The "real" raises --- from Jay - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Apr 11, 2006

The "real" raises --- from Jay

Date: Apr 11, 2006

RE: The "real" raises --- from Jay

Date: Apr 11, 2006

RE: The "real" raises --- from Jay

Date: Apr 11, 2006

RE: The "real" raises --- from Jay

Date: Apr 11, 2006

Not an Accountant wrote:

Could the confusion be that the state has the money for 5%, but after the fringe benefits the faculty will only bring home 3.75%?

That makes sense. The state also could be covering some sort of rise in insurance rates, etc.

Date: Apr 12, 2006

Just wait for the college-level skim on the raise money. I doubt there will be even 1% in across the board raise money.

Date: Apr 12, 2006

Increase in employer contribution to PERS.
unfunded midyear raise under Lassen.
Increase in Medical contribution.
Fringe benefit match on current raise.
decrease in enrollment.
increase in utilities.
new buildings coming on line = unfunded utilities and janitorial staff.

"and the breat goes on"!!

Date: Apr 12, 2006

When I was in the corporate world and we used to do budgets, employee benefits were calculated at 35% of salary. So, if we had 5% we could increase in total employee compensation, the amount of actual raises would work out to be about 3.75%.

Date: Apr 12, 2006

It means exactly what it says. The Legislature authorized a 5% raise but provided money for a 3.75% raise. That let's them say they gave you a 5% raise without having to ante up for it.

Remember it at the polls.

Date: Apr 12, 2006

Tracks of my tears wrote:

Just wait for the college-level skim on the raise money. I doubt there will be even 1% in across the board raise money.

across the board raises simply continue to reward those who do little or nothing. if you cannot defend yourself in a merit raise situation then you deserve to get left behind.

Date: Apr 12, 2006

Everyone who has remained, and stayed loyal, to USM, deserves an Across-the-board raise - there is no doubt about it. If you stick it out here, you do not deserve to be "stuck to"! The raise should be the very same for every person, whether it is 5% or less - every one of us has worked fingers to the bone.

Date: Apr 12, 2006

I agree that merit raises are as an idea the best way to go. However, there is a big problem at USM on who decides what merit is, and what the scale for raises happens to be. Also the lack of raises of any type has created a huge backlog of salary compression and need that requires an across the board raise in this case. I feel that in a merit raise situation that I would gain -- however, in this case I think that foregoing it in favor of across the board is the way to go.

Date: Apr 12, 2006

Gimme wrote:

I agree that merit raises are as an idea the best way to go. However, there is a big problem at USM on who decides what merit is, and what the scale for raises happens to be. Also the lack of raises of any type has created a huge backlog of salary compression and need that requires an across the board raise in this case. I feel that in a merit raise situation that I would gain -- however, in this case I think that foregoing it in favor of across the board is the way to go.

To be quite blunt, Dana Thames has constantly received merit raises without merit. Her raises have tainted that whole idea. One big sewer mess. Lord, she'll still get the NEXT raise (across the board one) but it won't stink as much as the other ones she has received. Frankly, many of us can't wait till a couple of these lawsuits that name her and her daddy as defendants get to court.

Date: Apr 13, 2006

Shaft wrote:

To be quite blunt, Dana Thames has constantly received merit raises without merit. Her raises have tainted that whole idea. One big sewer mess. Lord, she'll still get the NEXT raise (across the board one) but it won't stink as much as the other ones she has received. Frankly, many of us can't wait till a couple of these lawsuits that name her and her daddy as defendants get to court.

If the "across the board" raises are a percentage of salary, then DT will receive more than she deserves because it will be based on an unfairly inflated base.

Date: Apr 13, 2006

RE: The "real" raises --- from Jay

Date: Apr 13, 2006

RE: The "real" raises --- from Jay

Date: Apr 13, 2006

More on the pay raise...

The legislature approved 5% but set it up so that 2.5% is awarded in July & another 2.5% in January. So you actually get 5% for only six months & the true amount is 3.75%. This way the legislators can puff up & brag about the 5% raise while only having to pay for 3.75%.

IIRC, universities were given a lot of leeway in how the raises were dispersed as long as things "averaged out."

Happy "merit" raises.

Date: Apr 13, 2006

Invictus wrote:

More on the pay raise... The legislature approved 5% but set it up so that 2.5% is awarded in July & another 2.5% in January. So you actually get 5% for only six months & the true amount is 3.75%. This way the legislators can puff up & brag about the 5% raise while only having to pay for 3.75%. IIRC, universities were given a lot of leeway in how the raises were dispersed as long as things "averaged out." Happy "merit" raises.

That's the old "Mader Math" way of figuring percentages - I guess she learned from the best in state government when she worked for Musgrove.

Date: Apr 13, 2006

psc wrote:

Tracks of my tears wrote: Just wait for the college-level skim on the raise money. I doubt there will be even 1% in across the board raise money. across the board raises simply continue to reward those who do little or nothing. if you cannot defend yourself in a merit raise situation then you deserve to get left behind.

Not when the "merit" system is rigged.

And not when we have had so few opportunities for raises that we have fallen hugely behind on inflation and cost of living -- this doesn't represent a rsise when opportunities only come twice in seven or eight years.

And, finally, when the only "merit" considered is in the year of the raise. Lots of faculty who might not get great evals this year got great evals in past years - but no raise. That isn't a merit system -- its a lottery.

Date: Apr 13, 2006

From the Clarion Ledger.

For workers eligible for the $1,500 raise, salaries could increase $750 in July and $750 in January. The money would be spread through each paycheck.

Other employees have waited years for the Legislature to accept Personnel Board recommendations to realign salaries to regional averages. The adjustments also would be distributed in the same manner as the pay raises.

The $38 million plan includes workers under the purview of the Personnel Board, not public school teachers, university or community college faculty or University of Mississippi Medical Center employees. Lawmakers are considering raises for professors and college instructors.

Date: Apr 14, 2006

The decline in quality of math education is this evident in this thread. A bunch of really smart people struggling with how one should correctly apply simple mathematical principles.

Remember the source of these numbers - POLITICIANS. The first step in any applied situation is to remember "figures never lie but liars figure".

Date: Apr 19, 2006

What does all this mean?

Date: Apr 19, 2006

A better question -- why are all these old threads being bumped up without any actual information being added?

Date: Apr 19, 2006

41% Turnover thread - bumped up from 10 days ago

Universities: Secrecy thread - bumped up from April 4

Provost Grimes thread - bumped up from 9 days ago

CL, 4/10/06 - bumped up from 8 days ago

HA, 4/8/06 - bumped up from 8 days ago

The "Real" Raises - bumped up from 4 days ago

Thames Raises - bumped up from 2 days ago

I think further down the page someone got stung pretty hard on the first of two IHL meeting days and wanted the ugly truth to get buried. Add in the targeted attacks on graduate assistants and the psychology lines and the vindictiveness from the dome is just all too obvious.

Date: Apr 19, 2006

Ok, as long as there's a legitimate reason for it.

Date: Apr 19, 2006

LVN wrote:

Ok, as long as there's a legitimate reason for it.

I don't think there's anything legitimate about it, just blatant.

Date: Apr 19, 2006

Ok, I was reading your other post backwards. Bear with me -- tree guys are here, and I can hardly hear myself think.