its nice to see the actual accurate numbers finally published. I remember asking for these exact numbers prior to the Union vote, without much success.
1832 union members (the dog has been excluded) 521 TTF members
implications
1. about 25% of the TTF faculty is not in the union 2. NTTF/TTF ratio is 2.5 : 1 3. IR.uoregon.edu says that Fall 2011 there were 696 TTF (so 175 TTF are not in the Union); 661 Fixed NTTF; 453 adjuncts –>661+453 = 1134 meaning there must be 177 research associates, postdocs, and the like in the Union.
Anonymous
10/12/2012
Just to add a little to Dog’s numbers: IR also says that Law had 27 FTE a year ago. That means that the remaining 148-ish non-Union TTFs are in the same schools/departments as union TTFs. For a mix of equity and pragmatic reasons their salaries (most probably) and benefits and working conditions (certainly) will be pegged to union negotiations but they are legally prevented from participating or voting on that process.
roo-nix nerd
10/12/2012
I’m a little unclear on what a “Fixed NTTF” is..
I know there can be some repeats in the salary pdfs, so there’s some slop, but I also have coworkers who are NTTF research, but don’t actually have “research assistant” or “research associate” in their title..
% grep “Research Ass” Unclassified\ 060112\ to\ 083112.txt | sort | uniq -c | sort -n 1 Adj Research Asst-Technology 1 Adj Sr Research Assistant I 1 Adjunct Sr Research Associate 1 Bilingual Research Associate 1 Facilitator/Adj Research Asst 1 Facilitator/Research Asst 1 NET Developer/Research Asst 1 Professor, Assistant Professor, Senior Instructor, and Instructor. Research ranks include Senior Research Associate, 1 Research Assc/Project Dir/PI 1 Research Assistant/PHP Develop 1 Research Assistant/Proj Coord 1 Research Assist/NET Developer 1 Research Associate NSRC 1 Research Associate Professor 1 Research Associate, Senior Research Assistant, Research Assistant, and Postdoctoral Research Associate. Most 1 Senior Research Asst I 1 Sr Adjunct Research Associate 1 Sr Research Associate 1 Sr Research Assoc I/Exec Dir 2 Adj Research Asst/Facilitator 2 EWP Research Associate 3 Research Assistant Professor 8 Senior Research Associate I 13 Senior Research Assistant I 20 Senior Research Assistant 20 Senior Research Associate 25 Adjunct Research Associate 75 Adjunct Research Assistant 145 Postdoctoral Research Assoc 205 Research Associate 442 Research Assistant
roo
10/12/2012
to clarify, that counts occurrences of “Research Ass” within a text dump of the latest salary pdf from ir.uoregon.edu
So it’s not people, just the number of times that the string occurs, but it’s 979 times, and I seriously doubt that it occurs more than 5 times for each employee.
I suspect that the “Fixed NTTF” category includes research assistants/associates – isn’t it more reasonable that 176 is specifically the number of postdocs?
Anonymous
10/12/2012
Dog says
1. Fixed NTTF means they are on fixed contracts (at least one year, renewable).
2. Adjuncts could come and go on a quarter by quarter basis – they generally are not on fixed, renewable contracts.
3. Sure 176 could be postdocs – I have never understood the research associate/assistant classification even tho I employ some, and how they count towards what IR considers to be faculty.
David Luebke
10/12/2012
Who was it who wrote that “It doesn’t matter how badly they misquote you, as long as they spell your name right”?
(I have no idea how the comment below thinks the comment above is “chiding” or criticizing in any way. Calm down, people…)
David Luebke
10/12/2012
Out of deference to the offended commentor below, I will allow that my comment contained a clever and obtuse acknowledgement that the author of the EW did not, in fact, misquote me. An excess of stublety, for which I apologize to all the barnyard animals.
Anonymous
10/12/2012
Why do faculty try to be so clever and obtuse at the same time? It seems dog simply did some arithmetic with cited data (the EW story – maybe its not accurate, I don’t now) and is then, chided (I think) by some obscure comment from a pro faculty union member. Honestly, I don’t know what the second comment even means.
David Luebke
10/12/2012
For the record, I am not chiding the Dog. I only wish the author of the EW story had spelled my name properly.
Anonymous
10/12/2012
Dog
Its fine to chide the dog. Dogs are use to this and the dog is not offended but who the hell is dekartez? I thought I knew but no longer am
Anonymous
10/12/2012
And just to set the record straight, we DID give them the correct Latin. Hope their numbers are more accurate.
Dog
its nice to see the actual accurate numbers finally published. I remember asking for these exact numbers prior to the Union vote, without much success.
1832 union members (the dog has been excluded)
521 TTF members
implications
1. about 25% of the TTF faculty is not in the union
2. NTTF/TTF ratio is 2.5 : 1
3. IR.uoregon.edu says that Fall 2011 there were 696 TTF (so 175 TTF are not in the Union);
661 Fixed NTTF; 453 adjuncts –>661+453 = 1134 meaning there must be 177 research associates, postdocs, and the like in the Union.
Just to add a little to Dog’s numbers: IR also says that Law had 27 FTE a year ago. That means that the remaining 148-ish non-Union TTFs are in the same schools/departments as union TTFs. For a mix of equity and pragmatic reasons their salaries (most probably) and benefits and working conditions (certainly) will be pegged to union negotiations but they are legally prevented from participating or voting on that process.
I’m a little unclear on what a “Fixed NTTF” is..
I know there can be some repeats in the salary pdfs, so there’s some slop, but I also have coworkers who are NTTF research, but don’t actually have “research assistant” or “research associate” in their title..
% grep “Research Ass” Unclassified\ 060112\ to\ 083112.txt | sort | uniq -c | sort -n
1 Adj Research Asst-Technology
1 Adj Sr Research Assistant I
1 Adjunct Sr Research Associate
1 Bilingual Research Associate
1 Facilitator/Adj Research Asst
1 Facilitator/Research Asst
1 NET Developer/Research Asst
1 Professor, Assistant Professor, Senior Instructor, and Instructor. Research ranks include Senior Research Associate,
1 Research Assc/Project Dir/PI
1 Research Assistant/PHP Develop
1 Research Assistant/Proj Coord
1 Research Assist/NET Developer
1 Research Associate NSRC
1 Research Associate Professor
1 Research Associate, Senior Research Assistant, Research Assistant, and Postdoctoral Research Associate. Most
1 Senior Research Asst I
1 Sr Adjunct Research Associate
1 Sr Research Associate
1 Sr Research Assoc I/Exec Dir
2 Adj Research Asst/Facilitator
2 EWP Research Associate
3 Research Assistant Professor
8 Senior Research Associate I
13 Senior Research Assistant I
20 Senior Research Assistant
20 Senior Research Associate
25 Adjunct Research Associate
75 Adjunct Research Assistant
145 Postdoctoral Research Assoc
205 Research Associate
442 Research Assistant
to clarify, that counts occurrences of “Research Ass” within a text dump of the latest salary pdf from ir.uoregon.edu
So it’s not people, just the number of times that the string occurs, but it’s 979 times, and I seriously doubt that it occurs more than 5 times for each employee.
I suspect that the “Fixed NTTF” category includes research assistants/associates – isn’t it more reasonable that 176 is specifically the number of postdocs?
Dog says
1. Fixed NTTF means they are on fixed contracts (at least one year, renewable).
2. Adjuncts could come and go on a quarter by quarter basis – they generally are not on fixed, renewable contracts.
3. Sure 176 could be postdocs – I have never understood the
research associate/assistant classification even tho I employ some, and how they count towards what IR considers to be faculty.
Who was it who wrote that “It doesn’t matter how badly they misquote you, as long as they spell your name right”?
Dekartez?
Maybe P.T. Barnum, maybe not: http://www.nku.edu/~turney/prclass/readings/3eras1x.html
(I have no idea how the comment below thinks the comment above is “chiding” or criticizing in any way. Calm down, people…)
Out of deference to the offended commentor below, I will allow that my comment contained a clever and obtuse acknowledgement that the author of the EW did not, in fact, misquote me. An excess of stublety, for which I apologize to all the barnyard animals.
Why do faculty try to be so clever and obtuse at the same time? It seems dog simply did some arithmetic with cited data (the EW story –
maybe its not accurate, I don’t now) and is then, chided (I think) by some obscure comment from a pro faculty union member. Honestly, I don’t know what the second comment even means.
For the record, I am not chiding the Dog. I only wish the author of the EW story had spelled my name properly.
Dog
Its fine to chide the dog. Dogs are use to this and the dog is not offended but who the hell is dekartez? I thought I knew but no longer am
And just to set the record straight, we DID give them the correct Latin. Hope their numbers are more accurate.