Best local hell-raiser?

9/10/2013: From the comments:

Vote for UOmatters.com on the Eugene Weekly’s “Best of Eugene.” I propose, 

4. Best local hell-raiser
26. Best self-published literary item (blog, zine) 

Go to http://bestofeugene.com/

Thanks! FWIW, my last muckraking award was from the Oregon Society of Professional Journalists, for this blog and for getting the DOJ to put the public records records manual online.

PAC-12 boss claims he wants money for athletes, not "Sweat Shop" and coaches

8/9/2013: From an extensive interview with Larry Scott by former UO student Allie Grasgreen, in IHE:

There’s obviously already a big concern, especially among the academics we write for, about the escalation of spending and the so-called arms race, and Oregon’s new football building is a good example of that. Would you see that sort of spending shooting up even further and faster under a new division? 

I would not…. To the contrary, I would like to see more of the available resources going to support student-athletes, less going to buildings and coaching salaries.

Because you would have different ways to incentivize students? 

Precisely. Right now you’re limited on what you can do, therefore the available resources go to other places.

UO Provost search begins

7/29/2013: Job posting in the Chronicle here. The hiring committee is here, Alec Murphy chairs. The search firm is Isaacson Miller. From what I can tell their most recent prior contract with UO was for the CFO search in 2011, which failed. President Lariviere then made the command decision to give the job to Jamie Moffitt, from the athletics department. A bit unusual, given that Moffitt had been on the hiring committee, participating in reviews and discussion of other candidates.

The search process that the Senate approved in its March resolution to President Gottfredson, in reaction to the fact that Jim Bean was appointed as interim provost and kept the job for 4-5 years without substantial review or faculty input, is here:

3) PERMANENT PROVOST SEARCH PROCESS:

For the permanent search, the goal is to identify a short list of candidates and forward a ranking of these candidates, with commentary, to the University President for consideration. If a professional search firm is hired, the PSC or a subcommittee will be involved in writing the RFP and evaluating firms to the maximal extent legally allowed.

The University President and the PSC shall seek and accept nominations. After receiving nominations and confirming that the nominees are interested in serving, the President and the PSC will ask for statements and conduct interviews as they see fit. The PSC shall consult with the President and identify at least three finalists, and recommend a ranking, with explanation, to the President.

The Senate strongly prefers that all the finalist’s names be made public and that no fewer than three candidates be brought to campus. However, we recognize that there are arguments for maintaining the confidentiality of applicants, and that it may therefore be preferable for campus visits to be done sequentially, stopping with the first candidate to be approved by the President.

Campus visits for finalists shall include a written public statement, meetings with the FAC and the Senate Executive Committee, as well as a public presentation to the university community on the current challenges facing the university and its future direction. Each presentation will include an open Q&A session. Following the interview process, the PSC shall solicit feedback on the candidates from the university community. The PSC will then forward its recommendation to the University President, along with a summary of community feedback.

4) The interim Provost can be a candidate for permanent Provost, but the University President shall not appoint the interim to the permanent post without a full national search.

5) In the event that the President sees a need for changes in the procedures above, he shall work with the PSC, the FAC, and the Senate Executive Review Committee to develop these changes. The SERC shall report the changes and rationale to the Senate.

Bargaining XXXI: CANCELLED

There was a last minute cancellation of this session. I went to the meeting room, and it looks like the admin team took off to find some more money:



Wed 7/23/2013, 1PM – 4PM. 122 Knight Library. I’ll live blog it.

Your Guarantee of TruthinessAll UO Matters bargaining posts are publicly fact-checked by Geller and Rudnick’s secret team of well paid consultants. How well paid? Gottfredson wants me to pay to find out. I asked for the most recent 3 months of invoices 6 weeks ago, eventually got an estimate of  $214.50, paid it last week, and still haven’t had a response to my question about when the documents will be ready. The Oregon AG says 2 weeks is typically a reasonable time frame, start to finish, and the DOJ generally produces legal invoices in one or two days.

Disclaimer: My opinion of what people said or were thinking but were too polite to say. Nothing is a quote unless in quotes.

Synopsis:

Prologue, from session XXX:

  • After actively participating in the discussion about Deb Carver yesterday, the admin team now seems to be claiming that the union team and UO Matters may have violated UO’s respectful workplace policy by repeating criticisms of Carver raised by union members from the library – criticisms which Rudnick, and I believe Gleason, repeated word for word during the discussion without raising any objections. And Rudnick is a lawyer, specializing in labor law?
  • Admin’s last proposal was for 10.5% raises (spread over last year and the 2 years of the contract), and for many faculty the first raises since 2007. The union counter was 14.5%. Despite the fact that all the financial news broke UO’s way, the UO administration proposal for today is also for 10.5%. Never give an inch, as Hank Stamper used to say.
  • Gleason and Rudnick went ballistic when the union brought up the Senate resolution on ending athletic subsidies.
  • Summer record for UOM visits yesterday. The faculty want to see the money:

Cast: 

Live-blog:

Update: UO salaries *fall*. Raises to get to AAU peers shown.

7/22/2013 update: Some fodder for the UO Trustees counter-proposal on raises to be presented Tuesday. IR should have new salary data from the AAU data exchange soon, but the sharing agreement says it can’t be posted on the web. 

4/8/2013 update: The AAUP released its latest salary report, showing average faculty salaries at public universities increased 1.3% over last year.

Here at UO salaries for full and instructors increased about that much, but pay for associates and assistant professors actually decreased, according to the data reported by UO to the AAUP. Page down to see how far behind our AAU comparators you are, by department and rank.

2011-12:




2012-13:


3/17/2013. The administration has proposed 5.05% average raises for the faculty through the 2013-14 AY.

This table comes from the data on the UO IR website and shows what percentage raises would be needed, by department and rank, just to get faculty to where the AAU comparators were back in 2010. Add another 5% or so to account for increases at the comparators since 2010, and as the comments note you might want to knock off a bit for fulls hired before 1996, on account of their PERS tier 1 deal, if you think they can keep it.

I’ve put the departments that are at or above median in the NRC rankings in bold. I apologize for the lack of data on instructors, I don’t have a good source.

Department Rank Oregon
average
2012-13
AAU
comparators 2010-11
Increase 
needed
to get to
2010 AAU
AAA Architecture & Interior Arch Full $97,221 $112,600 16%
AAA Architecture & Interior Arch Assoc $75,812 $83,600 10%
AAA Architecture & Interior Arch Asst $65,333 $68,400 5%
AAA Art History Full $102,163 $118,300 16%
AAA Art History Assoc $67,045 $75,400 12%
AAA Art History Asst $57,500 $63,800 11%
AAA Arts & Administration Assoc $76,981
AAA Arts & Administration Asst $54,522
AAA Department of Art Full $91,213 $94,900 4%
AAA Department of Art Assoc $65,491 $73,200 12%
AAA Department of Art Asst $57,429 $60,200 5%
AAA Landscape Architecture Full $99,735
AAA Landscape Architecture Assoc $71,851 $78,100 9%
AAA Landscape Architecture Asst $70,000 $58,700 -16%
AAA Planning, Public Policy and Mgt Full $95,724 $132,700 39%
AAA Planning, Public Policy and Mgt Assoc $71,900 $94,100 31%
AAA Planning, Public Policy and Mgt Asst $73,500 $79,800 9%
Business, College of Full $150,417 $200,000 33%
Business, College of Assoc $146,752 $156,900 7%
Business, College of Asst $144,115 $148,400 3%
CAS Anthropology Full $103,974 $111,000 7%
CAS Anthropology Assoc $70,360 $76,400 9%
CAS Anthropology Asst $63,153 $63,900 1%
CAS Asian Studies Full
$112,400
CAS Asian Studies Assoc
$74,800
CAS Asian Studies Asst $67,535 $65,500 -3%
CAS Biology Full $99,812 $119,200 19%
CAS Biology Assoc $78,336 $82,200 5%
CAS Biology Asst $72,067 $71,400 -1%
CAS CIS Computer  Full $110,810 $128,900 16%
CAS CIS Computer  Assoc $90,892 $102,000 12%
CAS CIS Computer  Asst $87,133 $91,100 5%
CAS Chemistry Full $104,626 $140,400 34%
CAS Chemistry Assoc $79,394 $92,900 17%
CAS Chemistry Asst $67,643 $77,700 15%
CAS Classics Full $88,508 $110,400 25%
CAS Classics Assoc $68,337 $75,900 11%
CAS Classics Asst $56,000 $59,100 6%
CAS Comp Lit Program Full $86,677 $98,500 14%
CAS Comp Lit Program Assoc $63,951 $67,300 5%
CAS Comp Lit Program Asst $57,100 $60,100 5%
CAS Creative Writing Full $107,866 $104,900 -3%
CAS Creative Writing Assoc $76,539 $67,800 -11%
CAS Creative Writing Asst $64,000 $58,100 -9%
CAS East Asian Language Literature Full $74,900 $109,400 46%
CAS East Asian Language Literature Assoc $68,535 $72,500 6%
CAS East Asian Language Literature Asst $59,264 $62,400 5%
CAS Economics Full $132,062 $167,500 27%
CAS Economics Assoc $106,164 $112,500 6%
CAS Economics Asst $97,458 $102,600 5%
CAS English Full $94,934 $112,500 19%
CAS English Assoc $68,090 $76,000 12%
CAS English Asst $57,576 $62,800 9%
CAS Ethnic Studies Full $98,294 $112,400 14%
CAS Ethnic Studies Assoc $80,571 $74,800 -7%
CAS Ethnic Studies Asst $61,000 $65,500 7%
CAS Geography Full $120,549 $126,000 5%
CAS Geography Assoc $76,539 $82,300 8%
CAS Geography Asst $67,157 $65,700 -2%
CAS Geological Science Full $91,998 $119,400 30%
CAS Geological Science Assoc $73,994 $79,300 7%
CAS Geological Science Asst $69,522 $72,000 4%
CAS German and Scandinavian Full $88,549 $98,300 11%
CAS German and Scandinavian Assoc $65,200 $74,000 13%
CAS German and Scandinavian Asst $57,500 $58,200 1%
CAS History Full $102,737 $115,500 12%
CAS History Assoc $70,979 $77,600 9%
CAS History Asst $61,229 $61,900 1%
CAS Human Physiology HPHY Full $110,700
CAS Human Physiology HPHY Assoc $84,700
CAS Human Physiology HPHY Asst $70,444 $70,300 0%
CAS Int’l Studies Full $122,500
CAS Int’l Studies Assoc $65,379 $76,500 17%
CAS Int’l Studies Asst $67,493 $67,300 0%
CAS Mathematics Full $99,437 $120,400 21%
CAS Mathematics Assoc $77,459 $84,600 9%
CAS Mathematics Asst $63,117 $76,700 22%
CAS Philosophy Full $111,271 $125,000 12%
CAS Philosophy Assoc $62,062 $78,500 26%
CAS Philosophy Asst $60,634 $67,000 10%
CAS Physics Full $99,534 $122,200 23%
CAS Physics Assoc $79,789 $88,300 11%
CAS Physics Asst $68,168 $77,100 13%
CAS Political Science Full $108,907 $139,400 28%
CAS Political Science Assoc $79,168 $83,400 5%
CAS Political Science Asst $69,222 $72,400 5%
CAS Psychology Full $113,208 $130,200 15%
CAS Psychology Assoc $76,755 $82,500 7%
CAS Psychology Asst $70,954 $72,100 2%
CAS Religious Studies Full $91,088 $108,600 19%
CAS Religious Studies Assoc $65,587 $72,500 11%
CAS Religious Studies Asst $60,367 $60,900 1%
CAS Romance Languages Full $89,021 $99,200 11%
CAS Romance Languages Assoc $66,938 $72,300 8%
CAS Romance Languages Asst $54,946 $61,100 11%
CAS Sociology Full $108,269 $124,700 15%
CAS Sociology Assoc $76,611 $84,100 10%
CAS Sociology Asst $70,340 $72,100 3%
CAS Theatre Arts Full $86,694 $99,600 15%
CAS Theatre Arts Assoc $60,763 $67,800 12%
CAS Theatre Arts Asst $54,696 $58,100 6%
CAS Women’s Studies Full $81,041 $110,600 36%
CAS Women’s Studies Assoc $76,396 $78,900 3%
CAS Women’s Studies Asst $53,000 $62,000 17%
ED Education Studies Full $103,000 $111,700 8%
ED Education Studies Assoc $81,250 $81,500 0%
ED Education Studies Asst $68,000 $68,400 1%
Ed Methodology, Policy & L Full $110,000 $108,400 -1%
Ed Methodology, Policy & L Assoc $114,251 $68,900 -40%
Ed Methodology, Policy & L Asst $70,000 $62,300 -11%
Ed Special Education Full $117,000
Ed Special Education Assoc $80,333 $81,600 2%
Ed Special Education Asst $70,000 $68,400 -2%
Journalism & Communicatn, School of Full $102,092 $124,100 22%
Journalism &Communicatn, School of Assoc $73,561 $78,400 7%
Journalism & Communicatn, School of Asst $62,472 $65,800 5%
Law, School of Full $139,257 $196,900 41%
Law, School of Assoc $125,584 $133,600 6%
Law, School of Asst $105,333 $133,600 27%
SOMD Dance Full $62,561 $87,500 40%
SOMD Dance Assoc $59,000 $68,100 15%
SOMD Dance Asst $47,750 $59,200 24%
SOMD Music Full $80,651 $101,900 26%
SOMD Music Assoc $60,559 $73,300 21%
SOMD Music Asst $53,889 $58,500 9%
Environmental Studies Full
$135,800
Environmental Studies Assoc
$81,900
Environmental Studies Asst
$60,100

Prozanski, Holvey, and Greenlick on opposition to SB 270:

7/18/2013: I asked a few of the legislators who voted against SB 270 if they would send a statement explaining the reasons for their vote, to post on UO Matters. Here are the replies I received. Comments welcome:

Senator Floyd Prozanski (Eugene):

As much as I support individual governing boards, I cannot support SB 270-B in its current form.  

To allow a governor to decide whether or not certain members of a governing board should have the right to be a voting member is subjective, arbitrary and is wrong. All members should be voting members. Further, it is not good public policy to permit a governor to allow certain members of a governing board to be voting members but to not allow those same members of a different governing board to not be voting members. Why should the faculty member at PSU or OSU be allowed to serve as a voting member, but not the faculty member at UofO? This is an inconsistency that I cannot support.  

Since the governing boards will have 11 to 15 members, it is hard for me to understand why two positions (faculty and classified staff) should not be full voting members. There is no way two members of an 11-to-15 member board can ever exert pressure over the other board members.  

It only seems equitable, especially at an institution of higher learning, to allow all board
members to have the same right to vote on matters brought before the governing board. 

Representative Paul Holvey (Eugene/Veneta):

Thank you for contacting me regarding Senate Bill 270 and the creation of independent institutional boards. 

I am supportive of institutional boards for Oregon Universities in hopes we can reduce the rise in tuition costs and continue to improve the access and quality of higher education.  With that being said, it is essential that any educational institution keep the needs of the student and faculty central to their goals.  Making a place for students, faculty, and staff at the board’s table will go a long way toward ensuring that all groups are being properly represented during decision making processes, and that the institution can act in the best interest of all parties involved.  It is also critical that in the process of granting autonomy to some of Oregon’s Universities, we are able to adequately service the needs of all higher education institutions across our state.   

I have made it clear to all during this process that I would not support independent institutional boards unless faculty, staff, and students have a voice on the board.  SB 270 did not provide an assurance that university faculty and staff would have a voting position on these boards, but left that decision up to the whim of the Governor and future Governors.  That policy does not go far enough to ensure an inclusive and representative board and therefore I voted in opposition to SB 270.   

Representative Mitch Greenlick (Portland):

Happy to answer.  First of all, as I announced on the floor, I had committed to Wim Weiwel that I would vote yes if mine was the deciding vote.  It was not needed, so here is what I said on the floor (if I remember correctly). 

1.  Process:  The bill had no opportunity to be worked in the House.  Our committee had no part of the work on the bill.  It was worked in the senate and then sent to Ways and Means where they made significant policy changes after negotiations behind closed doors. 

2.  I thought the bill was premature because it did not adequately deal with how changes would affect the regionals, despite last minute changes including a bit of lip service to the regionals. 

3.  A personal complaint.  I have been working on a plan to move PSU and OHSU under the same governance structure for more than ten years.  That approach came from observing both institutions as a faculty member and a department chair.  While I believe this model kills that approach I was told there was a part of the bill that pointed to that as a possible future option.  That section disappeared in the Ways and Means Committee.

OSU gets state cash for white wine and oyster programs

7/9/2013: Those are some classy earmarks at the bottom.

Is the $15m tuition deal good news or bad news for UO’s budget? Every 1% cut to in-state tuition costs us roughly $100 a head, or maybe $1.5 million a year. My guess is pretty close to a wash. 

Oregon University System

The Subcommittee increased the General Fund appropriation for public university support by $15,000,000 with direction that the money be used to reduce resident undergraduate tuition increases at the state’s seven public universities. The Subcommittee adopted the following budget note to limit tuition increases on resident undergraduate students:

Budget Note:

In adopting the budget for the Oregon University System, the Legislature intends that increases in the base rates for tuition paid by resident undergraduate students on all seven campuses and one branch campus (EOU, OIT, OSU, OSU-Cascades, PSU, SOU, UO and WOU) may not exceed an average of 3.5% at any individual campus in any given year of the 2013-15 biennium. For students choosing the Tuition Promise program at WOU, rates of increase over the prior cohort may not exceed 5.7% in any given year. These limits on tuition shall apply to all seven campuses and one branch campus for the next two academic years (2013-14 and 2014-15) regardless of the outcome of any governance changes that may be implemented during the biennium.

House Bill 5008 includes General Fund appropriations to the Oregon University System (OUS) State Programs budget unit for the following purposes:

• $1,200,000 to expand fermentation science programs at Oregon State University.

• $250,000 one-time appropriation to Oregon State University for technical assistance to help shellfish hatchery larval production affected by ocean acidification and assist with the maintenance of OSU’s Mollusca Brood Stock Program with the intent to produce larval strains more resilient to the adverse effects of ocean acidification.

• $80,000 to increase the base funding for the Labor Education and Research Center at the University of Oregon.

UO staff have right priorities

The Register-Guard clearly displayed what it viewed as the single most important news of the day on June 27. Of course, it was the fact that the Oregon Ducks football team would be spared the horrific fate of not playing in a bowl game despite breaking some rules and, perhaps worse, getting caught. The story was above the fold, proudly and prominently on a pedestal for all subscribers to view. 

What news story got to play second fiddle? The Defense of Marriage Act going down at the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court — that’s right, important, historic national legislation that signifies a major turning point on a controversial social issue for our community, state, country and world was made to take its place on a lower tier than Duck athletics. …

It’s easy for tenured faculty like me to bitch about Duck football excesses, but it takes real courage for the staff to speak out. Thank you. Having spent some time at top-scholar recruitment events, I can say that he does a damn good job with the prospective students and their parents too.

There’s also a letter from former UO Bookstore Duck Store manager Jim Williams, on Rob Mullens’s plan to cut off local Duck vendors:

I believe it will be a huge mistake if the University of Oregon goes forward with the plan to limit the number of local, state and regional vendors who can provide UO-imprinted sportswear and memorabilia. Having retired a little over a year ago as general manager for 35-plus years at the UO Bookstore/The Duck Store, I had a front-row seat when it came to watching the growth and the sale of such products. … 

With the proposed change, it’s unlikely there would be opportunities such as the UO students who did the “I Love My Ducks” shirts, Shady Peeps sunglasses, etc. We at the Duck Store felt it was our responsibility to help young entrepreneurs and local business share in the passion associated with the university and its athletic programs. 

There’s been lots of pressure on President Gottfredson to rescind Mullens’s decision – but the AD has got to pay for his staff’s free cars somehow. I notice they have stopped paying for cell phones though – presumably because it made it too easy for the sports writers to get copies of the calling records. Don’t give up guys, the public records law still applies!

Duck brand rules burn local firms

Earlier this month, the UO’s office of marketing and brand management sent out a request for proposals for anyone seeking to manufacture Ducks apparel, requiring a guarantee starting July 1 of a least $500,000 a year in royalties to be paid to the UO.

Many of the current licensees — including Lane County companies — haven’t come close to that in the past. Of the approximately 73 apparel licensees in 2012, only one Oregon firm — Springfield-based McKenzie SewOn — exceeded $100,000 in royalty payments, according to the UO’s office of merchandising. McKenzie SewOn could not be reached for comment.

Henzie’s company isn’t the only one worried about the change. Rick Lieberson of T-Line Design in Canby, said that UO related sales make up about ten percent of his business and he had expected that to grow. “Nobody in Oregon will be able to do this, so it will have to be out of state,” Lieberson said. “I don’t think anyone’s going to bite.”

Senate coordinator

6/22/2013: A small step for the faculty. Very small. Why does the UO Senate Coordinator report to Dave Hubin? Job ad here:

Title:  Executive Coordinator for the Statutory Faculty and University Senate
Department:  President’s Office
Reports to:  Sr. Assistant to the President and the Senate President
Salary Range:  $38,000 to $42,000 (Plus an excellent benefit package.)
Appointment Type:  Officer of Administration/1.0 FTE/Fixed-term/12-month/No Rank
Application Dates:  Position open until filled.  To ensure consideration, please submit a complete packet by July 12, 2013. 
GENERAL STATEMENT OF DUTIES
The University of Oregon (UO) President’s Office seeks applications for an Executive Coordinator (EC) for the Statutory Faculty and University Senate.  The EC possesses an in-depth understanding of the university’s academic environment and strong working knowledge of university policies and procedures.
The EC has two primary areas of responsibility:
1. Pursuant to the Constitution of the University of Oregon, the Statutory Faculty employs an Executive Coordinator, reporting to the President’s Office, whose responsibilities include generating and maintaining public records, organizing statutory elections, and event coordination relating to convening the Faculty Assembly.
2. The Executive Coordinator for the Statutory Faculty also fills the position of Executive Coordinator for the University Senate, reporting to the University Senate President and the President’s Office.

Lavish stadium spending sparks protests, tear gas and rubber bullets

6/17/2013:

Protesters showed up by the thousands … evolved into a broader movement by groups and individuals irate over a range of issues including … lavish new stadium projects. 

In images shared widely on social media, the police here were seen beating unarmed protesters with batons and dispersing crowds by firing rubber bullets and tear gas into their midst.

Whoops, never mind, that’s in Brazil. Here in Eugene everyone’s cool with Phil Knight’s plan to spend $5 million on new landscaping at Autzen. It’s tax deductible of course, since nothing supports UO’s academic mission like a prettier football stadium. Meaning the rest of us taxpayers will foot half the bill for this gift, just as we did for Knight Arena. Or the government can just cut back on spending for things like Pell grants.