UTMB ADMINISTRATORS WIN 2ND "PANTS ON FIRE" AWARD FOR "REWARDING EXCELLENCE" PITCH

Just in case anybody still thinks the new compensation plan is about rewarding excellence, here's an e-mail that recently came to light via the Texas Public Information Act.  It is from Dean Valerie Parisi to UTMB President Dr. John "Jack" Stobo, with a cc to UTMB attorney Christopher Johnsen.  It was sent on Thursday, June 22, 2006, at 10:57 AM:

Dr. Stobo:

Could Chris join the SEC tomorrow for a few minutes? He has been working hard but has not really identified any appropriate strategy for us to reduce tenured faculty except for reducing salary. [Blogmeister's note: Notice that, by implication, reducing salary is "appropriate."  It's the only "appropriate" strategy proposed.]

We do not have early retirement option (except very few TRS) or a mandatory reduction to part-time--This will be a significant issue in keeping us from our $31M goal.

VMP

Still not good enough for you?  How about this next gem? It is taken from the handwritten notes of Barbara Thompson, Medical Director, Hospital Administration.  The notes have "Navigant Issues" written at the top of the first page.  One spot in her notes contains the underlined words "Salary Reductions" and has an arrow extending from "Salary Reductions" to these words of wisdom: "This is the best strategy." 

So here's to you, UTMB administration.  You've all won TFA's "Pants on Fire" Award.   

Comments

[angry, fustrated professor]

It is clear that the compensation plan is being implemented to save money by reducing the number of tenured faculty. The email from ex-Dean Parisi shows that the Administration has been plotting to find a way to get rid of tenured faculty, and they have decided salary reductions just might accomplish this. This scheming is wrong, wrong, wrong.

In Texas, a man is judged by doing what is right, not by the boots he wears. John Stobo, it is time to stop wearing cowboy boots to look Texan. It is time to be Texan by standing up and doing what is right. Restore the tenure system, in both letter and spirit, at UTMB.

[anonymous]

This is what we've been saying all along. The salary plan is not a way to reward productive faculty. It is a way to cut faculty salaries and save the institution money. Why won't anyone believe us? It's so bad, no one can believe it could possibly happen.

[Disappointed in my leaders]

Cutting faculty salaries is shown by VMP's email message to be a policy decision. There are clearly two classes of faculty, the administrative class (It is my understanding that policy makers like Drs. Parisi, Barbara Thompson and Stobo are faculty members), and the class of faculty who actually teach, see patients, and do research. The policy of cutting faculty salaries appears only to be imposed on the latter class, by the policy makers (the former class of faculty). How can this policy not be considered discriminatory against one class of faculty by the other class which has policy making powers?

Here is a question I would like to submit for the Compliance Exam we must take each year on ethics and legal behavior.

It is fact that the Board of Regents rewards administrators who implement their wants and desires. Bolstered by the Higher Board's aberrant concept of the meaning of tenure (that is untested by the courts), an administrator determines to cut salaries as a cost cutting measure. In looking at salary structure, it becomes abundantly clear that the highest salaries are held by administrators. Rejecting the idea of cutting administrator salaries, the administrator quickly turns to salaries of tenured faculty members. The problem is that nearly all the tenured faculty have excellent annual evaluations and many are tops in their fields. Determined to impose a compensation plan on faculty that puts most of the salary of faculty at risk, and guts the concept of tenure, the Administrator proceeds.

1. T or F - This is not an example of administrator personal gain at the expense of the livelihood of faculty.

2. T or F - Star faculty will be attracted to this new definition of tenure, and it will be easy to recruit them from institutions that define tenure in the traditional sense.

3. T or F - Because most Administrators also hold faculty appointments, the implementation of the compensation plan is unevenly applied to all faculty and is therefore illegal.

4. T or F - Tenure without some reasonable guarantee of base salary is meaningless.

I invite you to add to this list. I think we have the makings of an Compliance Exam in legal and ethical behavior that the Board of Regents, Higher Education administrators, and especially all faculty in Texas should take.

[Tenured Faculty in distress]

Just where is Dean or ex -dean Parisi these days to explain and respond personally to such e mail as the one posted by TFA?
I equate her exit as if Condoleza would have taken some leave when the Middle East crisis is brewing.
Is Parisi going to return and play Dean again? Are we the Faculty going to allow that to happen after all the harm she has done to us, the institution and the county of Galveston?