Administrative Trust & You

[Wahoo Redux]

I don't actually see a lot about administration of this version of the Fora except when peeps are mad.

And I find the relationship to admin interesting since the earls, counts, dukes and duchesses of academia almost always come up from the ranks, even if the presidents are sometimes business people, or politicians, or coaches these days.  So these people were human bein...uh, I mean professors once too, you know.

I'm also asking because, while our admin is hardworking and competent (if not overly dynamic or innovative) they don't seem to have the workers' best interests in mind, nor do they seem to be playing fairly.

Example: Our union asked for a 1 year "roll-over" contract since we are in the midst of an international health crisis.  I've talked to several faculty personally who would have no problems with furloughs or temporary pay-reductions under the circumstances (our president and provost voluntarily took pay reductions) provided that they were not permanent; my wife and I agree with this; scuttlebutt is that the union is okay with this (of course, what is actually said is secret, which is its own problem). 

Admin: No deal. 

They are bargaining hard, already threatening arbitration, and springing unilateral reorganization decisions on the school with no warning or input.  We may even lose authority to elect our own department chairs.  The workers are reasonable people, I think, and willing to work for the common good---but then they hit us with a hammer.

I mean, sure, we understand the uncertainty of the immediate future and the possibility that our institution may be permanently damaged, but come on!  We're willing to work in good faith!  And let's see how bad it gets before we drop the guillotine!  All the union asked for was a 1 year contract until we get a better purchase on what's going to happen, for pete's sake.

At the same time, our union is filled with very excitable, combative people----maybe for a reason----and every three years there is a lengthy showdown that makes the local news.  The town tends to look at us as a bunch of entitled showboaters who don't have to work during the summer.  Not good.

Anyway, just wondering how people viewed their admin.  Love or hate or something in-between?

[mamselle]

Where are the trustees in this scenario?

Is it possible admins are being forced into such positions behind their backs?

M.

[polly_mer]

Your administration needs to make changes to the contract so a rollover is a bad idea.

It's nice that some faculty are willing to accept furloughs for now. 

The probability is high that other changes are needed that won't be easily accepted by a "showboating" union.

Covid brought things to the fore, but it's likely that necessary changes were already being discussed for the past year.

Again, what a typical faculty member sees as day to day is often far from the top five priorities for the success of the institution as a whole.

[Aster]

I very much like the "If Only They Were Competent!" statement. Funny and True.

[mahagonny]

Example: Our union asked for a 1 year "roll-over" contract since we are in the midst of an international health crisis.  I've talked to several faculty personally who would have no problems with furloughs or temporary pay-reductions under the circumstances (our president and provost voluntarily took pay reductions) provided that they were not permanent; my wife and I agree with this; scuttlebutt is that the union is okay with this (of course, what is actually said is secret, which is its own problem). 

But if you were asking about my state university, it's not really the provost and the president who are taking the pay reduction unless they are currently living a lifestyle so extravagant that it couldn't be funded without all that income. And if that were true, they would not be hard working as you report; they would be hard-vacationing.The effect on their end is less money to leave to their children, grandchildren, family trust, things like that that are seen way off in the future.

Anyway, just wondering how people viewed their admin.  Love or hate or something in-between?

I have no choice but to hate their culture for the crazy amount of wealth it builds for itself, how they give these gigantic bonuses, then cast themselves as good Samaritans by skipping one during a crisis. Yes, I think it's fair to say we consider it disgusting.
As for how negotiating plays out, I would advise anyone in my situation against entering into non-binding arbitration, because if the administrators don't like what the arbitrator recommends they'll just say 'no, we're not doing that.'

[Wahoo Redux]

Where are the trustees in this scenario?

Is it possible admins are being forced into such positions behind their backs?

M.

Possible.  While there were some other irritating news in the campus newsletter from the board (in the midst of the downturn we are supposed to hire "consultants" to tell us what to do) there was nothing to this effect.  And our president is a go-getter, very dedicated, but also visibly unfriendly (I found myself accidentally standing next to hu in an auditorium before a college-wide meeting and, as adults often do, respectfully introduced myself----the laserbeams from his eyes promptly reduced me to a puddle of steaming goo...and I am not alone in producing this reaction) and he is a control-freak. 

We seldom hear the details of these things.  Our union just refers to "the administration."

[Wahoo Redux]

Your administration needs to make changes to the contract so a rollover is a bad idea.

Covid brought things to the fore, but it's likely that necessary changes were already being discussed for the past year.

Well, the interpretation among the ranks is that the admin is using Covid as an excuse, essentially a weapon, and taking advantage of a worldwide tragedy to forge a contract.  That's some dirty pool.

I fail to see why a 1-year roll-over is a bad idea or an unfair request under the circumstances, overall health of the institution or not.

[polly_mer]

I fail to see why a 1-year roll-over is a bad idea or an unfair request under the circumstances, overall health of the institution or not.

That failure to understand is exactly why I know faculty don't understand enough of the details to make an informed opinion.

For example, you've mentioned that just your department has 25 full-time faculty (including non-TT) and 80 adjuncts of uncertainty quality.  It's possible that a conversion to something of better quality, but smaller due to projected needs, has been in the works.

We've read nothing in your posts about other departments regarding how many faculty they have related to their needs and whether those departments are turning away aspiring students due to lack of capacity.

We've read nothing about how changes in international students (often full pay students with non-resident rates) affect your institution since that's seldom a humanities concern,

We've read nothing about any turnover among faculty who have choices (e.g., often expensive to replace) and decide not to be at your institution any more with the ongoing plans related to student enrollment needs.

And that's all before any considerations related to the current fallout and ongoing situation that's likely to be a minimum of two years.

My frustration on these issues continues to be faculty's lack of knowledge of other factors and yet insisting that those factors can't be as important as the ones the faculty know.

[Wahoo Redux]

Ah Polly.  You always seem to assume you know more than you do.

I've posted about most of that stuff, actually.  I wouldn't expect you to remember every single post I've ever made, or even to have read them all, but I actually HAVE posted on the other departments I know about and even about the percentage of FT to PT at our institution overall.  You may go through my profile  to see for yourself if you like.

Doubtful that there is any discussion of the adjuncts in our department except that they are the first to be cut---so sure, smaller due to present needs, but that comes from our chair, not anybody higher up.  I doubt they are on the admin's radar at all.  B'sides, our projected decrease is not as steep as some places and Forbes and Edmit both rate us as solid financially despite the plague.  All the faculty are running all their classes next year; the dip is in freshman gen ed classes where we are.

We have a very small body of international students (why should I mention them?), many of whom were stuck on campus.  They will have very little effect on our enrollment one way or the other.  We are a very regional campus.

So far we have had no turnover in my department directly related to Covid (again, why should I mention that anyway?) but I've repeatedly posted about the one retirement this summer and the two expected in the near future as well as the lack of any conversation regarding their replacements.  This situation preceded Covid.  Again, feel free to read my profile if you so choose.

And what does any of that have to do with anything?   It'd be interesting to see what super dinky faculty thought of their administrators.

But here's a question for you: If there are "details" that would help faculty understand admin decisions, why not share them?

[mahagonny]

But here's a question for you: If there are "details" that would help faculty understand admin decisions, why not share them?

WHAM!!!!!! Right between the eyes.

[mahagonny]

But here's a question for you: If there are "details" that would help faculty understand admin decisions, why not share them?

WHAM!!!!!! Right between the eyes.

It's really not hard to see when people of a certain personality type are drawn to positions where they can, or believe they can dominate, because that is what satisfies..

[the_geneticist]

I don't trust our Administration to look out for the best interest of our students OR the mission of the campus.
Case in point: they promise to uphold the teaching mission of our department and yet are making us cut TAs for our labs.  That means we will not be able to meet the teaching demand from the undergraduate students, students will be delayed in graduation, and we'll have a smaller budget than usual due to less lab fees.

[fishbrains]

I trust my administration to make decisions based on the financial, legal, and political (internal and external) ramifications of those decisions. If the adminicritters are long-term employees, these decisions tend to look to the long term and benefit the College. For admicritters looking to move on to "bigger and better" things as quickly as possible, the decisions tend to represent short term, self-centered visions.

If they have a sense of what's best for students, staff, and faculty when making their decisions, it's nice; but I don't trust them to make decisions based solely on what's best for us. I'm not sure it's fair for us to expect them to do so.

Now I'm sad. 

[mahagonny]

I trust my administration to make decisions based on the financial, legal, and political (internal and external) ramifications of those decisions. If the adminicritters are long-term employees, these decisions tend to look to the long term and benefit the College. For admicritters looking to move on to "bigger and better" things as quickly as possible, the decisions tend to represent short term, self-centered visions.

If they have a sense of what's best for students, staff, and faculty when making their decisions, it's nice; but I don't trust them to make decisions based solely on what's best for us. I'm not sure it's fair for us to expect them to do so.

Now I'm sad.

For me as a part time adjunct the analysis is a bit simpler. I know they would never make a decision based on what's good for us as a group, and what's fair to expect is defined with the assumption that we are lucky to ever be there at all, even temporarily. And if they make a decision based on what's fair to full time faculty while terminating us, we are expected to see that as a pro-faculty sensibility.

[fishbrains]

I trust my administration to make decisions based on the financial, legal, and political (internal and external) ramifications of those decisions. If the adminicritters are long-term employees, these decisions tend to look to the long term and benefit the College. For admicritters looking to move on to "bigger and better" things as quickly as possible, the decisions tend to represent short term, self-centered visions.

If they have a sense of what's best for students, staff, and faculty when making their decisions, it's nice; but I don't trust them to make decisions based solely on what's best for us. I'm not sure it's fair for us to expect them to do so.

Now I'm sad.

For me as a part time adjunct the analysis is a bit simpler. I know they would never make a decision based on what's good for us as a group, and what's fair to expect is defined with the assumption that we are lucky to ever be there at all, even temporarily. And if they make a decision based on what's fair to full time faculty while terminating us, we are expected to see that as a pro-faculty sensibility.

It's interesting that you think administrators--especially non-academic administrators--think or talk much about adjunct faculty. If the adjunct faculty are brought up at all in a big meeting, the subject gets a few grunts and a couple of head shakes, and then the meeting moves to the next topic.

Now I'm more sadder.