BESC report to Faculty Senate, 2017-18

The BESC charge: the Budget and Economic Status committee has four primary responsibilities: (a) to study and report to the Senate on financial aspects of public higher education in Tennessee and on prospects for faculty salary levels and raises; (b) to examine fringe benefit situations and recommend changes and additions as appropriate; (c) to participate in recommending faculty salary policies; and (d) to participate in broader budgetary matters that impinge on the educational function of the institution.

2017-18 committee members: Titus Albu, Bo Baker, Michael Bell (chair), Boris Belinskiy, Nicholas Boer, Leonora Brown, William Crowe, Susan Eckelmann-Berghel, Rachel Fleming, Tim Gaudin, Sara Knox, Phillip Lewis, Hong Qin, Chris Smith, Charlene Schmidt

Ex officio: Richard Brown, Jerald Ainsworth, Robert Dooley

The 2017-18 BESC met five times (10-9, 10-27, 11-17, 2-8, 3-19).

We wish to highlight the following points that came out of discussion among ourselves and with representatives of the campus Administration:

  • The campus appears to be on a solid financial footing thanks to full funding of the allocation formula and the University remaining the top performing four-year college in the state.
  • Capital outlay projects are extensive and ongoing:
  • Guerry renovation bid delayed due to roof issue-issued soon
  • Holt renovation pushed back due to fire marshal concerns
  • Oak and Vine streets’ renovations delayed
  • The new dorm is on schedule
  • Fundraising effort are underway for the addition to McKenzie Arena
  • The $13 million renovation of Hunter Hall has been approved and funded
  • UTC has received approval to move forward with planning for the $110 million Health Sciences Building
  • While the campus is looking at 0% increase in tuition for 2018-19, the Administration is hoping to gain approval for moving to the 15/4 model already in place on other UT campuses. This would result in an increase of approximately $2 million for the University. This would fund:
  • New lines to eliminate bottleneck courses (English, Mathematics, etc.)
  • Additional scholarships
  • Additional advisors
  • Additional funding for career centers
  • It is believed that enrollment for 2018-19 will be up (applications well ahead of any previous year), with projections that this will generate an additional $1.5 million in funds.
  • The campus will be reviewing how it is spending certain student fees. The Technology Fee and the Online Course fee in particular have been targeted for scrutiny. This may have an impact on funds available for instruction and technology needs.
  • The faculty salary comparison of UTC and its peers provided by HR is very welcome.
  • There is a sense on the part of some faculty members that the merit compensation plan was not well communicated to the campus. This sense appears to have varied widely among the colleges. The Library for example had excellent communication of the process, while faculty members from other colleges felt they were not as well-informed.
  • Some faculty members felt that different colleges using different distribution models led to confusion and a sense of disparity in how funds were distributed across the campus.
  • There is confusion or a lack of clarity on the part of some faculty as to how “exceeds expectations” is assigned by department heads in the EDO process.
  • There was a great deal of dissatisfaction within the ranks of the A&S faculty regarding the process used in their college by the previous administrator.
  • There is concern on the part of some faculty members that the distribution of salary raises over the past few years has depended too much on the luck of the draw with regard to whether an EDO rating of “exceeds” in a year when there is no raise pool available means anything in subsequent years. Some colleges have taken this into account, while others apparently have not done so.
  • There were a report from a Senator that the market equity adjustments had created disparity within their department. In her last report to the committee, Laure Pou noted that HR had been at pains in making salary adjustments to avoid just such a situation. All adjustments were reviewed to determine that they did not create any gender or ethnic disparities. Compression issues were not taken into account during this latest round of market adjustments. HR will be looking at the effects of compression on senior faculty in the coming year.
  • The 2017-18 salary document is now essentially irrelevant. Our peer group has changed (again) so the comparisons from this survey are no longer valid. HR will be doing no further analysis of the existing report.
  • In 2018-19 the UT System will working with Sibson and release a new salary comparison report for all UT employees (faculty members first), using the new peer groups.
  • Subsequent market adjustments will be based on this survey, pending the availability of funds.
  • The University has utilized CUPA data as the source of information for all university-wide market/equity salary reviews for several years now. Doing so provides continuity and consistency over time.
  • The committee views the new peer group for UTC with some suspicion.
  • Dr. Brown would like to review market comparisons on an annual basis, with regular equity adjustments, with merit increases on top of this.
  • While Dr. Brown suspects any salary adjustments in the coming year will be primarily merit based, he is hoping to convince the Board to allow some flexibility at the campus level and allow some cost of living increases across the campus. There is strong support on the part of the committee for cost of living increases.
  • Dr. Brown hopes to create a pool of funds for the purpose of addressing salary compression.
  • The committee wishes to thank Dr. Brown and Laure Pou for their willingness to meet with us, share information, and respond to questions regarding the overall budget and how salary adjustments were distributed this year.
  • Despite the questions and concerns raised in committee, we do commend all parties involved for their efforts to improve UTC salaries.

The Committee wishes to make the following recommendations:

  • There should be greater clarity at the department level over what constitutes “exceeds” in the EDO process. This may involve more training of department heads in evaluating, or more discussion in the department of how “exceeds” is determined every year. If merit is to the basis for future salary increases then clarity and consistency in the awarding of exceeds becomes increasingly important to the faculty.
  • Subsequent salary adjustment plans (be they merit or equity based) should be developed with more consistency across the campus, and should be administered with more oversight by the campus Administration. It does not follow that all collegiate plans should be exactly the same, but more uniformity would address some of the “fairness” anxiety on the part of the faculty.
  • Subsequent salary adjustment plans (merit or equity) should be communicated to the campus at least at the college level (by the Deans), but preferably to all faculty by the Administration (communication is key).
  • The results of the UT System-wide review of faculty and staff salaries being conducted this year should be shared with the BESC and the Senate as soon as it is available.
  • The Administration must not lose sight of the impact of salary compression on senior faculty. The lack of salary distinction between rankscan be demoralizing.
  • While we recognize the continued focus of the UT Board on performance (merit based salary increases and post-tenure review) makes across-the-board increases increasingly unlikely, the long-term effects of no cost of living salary increases is counter-productive as it is demoralizing for employees and leads to low morale. Recognition of this impact must be taken into account as the University moves forward.
  • With the expansion of the campus footprint and the increase in student enrollment, we encourage the campus Administration to continue to make adding additional security personnel a priority.
  • While we applaud the faculty/staff computer refresh program, we encourage the campus Administration to not neglect support for student computer labs-aging hardware and a lack of IT support will inevitably have detrimental effects on student performance and future enrollment (and an impact on our bottom line).
  • The committee recommends the campus Administration request that President Di Pietro schedule a visit to campus to visit with the UTC faculty.