UC gives profs and staff raises – not admins

8/18/2011: From the LAT:

Under the plan, all faculty with good performance reviews will receive 3% raises this year, and nonacademic staff, who have received no increases since 2007, could be in line for larger raises.

About 78,000 UC employees will be eligible under the plan, officials said. But nearly 400 employees — senior administrators and non-teaching staffers who earn more than $200,000 a year — will not be included.

Tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to UC gives profs and staff raises – not admins

  1. Anonymous says:

    Where’s the “like” button?

  2. Anonymous says:

    How about the rumored big secret faculty equity raises (to selected departments and faculty) at UO? Is that for real or what?

  3. Anonymous says:

    Yes it is. See http://dl.dropbox.com/u/971644/uomatters/UO_Administrator_Pay/6DigitUOAd2011.pdf Classified staff, who have had a pay cut the last two years and just heard OUS tell them they had to take another pay cut the next two years, are hopping mad. What kind of leadership does it show to take such raises when your “team” — the faculty and staff under you — are going backwards and even suffering under their pay cuts?

  4. Anonymous says:

    Dog responds

    I am not sure that this is all that super secret.
    As of may 1, for instance, in CAS all full professors got a 6.9% “equity” raise. I don’t know of many exceptions. I do know that if your
    academic salary was larger than about 102K that Russ Tomlin initially decided you were “overpaid” and didn’t need and more salary. He eventually caved on that.

    So if you call a 6.9% raise on May 1 – the first such raise since Nov 1, 2008, a
    “big secret faculty equity raise” then so be it.

    I do not know if a similar set of raises occurred outside of CAS but I suspect they did.
    Within CAS all faculty ranks got since equity raise on May 1.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Well, Dog, that is not what I’ve heard. Who knows what the hell is going on. Whatever. It certainly hasn’t been very public. Ya think maybe they don’t want it to get out?

  6. Anonymous says:

    Dog responds

    you don’t have to “hear anything” – you can verify yourself using the data at ir/alpha

    compare the May 1 2011 reporting period to
    the one just prior and that will show you the
    May 1 raises in the cases where the salaries
    for the individual your looking up
    changes between the two reports

  7. Anonymous says:

    It certainly has not been very transparent. If you look at the quarterly reports, it is clear that many faculty in CAS did not receive a raise. Even with full professors, there doesn’t seem to be a consistent percentage. Where did you get 6.9 percent?

  8. Anonymous says:

    Dog says

    CAS used the following algorithm ( and I guess
    you can choose whether or not to believe it) –
    this was announced a couple of times at various
    department heads meetings last feb/march:

    Figure out the average, say full professor salary.
    and compare that to the average of our offical OUS comparators. The raise amount will be 1/3 of that average.

    Hence the 6.9 percent, admittedly for one particular department is the result that on average, full professor had salaries 20-21%
    below the comparator average for that discipline.

    Other departments might have had higher or lower
    comparator averages to the % is not the same
    across departments.

    however, I am skeptical of the claim that “many faculty in CAS did not receive a raise” and probably will spend an hour of research either verifying or refuting that. If its really true,
    then CAS reneged on a promise made to all CAS
    department heads, and I really don’t believe that is the case. There is no reason for it to be the case – CAS has plenty of money to fund this.

    Now, ultimately all raises had to be approved by Tomlin and so if a CAS member did not get a raise, its because Academic Affairs did not follow CAS’s recommendation.

    Indeed there are many CAS faculty that read this BLOG –
    perhaps they can anonymously state if they really got no raise.

    Now, this raise might not be that noticeable if you don’t get summer salary – you may have noticed it only for the 1/2 a month in June.

    So if there are any CAS faculty reading this that don’t know if they got a raise or not (no letters were sent out, which is bullshit) go to
    duckweb and compare your june 10 academic salary with your june 11 academic salary rate.
    Then you will know for sure. If you didn’t get a raise, I would certainly ask why not!

  9. Anonymous says:

    dog says

    actually there is an even simpler way to
    determine your salary status

    just login to duckweb

    select employee information

    select Job Record Changes

    select what ever the most relevant entry is
    for you and that will show you your entire
    salary history back to 1999 and will indicate
    the May 1 raise (effective with June 1 paycheck)
    as “equity adjustment:

  10. Anonymous says:

    This is absurd. Evident just from here that nobody outside the ruling clique really knows what went on with the equity increases. It was all done in secret, intentionally or not. Even the department heads were caught by surprise. By comparison, Frohnmayer/Moseley were paragons of openness! This is going to make the state supportive of the New Partnership?

  11. Anonymous says:

    Dog provides some data.

    Here is some faculty raise data on 3 CAS departments that are not in the Natural Sciences.
    These were randomly selected. As I stated earlier, these May 1 “equity raises” are largely based on a formulaic discipline based comparison to OUS peers. To deal somewhat with faculty compression, generally higher equity raises were given at the full professor level. At the assistant prof level, most only got a 2% “COLA” raise this time around. I did not discover, in this random process, a single CAS professor (except those officially on leave) that did not get some sort of raise on May 1.

    Here is the department data in terms of % raises. The many identical percentages re-affirms the formulaic method.

    Dept 1:

    1.036
    1.036
    1.036
    1.072
    1.101
    1.123
    1.125
    1.125
    1.146
    1.174
    1.176

    Dept 2:

    1.019
    1.019
    1.021
    1.045
    1.045
    1.073
    1.073
    1.073
    1.073

    Dept 3:

    1.020
    1.020
    1.020
    1.020
    1.023
    1.023
    1.023
    1.023
    1.023
    1.023
    1.023
    1.023
    1.023
    1.068
    1.068
    1.068
    1.068
    1.068
    1.068
    1.068
    1.068
    1.074
    1.130
    1.138
    1.142