Questioner: Anonymous
Posted to: John White, President United Faculty of Florida
Some 15 plus years ago money were available for compression/inversion (C/I/D). About 70% of it was given to adjust salary to the Professor rank. When others complained they were told to get promotion for raise. Some did just that. This time around even though some department Professors got big raises but in most departments Associate and Assistant Professors got bigger percent of raises. What was the rationale behind this year’s negotiation to keep Professors salary mostly across the board?
In addition, is it fair that the highest paid faculty member in COAS got a raise through compression and inversion?
I apologize for the delay in responding to the question; because it was not forwarded to me for a response, I did not see it until the June Faculty Association meeting.
The compression and inversion model was designed to address across-rank departmental compression (i.e., associate and full professors who made less than 112.5% of the departmental median of the next lower rank). The model did not account for the issue of within-rank compression that is at the heart of this question. The rationale behind the choice of this model is simple: the amount of funding provided to address compression and inversion ($1 million) was, though very welcome, far too low to address the problem in its entirety. To put the issue into perspective, addressing C & I for Coggin faculty would alone have consumed at least 40% of the total C & I funds. In addition, the model addressed one of the primary aims of President Delaney: to provide more money to the lowest paid associate and assistant professors.
In terms of percentages, because assistant professors and associate professors far outnumber full professors at UNF, a much larger percentage of the total raise pool (including the 4% across-the-board raises) went to these ranks. Nonetheless, full professors in departments in which their median salary was less than 112.5% of the median associate professor salary did receive C & I adjustments (excepting for those individuals making over $130,000 per year).
The questioner asks: “[I]s it fair that the highest paid faculty member in COAS got a raise through compression and inversion?” The salary model—applied consistently and per fair labor practices—required it. All raises were based on nine-month pay rates rather than total annual salary (the salary table reflects faculty members’ contracted annual salaries). The faculty member in question is contracted for 12 months of full time work; when adjusted for nine months, her salary is 33% less than shown in the table. In addition, because the model’s calculations were based upon department-rank groups and because several full professors in this person’s department were compressed—thus pulling down the median salary for that group—she received a C & I adjustment.
For more information on the C & I model and/or the contexts surrounding the funds for C & I, please visit UNF-UFF.org/contract or contact me (j.white@unf.edu), John Hatle (jhatle@unf.edu), or Susan Perez (sperez@unf.edu).
