An elite DI set of assistant coach salaries

[Anselm]

If the salaries were capped at a much lower rate then they would still have great teams with great coaches.  I mean, where else are they going to work?

[Ruralguy]

Maybe, but they'd likely leave much earlier. Once they get a bit of fame, they'd just cash in on that. Why stay if you are only getting peanuts. Granted, most places under this scheme wouldn't pay any more. but the point is they'd leave the system entirely much earlier.

[kaysixteen]

What exactly does it mean for a professor to be/ become a 'high performer', and how can Professor X evaluate whether he himself is one?

[Wahoo Redux]

What exactly does it mean for a professor to be/ become a 'high performer', and how can Professor X evaluate whether he himself is one?

I guess the way we all know how well we and our colleagues do.

Student evals?  Publications?  Meaningful service (I finally talked my wife out of taking on so many committees----although the work load did a lot of the convincing by itself; people kept coming to her because they knew she would take on work and do a good job of it and I'd end up driving home by myself and then coming back later to get her)?  Curriculum advancements?  Whatever makes a good academic.

Certainly we know who the "dead wood" in our departments are?  Even wished someone would just retire because it is obvious they will not be fired?  Anybody know someone who should really not be in front of a classroom?

Conversely, anyone mention a colleague's name and have a student exclaim, "Oh, I love Dr. X!"

[poiuy]

What exactly does it mean for a professor to be/ become a 'high performer', and how can Professor X evaluate whether he himself is one?

Most Departments and Schools have (or should have) criteria for annual evaluations and for tenure and promotion, that are posted and shared with all colleagues. That represents a basic yardstick against which to craft your narratives.

There are also some unspoken or unwritten criteria in addition to the written ones - e.g. some places don't write down a specific number of articles published per year or amount of external funding brought in (in relevant fields) that people should achieve, but there are informally known expectations that colleagues discuss, or Chairs mention in conversations, etc.

Then there are one-off occurrences like awards or prestigious invited speaking gigs or some unusual / extraordinary leadership activities, etc.

If a faculty member frequently exceeds such criteria each year, then they can make a compelling argument of why they are high(er) performers and deserve merit raises for example.

[marshwiggle]

Part of the problem with unions, and specifically faculty unions, is that the well-being of the institution (including the students) is not a priority.

Supporting* people with lousy teaching undermines claims that the faculty are more concerned about students than administrators are.

*If/when support doesn't involve getting the people to do some sort of professional development regarding their teaching.

Can you substantiate these in some way?  Or are you spitballing?

Our union just saved our single most decorated and one of our most popular professors when our admin tried to cut him.  We would have lost one of our best but for the union.

One incident which I have brought up before. A math prof from a prestigious university was charged with attempted murder for attacking his wife with a rock. He was convicted of assault. The faculty union fought to let him retire rather than be fired.

That kind of stuff is all too common with unions.

[Wahoo Redux]

One incident which I have brought up before. A math prof from a prestigious university was charged with attempted murder for attacking his wife with a rock. He was convicted of assault. The faculty union fought to let him retire rather than be fired.

That kind of stuff is all too common with unions.

Is this the kind of stuff that is common with unions?  Hmmmmmm...don't think so, Marshy.  This is moderately sensational.  Methinks you are reaching pretty far here to prove a point you probably can't make.  I assume you are not blowing smoke since this is U of Waterloo, but I see nothing about a "union" and "Platonov."  He took an "early retirement," which sounds legitimate to me considering that his crime was plead to "assault" and did not occur on campus.

At some point, when I don't feel like actually working, I'll tell some union stories, good and bad, but for now I will leave you with a thought: unions support faculty; unions support staff; the primary purpose of the university is fulfilled firstly by faculty, secondly by staff; ergo, the union supports the workers who support the primary purpose of the university.  What is your problem with that? 

[marshwiggle]

At some point, when I don't feel like actually working, I'll tell some union stories, good and bad, but for now I will leave you with a thought: unions support faculty; unions support staff; the primary purpose of the university is fulfilled firstly by faculty, secondly by staff; ergo, the union supports the workers who support the primary purpose of the university.  What is your problem with that?

A personal story; one I could have benefited from:

in a previous job, I was hired for a one tear maternity replacement. At the same time, another person was hired for a part-time ongoing position in the same department. (We actually wound up sharing an office and becoming friends.) At the end of the year, when my position was done, a union rep came to tell me that the union would support me in taking my colleague's job, since I had more seniority since I was full-time and she was part-time.
This made me feel soiled.
Things that did not matter:

• I did not initiate the conversation.
• I was hired for one year and I knew it at the time. (And a maternity replacement is not normally going to last longer.)
• Neither my or my colleague's teaching ability was considered.
• The fact that my colleague had experience teaching her courses and I did not didn't matter.

All that mattered was STUPID SENIORITY. PERIOD.
The good of the students and the good of the organization did not matter one iota. JUST SENIORITY.

[dismalist]

A personal story; one I could have benefited from:

in a previous job, I was hired for a one tear maternity replacement. At the same time, another person was hired for a part-time ongoing position in the same department. (We actually wound up sharing an office and becoming friends.) At the end of the year, when my position was done, a union rep came to tell me that the union would support me in taking my colleague's job, since I had more seniority since I was full-time and she was part-time.
This made me feel soiled.
Things that did not matter:

• I did not initiate the conversation.
• I was hired for one year and I knew it at the time. (And a maternity replacement is not normally going to last longer.)
• Neither my or my colleague's teaching ability was considered.
• The fact that my colleague had experience teaching her courses and I did not didn't matter.

All that mattered was STUPID SENIORITY. PERIOD.
The good of the students and the good of the organization did not matter one iota. JUST SENIORITY.

Seniority, why seniority? Because it implies that those voting for the union in the first place will never have to compete for their jobs with the 'yunguns on criteria like productivity. The originals win higher wages [if the union doesn't kill the  firm]; the newcomers compete elsewhere and have lower wages than otherwise.

[Wahoo Redux]

At some point, when I don't feel like actually working, I'll tell some union stories, good and bad, but for now I will leave you with a thought: unions support faculty; unions support staff; the primary purpose of the university is fulfilled firstly by faculty, secondly by staff; ergo, the union supports the workers who support the primary purpose of the university.  What is your problem with that?

A personal story; one I could have benefited from:

in a previous job, I was hired for a one tear maternity replacement. At the same time, another person was hired for a part-time ongoing position in the same department. (We actually wound up sharing an office and becoming friends.) At the end of the year, when my position was done, a union rep came to tell me that the union would support me in taking my colleague's job, since I had more seniority since I was full-time and she was part-time.
This made me feel soiled.
Things that did not matter:

• I did not initiate the conversation.
• I was hired for one year and I knew it at the time. (And a maternity replacement is not normally going to last longer.)
• Neither my or my colleague's teaching ability was considered.
• The fact that my colleague had experience teaching her courses and I did not didn't matter.

All that mattered was STUPID SENIORITY. PERIOD.
The good of the students and the good of the organization did not matter one iota. JUST SENIORITY.

Being as how unions are human entities, they are imperfect. 

Tell me, Marshy, has anyone ever benefitted from a union?

[kaysixteen]

Hmmmm... all the comments about judging 'high performer' status, or at least almost all, seem to have nothing to do with, ahem, actual teaching.   Hint, student evals are nigh onto worthless, and certainly can be gamed by a prof, and that some kid waxes eloquent about 'loving Dr. X', well... (more or less same problem is possible, even likely).

[jimbogumbo]

Just curious: has anyone here besides me ever been in a non-academic or teaching union? I was in two in factories. They both worked to ensure safer working conditions, and only one seemed to be really concerned about seniority at all. Neither got particularly great wages compared to all the UAW shops in the area.

[Wahoo Redux]

Hmmmm... all the comments about judging 'high performer' status, or at least almost all, seem to have nothing to do with, ahem, actual teaching.   Hint, student evals are nigh onto worthless, and certainly can be gamed by a prof, and that some kid waxes eloquent about 'loving Dr. X', well... (more or less same problem is possible, even likely).

What can I say, kay.  There is some stock to student evals----we like to pretend there is not, but there is (problems noted---I can't imagine there is any need to enumerate them with the folks here who already know).  And sure, kid who loves "Dr. X" probably has a reason.

Are you telling me that you have absolutely no idea who your best and worst faculty are?  Are you suggesting that there is no way to evaluate professors and instructors?   Is it possible that chairs and admin are so out-of-touch that they have no idea whatsoever about how their people are performing?

And just so you know, I am not sure EXACTLY what the dean from my anecdote said; this was a long time ago.  I used "high performers" simply because that is the gist of hu's comment to me.  What hu specifically said is buried in time.  And anyway, hu said it, not me.  Your argument really is with hu.

Again, intelligent people do not look at complex issues from a single viewpoint.

Take Marshy's little bark about "seniority."

Seniority simply for the sake of seniority = bad.

Seniority to keep admin from removing the most qualified, most experienced people to hire on inexperienced, lower-paid newbies = good.

Seniority to protect people who have dedicated their working lives to an institution and deserve respect and security because of what they have accomplished (no matter how expensive they may be) = good.

Denying the hardest working, most accomplished people a bigger slice of the pie to protect the middle-of-the-pack = bad.

Denying admin the ability to raise toadies, yes-people, and sycophants up the ladder ahead those who do honest work for the good of all = good.

Protecting workers from the caprices of incompetent and egotistical admin = good.

Denying ambitious and insightful admin the ability to better their institution, or denying admin the ability to make difficult decisions in times of financial stress = good and bad, depending.

What if the unions had the power to limit coaches salaries for the benefit of the university?

[Wahoo Redux]

Just curious: has anyone here besides me ever been in a non-academic or teaching union? I was in two in factories. They both worked to ensure safer working conditions, and only one seemed to be really concerned about seniority at all. Neither got particularly great wages compared to all the UAW shops in the area.

YES!  I have worked in a union store.  And I got a great view of both good and bad union policies.  My experience both fortified my ideas about union failures and changed my mind about the role of unions overall.  I can post about it later, it is too late in the day now.

[marshwiggle]

At some point, when I don't feel like actually working, I'll tell some union stories, good and bad, but for now I will leave you with a thought: unions support faculty; unions support staff; the primary purpose of the university is fulfilled firstly by faculty, secondly by staff; ergo, the union supports the workers who support the primary purpose of the university.  What is your problem with that?

A personal story; one I could have benefited from:

in a previous job, I was hired for a one tear maternity replacement. At the same time, another person was hired for a part-time ongoing position in the same department. (We actually wound up sharing an office and becoming friends.) At the end of the year, when my position was done, a union rep came to tell me that the union would support me in taking my colleague's job, since I had more seniority since I was full-time and she was part-time.
This made me feel soiled.
Things that did not matter:

• I did not initiate the conversation.
• I was hired for one year and I knew it at the time. (And a maternity replacement is not normally going to last longer.)
• Neither my or my colleague's teaching ability was considered.
• The fact that my colleague had experience teaching her courses and I did not didn't matter.

All that mattered was STUPID SENIORITY. PERIOD.
The good of the students and the good of the organization did not matter one iota. JUST SENIORITY.

Being as how unions are human entities, they are imperfect. 

Tell me, Marshy, has anyone ever benefitted from a union?

As I said, Solidarity was a great benefit to society. German unions, (and apparently Japanese unions, as dismalist noted), are very good for everyone, since they actually see everyone (labour AND management) as needing to work together for the good of the organization. The adversarial stance in North America, which views labour negotiations as a zero-sum game, often winds up with situations of people cutting off their noises to spite their faces. (Consider stories of how unions have gone on strike until they bankrupted the company and wound up unemployed, for instance. It's hilarious in those cases to see the shock of members who actually thought that everything the company said about finances actually turned out to be correct.)

I don't expect unions to be perfect, but I expect them to be honest. For faculty unions, if they really had the best interests of students and their education in mind, (which they always claim), their priorities would be different than they are.