Search This Blog

Thursday, February 5, 2015

More From UT-AAUP

cut and paste:

The UT-AAUP Executive Board invites you to join us for one of the following member meetings for further information and updates about negotiations.
---Wednesday, February 4 in SU 2584 from 3-5pm
---Thursday, February 5 in SU 2584 from 3-5pm
The UT-AAUP has analyzed the salary increases awarded to everyone but UT-AAUP union faculty over the past two and a half years. During this time, the Administration has been crying about the alleged budget shortfalls, even though the audited financials show that since 2010 UT has amassed profits of well over $149 million.
In spite of the professed shortfalls, salary increases continued. We note the following:
  • In FY 2013, the BOT awarded over $3.2 million in salary increases and promotions to about 242 individuals, none of whom were UT-AAUP bargaining unit members.
  • In FY 2014, approximately 243 non UT-AAUP individuals received again over $3 million in salary increases.
  • So far for FY 2015, as of December 2014, 196 individuals, none of whom were UT-AAUP members, received over $2 million in raises.
  • Nursing faculty promoted after their accretion into the UT-AAUP did NOT receive the contracted amount for promotion, and did not receive other contracted compensation.
The UT-AAUP faculty salaries represent about 10% of UT's $500 million academic budget, or about $50 million. Each 1% raise in salary for our unit is the equivalent of about $500,000. For the approximately 600 members of the UT-AAUP chapter, $3 million amounts to about a 6% raise. If the BOT can approve $3 million for salary and promotion for a group much smaller than our unit, it can surely find the funds to equitably recognize faculty contributions to the creation of the stunning profits of over $149 million.
Our students have been gouged by the Administration as well. UT pocketed large sums of money while our students went further into debt, and faculty compensation failed to even keep up with inflation. Remember the dire predictions of gloom and doom for FY 2012 and 2013?
  • In FY 2011 tuition went up 3.5% across the board, following a $44 million profit in FY 2010.
  • The FY 2012 budget raised in-state undergraduate tuition 3.5% and in-state graduate tuition nearly 6%. LLSS students were charged a new upper division fee, meaning students paid more as they advanced through their programs. All this in spite of the fact that in FY 2011, UT made a profit of$67.8 million.
  • The FY 2015 budget raised in-state undergraduate tuition over 2%, in spite of a $24 million profit in FY 2014.
We have pointed to the healthy financial status of our university only to be met with a grudging admission on the part of the Administration that the audited financials do indeed show that UT is doing fine, but it simply will not spend that money on UT-AAUP faculty.
Faculty generate the revenue for the academic enterprise. We are on the frontlines and yet we have been left in arrears since Fall 2010 when we had our last raise.
Each of the eight candidates recently interviewed for the president's position asked about the status of our labor negotiations. The Blade reported that we received only 29 applications for the position; clearly the word is out about UT. This paucity of interest in what can only promise to be a lucrative presidential salary predicts that our faculty hiring plan will also produce little interest in an institution proven to be stingy with those who generate the revenue.
Linda Rouillard
UT-AAUP Vice-President


Anonymous said...

Linda, I wish you would explain this profit. Where is the profit? If profit is what is left from total revenue after all expenditures are paid, then there is a pile of money somewhere. Clearly that can't be the case since the state would intervene. How was "profit" calculated, where is it? Again, I don't doubt your conclusions that UT's financial health is better than we have been led to believe, but I do have some reservations about your methodology.

I know your area of concern is the faculty, but look at PSA too. The majority of us are in the same boat as faculty or even worse.

Anonymous said...

Can anyone report on what was said at the meetings?

Anonymous said...

I have heard from members of the search committee and members of the faculty Senate that members of the search committee met socially and professionally multiple times with Christopher Howard during the search and not the other candidates. I hope someone asks him during his town hall if this is true. Is this a real search or as it just a show to take up time until we all have to salute?

Anonymous said...

Do you really think that the AAUP or the faculty give a damn about the PSA?

I don’t.

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:33 AM

I know they don't care. The faculty doesn't even care about themselves really. There is virtually no sense of community or solidarity within the various groups yet alone between the groups. The previous administration is blamed with playing divide and conquer politics. They did, but we were already divided well before they got here.

Anonymous said...

If they meet with him more then just the airport interview including socially, it is unfair to the other two candidates and an unethical way to conduct a search. If either of the other two found out no doubt they would likely pull their names from consideration. Again the BOT have no idea how to run a proper Presidential search and should be held accountable by HR and OBOR, but of course they will not be.