Approved by University
Council 9/04/03Approved by FacEx: 6/26/02
Revised 9/3/02
Standing Charges
1. Provide leadership to an open process that reviews
the salary and benefit structure of faculty at the University. Look at the
distribution of salaries in different schools and departments. Include
comparative data on salaries and benefits at peer institutions and other
comparative groups. Make recommendations to FacEx by 12/1/03 as to improvements
in salaries and benefits for FY 2005, which will be shared with the
Chancellor in advance of the Board of Regents framing of its recommendation to
the legislature. Report monthly, or as
appropriate, to FacEx on the progress of this charge.
Explanation. There are many issues that might be
addressed in this charge, and the work on some of the charges below will be
useful. Please give consideration to
the following issues at a minimum. Are
there peer institutions whose faculty salaries and benefits could serve as
targets we wish to equal or surpass?
Does the faculty wish to continue with a “merit only” system for salary
increments or might we suggest separating the idea of cost-of-living raises
from merit (with funds available for both, hopefully)? Would the faculty prefer a cafeteria-style
benefits plan, and, if so, what benefits should be included (e.g., tuition
waivers for dependents)? Please
consider holding a series of hearings that would allow the Committee to hear
the concerns of faculty. We recognize that
the December 1 reporting date is early, but this is necessary so the faculty
can have meaningful input into the University’s and State’s budget development
process.
2. Monitor salary inequities by gender, compression and
inversion at all ranks and disciplines and report to FacEx by 2/1/04. Explore the adequacy of the policies and
mechanisms currently in use by the University to address salary
inequities. Develop necessary
recommendations to repair inadequacies.
Report monthly, or as appropriate, to FacEx on the progress of this
charge.
Explanation: Most faculty believe that the only
(primary?) way that salaries are improved at the University is through merit
processes that operate at the departmental and school level. Notwithstanding
the best efforts of University administration to monitor and correct
inequities, salary inequities seem to continue. What options does a member of the faculty who experiences one or
more of the several types of salary inequity have to resolve the situation?
Many faculty believe that the primary (only?) method of doing so is to go on
the job market and be offered a job elsewhere (with the hope that KU will match
the offer)? If this is the case, or
even mostly the case, the University might benefit from a more systematic
approach that, in the long run, is less expensive for the University and less
demoralizing for faculty. Should the
University set aside a portion of funds to deal specifically with salary
inequities and implement a system of periodic salary reviews at major career
benchmarks (e.g., third year review, tenure, promotion) whereby corrective
action could be taken to reduce inequities? Again, the Committee should
consider holding public hearings in order to estimate the size of the problem,
its consequences, as well as possible solutions.
3. Submit to FacEx: 1) the approved minutes of each
meeting (minutes much be kept); b) recommendation for action as they are
approved by the committee; and, c) a final report by April 1, 2004. The final
report should make clear what was done (or not done) about each of the charges
to the committee and make recommendations to FacEx for action. The report also
should provide the names of the committee members and include suggestions for
charges to, and the chair of, the next year’s committee.
4. Examine and report on the 2003 merit and exceptional
merit distribution. Look into how
decisions were made on the allocation of merit and exceptional merit and any
problems in the process (See FacEx minutes of 8/26/03).
5.
Compare
the “real value” of faculty salaries over time, given rising inflation and cost
of living increases in Lawrence. Can faculty afford the costs of housing in
Lawrence?
6.
Consider
and make a recommendation regarding a University policy that would allow paid
leave for maternity/paternity. This
recommendation should be submitted to FacEx by March 1, 2004.
7.
Investigate
methods to entice faculty both to come and to stay at KU other than salaries.
Explanation. A comparison of benefits offered by other
schools might be one avenue to take.
Also, many other universities have “faculty services offices.”
8.
Consider
the cost-benefits of tuition waivers for family members of KU employees,
including assessing the extent to which peer universities have this benefit and
the relative fairness to single faculty or faculty without children or those
who are not in need of this benefit. How do other institutions that have this
benefit deal with this issue? (Please invite a representative from UPSA and
from the Classified Senate to participate in the discussion of this
charge.)
9.
Chairs of the Planning and Resources and Faculty Compensation committees
shall confer and develop efficient mechanisms to communicate and coordinate on
issues of mutual concern.