UNM President David Schmidly said that faculty members’ concerns about salary and benefits are not unique to UNM, and any university facing budget cuts is in the same situation.
“Whenever there are big budget reductions, there are going to be tensions — they go hand in hand,” he said. “They’re very few black and white decisions, and not everyone agrees. During extreme, tough budget times there is often friction between what faculty see and what administrators do.”
Some faculty members said the administration was neglecting to uphold the University’s academic mission, and cited as evidence the decrease in tenure-track faculty an increase in part-time faculty.
As enrollment and class sizes go up, Schmidly said he acknowledges the adverse impact these factors have on students’ education. He said the administration has already taken steps to lower the average number of students in each class. He said this problem is common in universities across the United States.
“We’ve lost a lot of money, and that money has impacted what we’ve been able to do, but the clear priority of the institution is the academic mission,” he said. “We’re doing everything we can to continue hiring faculty in difficult financial circumstances so that we can serve the increased number of students coming to the University.”
Indeed, “The main campus tuition and fee scenario-FY12” from the UNM Office of Budget Planning and Analysis reflects no budget cuts that would affect the core mission. Reductions were made in administrative areas, executive salaries, IT, and the Dean’s Council.
Conversely, it shows that $200,000 was allocated for faculty promotions, $2 million for hiring tenure-track faculty, just over $562,000 for hiring GA/TAs and $500,000 to hire more part-time faculty for the College of Arts and Sciences.
Regent Gene Gallegos said the amount in the Athletics Department coaches’ salaries is irrelevant to faculty complaints about their own salaries, since roughly $28.5 million of their $30 million budget is self-generated.
“It does not do anybody any good to try and point at Athletics,” he said. “You’ve obviously got different faculty members who don’t care about Athletics or sports, but that’s not going to solve anybody’s situation. What we need to do is, there needs to be something done about this top-heavy management. We have vice presidents that aren’t needed.
There needs to be a consolidation of those functions.”
Because of contractual obligations, Schmidly said he can’t alter administrative salaries. As he did when the VPs for Branch Operations and Institutional Services left the University, he will keep the least important administrative positions vacant as administrators retire.
“As we look at cost containment, we’ve been squeezing the administration and we’re going to squeeze it even more,” he said. “There’s no choice, it’s the right thing to do. There’s no opposition to that.”
In response to the faculty members’ avowed disconnect from the administration, Gallegos said the problem stems in some communication issues between faculty and the Provost’s office.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
“I think the first solution involves the Provost office,” he said. “That should be the place that faculty can really interface efficiently and completely with the administration.”
Provost Suzanne Ortega was unavailable for comment.
In his complaints about the administration, distinguished professor Gary Scharnhorst said members of the Board of Regents, specifically those with backgrounds in law and business, don’t have relevant experience for their positions.
Gallegos said this complaint could be attributed to a misconception of what the position entails, which includes litigation, real estate purchases, selling, leasing, budget work and auditing.
“All of those things require some expertise in management that the faculty does not have,” he said. “They don’t recognize our experience and expertise that regents need to have. There’s a whole lot on the business side to being on the Board of Regents.”
