House and Senate Budget Proposals

Dear Colleagues:

The injurious budget proposals put forward by the Senate and the House Ways and Means Committees call upon us to act effectively to protect our university and our values. This letter suggests some resources.

Useful information can be found in two new documents on the Planning and Budgeting website, http://www.washington.edu/admin/pb/home/, under Planning and Budgeting Briefs:

. Initial House and Senate Chair Budgets for 2009-11 Operating Budgets;
. Tuition Increase Mitigation Chart

Most of you know that academic units were asked to model cuts in their state-funded budgets at 8%, 10%, and 12% levels (each school's proposals can be found on the Planning & Budgeting website). To understand the effect of the Senate and House proposals on educational programs, we need to look at budget figures in annual terms, adding to the drastically reduced state allocations the portion (just over 40%) of our educational budget funded by tuition. While the Vice Provost's Office will soon provide more reliable calculations, the Senate's budget appears to place us in the 12% range; the House budget might deepen the cuts by another 4% or so.

As faculty, we are better positioned than anyone to understand just how devastating such cuts would be to our programs, and in particular to objectives that legislators value: broad access to higher educational opportunities, and equipping graduates with skills to support our state's knowledge-dependent economy. The following are examples of likely
consequences:

. Loss of x sections of basic writing, with y students each, sharply reducing
opportunities for students to learn required workplace skills and complete their
programs;
. Loss of x sections of chemistry (physics, math, etc.), cutting back severely the core
preparation for high-demand areas such as science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics.

You may wish to share your understanding of such effects with policymakers.
If so, please consult our Faculty Legislative Representative's website:
http://legrep.blogspot.com/ .

Negotiations among policymakers are now at a critical stage, and the range of options is narrowing. Substantial raises in resident undergraduate tuition rates now seem the most realistic way to mitigate damage to our educational mission. Among other considerations, allowing the UW to raise more funds through tuition does not reduce funding available for other public goods such as housing, health care, and basic subsistence which have also been severely slashed in these budget proposals. We are not alone in suffering the pain of injured institutions, nor do we stand alone in keeping alive the hope of a brighter future.

David Lovell, Chair
Faculty Senate

Faculty Salary Policy

In a previous message, I described the work of a committee to re-evaluate Executive Order #64, which requires that all meritorious faculty receive an annual 2% pay increase. Attached to this message are two drafts of a new Executive Order. The first was issued by the President on February 18th for review and comment. The second is a revised draft, suggested by the joint committee to re-evaluate EO #64, after the first draft was reviewed by the Senate Executive Committee in its February 23rd meeting.

Review of the new Executive Order is scheduled for the Senate meeting this Thursday. We expect the Senate will also be asked to vote on a Class C Resolution stating some principles and expressing support for a temporary suspension of policies requiring a general merit pay increase. Discussion so far has revealed principled differences among members of the faculty on the wisdom of suspending EO #64 as well as on what stance the Senate should take. It is more important than ever that you discuss these issues with your colleagues so you can effectively represent the values and interests of faculty. Let me express three hopes.

First, please think through the issues, taking advantage of available sources of information. These are the rough dimensions of the problem we face:

--The Governor's proposed budget calls for a cut of $60 million annually in our core educational budget;

--Recent budget projections have led to proposals to cut our budget by half again as much;

--Because approximately 75% of our core educational budget consists of personnel, we may lose between 400 and 800 instructional and administrative staff;

--Schools and colleges are being asked to model cuts ranging from 8 % to 12%, with the higher range sounding more realistic based on recent estimates. Administrative units are being asked to model higher percentage cuts.

--The cost of a 2% general merit increase is roughly $6 million.

Putting these numbers together may help faculty judge the merits of the proposals before us. More detailed sources of information include the website maintained by the Vice Provost for Planning and Budgeting, presenting summaries of the proposed cuts and their rationale at each school and college, at http://www.washington.edu/admin/pb/home/uw-bgt-process.htm; the blogs of the Senate chair and especially the faculty's legislative representative, on the Senate website http://www.washington.edu/faculty/facsen/ ; and the website of the Office of State Relations, providing updates on discussions in Olympia, at http://depts.washington.edu/staterel/wordpress/ .

Second, please bear in mind that we have a right and responsibility to participate in discussions of budget priorities in our departments and schools as well as at the Senate Committee on Planning and Budgeting. As you may infer from the above estimates, decisions about priorities at the level of schools and colleges are far more consequential in financial and program terms than the general pay increase; it is the status of shared governance that makes the pay increase discussion especially significant.

Finally, please think about these matters in broader terms than the relationship between the faculty and the administration. I have views that differ from those of administrators on some questions, and many of us have differences among ourselves; but other key participants in this conversation include the legislature, the Board of Regents, the citizenry, and our own colleagues and staff who are vulnerable to losing their jobs. For these reasons, we have a duty to proceed wisely and fairly within the constraints of the faculty code and state law.

David Lovell, Ph.D.
Chair, Faculty Senate

Budget Process as of February, 09

It is understandable that the severity of our current financial situation would lead many faculty and staff to wonder what kind of measures are being considered and what role is played by the Senate and other instruments of shared governance in decision-making.  While planning at the school and college level is by far the most important part of this painful process, at least in its early stages, several more general issues have come up. I’d like to address three issues here:

·         Participation in decision-making in schools and colleges;

·         Furloughs, salary reductions, and layoffs;

·         The Faculty Code and annual 2% minimum raises.

 

Budget Cutting Plans in Schools and Colleges.  The initial decisions and plans for coping with the current predicament have been developed within each school and college, in response to the Provost’s request to model cuts at the 8%, 10% and 12% levels and describe their effects and the rationale for the choices.  In this process, we reminded the Deans and the elected faculty council chairs of the provisions of the Faculty Code that the faculty councils shall advise the Deans on budgetary decisions.  We have met with faculty council chairs to monitor this process and will be requesting their review of the plans proposed by the Deans.  Please understand that we have many weeks to go before the budget is completed, and that it's worthwhile to keep pushing for what you think is important.

 

Furloughs, Salary Reductions, and layoffs of faculty.  The Faculty Code is clear that the UW cannot impose furloughs, salary reductions, layoffs of tenure-track faculty (including Assistant Professors), or dismissal of other non-tenure-track faculty before their contracts expire, unless a financial emergency is declared.  This the UW is loath to do for a number of reasons, including an immediate drop in our bond ratings and long-term damage to our reputation and ability to recruit faculty.  The circumstances under which declaring a financial emergency would be considered are part of the discussion agenda at the Senate Committee on Planning and Budgeting. 

·         If the President wishes to declare a financial emergency, the Chair of the Faculty Senate will preside over a financial emergency committee which is required to come to a determination on the need for such a declaration before the Regents can make the declaration. 

·         As in most faculty governance procedures, the Senate has no veto power but it is a required part of the process. 

The rules and procedures for declaring a financial emergency can be found at http://www.washington.edu/faculty/facsenate/handbook/02-02-26.html#anchor26-31

 

Provisions for an annual 2% pay increase.  In 2002, the administration failed include a minimum pay increase for meritorious faculty in its budget, although this provision is part of an Executive Order (#64) negotiated between administrators and faculty senate leadership, and the Executive Order is incorporated into the salary policy portion of the Faculty Code.  As most of us know, Duane Storti won a summary judgment, and a settlement was later reached requiring the UW to raise salaries and make partial restitution for past salary deficits. 

 

·         The court acknowledged that the Executive Order allows for a re-evaluation when funding is tight;

·         The court held, however, that without such a re-evaluation, the contractual agreement between the UW and its faculty did not allow the administration simply to withhold the stipulated salary increase for fiscal reasons;

·         The court hypothesized that such a re-evaluation would involve both faculty and administration but did not declare what form a re-evaluation should take.

 

Nevertheless, if the legislature passes a bill stating that there will be no general raises for state employees, it will supersede the faculty code and the executive order with the 2% stipulation.  Meanwhile, our concern has been to maintain the commitment to predictable salary increases along with other principles embodied in the salary policy.  At the same time, however, we have detected very little interest on the part of the faculty to push for a 2% increase this year; many of us believe it would almost surely come at the expense of additional layoffs of lecturers, teaching assistants, and staff, would likely cause the legislature to decrease further the funds available to the university, and would constitute a strategic blunder in faculty relations with the legislature, which have been improving over the last few years.

 

The Senate leaders raised the issue with the President and Provost.  Then, after consultation with the Advisory Council on Faculty Code and Regulations and the Senate chair’s cabinet, I as Senate Chair appointed faculty representatives and the President appointed administrators to a joint committee to re-evaluate Executive Order #64.  These are the members of the committee:

·         David Lovell, Senate Chair          Provost Phyllis Wise

·         Bruce Balick, Senate Vice Chair     Vice-Provost Doug Wadden

·         Lea Vaughn, School of Law           Vice-Provost Cheryl Cameron

·         Gerry Philipsen, Dept of Communication   

 

The committee’s re-evaluation has resulted in a new executive order, temporarily suspending the 2% provision but leaving the principles and priorities of the salary policy otherwise intact.  The order expires at the end of the 2009-11 biennium.  The wording of this order was reviewed by the joint faculty-administration committee.  The new order will be reviewed by the Senate Executive Committee on February 23, and by the full Senate on March 12, before it is issued by the President.

 

Welcome to the '08-09 Academic Year

The Faculty Senate welcomes you to the '08-09 academic year and invites you to help us as we work with the administration to shape the direction of the university.