Its hard to get more than a few faculty to agree on anything,
but the large number of faculty at the April 30 Emory College faculty
meeting unanimously approved the Statement
of Grave Concern reprinted below. Hundreds
of additional faculty and staff signed this statement in the few
days following the meeting.
The statement represents the response of the faculty and staff
to the large cuts in benefits announced by the administration, including
cuts that will eliminate retiree medical benefits for future employees
and probably put such benefits out of reach for most current employees
and retirees in the next few years (see the April 15 Emory Report
for the announcement of these cuts and see www.LearnLink.emory.edu/collexec/
for an extensive analysis by John Boli and others
of these cuts and their impact).
The faculty and staff have come together as a community to: (1)
condemn both the cuts in benefits and the decision-making process
leading to the cuts; (2) request a more meaningful and inclusive
role for faculty and staff in key decisions involving the University;
and (3) express their support for a more ambitious vision for Emory
a vision that will treat all past, current and future employees
with the respect they deserve and that will carry Emory into the
top ranks of American universities.
The faculty also approved two additional proposals at the April
30 meeting. The first, proposed by historys Tom Burns, states
that, if necessary, the faculty are willing to consider medical
plans that incorporate retirees into the general health care pool,
even though this would minimally increase health care premiums.
The second, proposed by educational studies Eleanor Main,
requests that Ben Johnson, chair of the Board of Trustees, and other
trustees of his choice meet with representatives of the faculty
and staff on or before May 13. The purpose of the meeting is to
discuss the benefits cuts and ways of improving communication between
the faculty/staff and trustees. (Editors Note: This meeting
was scheduled to take place May 9.)
Several faculty have commented that, while this year may represent
a low point in relations between the faculty/staff and administration,
it represents a high point in faculty and staff involvement. We
hope to build on this involvement in the near future by developing
better mechanisms for the faculty and staff to communicate with
the administration and trustees and by improving the faculty governance
structure.
The Statement of Grave Concern expresses faculty views
in these areas far better than we can, since scores of faculty contributed
to its development (under the wonderful coordination of Judith Miller).
Statement
of Grave Concern
The College faculty registers grave concern about the impact of
the benefits cuts and the process that produced these cuts. These
reductions in compensation are lowering morale among faculty and
staff; they will make it difficult to retain and recruit talented
faculty and staff, thus jeopardizing Emorys academic reputation;
they reflect a limited vision for Emory; there is good reason to
believe that they are unnecessary; and they were made without adequate
consultation between the involved parties. The College faculty therefore
urges that the benefits cuts be rescinded and that steps be taken
to improve consultation between the faculty and the senior administration/Board
of Trustees. Moreover, we recommend that the senior administration
affirm the definition of consultation as ongoing and transparent
two-way communication between the College faculty, or its representatives,
and senior administration.
1. From Our Perspective,
the Cuts May Be Unnecessary and Counterproductive: The
cuts are anticipated to save an average of $12$14 million
per year during fiscal years 200307, a figure that is likely
exaggerated because it fails to take account of the delayed retirements,
reduced productivity and reductions in contributions and bequests
to the University from faculty and staff that the cuts will cause.
Emory has substantial resources and, with anticipated endowment
growth and the planned capital campaign, Emory can afford continued
growth in faculty, staff and programs without these detrimental
cuts. Furthermore, the federal government is poised to increase
Medicare coverage for drugs, which would slow the increases in the
costs of health insurance for retirees. We therefore object to benefits
cuts as permanent and irrevocable. Nowhere have we seen mention
of a commitment to rescind any or all of the cuts at a future date.
2. The Impact of the
Benefits Reductions on Faculty and Staff: The cuts are
severe, especially in the area of retiree medical benefits. Faculty,
staff and retirees see these cuts as a betrayal of the commitment
Emory made to them, because they reflect a lack of appreciation
for the increased workloads that faculty and many staff have assumed
in recent years, and because they come on top of reduced funds for
salary increases. Responses to reductions in compensation from faculty
and staff already reveal demoralization and deepening distrust of
the administration as a partner in the shared enterprise we take
Emory to be.
3. The Impact of the
Cuts on Emorys Academic Standing: Emory stands
out among all other institutions for the large gap between its endowment
and ranking. The reductions, within the context of that already-existing
gap between endowment and ranking, reflect a lack of ambitious vision
for Emory. The cuts will make it difficult to retain and recruit
talented faculty and staff. Several department chairs note that
they are already experiencing problems in these areas. The University
will lose the increased indirect costs recovered from external grants
that the most talented faculty and staff would obtain. Moreover,
the reductions will cause faculty and staff to delay their retirements,
possibly well beyond age 65. Such delays will prevent Emory from
benefiting from the retirement of more senior, higher-paid faculty
and staff, and will be costly to the University. The reductions
will prevent the University from recruiting younger colleagues and
staff who will re-energize our campus.
4. Consultation and
Process: The College faculty condemns the lack of sustained
consultation with the faculty on the issue of benefits, and specifically
the senior administrations unwillingness to engage constructively
with the proposals in the College Facultys Resolution and
the Open Letter. In addition, the inability of the faculty and staff
to undertake substantive dialogue with the key decision makers,
such as the Board of Trustees, has limited the means by which the
University community could participate in these discussions. Moreover,
we see the absence of significant consultation with faculty on this
issue as part of a general pattern when the senior administration
proposes major changes in University policy or structure. For over
a year, ill-considered administrative pronouncements have forced
the faculty to divert its energies from its primary responsibilities
of teaching, research and program-building. We seek a more systematic
and positive process.
5. Structures for
Consultation: The College faculty recommends that formal
mechanisms for ongoing and cooperative communication with the Board
of Trustees be established that might include elected representatives
from the University faculty, with the right to vote, on the Board
of Trustees; and that the College faculty and its representatives
have regular meetings with the board so that matters vital to our
Universitys mission and future can be discussed openly and
collegially and the perspectives of the faculty can be better represented.
We believe that the faculty of Emory University must participate
actively and collegially in the plans that will lead our university
to greater eminence. We look forward to working with the senior
administration and the Board of Trustees to institute processes
and practices of consultation, an essential foundation for a stronger
Emory University.
|