Furloughs?

[bio-nonymous]

After the financial crash, we had to take a certain number of furlough days. In essence it is a just a way to say pay cut without saying so.



So, again, the bottom line is that furlough days are really nothing more than a pay cut.

^this +100. Many faculty will do what they always do, work no matter what. It might be a holiday, weekend,"furlough day" whatever, the work still needs to get done, we still need to do it. So the furlough for many faculty is exactly that: a pay cut, not an unpaid vacation day-->which, while annoying and painful, is a heck of a lot better than a pink slip!

[Cheerful]

I suspect in October there will be an announcement about faculty getting furloughed over winter break. Technically there is a month in which we aren't teaching, so it's possible to cut salaries this way by 1/9. This will happen after an early September announcement that the university will end its contributions to employee retirement accounts.

On my campus, faculty and staff are 99.99% certain that unpleasant announcements regarding "furloughs" (pay cuts), employer contributions to retirement accounts, etc. are ahead.  Admin will  wait to make such announcements until after the workforce completes all the hard work necessary for summer courses,  student recruitment and retention, and, the largest task, fall course prep.

Things are being orchestrated such that we are to be grateful to have our respective departments escape consolidation/elimination and to keep our jobs.  We already know our part-time faculty are in trouble; no hints yet of layers of high-paid admin facing pay cuts, etc.  I do appreciate my job.

[Ruralguy]

We are almost certain to implement such measures as well.

They basically wanted to figure out the best and worst case scenario budgets based on enrollments, see what the new guidance would be on corona, and then make additional budget cuts. My guess is that we'll see some of these cuts around July 1, after its a little more clear what our late enrollments/summer melt is figuring to be.

[Bonnie]

After the financial crash, we had to take a certain number of furlough days. In essence it is a just a way to say pay cut without saying so.

We were not allowed to take a furlough day on a day in which we taught or had departmental meetings. I don't think we were allowed to take a day on which we had a committee meeting. Most of us took them on Friday, in which we don't usually have any formal tasks.

I remember people getting up at meetings and asking administrators whether they should do research or prepare lectures or grade on furlough days. The official line was, do what you think is necessary so long as they don't fall on teaching days.

Of course, since the grading, prep and research needs to get done, if we didn't do it on Friday we would just have to do it on Saturday or Sunday. So it was, as I said, a pay cut with a different name.

If I know in advance there is going to be something similar this semester, I might cut down the number of assignments I give to better accommodate  having to take  furlough days. Of course, I might also do this to anticipate the larger class sizes due to possibly making all the adjuncts redundant.  But there is a limit to how much I could do this and still believe I am doing an effective job as a teacher.

So, again, the bottom line is that furlough days are really nothing more than a pay cut.

Yup. This is how it has worked at other universities in my state after the crash. You have to take x number of furlough days. But you can't take those on any of the days you have standing teaching or service commitments. And no, we will not adjust our productivity expectations.

Though it is at least a temporary pay cut.

[polly_mer]

Yes. So far it's been limited to food service, janitorial, etc. staff. I'd like to see some VPs, AVPs, etc. added to the list.

The savings from eliminating one high salary position that could be done without altogether could make a big positive difference. Of course this was always true.

It's not nearly as big a difference as people like to think.  Yes, one paycheck at 100k is much more than one paycheck at $3k. 

However, layoffs for jobs that don't need to be done now can save budget amounts of millions, even at a place like Super Dinky that only had a total budget under $15M.

It's a lot easier to hire many janitorial or even teaching staff when the jobs need to be done come back than to get a new VP.

At a big institution, there likely are a few jobs that never needed to be done, but usually fewer than people who have never attempted to run a college think.

[onthefringe]

After the financial crash, we had to take a certain number of furlough days. In essence it is a just a way to say pay cut without saying so.



So, again, the bottom line is that furlough days are really nothing more than a pay cut.

^this +100. Many faculty will do what they always do, work no matter what. It might be a holiday, weekend,"furlough day" whatever, the work still needs to get done, we still need to do it. So the furlough for many faculty is exactly that: a pay cut, not an unpaid vacation day-->which, while annoying and painful, is a heck of a lot better than a pink slip!

Amd, importantly, doesn't affect your base salary moving forward. So, in some dim and distant future where we (maybe) get raises again, at least they will be based on out current salaries.

[spork]

After the financial crash, we had to take a certain number of furlough days. In essence it is a just a way to say pay cut without saying so.



So, again, the bottom line is that furlough days are really nothing more than a pay cut.

^this +100. Many faculty will do what they always do, work no matter what. It might be a holiday, weekend,"furlough day" whatever, the work still needs to get done, we still need to do it. So the furlough for many faculty is exactly that: a pay cut, not an unpaid vacation day-->which, while annoying and painful, is a heck of a lot better than a pink slip!

Amd, importantly, doesn't affect your base salary moving forward. So, in some dim and distant future where we (maybe) get raises again, at least they will be based on out current salaries.

In 2009 my university eliminated its contributions to faculty retirement accounts. I was stunned when faculty members just sat there like frogs on a log when the announcement was made at a meeting. There was absolutely no comprehension on the part of faculty members in the room that, depending on the individual's length of time to retirement, they had just been told that they had lost $250,000 to $500,000 in compounded future earnings.

About four years later employer contributions were re-instated. But this time around it's different. The university never returned to pre-2008 recession enrollments. And I know from looking at net price of attendance and other data on IPEDS that a greater proportion of our undergraduates are on financial aid, so on average the students we've been getting since 2008 haven't been as profitable as the ones we were getting before 2008.

[Ruralguy]

You mean that at a minimum they are a pay cut. A school can also use it as an excuse to lock people out of buildings, turn down the seasonally relevant HVAC, turn down lights, etc.  My school I'd that in 09 or 10....I forget.  I went in anyway, but it was hot!

[ciao_yall]

After the financial crash, we had to take a certain number of furlough days. In essence it is a just a way to say pay cut without saying so.



So, again, the bottom line is that furlough days are really nothing more than a pay cut.

^this +100. Many faculty will do what they always do, work no matter what. It might be a holiday, weekend,"furlough day" whatever, the work still needs to get done, we still need to do it. So the furlough for many faculty is exactly that: a pay cut, not an unpaid vacation day-->which, while annoying and painful, is a heck of a lot better than a pink slip!

Amd, importantly, doesn't affect your base salary moving forward. So, in some dim and distant future where we (maybe) get raises again, at least they will be based on out current salaries.

In 2009 my university eliminated its contributions to faculty retirement accounts. I was stunned when faculty members just sat there like frogs on a log when the announcement was made at a meeting. There was absolutely no comprehension on the part of faculty members in the room that, depending on the individual's length of time to retirement, they had just been told that they had lost $250,000 to $500,000 in compounded future earnings.

About four years later employer contributions were re-instated. But this time around it's different. The university never returned to pre-2008 recession enrollments. And I know from looking at net price of attendance and other data on IPEDS that a greater proportion of our undergraduates are on financial aid, so on average the students we've been getting since 2008 haven't been as profitable as the ones we were getting before 2008.

Our state retirement system is underfunded to such a ridiculous extent, who knows what will happen?

In the meantime, faculty and staff all accept low pay today because... lifetime pensions!

And then they howl when the state wants to increase payments to the pension plan to start topping up, because "Isn't it supposed to be a 'pay-as-you-go' system?"

[polly_mer]

The question remains why educated people continued to be faculty even before the Covid shutdown.

[mamselle]

The question remains why educated people continued to be faculty even before the Covid shutdown.

"Because, with all its faults, it's still a wonderful world...."

   (That's a quote from somewhere, I forget where).

But in fact, those of us who are not idealistically blinkered, but remain aspirational academics who value community, conversation and interactive connections, if there weren't an academy with faculty and problems, we'd have to invent one.

   (Another quote, yes, I know...)

M.

[marshwiggle]

And then they howl when the state wants to increase payments to the pension plan to start topping up, because "Isn't it supposed to be a 'pay-as-you-go' system?"

One counterpoint to this that I've noted. In the pat, at times when pension funds ran surpluses, unions fought to have contributions reduced, rather than allow the surplus to build for a rainy day. When they have done that, they have to accept some responsibility themselves for getting wet when it rains.

[mahagonny]

The question remains why educated people continued to be faculty even before the Covid shutdown.

"Because, with all its faults, it's still a wonderful world...."

   (That's a quote from somewhere, I forget where).

But in fact, those of us who are not idealistically blinkered, but remain aspirational academics who value community, conversation and interactive connections, if there weren't an academy with faculty and problems, we'd have to invent one.

   (Another quote, yes, I know...)

M.

Your friend Polly enjoys taunting people.

[quasihumanist]

The question remains why educated people continued to be faculty even before the Covid shutdown.

Because the vast majority of for-profit companies are fraudulent institutions I am unwilling to work for, and, as a pacifist, I'm also unwilling to work in about three-quarters of the government.

[polly_mer]

The question remains why educated people continued to be faculty even before the Covid shutdown.

Because the vast majority of for-profit companies are fraudulent institutions I am unwilling to work for, and, as a pacifist, I'm also unwilling to work in about three-quarters of the government.

Have you really looked under the hood for non-profit academic institutions?  I'm much more willing to be in the honest defense business than pretending to be in the education business and claim to be good because non-profit.