Jonathan Rees at More or Less Bunk publishes CSU-Pueblo President Leslie Di Mare’s letter explaining that professors who teach a 3-3 now will be teaching a 4-4 load in 2014-15. He also links to this article in the Pueblo Chieftan which publishes Professor William Brown’s analysis of the situation:
“On this new 4-4 plan some of us would go from teaching nine (credit) hours a semester to 12 hours a semester and as a result, we would be paid the same small amount,” Brown said.
“If you do the math it turns out that we would be getting a 25 percent pay reduction.”
Brown said the school’s managers, who he said were responsible for the budget crisis, are not taking pay cuts.
“I don’t know why we as faculty members and teachers, who have had no part whatsoever in this financial problem, why we should have to pay the primary price,” Brown said.
Go back to that link at More or Less Bunk to Di Mare’s letter. It’s very strange. The almost exclusive use of the passive voice and the subjunctive tense is striking: faculty “are requested to teach a 12/12 credit hour load.” Requested, not ordered? Not required? She continues: “Contact hours relating to labs and clinicals should be taken into consideration in determining the 12/12 workload. Faculty may be assigned by their respective chairs to teach US 101, recitation sections, or general education courses, etc., when necessary.”
But wait–there’s still more indecision and doubt! “[M]ore careful examination of differentiated workloads should be undertaken in the upcoming year. Therefore, I would ask that department chairs and deans work together with the Provost to review existing policies & processes regarding workload equivalencies in departments and colleges/school and create a campus-wide umbrella policy with specific guidelines by the end of calendar year 2014. Thank you all for your patience and commitment to the university during these difficult budget times.”
Doesn’t she mean that she “would ask for your patience and commitment to the university” instead?
Once again, it looks like the administrators expect department chairs to be the hatchet women and men for this work speedup. They don’t want to give up on the illusion of faculty governance because that will help them spread the blame around more effectively! In other words, “we administrators who created this problem can’t possibly say what you faculty might be requested to do next year. Just bear in mind that an appoximately 33.33% increase in your teaching workload is likely.”
Or, to quote a much more competent politician than Leslie Di Mare or Michael Martin, “you might well think that. I couldn’t possibly comment.”
16 Responses to “Poor management at CSU-Pueblo means work speedup for the proles”