 "Photo: N/A")
I write in response to the editorial of Oct. 29 calling for the “symbolic act” of a salary reduction for the senior officers of the College (“As a symbolic act, if nothing else, senior officers must reconsider pay cut,” 10.29.09).
First I would like to express my appreciation to the editors of the The Miscellany News for recognizing the work our senior officers do daily to “maintain our community whilst preserving the economic health of the College” during these difficult economic times. There is no doubt that this has been a year of unprecedented challenge for our College and I appreciate the constructive role that the Miscellany has played by fairly reporting on proposals, decisions and plans and raising important issues and questions for the community to consider and discuss.
Let me put your proposal in some context. One of the suggestions for what would actually constitute significant relief of budgetary pressure has been to make an across-the-board pay cut for employees whose salaries are above some threshold. Depending on that threshold, this would include the more senior members of the administration and the faculty. This proposal was considered carefully and ultimately rejected in recognition that a long-term solution to the financial situation requires changes in the College’s organizational structure and employment levels, rather than a short-term lowering of current employees’ compensation. Competitiveness plays some role in this, but more fundamentally it is important that work be compensated equitably and fairly. We have always closely monitored Vassar’s compensation levels relative to those of peer institutions and the local economy. The goal (not consistently achieved) has been to have faculty compensation in the top third of our 21-college peer group. To ensure that other employees are well paid, we monitor administrative salaries against data provided by the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources (CUPA-HR) and compensation for staff relative to the local labor environment. The Board of Trustees sets the President’s salary and that of the senior officers, taking into account comparative data for our peer schools.
Although we rejected the approach of across-the-board cuts, we did incorporate a version of this strategy last year by only giving increases to unionized staff (as contracted) as well as to the less highly paid administrators and faculty. Compensation for higher-paid administrators and faculty members was frozen at 2008-09 levels. The savings to the College were significant, and I can assure you that many of those not receiving the expected annual increase understood this as a sacrifice asked of them for the good of the institution.
Having rejected an across-the-board cut in compensation for a larger group of employees, I would not single out the senior officers for such reductions. Their positions require them to manage various aspects of the College in response to institutional financial realities, and cutting their personal compensation because of having those responsibilities almost seems to fault them for having to make difficult and painful decisions. I would also reject the editorial’s assertion that no sacrifice has been made by senior officers similar to those identified in the editorial (reductions in curriculum, staff size, equipment and plant budgets). Their offices and the operations that support them have been subjected to the same challenges faced by every area of the College through reduced budgets and services. In fact, they are responsible for all these other areas of the College and are managing now with fewer people and resources.
I do recognize the importance of a special commitment to Vassar from those who are the most highly paid at the institution—and I mean more than a symbolic commitment. There is a mechanism already in place for just that, which is making a contribution to the College through the Annual Fund—money that goes directly into offsetting current expenses. The editorial seems to dismiss such contributions as inadequately symbolic, but there is little financial difference to an individual or the College if the money is given back or never received. I would argue that the more powerful symbolic act is the voluntary one. As the head of the institution and its highest paid employee, I do feel a special responsibility, and so I have contributed five percent of my salary this year to the College. All of the senior officers supported the Annual Fund generously this year as well. Perhaps it was my mistake not to realize the extent to which symbolic acts need to be public acts, but at the time I made this decision, it seemed to me to be a personal one.
My hope would be that these examples motivate others able to do so to make their own contributions and together make a truly meaningful, not merely symbolic, difference in Vassar’s financial health. Although it may be surprising to some, it is a great testament to the strength of our community that many employees and a significant number of families of current Vassar students give to the Annual Fund. Of course, not everyone is in the position to make a financial gift to the College, and that is understandable. There are many other ways to support Vassar, including participating in the discussions about the future of the institution in constructive, responsible and thoughtful ways.
Let me once again express my appreciation for the balance reflected in the Miscellany’s editorial of Oct. 29 and in its thorough coverage of Vassar’s fiscal challenges more generally. The Miscellany News has shown that genuinely useful service to any institution comes when facts and data are considered thoughtfully and rhetoric is employed carefully. The key point made in the Oct. 29 editorial is that the symbolism of a voluntary pay cut on the part of the leader of the institution would be “meaningful” to the community, not as a solution to our difficulties but as a sign that I understand that sacrifices are being made everywhere, and that such a cut would be perceived differently by the community than the private giving that the leadership of the College has undertaken this year.
Vassar’s senior officers already have, and continue to, make sacrifices for “the community which we call home.” As President of the College and a member of this community, I will reduce my current salary next year by five percent to signal—to symbolize—that everyone is sacrificing at this moment in our College’s history.
I want to thank all the members of our community who have participated in our ongoing conversations about the College’s response to the current fiscal situation with thoughtfulness and respect for differing points of view.
—Catharine Bond Hill, President of Vassar College.
12 comments
Do you understand how financial aid works?
Do you understand that close to 60% of our students are on financial aid?
Do you realize that increasing financial aid and salvaging need blind status have been two of Cappy's primary objectives?I have a critique of Cappy like everyone else, but usually, I find that she is doing her job a lot better than most faculty, staff and/or admin here. This is yet another example of her thoughtful leadership (though it is belated).Now, if we could just get the faculty, staff and admin who do little to earn their paychecks to take one for the team and think about working as park rangers or park ranger aids, we'd be okay.Let's start with you.