Dear Colleagues:

We have published a salary survey every year since 1974, the only exceptions being those years without raises. All the data comes from the UI Budget Office and the UI Office of Institutional Research and Assessment. Salary data and analyses going back to FY2001 can be found here. For the second  time the UI did not provide percentage increase in salary, because the UI counsel determined that it constituted an invasion of privacy.  Please refer to the FY07 salaries here to calculate the percentage increase. 

From 619 Faculty in FY96 to 500 for FY08; Only 15 net positions, not 67 as Announced, for 2007-2008

During the academic year 1996-97 there were 619 faculty in the ranks of assistant, associate, and full professor. This year the number is 500, a reduction of 119 faculty over 12 years.  This means that UI students are enrolling in much larger classes and also being taught by more TAs and lecturers.  At least the budget outlay for faculty salaries, stagnant over the period 1996-2005, did increase from $29 million in FY05 to $35.5 million in FY08.

The net increase in 15 ranked positions contrasts sharply with the UI announcement that 67 faculty had come on board for FY08.  If one counts the ranked faculty on the Provost's new faculty list, there are 61 new assistant and associate professors. What accounts for this huge discrepancy?  Has there been that much turn over in existing positions such that the net increase is only 15 positions?  We have asked for clarification from the UI administration, but nothing satisfactory has been forthcoming.

Once Again, Governor's Higher Education Budget is Good, but still No Funds for Pay Equity

Governor "Butch" Otter has been good to Idaho's colleges and universities since he has assumed office.  His budget recommendation, not including Ag Extension and Research and community colleges, is $295,506,300, an 11.8 percent increase. He has also proposed a 5 percent pay increase for all public employees.  As the following analysis dem-onstrates, a separate appropriation for pay equity (not merit based) is desperately needed to bring each professorial rank closer to our peers.  If our peers receive similar raises for FY08 (as safe assumption), then we will remain at the bottom of the peer list.

Average Faculty Salaries Rose 4.3 percent in 2007-08—but 17.2 percent behind Research II Average

We always rely heavily on Archie George of the UI Office of Institutional Research and Assessment.  George reports:  “Overall, the average academic year salary for U Idaho faculty in academic departments with rank of full, associate or assistant professor increased from $60,824 in FY 2004-05 to $71,077 this year [FY08]. This represents an average increase of 5.3% per year for the last three years. This year’s 4.3% increase ($68,138 to 71,077) is less than last year’s 7.9% increase (from $63,138 to 68,138) but still appears to be large enough to gain against national averages.”  The fact is, however, that we are still 17.2 percent behind the average at Research II institutions.

UI Ranks 14^th out of 17 Peer Institutions: Full Professors lag 12%; Associates, 9%; Assistants, 10%

From FY06 to FY07 the UI gained 3 percent for its associates and full professors, but only one percent for its assistant professors. The 4.3 percent raise for FY08 may not allows us to preserve their gains. In FY07 peer full professors made an average $93,947 contrasted to UI’s 82,400; peer associates earned $69,753 versus UI’s $63,000; and peer assistants averaged $60,588 while UI assistant pay was $54,300. The average faculty salary in all ranks among our peer institutions was $74,684 compared to UI’s $66,566.  See Table II for the full list of peer institutions. 

Administrative Raises up 260% from 1982-2008 while Full Professors were up 187%; CPI is 210

In 1995 we thought that we had succeeded in curbing excessive increases in administrative raises, but as Tables I & III  indicate below, they have outstripped full professors by 73 percent over 25 years. During the period 1990-1995 raises for the higher administration rose by 21.34 percent compared to 16.5 percent for faculty. When the AFT made these increases an issue in 1995, the next year administrator pay rose only 2.33 percent, about 3 percent lower than the faculty. This year the average raise for on-going administrators was 5 percent compared to the 4.3 percent for all faculty.  We hope that this is not a new trend that will again outpace faculty salaries.

Those who justify these huge administrative salaries say: "This is what the market demands, and we are still paying less than peer institutions." If faculty salaries had been keeping up, this would have been persuasive. But, as the State Board of Education continues to approve these administrative increases each year, faculty salaries have fallen further and further behind.

In a 2005 meeting with the AFT, Provost Douglas Baker said that increased pay for administrators is caused by high turn over.  In the past our administrators stayed in their posts much longer, and our theory is that excessive administrative salaries are caused by applying a corporate model to higher education management. Last year United Airlines emerged from bankruptcy after dumping its pensions on the government and demanding wage reductions for its employees. Its management team, however, continues to get raises and bonuses.  Some of us discern some instructive and demoralizing parallels here.

Large Variation in Salary Deficiencies Across the Disciplines:  Full Professors Lag 2.8% to 36.8%
Departments whose Full Professors are more than 30% behind increased from 9 to 11 from FY07 to FY08

The number of departments in which full professors are more than 30 percent behind has increased from 9 to 11: management/ marketing (36.8.4%); foreign languages (34.8%); history (33.9 %); psychology (33.9%); materials science (33.4%); philosophy (33.9 %); political science (32.3%); ag economics (32.1%); civil engineering (30.6%); sociology-anthropology (30.6%); family/consumer science (30.1). For the complete list by discipline all ranks, by college all ranks, and average in each rank seethis link.

Promotion Increments Help Full Professors, but Associate salaries are still Compressed

For many years the faculty union urged the administration to increase the promotion increments in order to alleviate salary compression in the upper ranks.  They used to be a measly $1,000 for promotion to associate and $1,500 to full.  We take some credit for the fact that the Hoover administration increased those increments to $5,000 and $6,500 respectively.  Recently they were boosted to $6,000 and $8,500, and finally we are seeing an appropriate gap between associate and full professor salaries. But associate professor pay is now far too compressed with reference to assistants and that problem must be addressed.

White’s $286,187 is a 392 percent increase over Gibb’s FY82 Salary; National Presidential Pay Rose, on average and inflation adjusted, 35 percent while Faculty Salaries Increased 5 percent from FY96 to FY06

In 1972 new assistant professors made about $10,000, and President Ernest Hartung made about $30,000. When President Richard Gibb hired in 1977, his salary had risen to four times that of entry-level faculty. Faculty complaints became more vocal when Elizabeth Zinser’s FY 94 salary was $125,039, five times entry-level salaries. Zinser promised that her "high tide" wage would float all faculty boats, but instead our boats have been swamped. The differential with entry-level faculty has now risen to seven times.

A recent study by the American Association of University Professors reveals “that chief executives of colleges and universities have experienced extraordinary increases in their compensation. The inflation-adjusted salaries of chief executives in higher education increased by more than 35 percent from 1995–96 to 2005–06, while the inflation-adjusted salaries of faculty members increased a mere 5 percent. Inflation-adjusted endowments grew an average of 82 percent during that time. These figures raise a question of priorities: if institutional endowment funds and presidential compensation grew at substantial rates, why should faculty compensation remain so depressed?”

Over Eleven Years, 45 Faculty in 15 Disciplines have moved on to Greener Pastures

Last year Rep. Shirley Ringo asked the AFT to make a list of UI faculty who have left for better jobs. An e-mail survey of about 250 faculty resulted in responses from 15 disciplines reporting a total of 45 faculty moving on to greener pastures.  Plant, Soil, and Entomological Sciences reports a 20 percent attribution rate, and about a dozen faculty are actively looking for jobs elsewhere.  Biological sciences has lost at least eight faculty in ten years and they report three failed searches because of noncompetitive salaries.  The full list can be found at this link. Please email ngier@uidaho.edu if you have anyone to add to this list.

Across the Board Raises before Merit Pay; otherwise Many Faculty Lose Pay to Inflation

The Hoover administration committed itself to "across the board increases" for "all employees showing at least satisfactory performance." This promise stands first in a list that includes promotions, merit pay, and equity adjustments. The AFT position has always been that as a long as salaries do not keep up with the cost of living, then merit pay is a moot point. When legislative raises are applied according to merit, many faculty end up with pays cuts because of the decline in general buying power.  Merit pay must be funded by separate appropriations.

Collective Bargaining is the Only Answer; Support the Bill Now in the Legislature

During the late 1960s there was a large expansion of our public higher education system. This was good for educational opportunity, but bad in the way that this system developed according to a business model. University presidents became less like academic leaders and more like CEOs, and their salaries, as well as those of their management teams, have skyrocketed. A natural response to the industrialization of the university was the rise of faculty unions. They now represent a large majority of faculty in states where collective bargaining is allowed. Idaho, unfortunately, is not one of them.

A central feature of these contracts is a salary step system that guarantees cost of living increases as well as raises above that in good years. If UI faculty had gone for our salary step proposal in 1976 (see Table IV), we would now be nearer to the top of our peers rather than at the bottom. Furthermore, faculty without "market value"–those hard working faculty in the library, humanities, and social sciences--would be making a decent professional wage.

Our membership on six campuses has more than doubled over three years and these new members have inspired their AFT leaders to attempt, once again, to lobby for collective bargaining in the Idaho Legislature.  The resolution for the elected representatives at these institutions is printed as the first page in this booklet.

Sincerely,

Robert Dickow, President                                                                                         Music (Dickow@uidaho.edu) 

Lynne Haagensen, Vice President                                                                                Art  (lynneh@uidaho.edu)                 

Nick Gier, Secretary                                                                                              Philosophy (ngier@uidaho.edu)

Sarah Nelson, Treasurer                                                                            Foreign Languages  snelson@uidaho.edu)

Local 3215, American Federation of Teachers                                          http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/ift.htm

TABLE I  AVERAGE ACADEMIC YEAR SALARY BY RANK 1982-2008
Compared to National Average of Research II Institution Salaries
187 Percent Increase for Full Professors over 26 Years; Consumer Price Index at 210

TABLE II: PEER INSTITUTIONS BY RANK & ACADEMIC YEAR SALARIES (2006-2007)

Full Professors are 12% behind; Associates Lag 9%; Assistants, 10% behind; AAUP figures

TABLE III: ADMINISTRATIVE SALARIES (from UI Budget Books)
260 Percent Increase in 11 Positions from FY82 to FY08; First Number in Last Column is FY08 raise

TABLE IV: UI FACULTY SALARY STEP SYSTEM (UIS³) 

UIS³-8: Instructors and Lectures.  All part-time faculty would join the scale and their salaries would be prorated; UIS³-9: Senior Instructors.  Any faculty member who has served satisfactorily at UIS³-8 for ten years would be promoted to this rank and would be eligible for tenure; UIS³-10: Assistant Professor; UIS³-11 &12: Associate Professor; UIS³-13&14: Full Professor; UIS³-15&16: Senior Professor is a new rank based on superior teaching and research.