The Fight for a Living Wage

Across the country today, workers are joining the struggle for a living wage.

Why we seem so thoroughly convinced that universities shouldn’t get money from the state and yet seem perfectly content to let those same dollars subsidize the externalized costs of big companies is something tragic.

In any case, the reason I bring this up is because UNCG participates in this shameful low wage cabal. What I mean is that we aren’t all poor struggling to get by, UNCG just has some employees that it pays a pittance to and some who get fat raises at the same time.

For example, Tim Crews who has worked for UNCG for 19 years is employed full time for $10 an hour. If minimum wage had kept up with cost of living increases it would now be $18 an hour. So, we pay him only slightly more than half of what the absolute bare minimum pay should be.

After 25 years of loyal performance, Alice Courts only makes $23,762 a year. And she’s on the list of essential employees who must come to work at UNCG even when hazardous weather causes others to stay at home and the university to close.

Imogene Cathey, however, pulls in a handsome $85 an hour.

Jan Zink rakes in $137 per hour.

And they get to stay home.

UNCG has more than 200 full time employees earning less than $15/hour. Adjunct pay is shameful too.

Nancy Maree has been willingly teaching our students in the nursing program for 12 years and in return? She get $1,000. That’s all a class is worth? That’s all her expertise and insight are worth?

And, of course, the enormous raises given to those who already make more than they deserve continue to roll in. The execs get bigger salaries while the rest of us have to deal with nothing or fight among ourselves for scraps.

We are the workers.

We are the people.

We can do better.

Numbers Don't Lie But You Have to Ask the Right Questions

One of the cards that administrators like to use when paying for things that they want while saying that there isn’t money for what others want (need) is the idea that the money they have to spend somehow exists in inviolable separate bundles. They use this mantra to indicate that their hands are clean, but that they are bound to, in an amazing coincidence, pay for the things they wanted at the expense of others.

This has been demonstrated time and time again to simply be untrue in the strongest, most direct sense of the word. There are (at least) two important things to keep in mind about university finances:

1. Yes, there are some rules from the state regarding money that has been appropriated for specific expenditures not being redirected toward other expenditures. However, we have to keep in mind that all that this means is that we need to ensure that our administration asks for the right things. Legislators don’t wake up in the morning and decide they’d like to fund an unplanned rec center. They have been asked to and once they have determined that they would like to fund such an enterprise (for a whole set of reasons that I hope to be able to address later) that money is set aside for that.

2. There are two systems of accounting at work here. One that is mandated by the state and the other that is set up internally within the university. The one used within the university is changeable and is being misused. The budget is a projection of the ways in which the university would like to spend money, not a reflection of how it has been spent. Right now, it is being used by upper admin to claim that there is simply nothing that can be done to change the way the money is spent and to protect executive expenditures at all costs (pun intended and tragic).

As an example, Kim Record’s basketball pipedream is being funded out of available resources to the tune of $8 million. That money is not legally restricted to funding athletics, it has simply been budgeted for it. It could be redirected (yet another topic I’ll have to cover later) or at least scaled back - possibly tied to her ability to demonstrate a newfound ability to retain employees...

UNCG is also holding approximately $85 million in unrestricted funds that could have been used, for example, to ‘repay’ the money we had to give back because of the ‘accidental’ incorrect projection of student numbers. Instead, the execs put on their long faces and cried crocodile tears as they asked the rest of us to suffer.

You don’t have to take my word for it. Professor of Accounting from Eastern Michigan State laid it all out in great detail, just as he has done for several other universities, and has shown that UNCG didn’t need to go under the knife.

As the Board of Trustees promises the incoming chancellor a salary increase while the message comes down to the rest of us that yet again there will be not only no pay increases but continued shaving of whatever meager budget has been left, I think it’s only right we ask for a full accounting. And while the Bryan Foundation may be footing the bill for the upgrade the chancellor’s mansion, I think it’s time we ask if they would consider donating that money to other university causes more vital to its continuing mission.

And as the legislature hands down more budget cuts while the BoG springs for a tuition increase, it’s definitely time for Jan Zink to reconsider her $150k ice sculpture expenditures (or whatever other frivolous folly she has dreamed up in the meantime).

Heck, I'd even chip in for a dictionary for the execs so that they can use the same definition of the word "civility" as the rest of us.

New Chancellor Will Get More Money

Sometimes, it is hard for my to type through the tears as I imagine the struggles that our current chancellor-in-chief experiences. Recently, she complained to those still unlucky enough to work with her that this "anonymous voice" just doesn't understand what she is going through. As much as that pulled at my heart strings, I do have to remind her that given the fact that she never, ever, ever, ever explains herself, it can't really be my fault that I don't "get" how hard it is to be her.

The board of trustees (who I have decided no longer deserve capital letters) is falling all over themselves to reassure any potential chancellor candidates that they won't have to work for the pittance paid to the current occupant of that vaunted position (a measly $324k if you can imagine the indignity!) I say, finally, hurrah, good for them. It must be so hard to stand up in the face of the powerless and give in to moneyed interest. The courage it takes to roll over (and on top of the rest of us) and promise more to an as yet un-wooed confidential individual...it warms my heart.

So, how much more than $324k are we talking about?

Well, it hardly seems dignified that a mere dean (albeit of the under-populated nano school) should make more than the grand high poobah (the new name for the position of chancellor, by the way, I don't know if you got the memo, they only send it on Tuesdays to every third employee who began working in an odd numbered month...). Since he gets $354k, I guess the new poobah is looking at at least $360. I say, why not just make it a cool million, right? I mean, if we want the best candidate, don't we have to pay the best salary?

And we do want the very, very best.

Why shouldn't we have that? I mean, other than the fact that North Carolina's higher education is being gutted. And that once the student loan bubble pops we're upside down in a mortgage for three times the amount of our cash reserves. And that faculty and staff are fleeing the institution. And that we've made some not so great headlines while doing some not so great stuff and then not fixed any of it.

Maybe we'll get someone truly forgiving, generous, and willing to lead a troubled place back to glory, like, I don't know, the Dali Lama. What do you think his salary requirements might be?

Barring that, we can only hope that maybe the very best candidates don't have Google.

Jan's $100,000 Gift Basket Budget

Here’s a question I’d like to get an answer to (as opposed to all the others that I ask but that don’t get answered):

Is there anything that the university needs in order to continue to support its mission that costs less than $100,000?

The reason why I ask that is because $100,000 is the budget that Jan Zink has for purchasing gift baskets. And, well, it seems to me like there might have been some things that were in the lineup of priorities that we would be funding before we got down to gift baskets (or $150,000 for ice sculptures for that matter).

Now, maybe that wasn’t the entire amount that she asked for in the gift basket fund, so she’s feeling that she has tightened down too.

Here’s where things start to get fuzzy for me. We know that Jan doesn’t think that UNCG people give. Does she have the idea that UNCG people would if they thought they were going to receive a woven basket with an assortment of small cheeses? I think she may have our donors mistaken for rodents. Does she think our donors can’t find their own body wash or ground coffee? That the only reason they would give is because it will lighten their weekly shopping load a tad?

Here’s a gift basket that looks very nice for $39.95 – Jan could buy 2,503 of them with that budget. Are we sending out 2,503 gift baskets a year?

But maybe that’s not as fancy as the ones she orders. After all, she is the one who thinks that the appropriate décor for a donor function is an ice sculpture of a grand piano…because nothing says “we’re spending your donation wisely” like something that costs a lot and yet melts.

So, are we sending out “Tower of Treats” baskets from Harry & David at $149 a pop? That budget lets Jan “gift basket” Zink send 671 thank you baskets complete with smoked salmon, nuts, pears, and hopefully some explanation of why we thought they would want us to spend such a large part of their donation on a gift for them.

Meanwhile, we have students and staff who are well below the poverty line – with at risk housing and food shortages. We have buildings that have holes in the floors and soon much of the teaching technology in the classrooms will be removed and sold off. We have faculty using 7-year-old laptops and desks that stand up when a book is propped under one leg. We have field trips the students can’t afford to attend and doctor’s co-pays that break the bank.  We have staff who have been laid off, course sections that have been cancelled, library resources that have expired…and I could go on, but you get the picture.

I think that our donors give to UNCG because they love UNCG, not because they need a really complicated way to get a basket of candied fruit and cashews. Our donors want the personal touch, not the champagne treatment. If people aren’t giving, it’s because we’ve alienated them, not because they have been lured away by other universities’ giveaways. Our donors can tell when you care about them and when you are just trying to get their money. And you, Jan, are as transparent as plate glass.

UNCG people have a long tradition of giving more than they are asked and of giving because they care – and are cared for. You can’t buy your way into their hearts.

Your oil money doesn’t translate well here; maybe it’s time for you to just get on home to Tulsa.

The Real Costs of UNCG 'Leadership'

That sounds odd, doesn’t it? Chancelloring (and for that matter, Provosting) doesn’t really work as a verb and I’d say it’s a darn sight harder to figure out exactly which verbs go with the somewhat vague description as ‘leadership positions.’ What is all of this ‘leadership’ at UNCG costing the university?

Let’s take a look.

Position	Salary
Vice Chancellor, Student Affairs – Cheryl Callahan	$188,181
Associate Vice Chancellor, Human Resources – Edna Chun	$141,625
Vice Chancellor, Information Technology – James Clotfelter	$208,421
Associate Vice Chancellor, Safety & Risk Management – Rollin Donelson	$115,833
Associate Vice Chancellor, Information Technology – Robert Dunn	$162,280
Associate Vice Chancellor, Information Technology – Donna Heath	$162,280
Associate Vice Chancellor, University Relations[1]	$121,440
Assistant Vice Chancellor, Foundation Finance – Jill Hillyer	$93,459
Associate Vice Chancellor, Office of Research & Economic Development – Jerry McGuire	$166,290
Assistant Vice Chancellor, Student Affairs – Vicki McNeil	$136,620
Provost & Vice Chancellor – Dana Dunn	$300,000
Associate Vice Chancellor, Facilities – Jorge Quintal	$149,350
Associate Vice Chancellor, Finance – Steven Rhew	$163,893
Assistant Vice Chancellor, Student Affairs – Jim Settle	$136,620
Vice Chancellor, Business Affairs – Reade Taylor	$228,215
Associate Vice Chancellor, Information Technology – Gloria Thornton	$162,280
Associate Vice Chancellor, Business Affairs – Laura Young	$128,092
Vice Chancellor, Advancement – Jan Zink	$273,000
Chancellor, Linda Brady	$318,780
Vice Chancellor & Chief of Staff – Bonita Brown	$151,800
Associate Vice Chancellor, Auxiliary Services – Michael Byers	$127,285
Associate Vice Provost – Andrea Whitley	$87,085
Associate Vice Provost, Academic Technology Systems – Harold Bodenhamer	$80,960
Vice Provost – Alan Boyette	$221,486
Associate Vice Provost – Elizabeth Meeks	$78,936
Assistant Vice Provost – Leigh Olsen	$59,000
Associate Provost, International Programs – Penelope Pynes	$136,620
Total	$4,137,471

So, first thoughts:

Clearly whatever ‘chancellors’ do is worth more than whatever ‘provosts’ do, as there is a significant drop in the salaries awarded (with the exception of the top position…but that has Vice-Chancellor in the title, so it’s still consistent.)

Part of the difference between a Chancellor and a Provost is that the Provost deals with the academic side of the university. Obviously, that is something not nearly as important as whatever that other side of the university is…after all, it’s only: the reason the university exists.

And yet, the highest paid among those on this list are the people who get raises. Provost Dunn is earning $20,000 a year more than her predecessor, Dave Perrin. Why wasn’t $280,000 enough for a provost? Shouldn’t that $20,000 have been split into raises among the assistants in the office?

Meanwhile, the assistants to highest paid of these positions earn less than $50,000 a year.

Karen Anderson, Administrative Support Assistant with 11 years of service to UNCG is earning $36,824 a year.

Doris Deal, Administrative Support Associate, after serving at UNCG for 14 years is earing $38,171.

Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Cheryl Callahan has received $48k in raises over the last four years. This means that the amount of her raises alone have been greater than the entire salary of an employee such as Sheryl Williamson, an administrative Support Specialist in Career Services, a department that is under the umbrella of Student Affairs. Meanwhile, Williamson, despite 12 years of dedicated service to UNCG, has received less than a $1,000 raise.

Why do we seem to believe that the management of things is always deserving of better pay than the actual doing of those things?

We all live in the same week, with the same number of hours. How is it possible that in an institution whose goal is education, that we can determine that the value of the work done by one in any particular hour is worth 10 times more than the time of the other. Either the things that someone does are worth doing or they aren’t, if they aren’t let’s stop doing them and if they are, then lets start treating them that way.

This kind of gross salary differentiation creates a class system that clearly communicates the value of the human beings who people the university community. Those at the top have internalized their financial compensation as synonymous with their worth as human beings and proceed to treat those who make less as less valuable. The bullying that has become endemic at UNCG of the ‘lower’ class by the ‘upper’ class is no more than the manifestation of the belief that these financial divisions are actually reflections of the contributions that people make.

Paul Mason, Jan Zink, Kim Record, Bryan Terry (and others) treat those ‘below’ them in a manner consistent with the inflation of their egos by the overestimation of their value. It’s time that they learned their place as fellow human beings – not superior creatures - and that they walked a mile in the shoes of others.

That would be doing something bigger altogether.

---

[1] This is the salary for Helen Hebert, who occupied the position before Paul Mason, Mason’s salary information has not been published yet.