TaxProf Blog

Editor: Paul L. Caron
Pepperdine University School of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Monday, March 8, 2010

32.6% of Faculty (but only 8.3% of Administrators) Took a Pay Cut in 2009-10

The College and University Professional Association for Human Resources today released its annual report on faculty salaries for the 2009-10 academic year. Among the interesting findings:

  • 32.6% of faculty had their salaries reduced, with a median decrease of 3%
  • 21.2% of faculty had their salaries frozen
  • 46.2% of faculty had their salaries increased, with a median increase of 3%
  • 8.3% of administrators had their salaries reduced
  • The highest-paid disciplines:  law ($102,101); business ($91,886), engineering ($90,208)
  • The lowest-paid disciplines:  English ($60,850), parks, recreation, leisure, and fitness studies ($61,709), visual and performing arts ($61,898)

Press and blogosphere coverage:

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2010/03/326-of-faculty-took-.html

Legal Education | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4eab53ef01310f79f714970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 32.6% of Faculty (but only 8.3% of Administrators) Took a Pay Cut in 2009-10 :

Comments

I suspect its higher than this. We for example did not have a pay cut but rather a "delay" in faculty raises. But of course, after the delay, we got the second year's raises without any makeup for the first year. In English that's a pay cut. Not a horrible or even unfair one, to be sure, but still a cut.

Posted by: mike livingston | Mar 8, 2010 9:43:43 AM

Call me crazy, but its a bit frightening that English profs make less on average than park, recreation, leisure and fitness studies profs...

Posted by: Alex | Mar 8, 2010 2:05:04 PM

Delay <> Cut. Decrease = cut. Or in English. A delay is not equal to a cut. A decrease is a cut.

Posted by: RKV | Mar 8, 2010 2:08:56 PM

> I suspect its higher than this. We for example did not have a pay cut but rather a "delay" in faculty raises. But of course, after the delay, we got the second year's raises without any makeup for the first year. In English that's a pay cut. Not a horrible or even unfair one, to be sure, but still a cut.

A "delay" with or without a subsequent "makeup" is not a cut in English or any other langage.

Not getting what you expected or hoped for is not a cut.

A cut is where you're paid less than you were before or do more work for the same pay. During the "delay" you got the same - that's not a cut. After the delay, you got a raise, which also isn't a cut. At no point were you paid less than before.

Yes, you may have received less due to increased taxes or inflation, but that's different. FWIW, "received less" is the whole point of increased taxes.

Posted by: Andy Freeman | Mar 8, 2010 2:09:17 PM

Shouldn't the headline read "Faculty 15% more likely to receive a pay increase than a pay cut"? That's a lot better than anybody else (outside the banking sector anyway) is seeing.

Posted by: Mark Buehner | Mar 8, 2010 2:09:51 PM

Teach math do you Mike? If you never at any point get less money, just wait a while then get more, that is not a pay cut.

Posted by: Fortescue Buulrout | Mar 8, 2010 2:24:28 PM

Sorry Mike, but that's how liberals/democrats/progressives think. If you did not lose net salary, but didn't get a raise, that is not a cut. A cut involves actually losing salary. You got a raise in year 2, gaining you a raise. It might not be as large as you would have liked, but still a raise.

Posted by: Rick Hess | Mar 8, 2010 2:57:23 PM

To Mike L:

Have to disagree with your understanding of "pay cut". To me that means that a person's gross pay went down in Absolute dollars. You got a delayed raise which usually means an absolute gross dollar increase.

Did your absolute gross pay go down? If not, then you did not get a pay cut.

Posted by: WJ | Mar 8, 2010 3:25:05 PM

Posted by: mike livingston | Mar 8, 2010 9:43:43 AM

Call me crazy, but its a bit frightening that English profs make less on average than park, recreation, leisure and fitness studies profs...

Not so frightening as the thought that they may be being paid fairly....

Posted by: PersonFromPorlock | Mar 8, 2010 5:01:16 PM

No mention anywhere that the typical number of in-class hours worked per *week* is something like *6*.

And that the "dreaded" academic publish-or-perish dynamic (in theory accounting for the other 34 hours per "work" week) mainly leads to...

1) Papers that have more authors than readers

2) Papers that are written in opaque "High Academic" - mainly to hide from readers (and from authors) the essential uselessness/pointlessness of 85% of the "literature"

I think it is going to be a while before the general public (whose median *household* income - as in *two* adults' income - has been stuck at about 50K per year for a decade) start weeping for the professoriat.

As for educational administrators...we'd just as happily see them executed...

Posted by: cas127 | Mar 9, 2010 2:09:51 AM