Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 27, 1975)
monday, octobe- 27, 1975 daiiy neufiaksn paoa o Off icials disagree about administrator continuity 1975-76" 3tate Appropriations Continued from p. 1 However, Regent Schwartzkopf said he believes that when administrators leave NU, the continuity of the university is dis rupted, so that administrators' colleagues and NU students are affected. Some said that administrators leaving has a favorable effect on the quality of education. ! The exchange of administrators has a healthy effect on the quality of education because new ideas and perspectives are needed, according to Hoppner, Exon's press secretary. Schwartzkopf expressed dissatisfaction with Hoppner's views. He said that NU hasj some quality administrators it cannot, afford to lose. -Token few "And we need more than a token few scattered around the university," he said. "I'm proud that they receive offers, but I am upset about the exodus.' Yet, what k being done to preyent this exodus of top administrators? According to Regent Raun, the regents continually look at ways to keep top ad ministrators. He said they consider salaries, fringe benefits and general working conditions. According to Regent Koefoot, although there are ways of keeping administrators at NU, state funds are needed from the Legislature. However, nothing can be done in the Unicameral, Sen. George said, because the responsibility lies with the regents. Administrator responsibility Others, including Sen.. Marvel, Sen.. Clark and Regent Kerrr.it Hansen, said re sponsibility lies with the administrators; themselves. "Administrators should go through each area with a fine toothed comb and cut out the outmoded programs," Marvel said. "That way we can support the new and ex isting programs." Sen. Savage said, "I don't know the answer for keeping administrators at NU. I suppose the solution is to pay them more." All state employes, including those at the university, received a $468 plus five per cent raise for the 1975-76 fiscal year under LB588. "This response by the lawmakers resulted from frustration over the subjec tive judgment evaluations of employes,". said Eldin Ehrlich, legislative fiscal analyst. Ehrlich said that evaluations were based on more than hard facts and therefore, the merit pay plan could be used as an excuse to give employes more money. According to Marvel, regents complain to the Legislature about the budget, but the senators have to "take the heat" for: money that is raised. "It's a little easier for them to ask for' a raise than it is for us to give it to them," i he continued. "As far as expenses go, we're on the firing line all the time." Hoppner said that administrators leave for promotions as well as for higher salaries and that salaries are not valid reasons for administrators leaving. Sen. Burrows expressed similar views. "If those people are only interested in getting a pay check, I wish tney would move but," Burrows said. "There are plenty of people to fill their shoes." Sen. Marsh said she is certain salaries are valid excuses for leaving NU, but added administrators should remember that Ne braska has clean air, safe streets and favor able conditions for raising a family. Sen. Goodrich said that salaries are not valid reasons for leaving NU. "If administrators want to leave, so be it. Let them go," Goodrich said. "But if they want to stay in a progressive universi ty and community, then we're happy to hae them." Goodrich said there are some admin istrators he would like to see taking jobs elsewhere. Kedical Cent 133,024,356 35M NU Systems 540,57"-.4' TJNC--' 312,898,119 Other Educati 3 50. 076. 709 6; State College Eman Tr? A19'788'3'2 70 x Resources 17,539 7 w"w zzmzr neral 54 5.25- X. Government V'jr- X ' T V X ih x v l ranfl uui ban jlwu v x j X 313802,181 Vtura Public .i 2fi7,722 te3ources $19f712964 2.5?i r . . , " 1 ' " ... 1 f Pttoto by TMI Kirk Gov. J. James Exon (left) and Regent Robert Prokop (right). The two men said that NU has never had problems replacing administrators and that the quality of education does not depend heavily on administrators. 8 administrators' salaries The following table compares administrative salaries of Big 8 schools for the 1974-75 fiscal year. The table was prepared by the NU Office of Business and Finance from 1974-75 Big 8 budget books. AH salaries listed are for comparable positions according to Miles Tommeraasen, vice chancellor for business and finance. Univ. of Univ. of Iowa Univ. of Kansas Univ. of Nebraska Colorado State Kansas State Missouri Chancellor 39,990 50,000 45,500 42,030 42,000 40,500 Assistant to the Chancellor 21,500 20,400 19,800 26,600 28,620 37,100 Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs 37,500 42,000 41,700 35,500 37,500 35,500 Assistant Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs 25,000 33,000 24,469 30,840 20,880 25,800 Vice Chancellor for Business and Finance 32,500 32,500 37,300 29,000 28,620 37,100 Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs 32,000 36,000 33,800 28,900 31,860 32,000 Business Manager 25,500 25,600 24,500 22,500 27,600 Comptroller ' 22,500 33,500 23,000 20,300 24,000 25,000 Director of Accounting 17,200 17,208 18,300 22,639 19,719 1700 Bursar 13,600 20,369 17,000 17,850 Budget Officer 18,500 32,500 22,400 2200 24,540 19,000 Director of Personnel 2000 24,000 26,000 15,500 16,260 23,400 Director of the Physical Plant 25,000 25,000 28,200 28,000 2220 23,000 Chief of Campus Security 18,000 19,560 13,630 1353 1444 2100 Director of University Information 23,000 40,000 3400 19,500 16,640 20,100 Director of Academic Services 21.400 25,400 28,000 21,000 28,020 27,000 Director of Registration 19,090 20664 2400 19,500 16,920 1800 Director of Admissions 19.300 18,540 18,800 15,600 17,400 1800 Dean of Student Development 23,920 25,535 24,700 20,200 21,816 20,000 Director of Financial Aids 17,500 19,008 17,300 16,600 15,480 2U0O Director of the Student Union 21,610 21,800 27,000 22,200 20,800 DSrofllousjng 23,552 24,000 2800 2800 20,100 2400 Univ. of Oklahoma Oklahoma State 47,000 29,500 40,000 23,500 38,000 31,000 30,000 20,000 15,000 19,600 .24,000 24,200 2200 1900 3200 24,000 16,800 16,200 18,000 20300 18,000 24,700 47,000 23,700 39,600 24,000 36,900 32,100 22,200 25,500 1620 15,840 24300 23390 24300 14,880 24,000 25,680 25300 25300 24340 13,980 20,736 15,600 Ds8y titbisikatt Flitoto Comparisons questioned One way to rate NU administrative sal aries is to compare them with those at other Big 8 schools. However, some NU Board of Regents members and state sena tors said they doubt the validity of such comparisons. The Big 8 is an artificial standard," ac cording to Regent Robert Simmons of Scottsbluff. "There is no common denom inator except the athletic aspect." .Lincoln Sen. Harold Simpson, an Ap propriations Committee member, said that figures and surveys can be used any way a person wants, and added that he questions figures when used to someone's advantage. We're being compared with Big 8 schools just as if we were competing with the Joneses," said Sen. John Savage of Omaha, who is- also on the Appropriations Committee, However, some regents and state sena tors expressed concern about the uni versity' salaries when compared with other Big 8 schools. "Salaries at NU are not comparable to those at other schools and they should be," according to Grand Island Regent Robert Koefoot. Sen. Douglas Bereuter of Utica, Appro priations Committee member, said that Ne braska's position in the Big 8 does not surprise him. "I've felt we are not keeping up with other schools for quite a while," he said. "It's not that the state hasn't tried though. NU has cent a long way, according to North Platte Sen. Myron Rumery, an cation Committee member. But he added that in comparing NU with other schools "we haven't come along as quickly as we would like to."