Pernsteiner demands more croissants

3/5/2012: That’s the latest from Bill Graves at the Oregonian, buried at end of his gun story. More as we get the docs – and there’s some scandalous stuff here.

The board also voted to extend Pernsteiner’s contract through June 30, 2014, but is still negotiating terms. Pernsteiner, who has not had a pay raise in four years, earns $280,900 a year plus $12,720 in deferred compensation.

Three months ago he fired Lariviere for giving out unauthorized raises. Now he wants a raise too. Graves leaves off a few of Pernsteiner’s other perks and hiring peculiarities:

Tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Pernsteiner demands more croissants

  1. Anonymous says:

    As long as we’re out of OUS by 2013, more power to him. But if we *are* still in OUS by then, I hope that Article I of our new CBA states that the entire faculty will go on strike. That’s a union I could vote for!

  2. Anonymous says:

    Be careful what you wish for…. a unionized faculty is a sure a ticket to mediocrity as Pernsteiner’s “leadership.” I’m astonished at how many of the productive faculty (the faculty who still have other options) have applications out. And the most commonly cited reasons are (1) the OUS-UO debacle and (2) the prospect of unionization.

  3. Anonymous says:

    _Productive faculty_ do not always _have other options_, as you seem to imply. In many fields, lateral moves are only possible for international superstars. Those of us who are merely damn good, even great, are stuck here for life, especially if they are tethered to spouses or partners. Unionization is one way for this very broad mass of talented people to assert their interests in the future of the institution. Maybe it’s not the best way, but what else is on offer? Whether unions promote mediocrity is debatable; whether the OUS as it currently operates does so is not.

  4. Anonymous says:

    “Maybe it’s not the best way, but what else is on offer?”

    Faculty senate + new constitution has been mentioned numerous times

  5. Anonymous says:

    We do not have a faculty senate. We have a senate that serves five different constituencies. There are some valiant people trying to make it work, but most faculty are not really invested in it — witness the number of unfilled positions (VP, committee on committees, nominating committee). Unionization is fueled in part by those who have already decided to take their marbles elsewhere.

  6. Anonymous says:

    I don’t see why we don’t wait to discuss or unionize until after the new president comes in. If they suck, lets do it. But at this point, lets hope a good and dynamic president comes in, because lets face it, that is the hope for progress and cleaning on the administrative garbage.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Dog agrees

    Yes, I think it would be a wise move to wait.

  8. Anonymous says:

    thx, dog, dead duck agrees. We can engage finalist(s) with a clear expectation that they will do their part to help shared governance structures work better and have real influence over broad priorities, goals and accountability for them. uf you were a ‘faculty-blooded administrato of talent, would you prefer vitalized shared governance structures or formalized conflict in collective bargaining? if we get someone either unwilling or unable to commit to the former, the latter is always an option. let’s try watchful waiting, its only a matter of months.

  9. Anonymous says:

    We should form parties: monarchists (who vest their hopes in a strong president), republicans (who vest their hopes in a strong constitution), and socialists (who vest their hopes in a strong union). Just like 19th century Europe!