Search News


Browse Archives

News

Taking One (Percent) for the Team

December 10, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

At Brandeis University, faculty are considering whether to voluntarily forgo 1 percent of their salaries next year to prevent possible layoffs of support staff.

“It’s not painless for us, but it’s not a huge hit to take,” said William Flesch, the Faculty Senate chair and a professor of English literature.

Lawyers are still vetting the details of the proposal but, in short, interested faculty would contribute to the cause either by forgoing 1 percent of their paychecks, or via a charitable contribution to a reserved Brandeis fund. Faculty would volunteer individually and anonymously (“only the payroll office would know,” Flesch said), without any cuts to their listed base pay. And, to avert concerns about freeloading, contributions would kick in only if there is a critical mass of willing faculty -- if those who volunteer collectively earn at least 30 percent of the total faculty salary pool within the College of Arts and Sciences.

“The dean and I worked out that if we do get to 30 percent of the faculty volunteering to decline to take 1 percent of their salary next year, that would probably save two or three full-time jobs or four to six half-time jobs,” said Flesch, who sits on a college committee that has identified which staff positions would be the first slashed if economic conditions don't improve. When asked what sorts of staff jobs are vulnerable, Flesch said that members of the committee have interviewed chairs to discuss administrative staffing and duties within departments.

In other words, to Flesch, the possibilities for staff layoffs are anything but abstract. And, he believes, any bait and switch on the part of the administration would be apparent. “We already know where the cuts will be if the money doesn’t come in,” he said. “As the dean puts it, it’s basically as transparent as it could be without actually publicizing personnel rankings and personnel decisions.”

In a phone interview, Flesch stressed that the proposal was entirely faculty-generated. In fact, he said that while several top administrators have pledged to participate in the proposed giveback, “To tell you the truth, I’m not sure the senior administration is very happy about this.

“Brandeis is not asking us to do this and they don’t want anyone to think they’re asking us to do this. Things are under control at Brandeis, they’re not great, but they’re not great anywhere.

"The really important thing is things are under control and this is just a question of tweaking things to make it a little less harsh for a few members of the staff.”

Dennis Nealon, Brandeis’s executive director of media and public affairs, described the proposal as one of a number of ideas on the table. “Like all colleges and universities, Brandeis is actively looking at ways to cut costs and to do that, it’s going to gather proposals and ideas from across the community. Yes, the administration has actively invited students, staff, faculty to go ahead and submit proposals with an eye toward, yes, cutting costs,” said Nealon. He added that while layoffs are a possibility, “Nothing is cast in stone at this point.”

"Brandeis, like other schools, like other colleges and universities, is keeping a close eye on what the economy's really going to do and that's going to dictate in large measure how far cuts will go."

Speaking in a broader context, Ernst Benjamin, general secretary of the American Association of University Professors, said that similar issues arose at last weekend’s meeting of collective bargaining chapters. Should faculty volunteer to take pay cuts or renegotiate contracts (albeit in other cases at their administrations' request or even demand)?

“On the one hand, there was a lot of feeling that faculty should be careful before assuming that there is a genuine need for it, and the university is in as much trouble as it presents itself as being,” said Benjamin. At the same time, he said, “I wouldn’t necessarily think it’s a bad idea. Obviously the faculty who are there are in the best position to make a determination whether it’s (a) necessary and (b) better than the possible alternatives.

“A lot of it depends on the particular circumstances. Faculty often have a pretty good idea of whether they can view the administration as reliable.”

Concerns voiced about the Brandeis proposal at a recent faculty meeting reflect, at least in part, questions of trust. According to Flesch's account, and an account in the student newspaper, some faculty raised concerns that the foregone pay would be used for purposes other than shielding staff, and, more philosophically, that the administration would see the move as a concession suggesting that faculty could be paid less in the future.

Flesch said he’s uncertain of whether they'll reach the 30 percent threshold set. Under the current plan -- again, still being vetted by lawyers -- professors would respond to a still-to-be-sent e-mail with their individual verdicts by next Friday, December 19.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments on Taking One (Percent) for the Team

  • Be careful what you wish for
  • Posted by Sarah , Assoc. Prof. on December 10, 2008 at 9:25am EST
  • In my view, this could be a dangerous precedent to set. Yes, in the future faculty will do with less once the profs at Brandeis make a concession to take the 1% cut. What's to prevent this from happening again? Let's face it, this economic crisis is going to just worsen. How about another 1%, say, 6 months from now? How about never recovering again from all these voluntary paycuts?
    I wonder why the administration didn't volunteer to give up 1%? 1% of a six-figure income is nothing compared to 1% of the low pay that faculty get.

  • Posted by A on December 10, 2008 at 10:05am EST
  • Sarah, the low pay faculty get is nothing compared to the low pay staff receive. And staff have no job security or tenure.

  • Voluntary
  • Posted by Unemployed on December 10, 2008 at 10:05am EST
  • Sarah, in case you hadn't noticed, this is a voluntary 1% reduction that the Faculty initiated, not the Administration. Plus, I have no sympathy for the "low professor pay." Faculty get paid twice as much as I do and only work 9 months of the year. I would have gladly taken a 1% pay reduction so that I would not have been laid off this month.

  • Impressive gesture
  • Posted by sd on December 10, 2008 at 10:05am EST
  • I think this is a powerful gesture and remarkably empathetic toward people who typically never have the comfort of a contract, let alone tenure. I would be moved if the faculty at my institution were this brave and thoughtful.

  • kudos, but...
  • Posted by Alan Collinge , Founder at StudentLoanJustice.Org on December 10, 2008 at 10:10am EST
  • I appreciate faculty willing to take one for the team, truly. But...for which members of the team?

    College administrative salaries have shot through the roof over the past 3 decades, and student indebtedness has been increased to fund this, and the rec centers, and the climbing rock walls, and and and...

    Why not take this one percent and apply it directy to student aid? These are the people who need it the most.

    Why not cut the president's salary by 40%? This would probably pay for at least a couple of staff positions.

    Why not extend this to his/her staff? They will still be making well over $100 k/year. A more than comfortable salary by any measure.

    And don't counter with the well worn "we need to retain the best talent, and pay market rates for their services". That argument simply won't wash any longer.

  • Posted by IHE Reader on December 10, 2008 at 10:10am EST
  • Sarah, have you forgotten how to do basic multiplication? Actually, one percent of a six-figure salary is giving up a lot more money than one percent of "the low pay that faculty get." And the pay of an associate professor isn't low.

  • Posted by fred lapides , none at none on December 10, 2008 at 10:10am EST
  • ...ah,faculty...always trying to help the students and the school. Now let us get an equal salary cut from administrators and then it makes some sense.

  • Posted by P on December 10, 2008 at 12:55pm EST
  • Good for Brandeis! I teach at a University of South Carolina branch campus that's getting a budget cut of about 25% in January, despite steadily increasing enrollments. Sure do wish USC faculty and administrators would adopt a similar plan . . .

  • Sarah
  • Posted by VanGogh'sEar , Student Affairs Officer at University of California on December 10, 2008 at 1:00pm EST
  • Are you joking? The low salary that faculty get? Administrative Staff pay is way below Faculty pay (except for the executive level) and Staff are the first ones not to receive a merit increase or cost of living increase. Faculty are coddled and do a lot less work than they are paid for. Just my opinion.

  • I applaud you
  • Posted by Bill on December 10, 2008 at 1:25pm EST
  • Hats off ! Instead of finger pointing and bitching for someone else to rescue their institution from staff cuts, the faculty came up with a plan, built in protections and put their money up front. Recession economics will get tougher, but this group has stated quietly “we can get through this … we will make a difference”

  • Pay cuts
  • Posted by Adjunct on December 10, 2008 at 1:25pm EST
  • A great empty gesture. How about everyone taking a 10% pay cut to save 10% of the people instead of 1% of those to be laid off. It happens in industry all the time. If the faculty do not like it, they can resign and find a job somewhere else. Since faculty members like a graduated income tax, how about taking a pay cut proportional to the amount of money that the tenured faculty and administration make. Then they can save more than 10% of the faculty and staff. I have no sympathy for the tenured faculty.

  • I admire
  • Posted by George , Retired Professor at A State University on December 10, 2008 at 3:35pm EST
  • I admire the espirit de corps of a faculty willing to make a sacrifice for an institution. I admire an institution that engenders that spirit. Yes, there are all sorts of technical details and concerns. I would have liked to have worked at such an institution.

  • sucker!
  • Posted by fred lapides , none at none on December 11, 2008 at 8:55am EST
  • sent article to a friend, a former biggie in AAUP at his school and he says:

    A dangerous precedent at a private college. In the previous two economic downturns the UConn faculty gave up their contract guaranteed salary increases for a year. They never got the $ back when the economy improved and now they are under pressure again to make the same "noble gesture." This time they are determined to resist because to be burned three times would be ridiculous. After all the state is never really broke. Millionaire tax anyone?
    The faculty at most private schools have little or no idea about the worth of the university's assets and its ability to raise money. I wouldn't give a nickel, no less one %.A dangerous precedent at a private college. In the previous two economic downturns the UConn faculty gave up their contract guaranteed salary increases for a year. They never got the $ back when the economy improved and now they are under pressure again to make the same "noble gesture." This time they are determined to resist because to be burned three times would be ridiculous. After all the state is never really broke. Millionaire tax anyone?
    The faculty at most private schools have little or no idea about the worth of the university's assets and its ability to raise money. I wouldn't give a nickel, no less one %."

  • Taking one (%) for the team
  • Posted by Gregory A. Petsko , Professor and Chair, Department of Biochemistry at Brandeis University on December 18, 2008 at 1:50pm EST
  • Here are some thoughts about a few of the comments, from a member of the Brandeis faculty:

    Regarding it being a "great empty gesture", I don't agree. 10% would indeed do more than 1%, but 1% is the minimum for this entirely voluntary contribution; faculty are able to contribute more if they choose, and many have chosen to do so.

    Those who suggested that members of the administration should also contribute are missing the point. The faculty initiated this plan, so of course it was only formulated to apply to the faculty. I, for one, don't base my decision on whether to participate on anything members of the administration might or might not do. This is something the faculty is doing on behalf of the staff, who are in many ways the unsung heroes of an institution like ours.

    And as for those who seem to feel that the faculty are in some way being taken advantage of, or shouldn't engage in an act of generosity because it might be abused later, I guess my reaction is that such comments say more about those individuals and the institutions they work for than they do about the Brandeis plan. If the cut in pay were permanent, as opposed to temporary, I believe many of my colleagues would still endorse it, if it were the only way to save staff jobs. The issue here is not some nebulous principle of university governance or who should sacrifice more. It's simply about those of us who are fortunate dooing something to help save the jobs of people who can't afford to lose them, especially in an economic climate in which finding comparable jobs is likely to be extremely difficult. If in the end, that costs those of us with the security of tenure a little something, many of us feel we can afford it.