NTT Data Bank
Contingent appointments have increased dramatically in every sector of US higher education. After 30 years of growing contingency and shrinking tenure, the costs and disadvantages of the new academic labor system are coming into view. The following materials are a data bank of documents related to analysis of this issue for which we are developing strategies that establish and maintain professional standards, while defending the rights and dignity of non-tenure-track faculty. They are our colleagues who are fully qualified and highly professional researchers and instructors, but they are being disadvantaged by the changing structure of academia.
I. General Overview Documents
Shuster and Finkelstein, "On the Brink" (Fall 2006, Thought and Action, published by the NEA Higher Education Journal)
This article summarizes the full-length study by Jack H. Shuster and Martin J. Finkelstein, The American Faculty: The Restructuring of Work and Careers (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006).
AAUP 2011-2012 Report: Economic Status of the Profession: A Very Slow Recovery
II. Counter Trends and Responses:
Codifying Policy to Professionalize and Enhance Instruction and Research
1. AAU Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Report 2001
This report focuses on instructional faculty, identifies areas for consideration and makes recommendations. Produced by the American Association of Universities (AAU), April 2001: AAU Report Non-Tenure-Track Faculty 2001
2. Task Force Report on Non-Tenure Eligible Research Faculty 2007 from Iowa State University
This report gives a brief, but helpful, review of the situation at other AAU peer institutions as well as recommendations:
Iowa State's Non-Tenure-Track Task Force Report, 2007
3. Non-Tenure Track Academic Appointments Handbook from Indiana University-Bloomington 2009
The Indiana University policy is distinctive in that it codifies and clarifies, in a single document, university policy for NTT appointments at this elite research institution. The handbook emphasizes "...the importance of hiring the very best people and providing them with the support they need to do their best work." Click here to read: Indiana University Policy on Academic Appointments
4. Numerous peer institutions provide multi-year contracts for both instruction and research track NTT faculty.
Examine documents that detail examples of multi-year appointments for full-time non-tenure-track faculty at selected leading universities by accessing a list compiled by Rich Moser, Rutgers AAUP-AFT:
Multi-Year Contracts Offered by Leading Universities
5. Leading universities provide support for NTT Faculty who apply for permanent residency ("green card").
You may explore the policies at 13 institutions of higher education which provide support for visa applications in accordance with federal regulations for their international NTT faculty. Although policy details vary, the average qualification appears to be expectation of employment, secure funding, or employment contract for three years. This document was compiled by Rich Moser, Rutgers AAUP-AFT staff representative: Leading Universities Provide Support for Permanent Residency Applications
5a below is a 2006 Memo from the US Citizenship and Immigration Services of Homeland Security that provides guidance on applying the definition of "permanent employment" as set forth under US federal law when adjudicating first preference (EB-1) petitions filed on behalf of outstanding professors and researchers. The "Outstanding Professors and Researchers" category was added to the first preference (EB-1) classification in 1990 and is an expedited process for obtaining permanent residence ("green card") for certain qualifying employees, which include professors and researchers holding tenured and tenure-track positions as well as research positions that are funded by grant money received on a yearly basis. In the case of such grant-funded personnel, the employer is allowed to support the permanent residency application of an international scholar in cases in which the employer has offered employment intended to be of an "indefinite" duration and for which the employee would ordinarily have "an expectation of continued employment."
5a. Memo: US Citizenship and Immigration Services
The following are PDF copies of web pages or documents from four of the 13 universities referred to in the "Leading Universities" document above, and because the information may change, direct links are also included.
5b. University of Pennsylvania http://www.upenn.edu/oip/iss/penn/sponsorship.html
5c. Northwestern University http://www.northwestern.edu/international/index.html, then click on Faculty/Staff
5d. University of Illinois-Chicago http://www.ois.uic.edu/index.php?section=ifa&page=pr-guidelines.pi
5e. University of California-Davis Department Request for Permanent Residency http://siss.ucdavis.edu/PR_information.htm
6. Collective Agreement for University of Michigan Lecturers 2007-2010,
Lecturers' Employee Organization (LEO), AFT
This collective bargaining agreement between the University of Michigan and the non-tenure track lectureres (who are represented by the AFT) covers some 1, 200 lecturers. The contract provides for "presumption of renewal." The lecturer must meet departmental standards of excellence as established by a major review after a specified time period. Once they pass the "major review," faculty members get multi-year contracts ranging from 3 to 5 years depending on rank. See Article XI of the LEO Collective Agreement:
LEO Agreement Cover page
LEO Collective Agreement
7. Collective Agreement for University of California lecturers AFT
This collective bargaining agreement between the non-tenure-track lecturers (represented by AFT) and the University of California allows for "continuing appointments" for NTT faculty after six years as well as seniority, evaluation, workload, and paid sick and family leave.
Find the whole Agreement is online here:
http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/employees/policies_employee_labor_relations/collective_bargaining_units/nonsenateinstructional_nsi/agreement.html
8. Letter from Director of Writing Program 2007, University at California-Los Angeles
Professor Bruce Beiderwell explains in detail how the policy regarding Lecturers works in the highly ranked UCLA writing program.
III. NTTs at Rutgers University
Documents and Data about Rutgers University
1a) Number of NTT Faculty by Academic Department as of April 18, 2008 payroll
1b) Number of NTT Faculty
Academic Department and Title as of April 18, 2008 payroll
2. Average and Median salary of NTT Faculty by Title University Wide as of April 18, 2008 payroll
The following four charts--3, 4, 5, and 6--showing NTT Faculty Distribution in four different ways, are available in one combined document in PDF.
3. Distribution of NTT Faculty on Academic Year Appointments by Salary Interval as of April 18, 2008 payroll (by number)
4. Distribution of NTT Faculty on Calendar Year Appointments by Salary Interval as of April 18, 2008 payroll (by number)
5. Distribution of NTT Faculty on Academic Year Appointments by Salary Interval as of April 18, 2008 payroll (by %)
6. Distribution of NTT Faculty on Calendar Year Appointments by salary Interval as of April 18, 2008 payroll (by %)
7. Salary comparison that shows TT and NTT average and median salary for AY and CY Faculty
8. NTTs as a proportion of Full-Time New Hires (no PDF of this information):
2004-05: All New Faculty total 203, while New NTT number was 111, accounting for 54.68% of the total new hires
2005-06: All New Faculty total 201, while New NTT number was 113, accounting for 56.22% of the total new hires
2006-07: All New Faculty total 160, while New NTT number was 101, accounting for 63.13% of the total new hires
2007-08 (as of April 18, 2008 payroll): All New Faculty total
201, while the New NTT number was 113, accounting for 56.22 % of the total new hires
9. Rutgers Faculty Count by Rank
10. Unintended Consequences for Rutgers Graduate Program
Data collected by the New Brunswick Faculty Council (NBFC) show a troubling decline in the number of TA/GA positions since 2003. The cause of the decline is, in part, the low compensation and precarious status of the 53 Research Assistant and 165 Research Associates. The salary projections in the following data for TA/GAs were based on TA/GA minimum salaries and on Across the Board (ATB) salary increases and average "enhanced" pay awards for NTT faculty.
Click here to view and/or download a PDF of 10a and 10b.
10 a) Comparison of NTT research appointments and TA/GA (CY)
10b) Comparison of NTT instructional appointments (AY and CY) and TA/GA (AY)
The data in charts 10c, 10d, 10e, and 10f are combined into one document in PDF.
10c) Median Salary for NTT and Prorated Median TA/GA Salary (CY)
10d) Median Salary for NTT and Prorated Median TA/GA Salary (AY)
10e) Average Salary for NTT and Prorated Average TA/GA Salary (CY)
10f) Average Salary for NTT and Prorated Average TA/GA Salary (AY)
10g) Number of NTT Faculty with Salary below Prorated Minimum TA/GA Salary
11. Merit Pay Analysis conducted by Rutgers AAUP-AFT: http://www.rutgersaaup.org/FASIP2006-07.htm
A huge number of eligible Non-Tenture-Track Faculty received no steps at all in 2006-07. NTTs stand out for how much less they receive than any other rank. Among the tenured and tenure-track, size of awards decreases as rank increases, which is associated with average salary increases by rank. In short, the FASIP process (renamed in the new contract as "enhanced") moderately tends to decrease salary differences, relative to Across-the-Board (ATB) salary increases, with the notable exception of NTTs who get left out of the process or do not receive awards. Is Rutgers hiring undeserving and mediocre instructors and scientists? Or is there a bias in the merit system?
12. New York Times article citing Rutgers University: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/education/20adjunct.html
Rutgers University received national media attention because negotiations for the 2007-2011 Collective Agreement between Rutgers AAUP-AFT and Rutgers administration resulted in a Faculty Development Fund. The provision provided resources to add 100 new tenure-track faculty positions during the four years covered by the Agreement, an innovative, joint labor-management strategy to reverse the decline in tenure-track positions filled.
13. Teaching at Rutgers Proposal
At its May 2, 2008 meeting, the University Senate considered recommendations regarding the conversion of part- to full-time appointments but deferred commenting on the creation of a teaching tenure track for instructional faculty to the Task Force. The proposal also argues that converting full-time NTT positions to full-time TT appointments will stabilize and professionalize instruction that will promote quality instruction, boost the endowment and improve student retention. The excellent and experienced instructors and lecturers currently serving in contingent positions deserve greater respect through Rutgers University taking up the task of improving the quality of their work environment. In other words, underlying the proposal for TTT appointments is the idea that enhancing the coherence and continuity of undergraduate education and curriculum would add enormous value to Rutgers University.
14. Rutgers University Senate--Faculty Affairs and Personnel Committee Report 2006
This 2006 Senate report is one of the best general overviews of contingent faculty issues at Rutgers University. Follow the links below to read the Report and Recommendations on the Status of Full-Time, Non-Tenure-Track, Non-clinical Faculty and President McCormick's response:
http://senate.rutgers.edu/fapcannuals.pdf
http://senate.rutgers.edu/rlmackStatusOfFTNTTFaculty.html
15. New Brunswick Faculty Council Report
This Report from the New Brunswick Faculty Council (NBFC) is about the Senate charge on numbers and trends of different faculty cohorts. It notes the increase in non-tenure-track faculty, the decline in tenure-track lines and the dramatic drop in TA/GA numbers (see Figure 4 specifically).
16. Union Proposals related to NTT career path issues, 2012
The settlement that extended the union contract for the period 2011-2014 included a committee that would work on career path issues. This document contains proposals that union non-tenure-track team members developed and will use as we move forward with contractually-created committee to work on these issues.
17. Excerpt from Section 60 of the RU Policy Library:
Criteria for Academic Appointments, Reappointments, and Promotions (60.5.14) (current as of March 2012 and saved to Rutgers AAUP-AFT website)
The complete Rutgers University Policy Library is online
A link to the same PDF of Policy 60.5.14 (with the revision date given as 09/01/2010) on Rutgers University website: http://policies.rutgers.edu/PDF/Section60/60.5.14-current.pdf
|
