MLA’s recommended salaries

[Ruralguy]

Oh heck, our last two dept. techs were much more valuable than any faculty member, and we all said so.

[mleok]

The point is not to become grinning jackals.  There are lots of reasons that the culture has turned its cannons towards the Tower these days.  Let's not turn on each other----and there are some people on these boards who are absolutely bent upon internecine conflict.

Fair enough, but I don't think pointing out that the MLA's statement on recommended salaries is counterproductive is an example of us turning on each other.

[Wahoo Redux]

No one objects to pointing out the unreality of the MLA statement.  I don't like MLA all that well myself, although I applaud their attempts at activism, which is what I think this is.

Just don't play the game that certain posters like to play. 

[Hibush]

The point is not to become grinning jackals.  There are lots of reasons that the culture has turned its cannons towards the Tower these days.  Let's not turn on each other----and there are some people on these boards who are absolutely bent upon internecine conflict.

Fair enough, but I don't think pointing out that the MLA's statement on recommended salaries is counterproductive is an example of us turning on each other.

The call for a $15 minimum wage was considered ridiculous and counterproductive a couple years ago because it was double the existing US Federal minimum. Now $15 is a reality in several places, and is taken as a serious benchmark by the current Congress as it works on an update to the Federal rate.

If MLA can provide a justification based on different assumptions then it is a reasonable way to shift the debate. The current rate is based in part on what desperate people will accept. The MLA would have it based on the wage for positions with comparable responsibilities and for supporting a reasonable living standard. That's basically the argument for the $15

[marshwiggle]

If MLA can provide a justification based on different assumptions then it is a reasonable way to shift the debate. The current rate is based in part on what desperate people will accept. The MLA would have it based on the wage for positions with comparable responsibilities and for supporting a reasonable living standard. That's basically the argument for the $15

How does a "reasonable living standard" have any relation to a person's professional responsibilities?  The two things are, in principle, completely unrelated, except perhaps for people whose living situation is their work situation such as farmers, live-in domestics, lighthouse keepers, etc.

[Hibush]

If MLA can provide a justification based on different assumptions then it is a reasonable way to shift the debate. The current rate is based in part on what desperate people will accept. The MLA would have it based on the wage for positions with comparable responsibilities and for supporting a reasonable living standard. That's basically the argument for the $15

How does a "reasonable living standard" have any relation to a person's professional responsibilities?  The two things are, in principle, completely unrelated, except perhaps for people whose living situation is their work situation such as farmers, live-in domestics, lighthouse keepers, etc.

It is one factor in establishing appropriate compensation for a position. Pure free-market types reject it as a consideration, and your comment reflects that perspective pretty well. It's not uncommon.

Expected living standard comes into play when people are really scraping the bottom, such as working for $8 or $9 an hour; or for $1000 per course as an adjunct. The insecurity that comes with such low pay can be considered unseemly.

It also comes into play at the high end. Execs argue successfully for extra millions in compensation because execs at competing firms have bigger Aspen cabins and other lifestyle markers.

I think it is reasonable for a college to ask whether its value system supports a salary structure that allows business professors to own a house in the fanciest neighborhood in town, but English professors can't afford a house at all. That appear to be what MLA is challenging them to do. 

[marshwiggle]

How does a "reasonable living standard" have any relation to a person's professional responsibilities?  The two things are, in principle, completely unrelated, except perhaps for people whose living situation is their work situation such as farmers, live-in domestics, lighthouse keepers, etc.

It is one factor in establishing appropriate compensation for a position. Pure free-market types reject it as a consideration, and your comment reflects that perspective pretty well. It's not uncommon.

I'm pretty sure I'm not a "pure free-market type", if that means very little government regulation, low taxes, etc. However, just as there are physical laws governing the universe, there are laws of human behaviour that affect economics.

Expected living standard comes into play when people are really scraping the bottom, such as working for $8 or $9 an hour; or for $1000 per course as an adjunct. The insecurity that comes with such low pay can be considered unseemly.

It also comes into play at the high end. Execs argue successfully for extra millions in compensation because execs at competing firms have bigger Aspen cabins and other lifestyle markers.

Executive compensation, in normal situations*, is based on an individual's perceived value to the company. If the person is seen to be responsible for huge profits, then compensation which is likely to keep those profits rolling in is a financially sound investment for the company. (Note I've highlighted the inherent assumptions in this, some or even all of which may be incorrect, but when the assumptions are correct the decision is completely rational.)

*Golden handshakes and things of that nature are usually a reflection of the fact that people are making decisions to spend other peoples' money.

I think it is reasonable for a college to ask whether its value system supports a salary structure that allows business professors to own a house in the fanciest neighborhood in town, but English professors can't afford a house at all. That appear to be what MLA is challenging them to do.

Its "value system" has to support a salary structure which allows them to hire faculty of sufficient calibre in every discipline required. That same "value system" has to ensure that their costs are in line with their revenues. And the "value system" of each faculty member will determine whether the salary on offer is acceptable or not. A highly educated professional with well-developed critical thinking skills should be able to make this choice effectively.

[pink_]

As long as they don't mind "fulls" making 75, then this might go through in some places.

That'd be a pretty nice raise for me!

[mleok]

The point is not to become grinning jackals.  There are lots of reasons that the culture has turned its cannons towards the Tower these days.  Let's not turn on each other----and there are some people on these boards who are absolutely bent upon internecine conflict.

Fair enough, but I don't think pointing out that the MLA's statement on recommended salaries is counterproductive is an example of us turning on each other.

The call for a $15 minimum wage was considered ridiculous and counterproductive a couple years ago because it was double the existing US Federal minimum. Now $15 is a reality in several places, and is taken as a serious benchmark by the current Congress as it works on an update to the Federal rate.

If MLA can provide a justification based on different assumptions then it is a reasonable way to shift the debate. The current rate is based in part on what desperate people will accept. The MLA would have it based on the wage for positions with comparable responsibilities and for supporting a reasonable living standard. That's basically the argument for the $15

Yes, but I think that line of reasoning would be more effective in advocating for the minimum per course compensation. This in turn could then be used to justify a minimum salary for assistant professors. In any case, most of the push for higher minimum wages is driven by the notion of a "living wage," and that is now a reality in parts of the US where one simply cannot survive on the existing federal minimum wage, but is a harder push in parts of the country with substantially lower cost of living. Where it becomes more challenging is to justify why a reasonable living standard for an assistant professor is over three times what one would receive even with the $15/hour minimum wage. $15/hour X 40 hours X 50 weeks = $30K / year. $75K / 9 months = $100K / year.

[Wahoo Redux]

I cannot vouch for these numbers, but when I put "salaries doctorate" into Google, I come up with:

Research Scientist. $89k.
Assistant Professor, Postsecondary / Higher Education. $69k.
Data Scientist. $110k.
Physical Therapist (PT) $70k.
Senior Research Scientist, Biotechnology. $107k.
Research Scientist, Biotechnology. $95k.
Professor, Postsecondary / Higher Education. $89k.

MSU also published this table:

https://grad.msu.edu/phdcareers/career-support/phdsalaries

So as "laughable" as the MLA declaration is, their numbers are in-line with what other people with advanced degrees are making on the open job market.

[mleok]

I cannot vouch for these numbers, but when I put "salaries doctorate" into Google, I come up with:

Research Scientist. $89k.
Assistant Professor, Postsecondary / Higher Education. $69k.
Data Scientist. $110k.
Physical Therapist (PT) $70k.
Senior Research Scientist, Biotechnology. $107k.
Research Scientist, Biotechnology. $95k.
Professor, Postsecondary / Higher Education. $89k.

MSU also published this table:

https://grad.msu.edu/phdcareers/career-support/phdsalaries

So as "laughable" as the MLA declaration is, their numbers are in-line with what other people with advanced degrees are making on the open job market.

Those are the median salaries, not the starting salaries, which is what an assistant professor is. It also is significantly skewed by faculty salaries in far better compensated fields, which have a robust alternative career path in industry. Of course, you already know all about supply and demand, and the greatest impediment to humanities professors commanding a high salary is the large number of contingent faculty with PhDs who are willing to accept starvation wages. For example, my most recent PhD student received a $250K/year job offer straight out of graduate school, so you can be certain that he isn't going to accept a starvation wage contingent faculty position.

[eigen]

I cannot vouch for these numbers, but when I put "salaries doctorate" into Google, I come up with:

Research Scientist. $89k.
Assistant Professor, Postsecondary / Higher Education. $69k.
Data Scientist. $110k.
Physical Therapist (PT) $70k.
Senior Research Scientist, Biotechnology. $107k.
Research Scientist, Biotechnology. $95k.
Professor, Postsecondary / Higher Education. $89k.

MSU also published this table:

https://grad.msu.edu/phdcareers/career-support/phdsalaries

So as "laughable" as the MLA declaration is, their numbers are in-line with what other people with advanced degrees are making on the open job market.

The numbers for the research scientist positions are also skewed high (imo) due to the fact that a significant fraction of those positions tend to be in high COL coastal areas (Boston, SF, Seattle, etc.). Not that there aren't positions elsewhere, just where a lot of them tend to be.

The CoL argument is really a necessary part of this. My salary stayed (roughly) the same moving from a town of 10,000 in the rural Midwest to a much larger city on the coast. My salary was great where I was, and is tight where I am now.

At least in my field, academia also is known to be less competitive with salaries due to the increase in freedom and job security. I could make 2-3x as much if I moved to industry, but chances are I'd be likely to need to move relatively frequently, both companies and cities as research companies fold together, go belly up, or move locations.

[polly_mer]

I read Wahoo's list and think the numbers are low for people who would be competitive for an R1 assistant professor position in my fields.  Those numbers are just silly low for someone who isn't fresh out of grad school and has relevant experience.

Some of that is the skewedness in where those jobs are, as eigen notes.  My employer has official policies regarding salary negotiations including that cost of living is already included in salary bands so "it's expensive to live here" is not a justification to offer more money.

In contrast, when I look at assistant professor positions in my fields not in expensive cities, $75k is reasonable for places where the median family income is $50k.  For places where the median family income is $35k, the engineering assistant professor gets about $55k, the nursing assistant professor gets $75k, and the humanities professor who retires is not replaced unless someone accepts $35k.

[polly_mer]

My ex-brother-in-law was a machinist.  He also taught machining at a community college.  Occasionally he would have visits from "engineers" who would ask him and he friends questions about his work.  Dwight, my ex-brother-in-law, loved to gloat about "talking circles around engineers."  It seemed apparent to me that the engineers, some of whom were from the big land grant school if I remember correctly, were obviously trying to broaden their already broad knowledge with some specifics----but to Dwight they were a bunch of eggheads who had no idea how to actually do the work.

Machinist is a highly skilled profession that has nothing to do with being a professional engineer.  They are in no way interchangeable.  Who can do the work depends very much on the work that needs to be done.

PhDs are likewise highly specialized and not interchangeable.   

Insisting that teaching French in the hinterlands as a gen ed load is somehow comparable to running a 20-person, externally funded scientific research group to the tune of millions of dollars a year in an expensive city similarly doesn't work.  Both have value to society, but they don't have the same value and certainly aren't pulling from the same pool of people.

The people who are making decisions at the Super Dinkies of the world are unlikely to care what the MLA claims, especially when the question is more "can we require students to have already met gen ed requirements related to MLA fields before enrollment so we don't have to employ any MLA professors?" and less "what do we have to do to attract and retain MLA professors for majors we already cut?"

[Wahoo Redux]

My ex-brother-in-law was a machinist.  He also taught machining at a community college.  Occasionally he would have visits from "engineers" who would ask him and he friends questions about his work.  Dwight, my ex-brother-in-law, loved to gloat about "talking circles around engineers."  It seemed apparent to me that the engineers, some of whom were from the big land grant school if I remember correctly, were obviously trying to broaden their already broad knowledge with some specifics----but to Dwight they were a bunch of eggheads who had no idea how to actually do the work.

Machinist is a highly skilled profession that has nothing to do with being a professional engineer.  They are in no way interchangeable.  Who can do the work depends very much on the work that needs to be done.

PhDs are likewise highly specialized and not interchangeable.   

Insisting that teaching French in the hinterlands as a gen ed load is somehow comparable to running a 20-person, externally funded scientific research group to the tune of millions of dollars a year in an expensive city similarly doesn't work.  Both have value to society, but they don't have the same value and certainly aren't pulling from the same pool of people.

The people who are making decisions at the Super Dinkies of the world are unlikely to care what the MLA claims, especially when the question is more "can we require students to have already met gen ed requirements related to MLA fields before enrollment so we don't have to employ any MLA professors?" and less "what do we have to do to attract and retain MLA professors for majors we already cut?"

None of that was the point I was making, Polly, not in the least.

You are absolutely obsessed with "gen eds."  Weird.

But yeah, machining is very, very cool and takes a great deal of skill...which had nothing to do with what I was saying.  I really liked Dwight (not his real name, obviously) and liked it when he showed me his trade.  Too bad that marriage did not last.