March, 2005
University finances, Survey Results, ugFAct Sheets and Next Year Country
On University Finances
So, what happened to the money?
In past weeks, we have heard much about the University’s financial position, particularly about an $11 M deficit “problem”. The situation is so severe that dealing with it involves layoffs, across-the-board budget cuts, a call for restraint in salary demands, and a Presidential suggestion box for money-saving ideas. The chasm between income and expenditures is attributed to the failure of the provincial government to honour the second and third year of Quality Assurance funding for the double cohort ($4.5 M/ year), to costs associated with deferred maintenance, and to escalating utility costs. Inadequate provincial funding for post-secondary education is clearly a significant problem, as identified by the Rae Report, but the call for more money, on a more consistent basis, has yet to be translated into action in a provincial budget.
What is not clear about the present financial crisis is - why does the University of Guelph appear to be in such dire straits, in comparison with other Ontario universities who face many of the same issues? While other institutions are dealing with constraints and concerns, they seem to fall in the “normal” category of cautious budgeting and projecting. (As was the case last year at Guelph, where a worrisome $2 M “gap”, carefully managed, was eliminated.) Economic signals to universities have not dramatically changed, so what has been happening at Guelph that produced a problem of this size? Some of the things we have been asked by faculty: Had “pension holidays” become an essential part of balancing the books? Was there too much faith that promised money would appear? Are there hidden costs associated with making use of funding programs for new construction and for research chair programs? How much do some of the “buy-out” programs really cost, and where and when are we paying for them? All these things and more might be considered as possible explanations – which would, very quickly, make you wonder why our administrators and planners wouldn’t have thought about them. It would be disconcerting to believe that they missed so many signals, and made so many bad guesses, and were so imprudent. We really think they are a lot smarter than that.
Unrealistic demands?
The cynical view is that it is, after all, a negotiating year for the Faculty Association, Steelworkers, Professional Staff and others. Perhaps the key message was the one about curbing “unrealistic” demands. Distracting the negotiating groups by sic’ing them at each others’ throats is clever strategy. Point out that fat-cat faculty demands will cost staff jobs! Disrupt departments and units with position “bumping”. Raise international tuition and cut TA positions and let grad students and their advisors worry. To conquer, first divide the community – into as many parts as possible.
But, return to those comparisons with other Ontario universities, and it becomes quickly evident that the $11 M problem is not because Guelph faculty are so well paid. In age-weighted salaries we’re not in fifth place, but scrabbling for number eight at best. Similarly, when you look at the number of support staff at Guelph, or the salaries they are paid, that can hardly be blamed for putting the system into such fiscal imbalance.
So what’s going on?
The proposals to deal with the $11 M deficit are instructive. The big item is $8.43 M in budget reductions – the 4.5% across to board cuts in departments, colleges and other units. The rest is squeezing out the toothpaste tube – defer parking lot repairs ($0.4 M), international fees ($0.25 M), an information technology fee for students ($0.55 M), fund-raising specifically for operations ($1 M) and an item indicated as “reduction in capital” ($2 M). The interesting part is the rest of the plan, which involves more SPENDING. There will be $1.35 M for a “Creative Priorities Investment Fund, for something called “permanent restructuring issues”. And $6.5 M will be used for “one-time restructuring” – for yet more buy-out packages, in programs similar to last year’s VERR (Voluntary Early Retirement and Resignation). This will still leave a deficit of nearly $6 M – while again stripping away many of the people who keep the place functioning. Not a bargain - unless you are heading out the door.
The process only begins to make sense if viewed as a resource reallocation exercise. Positions and budget dollars are sucked firmly into central control, and reallocated in future to institutional priorities. That’s not a new strategy, nor is it necessarily a bad idea. We’ve done it before – whether as the long-ago “Houston Plan”, CRESAP, or one of the other strategies. The current concern is that we are quickly getting well into this reorganization, but as a reflex response to a budget crisis, rather than as a transparent and orderly planning strategy. We know it is to be called an “Integrated Planning model”, and we are being assured it is “based on collegiality and openness” (At Guelph, Feb 9, 2005). But if implementation begins before the strategy is developed, it is hardly that. What are “critical strategic areas and initiatives”? Who is deciding? Are the current activities actually a component of a “business plan” for the university, that is being implemented before the academic priorities are revealed or discussed? What do you think?
Roz Stevenson, UGFA President
Survey Results
We recently asked faculty to give us some feedback on issues facing UGFA. In a remarkably short time, we received responses from 35.7% of faculty – thank you! Of those, 82.3% indicated that adherence to the principle of ‘fifth place’ for salaries ranked as highly important (8,9, or 10 on a scale of 1-10), with 53.3% indicating it was a 10/10 issue. When asked about paths of action, 80.7% wanted to negotiate, and 53% supported a group grievance on the issue. On current salary negotiations, 50.5% were against a 3-year agreement; 24% were in favour.
Fact Sheets
Attached to the News and Views, is an information “backgrounder” on how unionized faculty associations differ from our current structure. In future, we plan to use this fact-sheet format to provide you with information on other “how things work” topics, so we have proudly presented it as “Fact Sheet #1”. And if there are subjects you’ve been wondering about – let us know!
Next-Year Country
Very soon, we will be electing the UGFA Executive and Council for 2005-06, and filling positions on a number of committees, including some University committees. Please consider standing for one of the available positions – and encouraging your colleagues to participate. If you want to chat about where you might fit, please give the office a call (x52126) or email facassoc@uoguelph.ca, and we’ll talk! UGFA participation is a great way to find out what‘s going on, and to meet new people from all over campus .