Letter: Hiring freeze could result in exploitation of staff

Editor,

In regard to last week’s University budget town hall, I would like to address an issue that came up. It’s a pity that President Frank completely missed the point that an employee made about the fact that individuals are being asked to do more for less.

It wasn’t surprising, though. I find the administration has a difficult time taking staff concerns into serious consideration, even though that is the purpose of the town hall meeting.

The employee was making a statement about the fact that when programs lose staff, they are not being given approval to hire a replacement. Instead, the work is being unloaded onto staff that are in completely different departments.

The administration fails to acknowledge that these staff members already have full-time jobs, and are now being asked to take on a workload that is equivalent to another full-time job with little or no compensation. The employee who spoke mentioned that this could result in exploitation, thus resulting in an exodus of staff.

This will leave the University with less institutional knowledge in moving forward. I would hope that is not the goal of the University.

At the town hall, President Frank stated that these small departments need to be consolidated instead of having staff members for each program. This consolidation of workload is a surefire way to diminish the work of your staff and ensure future exploitation. Again, it seems he did not understand that these people are already working in full-time positions.

In his weekly perspective on Oct. 24, the President said the following: “At the town hall, some people voiced concerns about having to continually do more with less. Our goal is to find ways to support each other across departments and units, sharing resources so our teams can accomplish the necessary work without overburdening individuals.”

How is this situation not “overburdening individuals” when, again, staff is already taking on a full workload in their existing position? So the question is, what is the measurement of “overburdening individuals?” This appears to be more rhetoric from the administration in the place of solutions.

Loyola Chastain

Staff Member