Budget cuts and salary raises still remain a hot, divisive issue for the UW System. In light of recent commentary publicly expressed by Regent Vice-President David Walsh and regent Roger Axtell, I would like to take this opportunity to ask the Board of Regents to keep the situation in context.

As stated in a Nov 17 article by Badger Herald reporter Shayna Miller, Bruce Axtell has reiterated that salary increases are the most efficient solution for replacing vacant administrative positions. Axtell claims this would be done for the welfare of UW students in order to hire "first-class" people.

While I certainly do not want to see incompetent or heartless applicants hired to fill administrative vacancies, I seriously doubt that the only "quality" applicants are those who would demand top dollar for their employment. Furthermore, although chancellors and vice-chancellors contribute greatly to raising money for our universities and improving our image, I am, quite frankly, more concerned about attracting quality professors and other faculty.

Ask any UW professor about the unprecedented number of cut positions or the deterioration of departmental budgets. We keep hearing from the Regents about how we must "adjust" pay ranges for the chancellors, but what about restoring the academic budgets that have been slashed? How about the course sections that have been reduced or eliminated? Where are our budgetary priorities in rectifying these problems?

David Walsh contends that failing to raise administrative pay will "send the message" that our chancellors don't deserve to be rewarded. What about the UW faculty, who are integral to students' education? Doesn't it send the wrong message to deny rewards to our professors for their hard work, especially given the current climate of the UW System? Regardless of how much the chancellors' salaries are increased, doesn't it send a rather pitiful message to UW students and taxpayers when we are asked to stuff more money in the pockets of the chancellors while our own educational benefits continue to decrease?

Our UW chancellors have put a lot of hard work and dedication into getting to where they are today. For that reason, they, more than anyone, should understand the overwhelming challenges of overcoming working-class, underprivileged backgrounds to afford quality educations. But it's very easy to merely express sympathy for the problem. Why is there no substantive discussion about giving the professors across-the-board or merit-based pay raises? Where is the discussion on tuition relief or academic supplementation for UW students? Aside from raising administrative salaries, I would like to hear about other ways the Regents hope to solve these very real problems.

Comparisons of UW salaries to those of a school such as UCLA are inappropriate, as the cost-of-living is inevitably higher in states with more expensive economies. Also, proponents of pay raises point to professors' higher salaries at other schools, but that is dodging the issue since no wide-scale pay raises appear to be in the works for UW professors. Why should administrators reap benefits from tuition revenue or tax dollars while the rest of us get screwed? Why should the chancellors, who are already at the top of the monetary food chain, be entitled to more of our system's scarce financial resources?

If educational access is such a concern to Axtell, Walsh, and their peers, where are the proposals for eliminating that obstacle? Alternatives to public revenue, such as annuities, deferred compensation, and private donations would be fine for administrative pay raises, if the Regents can produce those options. But in the meantime, faculty members are losing out on tenure. Under-appreciated departments such as English, Music, and Art have taken especially hard hits, both in jobs and funding. FAFSA doesn't cover all middle-class students for tuition, and federal work-study opportunities are limited for students who already receive financial aid. Shouldn't these issues be the priority?

So let me go straight to the source: Chancellors Erlenbach, Hastad, Keating, Lydecker, Markee, Mash, Miller, Shepard, Sorenson, Wells, and Wiley--do you plan to leave us if we don't raise your pay? Would your quality-of-life be significantly harmed by perhaps even a slight reduction in your annual salaries?

My challenge still remains to the Regents: implement a 5-10% pay cut in administrative salaries. But at the very least, do not insult the UW student body or Wisconsin's taxpayers by asking us to shell out more money to our chancellors and vice-chancellors.

If anyone reading with this agrees with me, I encourage you to write or email Katharine Lyall, the Board of Regents President, with your thoughts:

Katharine Lyall
1720 Van Hise hall
1220 Linden Drive
Madison Wisconsin 53706
Email: klyall@uwsa.edu

Everyone would love a pay raise. The UW system has many capable administrators who serve in thankless positions, as well as committed staff and faculty. But with escalating tuition, dwindling departmental budgets, faculty job cuts, and anticipated increases in housing, meal plan, and recreation costs, our priorities need to be focused accordingly.