faculty on this meeting’s agenda.  It entails some rewording of the AA-22 policy re: the annual evaluation of faculty.  Basically the only major change is that probationary faculty no longer have an entire year after a non-retention notification as they did in the past.  With the new policy, the employment of probationary faculty who receive a non-retention letter is terminated at the end of the current academic year like most institutions already do.  

The other wording change was to allow faculty to revise their annual report roles that are presented in December of each year. This allows faculty to modify their weights if it should happen that their responsibilities change dramatically mid-year (i.e. they receive a big grant, they fall ill, they assume new duties, their program changes mid-year etc.).  This item is attached FYI.  http://www.marshall.edu/ill/07-BOG/rev-bog-aa-22.pdf 

The other noteworthy issues presented included:

1) projection of increased enrollment for this AY is double the initial assumptions (over 8%); however, note this is a 3-5 year process as we experienced several consecutive years of decreased enrollment we must “make-up” so we’re still a little bit “in the hole.” Recruitment is largely responsible for this positive outcome.  Our new scholarship programs are also a big factor in our ability to attract new students.

2)  Our investments have realized a higher return rate now that we are controlling them. FYI the recent down-turn in the markets may have a negative impact on this but the “long haul” is what may continue to yield positive results.

3)  The CTC agreement was accepted – this is a lengthy agreement that calculates the overhead for the CTC administrative and academic functions the main campus provides.  While it is over 3m this annual fee is much lower than it would be if the CTC would have to support these services solo. Senator Plymale is helping the CTC obtain another 5m for the new building project on 20^th St.  Right now they have 10m promised from the Legislature for their much-needed facility.

4) The Academic committee also presented the tuition waiver report in which numbers stayed relatively constant for each type of waiver at both the UG and GD levels. FYI even when it appears that the university is waiving revenue, note that these students do still pay fees, room/board, books, and other misc. revenue-generating things so in essence, we do not lose a significant amount of income. Additionally, waivers help us recruit more international students, out-of-state students, and non-resident/resident scholarship recipients.

5) Senator Plymale presented a PowerPoint describing the innovative programs that he is spearheading through the Rayhall Transportation Center on campus.  Several involve educational programs that directly promote economic and workforce development in our region’s transportation venues (rail, river, & roadway).  Let me know if you would like to see this presentation and I’ll be happy to send you the handout he provided.

There were many items on the agenda I didn’t address here so if you see anything you’d like to know more about, let me know.

Please see the attached agenda for the next BOG meeting scheduled for Wednesday, August 22 at 10:30 a.m. in the Shawkey room of the MSC. The attached also includes committee resolutions, MU-MCTC annual agreement, the fee waiver report, and proposed revisions to BOG AA-22.  http://www.marshall.edu/ill/07-BOG/AGENDA-BOG-Aug-22-2007.pdf   

One faculty member did ask why we seem to spend valuable funds on buildings when our faculty salaries rank among the lowest in the nation (AAUP).  Many people feel this way.  While I think I understand how it works (bonds/legislative funding and construction initiatives are earmarked and not eligible to be used for any kind of E&G/operating or personnel support), I’ll ask for clarification and will be sure and post here.

In re: to another question from several people I had re: CUPA/AAUP salaries and our targets to market, I will discuss the process for correcting over-market salaries for new hires outlined in the Green book w/ the Provost at first opportunity and report back. 

In the meantime, from my experience working w/ salary data for the librarians, I can say that a lot depends on the following:

1. your market salaries from AAUP & CUPA data presented by IR

2. your CUPA code (do you know what your code stands for?)

3. your years of service and rank obviously and

4. your target to market - or in other words - how far is your salary from the 86% of market target MU strives for?

If you are far away, expect equity since we still allocate the salary pool on the equity-merit (49-51) split….if you are close or over market, then don’t expect equity.  This is a discussion that faculty should be having with their deans individually or as a group.

The other half of this discussion involves merit. I am sure you all have done this before – but once you obtain your OCR score, you need to calculate merit based on the % your college gets from the salary pool using the BOG formula from BOG AA-8.  It’s complicated but I have done this many times for our faculty and can help you if you have any questions when we learn of our % pool figures in late Sept or early Oct.

The meeting on July 20 was relatively short. The main item on the agenda was the recommendation of the MCTC presidential candidate.  The search committee did a super job of selecting three candidates who were outstanding. I had the opportunity to meet each person and listen to their comments at the general MCTC faculty meetings and receptions held the evening of their arrival.  Each candidate had a unique strength and all had outstanding reputations and careers as CTC administrators. All three individuals indicated their desire to forge a proactive relationship with the president and main Univ. campus faculty/staff in the hopes that more 2+2 and cooperative programming could be developed.  The individual selected was Dr. Keith Cotroneo– his vita indicated he has had success in retention programs resulting in increased enrollment at more than one prior institution. For more view the press release:  http://www.marshall.edu/www/pressrelease.asp?ID=1087 

The other items included votes to allow President Kopp and the admin to pursue the softball facility project in which foundation funds are being used to initiate the construction.  A fundraising campaign will be kicked-off to raise the funds to replace this line item.  Property is being purchases using MCTC funds gained from our local senator and delegate’s efforts at the legislative level.  The new MCTC building will have a prime location near the stadium on 20th.  Earnings from these initial funds (they were acquired 2-3 years ago) will aid in purchasing space for parking etc. within the same area.

As always, let me know if you have questions. If I do not know the answer I will be happy to make inquiries on your behalf.