Updated Feb. 1, 2009 at 11:12 p.m.
VIDEO: Excerpt from Chancellor Holub’s Q&A with faculty.
(Courtesy of UVC-TV)
“Do more with less” is Chancellor Robert Holub’s message to UMass faculty as he presents and outlines a campus reorganization plan to address the $46 million budget deficit that the campus will face in fiscal year 2010.
“That’s what happens when you’re in an economic crisis that hasn’t been seen by anybody in this room,” the Chancellor said, during a formal presentation Thursday.
“You have to go back to the Great Depression to see an economic crisis like this. I think that this is the best alternative among a bunch of alternatives that I don’t like.”
The proposal would merge several colleges and eliminate three deans’ positions along with associated support staff, saving the university $1-2 million while preserving tenured and tenure track positions. But numerous members of faculty felt that the reorganization will mean disorder and confusion during an already trying time, and offered some critiques during a lengthy question and answer period.
Professor of philosophy Louise Antony voiced concerns that for students, “there could be overwhelming difficulties in advising,” and ultimately a campus divided between new students and students who began earning their degree under an entirely different system.
Associate Professor Christine King worried that making the school of nursing less independent would be detrimental to its image, hurting nursing students applying for competitive jobs.
David Kotz, professor of economics, objected to the elimination of three deans’ positions. Kotz said that deans at the university are already overworked, and that the loss would seriously impact faculty, who benefit from a close working relationship with their college’s dean.
Another issue raised was whether the move would truly save money.
Kotz felt that it would be necessary to hire assistant deans to manage the extra workload, while Sara Lennox, director of the Social Thought and Political Economy program, said that if the deans return to faculty positions, eliminating them would only save the administrative stipend. Much of the audience signaled its agreement with applause when Lennox said, “The reorganization, which is taking an enormous amount of time, is 2 to 4 percent of the entire deficit. What’s going to happen to the other $44 million? We’re wasting a lot of time talking about not very much money.”
The relatively small amount of money to be saved prompted some faculty to wonder about the political motivation behind the plan. Holub spoke about the expectations of donors, the board of trustees, and politicians to see eliminations. “In order to be taken seriously in the management function of this university, if I say we’re going to lose fifty faculty lines — we’re not going to have any layoffs, we’re just not going to replace people — that’s not impressive at all,” Holub said. “If I say that I’m eliminating three colleges, and at the same time in eliminating three colleges can preserve the essential functions of the units and programs, then I think we’re much better off.”
Assistant Professor Steven Brewer was the most outspoken in his condemnation of these motivations. “It’s simply a public relations coup, where you can say we’ve made this big change,” he said. “It’s like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.”
One recurring theme throughout the faculty’s grilling of the Chancellor was anxiety over the current vagueness of the plan and the lack of a concrete proposal for either the reorganization or the new budget that it would generate.
At one point Holub said, “I don’t know if you want me to discuss specifics of the reorganization,” and was met with a resounding and collective, “Yes!”
However, despite the desire of the faculty to understand more concretely what this impending reorganization is going to look like, Holub continued to defer discussing specifics until after his final meetings with several faculty members, scheduled for Jan. 30, the day after his presentation to the faculty in general. He stated that he could not make any definitive decisions until after that point, and plans to present his final proposal, along with a complete budget, by mid-February.
Despite extensive objections to the plans for reorganization, faculty members did not unequivocally insist on taking the idea off the table. The main demand was for more input during the formative stage rather than later reviewing a definitive proposal. Lisa Selkirk, head of the linguistics department, suggested that a faculty committee be formed to consider multiple models of reorganization.
By the end of the meeting, it was clear that there is no simple solution to the problems presented both by the proposed reorganization and by the economic situation as a whole. Lennox expressed deep concern over the effects of layoffs by the area’s largest employer on the community. “If we’re going to cut a million dollars from the dean’s offices, we’re not cutting high paid administrators, we are cutting staff,” she said. “We’re going to be cutting lots and lots of staff. That is going to devastate the economy of Western Massachusetts.”
Holub’s response was composed but revealed his personal conflicts. “I appreciate what you’re saying about not wanting to live in a depressed area, not wanting to lay people off. I assure I didn’t take this position thinking that I would be in this role right now,” he said, “but if you look at the budget and you see what alternatives we have, you’ll see that there are precious few alternatives.
Holub’s reasons for seeking a reorganization on campus revolved around his sentiment that he would rather cut back $1 million in administrative costs than lose ten faculty lines. He spoke a great deal about his history as a faculty member and how he still considered that a large part of his identity, using anecdotes from that history to illustrate how he felt this reorganization could be positive by promoting new collaborations and synthesis among colleges that would find themselves with “new neighbors.”
“I think that we can run our colleges on a leaner basis. This is a difficult time, and we’re going to have to do more now with fewer resources,” said Holub. “That isn’t something that I wanted, but that’s the reality of the situation, and when I see that I can save faculty positions, that’s what I’m going to try to do.”
