Open Forum on Faculty Compensation
Faculty Affairs Committee Office of the Provost Office of Vice President for Finance and Administration
May 27, 2015
Slide 1
Guiding Principles and Strategies Principles  Recruit, retain, and reward faculty who excel as
teaching scholars
 Balance compensation goals with other priorities
within financial resources of the University
May 27, 2015
Slide 2
Guiding Principles and Strategies Strategies Employ merit pay and promotion
increases to recognize performance
Assure that faculty salaries are
competitive with faculty at the same ranks in related disciplines at competitor institutions
Provide a comprehensive set of benefits Offer housing assistance for tenured and
tenure-track faculty
May 27, 2015
Slide 3
Monitoring Salary Data to Ensure Competitiveness Annual Review of Salary Data – Provost’s Office examines data from 3 sources o AAUP: by rank o IPEDS: by rank (new source of data) o CUPA-HR: by discipline and rank • CUPA-HR data not available for six programs • NTT salaries studies just established
May 27, 2015
Slide 4
National Rankings
AAUP Survey: 1,096 institutions
IPEDS: Full Professor
Full: SCU # 52 (top 5%)
Stanford #2
Associate: SCU # 52 (top 5%)
UCLA #20
Assistant: SCU # 44 (top 4%)
IPEDS Report: 4,733 institutions Full: SCU # 56 (top 2%)
USC #26 UC Berkeley #27 SCU #56 Pomona College #58
Associate: SCU #66 (top 2%)
UCSD #60
Assistant: SCU #42 (top 1%) May 27, 2015
Cal Tech #25
Slide 5
Faculty Affairs Committee 2014-15 Tom Plante (Psychology) Tyler Ochoa (Law) Kate Morris (Art and Art History) Terry Shoup (Mechanical Engineering) Philip Kain (Philosophy) Harold Hoyle (Education) Fred Parrella (Religious Studies) Amy Shachter (Provost’s Office)
May 27, 2015
Slide 6
Monitoring Salary Data to Ensure Competitiveness The University strives to assure that faculty salaries are competitive with those of faculty at the same ranks in related disciplines at institutions with which it competes. It also strives to eliminate any internal salary disparities that cannot be reasonably explained by market comparisons, years in rank, and performance over time. The achievement of these salary goals is a high priority that will be balanced with other priorities within the financial resources of the University. Progress is monitored by the Provost's Office and the Faculty Affairs Committee on the basis of periodic salary studies conducted in accordance with implementation guidelines established by the Faculty Affairs Committee. (Faculty Handbook, Section 3.8.1) May 27, 2015
Slide 7
Monitoring Salary Data to Ensure Competitiveness Periodic Faculty Salary Studies
– 2009-10 Faculty Salary Committee: Identified 21 benchmark institutions – 2014-15 Faculty Affairs Committee:
Refined list of benchmark institutions and tailored to each College or
School; located in high cost-of-living areas; selected by type and quality Set target for average salary range of 95 to 105 % of the median salary of the BM schools (with recommendation to strive to closer to 100% due to relative cost of living) Recommended disciplines and ranks within clusters for 2015-16 and 2016-17market adjustments Concluded periodic salary study Completed implementation guidelines for periodic salary studies May 27, 2015
Slide 8
Benchmark Institutions for College of Arts and Sciences, School of Education and Counseling Psychology, Jesuit School of Theology, and School of Law – – – – – – – – – – – May 27, 2015
Babson College Bentley University Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Claremont McKenna College Fordham University George Mason University Loyola Marymount University Loyola University Chicago Loyola University Maryland Northeastern University Occidental College Slide 9
– – – – – – – – – –
Pepperdine University Pitzer College Pomona College Scripps College Seton Hall University The George Washington University Trinity University Tufts University University of San Diego University of San Francisco
Benchmark Institutions for Leavey School of Business
– – – – – – – – –
May 27, 2015
Babson College Bentley University Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Claremont Graduate University DePaul University Fordham University George Mason University Loyola Marymount University Loyola University Chicago
Slide 10
– – – – – –
Northeastern University Pepperdine University Seton Hall University Southern Methodist University Texas Christian University The George Washington University – University of San Diego – University of San Francisco
Benchmark Institutions for School of Engineering
– – – – – – – –
May 27, 2015
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Cooper Union Drexel University George Mason University Harvey Mudd College Illinois Institute of Technology Loyola Marymount University Northeastern University
Slide 11
– Old Dominion University – Southern Methodist University – The Catholic University of America – Tufts University – University of San Diego – Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Using Salary Adjustments to Ensure Competitiveness Merit – Recognizes faculty for recent performance Promotion – Recognizes faculty for successful promotion application Market Adjustments – Ensures that SCU faculty salaries are competitive with faculty at the same rank in related disciplines at BM institutions o Target of 95 to 105 % of the median salary of the BM schools
Equity Adjustments – Seeks to eliminate any internal salary disparities that cannot be explained by market comparisons, years in rank, and performance May 27, 2015
Slide 12
Implementing Salary Adjustments Merit pool
– 3.5 percent merit pool for tenure-stream, renewable, and continuing faculty – Largest percent increase since 2008
Promotion increase – 5 percent for promotion to senior lecturer – 7 percent for promotion to associate professor – 10 percent for promotion to full professor
May 27, 2015
Slide 13
Implementing Salary Adjustments Market Adjustments – Tenure-stream faculty
o Salary adjustments in Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences
– Adjunct faculty
o Minimum course rate for standard course
o Course rate adjustments for adjunct faculty in Arts and Sciences,
Business, Education and Counseling Psychology, and Engineering
May 27, 2015
Slide 14
Implementing Salary Adjustments Compression Adjustments
– Tenure-stream faculty o Salaries adjustments for compression after market changes in Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences – Senior Lecturer o Salary adjustments to address compression at the senior lecturer level within the College
May 27, 2015
Slide 15
Assessing the Impact of Salary Adjustments 2014-15 Average Salaries by Cluster Rank
Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor
May 27, 2015
Cluster
Arts and Humanities Arts and Humanities Arts and Humanities Business Business Business Engineering Engineering Engineering Math and Natural Science Math and Natural Science Math and Natural Science Social Sciences Social Sciences Social Sciences
Slide 16
SCU 2014-15 Average 68,791 87,595 119,165 138,586 157,506 191,593 89,874 112,944 146,666 78,857 98,173 124,564 68,455 86,711 124,176
Median of SCU 2015 Average as Benchmark Percent of Institutions BM Median 72,920 94% 85,541 102% 119,833 99% 135,028 103% 149,198 106% 174,968 110% 95,460 94% 107,392 105% 142,057 103% 74,652 106% 88,362 111% 120,611 103% 73,592 93% 91,551 95% 125,609 99%
Assessing the Impact of Salary Adjustments 2014-15 Average Salaries Rank
Assistant Professor Assistant Professor Assistant Professor
Cluster
SCU 2014-15 Average
Median of SCU Average 2015 as Percent of Benchmark BM Median Institutions 68,791 72,920 94% 89,874 95,460 94% 68,455 73,592 93%
Arts and Humanities Engineering Social Sciences
2015-16 Average Salaries with Benchmark Projection Rank
Discipline
SCU 2015-16 Average
2014-15 Projected SCU 2015-16 BM Median BM Median Average (2014-15 Salary as Median Percent of Plus 3%) Projected BM Median 72,857 72,920 75,107 97% 92,925 95,450 98,314 95% 73,749 73,592 75,800 97%
Assistant Professor Arts and Humanities Assistant Professor Engineering Assistant Professor Social Sciences
May 27, 2015
Slide 17
Assessing the Impact of Salary Adjustments 2015-16 Average Salaries with Benchmark Projection Rank
Discipline
Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor
Arts and Humanities Arts and Humanities Arts and Humanities Business Business Business Engineering Engineering Engineering Math and Natural Science Math and Natural Science Math and Natural Science Social Sciences Social Sciences Social Sciences
May 27, 2015
SCU 2015-16 Average
Slide 18
72,857 85,810 124,085 142,253 161,851 203,128 92,925 116,581 151,331 82,440 101,708 129,293 73,749 93,212 133,441
2014-15 Projected SCU 2015-16 BM Median BM Median Average Salary (2014-15 as Percent of Projected BM Median Median Plus 3%) 72,920 75,107 97% 85,541 88,107 97% 119,833 123,428 101% 135,028 139,079 102% 149,198 153,674 105% 174,968 180,217 113% 95,450 98,314 95% 107,423 110,646 105% 142,777 147,061 103% 74,652 76,892 107% 88,362 91,013 112% 120,611 124,229 104% 73,592 75,800 97% 91,698 94,449 99% 125,609 129,377 103%
Total Increase for 2015-16 Including all adjustments (merit, promotion, and market), the 2015-16 faculty salary budget increased by 4.7%.
May 27, 2015
Slide 19
Housing Assistance Rental Assistance Program – Rental assistance increase in 2015-16 – Increasing the number of University-owned properties for rental to faculty – FAC recommended extending rental term beyond tenure when housing stock is expanded
May 27, 2015
Slide 20
Housing Assistance Review of Housing Assistance Program – FAC and V.P. for Finance and Administration formed a faculty housing working group to explore new options for the housing purchase program and improvements to the rental program. – Working group members: Mohammad Ayoubi (Engineering), Greg Corning (A&S), Amelia Fuller (A&S), On Shun Pak (Engineering), Yasin Ceran (Business), Sreela Sarkar (A&S), Kate Morris (A&S, FAC), Amy Shachter (Provost, FAC), and Mike Hindery (F&A)
May 27, 2015
Slide 21
Questions and Discussion
May 27, 2015
Slide 22