Link Submitted by Reader

This may be of interest to some:

https://www.facebook.com/EndHowardsTerm?fref=nf

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.

Sincerely,

Linda Rouillard

UT-AAUP Vice-President

Lesions of History

Candidates

There are now three official candidates for President of the University of Toledo.  I would like faculty to add to the minimal information we have with anything they have learned.  Does anyone have experience with any of these fine applicants?  Does anyone have a friend of a friend who has experience with them?  Also, what kinds of questions would you like them to answer when they arrive here in the middle of winter?  Is there anything you have read in their resumes that you are happy with or concerned about?  The floor is now open for comments. 

Further "Updation"

Be Second Opinion Sure

Linda Rouillard

UT-AAUP Vice-President

On Friday, January 9, 2015 the UT-AAUP and the BOT completed three days of mediation. So far we have discussed workload for both units, definite progress since the BOT had previously refused to consider workload at all.

During these meetings, we also listened to a presentation on UT finances given by Mr. Dave Morlock, accompanied by Mr. Tom Biggs. Dr. Rudy Fichtenbaum, President of the AAUP and Dr. Howard Bunsis, Chair of the AAUP-CBC (Collective Bargaining Congress), traveled to UT to listen to the presentation with us; however, the BOT's team refused to allow them to attend the presentation.

Mr. Morlock's presentation consisted of a budget comparison of FY 2011 through FY 2015, along with a five-year projection. We find it odd that past budget projections were presented in mediation talks which will address faculty compensation, while actual audited financials were not referenced.

Budgets are merely plans for the future. Actual financials tell us what occurred with our money and as such are much better indicators of potential trends. It is more important to know what happened to UT's money than to hear about the Administrative's hopes and dreams, or their nightmare scenarios.

Mr. Morlock's five-year budget comparison highlighted a total five-year decline in enrollment of 12%, a 13% decrease in SSI, a 16% decline in Sales and Service Revenue, along with rising healthcare/benefits costs, for a total five-year income reduction of $60 million, accompanied by a $943,000 increase in expenditures.

On the other hand, in their fact-based second opinion evaluating the audited financials of UT, Dr. Fichtenbaum and Dr. Bunsis have given us a very different assessment of the state of UT's financial health:

In 2014, UT produced a bottom line positive cash flow of $30 million.

In 2013, UT produced a bottom line positive cash flow of $50 million.

The audited financials show the following increases in net position for the past five years:

2014	$24 million
2013	$9 million
2012	$5 million
2011	$67.8 million
2010	$44 million

Our Ohio Senate Bill 6 ratios, a rating that evaluates levels of assets, debt, reserves, revenues, and expenses, has climbed to a healthy 3.80, putting us very close to that of Ohio State at 3.90.

UTMC has recently rebranded itself as University Health. Billboards invite potential patients to “be second opinion sure,” which is definitely good advice. We took that advice and received the following diagnosis:UT finances are healthy!

Hope???

Happy New Year to one and all from your friends at the Blog.


So we seem to have the same amount of info on both the Presidential Search and Negotiations as we had before our break.  If the BOT follows the "schedule" traced out for us earlier  they will be doing interviews at airport hotels soon.  (We'll presume for a new president.)  When Akron had reached this point their Board saw fit to give to its constituents the list of semifinalists.  I wouldn't hold my breath waiting.  After all what would the Serfs do with such a list except wreak havoc in some undesirable way?




It was my pleasure to see Camelot when it came to Toledo recently.  At the beginning of the show, the King sings, "I wonder what the King is up to tonight."  If you supplant King with Board, it might just give a nice representation of what is going on with the Search.  At the end of the song, the King concludes he's scared.  And that's what the King is doing tonight.  I will leave it to our readers to draw their own conclusions as to what the Board is up to, but given the last several occupants of the castle, scared might be just be a useful adjective.  (Don't you just love transparency?)

UT AAUP "Updation"

Forgive the format change, please--Bloggie

To: Tenure/Tenure-Track Faculty

From: Linda Rouillard, Vice President, UT-AAUP

Date: December 15, 2014

We recently reported that the BOT had filed for fact-finding. Now, they want to return to the table with a mediator. The first meeting with the mediator takes place on Wednesday, December 17.

Here is a summary of recent BOT proposals for tenure/tenure-track compensation and health benefits

	BOT proposal in August 2014	BOT proposal (last, final) on September 26, 2014
Back Pay	None	None
Salary	•                a 3% increase in 2014, 1% in 2015, and 1% in 2016 - a total of 5% across-the-board for the next three years	•                $2000 applied to base, then 2.7% in year 1, followed by 2% in year 2, and 2% in year 3
Merit	•                a total of 1.5% for Merit over three years and 1.5% for Faculty Excellence Awards over three years	•                no merit pay, but a possible extra 1% in year 2, and 1% in year 3, should there be a 2% increase in enrollment
Health Care	•                employee contribution to health care would increase to 20%	•                employee contribution to health care would increase to 20%
Summer Teaching	•                capped at $2800 per credit hour	•                capped at $2800 per credit hour

As we reported in our two members' meetings in early September 2014, the majority of members responding to our survey about the BOT August 2014 proposal indicated that they would not be willing to accept a contract with such provisions.

Faculty hired since 2010 have seen no raises since their arrival. Faculty members who have devoted their careers to UT have had no raises in 4 years because the Jacobs' Administration, with the BOT's blessing, was determined to beat down the union.

On the other hand, the BOT has allowed administrators to richly reward each other. In fiscal year 2013-2014, as the Administration continued to drag out our negotiations, the BOT approved over $3 million in pay increases for approximately 240 individuals. More specifically, the BOT

•    gave the VP/General Counsel a $29,040 raise or a 15% increase;

•    moved an Executive Associate Dean to an Associate Vice Provost position---at an additional cost of $35,000 or a 23.3% increase;

•    promoted an Associate Dean to an Associate Provost with a salary increase of over $41,399 or a 40% increase;

•    promoted a VP for Medical Affairs and Associate Dean to Chief Operating & Clinical Officer and Senior Associate Dean - accompanied by a $45,000 raise or a 14% increase;

•    promoted the Associate Dean of the College of Medicine to Interim Dean -added cost of $102,770 or a 65% increase.

If UT's budget can handle these kinds of increases, it can afford to recognize the hard work of the faculty.

The $3 million in pay increases to anyone but union faculty would fund close to a 6% raise for our 600 bargaining unit members whose total salaries were approximately $51 million in FY2014.

Our UT-AAUP 2008-2011 contract provided 3% annual raises. No raises in 4 years at 3% of $51 million amounts to $6.12 million. Administrators have had this money long enough; it's time to share.