To: Contract Faculty Members
Finally, after many years of trying to remove the five year wait periods from the salary schedule, we were successful in doing so, largely because we now have more control over how we allocate our resources due to the resource allocation model.
The goal of this round of salary negotiations was to take a salary schedule that was very inequitable and create one that was more equitable. This new salary schedule is the first major step in that direction. I don’t think anyone can argue that a schedule where the majority of the contract faculty have to wait five years for a step movement while the remainder can move every year, and actually skip a step upon promotion, is fair.
We now have a schedule that has a built-in 2.75% yearly increase between steps A-R, 1.07% between R-S, and 1.0% from S-Z. Is this equitable? Clearly still not as faculty on steps A-R will receive a yearly increase greater than their colleagues on steps S-Z. Is it more equitable than the old salary schedule? Yes, since everyone now receives at least some type of automatic yearly increase. (Faculty will continue to skip a step upon promotion.) However you feel about this new salary schedule, it’s essential that you make your voice heard by voting for or against its ratification.
Our goal in the future will be to continue to add resources to steps S-Z until we get all of the steps up to 2.75%. I have stated this goal repeatedly over the past year at the various chair, senate, and department meetings I have attended without hearing a word of dissent. If you don’t agree this should be our future goal, now is the time, not after we settle the next salary schedule, to let us hear from you.
One final note on email etiquette: If you wish to send out a message to the contract faculty, look for that DL in your address book as I have done in this message. Sending a message to the entire college makes us look unprofessional as faculty.
As always, if you have any questions or concerns please send them to me and I will be more than happy to address them on an individual basis. It’s not my practice to respond to global posts.