Monday, August 9, 2010

{For a new U of M president?}

I've mentioned before the trial balloon sent up by the Chairman of the BoRe at Minnesota to make another outrageous salary for the next president more palatable.

Don't you usually pay someone based on experience and qualifications?

Why is it that the new president must be paid more than the current one, before we even know who he or she is? The current president is one of the most highly compensated public university presidents in the country, so why is it that the next one should automatically be paid more?

From the Strib
(of the red telephone):

Editorial: The price must be right

MnSCU and U face salary issues in searches for new leaders.

...President Robert Bruininks of the University of Minnesota, a smaller system, is paid a $455,000 base salary and earns a total compensation package of about $650,000.

As the searches progress for successors to both McCormick and Bruininks, who will also retire in mid-2011, Minnesotans should have a realistic assessment of what's required to compete for top higher-education executive talent. Filling these two positions wisely and well is crucial to maintaining Minnesota's best economic advantage -- its well-trained workforce. Minnesotans should not expect to do so at a bargain price.

The comments on this are particularly amusing, I'll just give one:

Ah... Good old Dr. Pangloss...
The illustrious U of M critic/Professor

Had to know that the first comment on here would be from him to criticize the U of M administration. Funny that they haven't found a way to get rid of you yet*. Pretty much any boss in the private sector would have found a way to put your butt on the curb for as much as you have a tendency to do nothing but show disrespect and loathing and your own bosses in public. And BTW, why would you want to lower the salary for the leader of the single biggest economic creator in the state that tax payers have an influence on? No other public institution has the economic impact through research, technology innovation, and private sector job creation than the U does. So why would you want to lower the bar and get less qualified people in to lead the most important public enitity in the state, during our worst economic crisis in half a century?

posted by holt0338

2 of 14 people liked this

*Apparently Mr. Holtz doesn't get over to the U much any more (except to go drinking with Futz?):

"Academic freedom must protect the integrity not only of scholarship and teaching, but also of the expression of views that may not be welcomed by bodies having power over the faculty. Even without such protection, many would speak out as they saw fit and necessary, but where such speech is not protected it can be muffled or silenced."

The University of Minnesota Revises its Academic
Freedom Policy

You probably want to have a look at the new Regents policy, Mr. Holtz, before you shoot your mouth off once again in this matter and embarrass yourself and the University of Minnesota.

From the document:

"Academic freedom is the freedom to discuss all relevant matters in the classroom, to explore all avenues of scholarship, research, and creative expression, and to speak or write without institutional discipline or restraint on matters of public concern as well as on matters related to professional duties and the functioning of the University."

No comments: