University Star

Faculty who receive merit awards might not receive salary increases next year.

Eugene Bourgeois, associate provost of Academic Affairs, said salary increases are an important type of growth. Faculty members obtain salary increases through merit awards as part of the University Strategic Plan.

The State of Texas requires universities undergo formal reviews of strategic plans. Strategic plans are compiled of ongoing goals the university wants to accomplish within a deadline.

Goals within the university strategic plan are re-evaluated every fiscal year and formally evaluated every two years, according to Cathy Fleuriet, associate vice president for Institutional Effectiveness.

The University Strategic Plan was recently reassessed and in 2012, will be formally evaluated again. Fleuriet said the goals will be reviewed and either continued, added to or deleted from the list. She said an increase in faculty salary is a goal that will most likely remain.

The state mandated 5 percent budget reduction might freeze funds set aside for merit awards. University President Denise Trauth sent an e-mail to faculty warning of merit adjustments because of unknown funding for next year.

“We are not immediately making these awards because of the uncertainty regarding the permanency of that 5 percent budget reduction,” Bourgeois said.

Trauth set aside $2.25 million in 2004 for faculty salary market adjustments. Department chairs and directors use a merit pool equal to 3 percent of individual faculty salaries. The money used for salary increases comes from the funds Trauth sets aside. The higher the merit a faculty member receives, the larger the salary increase, Bourgeois said.

Merits are awarded to faculty who publish books, papers and articles, receive grants or excel in their field. Chairs make recommendations to department heads who recommend merit applicants to the Provost’s Office. Accomplishments made between 2007 and 2009 are what merit raises for this year are based on.

Bourgeois said it is a “rolling cycle” allowing faculty to show their work over a period of time.

Departments are encouraged to complete merit assessments and recommendations in case funding becomes available, Bourgeois said. He said the Provost’s Office would send lists Monday of eligible faculty for merit awards to departments. Merit award eligibility goes to faculty whose employment began on or before Sept. 1, 2009, according to Trauth’s e-mail.

“Based on what faculty has done with annual reports, we still need to complete salary review, which includes merit review this spring, before the semester ends,” Bourgeois said. “By the end of this semester, I am asking chairs and deans to provide initial preliminary recommendations for merit awards for their faculty.”

Bourgeois said the goal of increasing full-time faculty salaries would remain a priority.

Frank DeLaTeja, chair in the history department, said the merit awards give faculty a chance to excel. However, DeLaTeja said the high, medium and low performance levels used in evaluating upsets faculty.

“It seems to indicate there is a pecking order,” DeLaTeja said. “At least where history is concerned, it’s based on the fact in any given year somebody may have gone beyond those expectations to do something.”

Sue Biedermann, chair of the Health Information Management Program, said the College of Health Professions carries a rigorous course load for faculty.

She said the heavy course loads allow all faculty the same chance of obtaining the highest merit.

“Here, (difference in salaries) doesn’t make as much a difference as the low, medium or high (merit levels),” Biedermann said.

Bourgeois said faculty members usually understand why budget cuts are made.

“Everyone recognizes, including faculty, if we don’t have the funding available, we might not be able to make those merit awards,” Bourgeois said.

Biedermann and DeLaTeja said their faculty would not be upset if merit awards do not result in salary increases this year.

“Just because we have increased salaries in the past does not mean we stop,” Fleuriet said. “This is a continuum. Until we go through our next evaluation, we will not know if our current goals are working or not.”