B.S. economics: while cash-strapped universities cut teachers, classes, and whole departments, they're ignoring all those managers in the Office of Public Relations

Washington Monthly, Nov, 1992 by Betsy Wagner, David Bowermaster

Not only have staff rolls gotten fatter, but so have administrative paychecks. In 1990-91, the median salary for all college and university chancellors was $95,500, nearly double the 1981-82 figure of $52,000. And nowadays, staff salaries and benefits consume the lion's share of budget outlays--up to 70 percent at some schools.

While some of the benefits are justified, the extravagant abuses that have been recently reported are not. Consider the crafty maneuvering in 1990 by Chancellor W. Ann Reynolds of the California State University. Reynolds sought to purchase six new cars to placate her vice chancellors, who were suffering the indignity of having to check vehicles out of a motor pool. But because the state was cracking down on faculty expenses at state universities, purchases of more than $100,000 had to be reported to the government. Reynolds thought it unwise to attract attention to herself---especially since she was also giving the vice chancellors salary raises of 15 to 25 percent. So she bought six Ford Tauruses at a total cost of $99,998.70.

With a logic familiar to observers of congressional pay raises and fat-cat tax breaks, Peter Linkins, president of Lehigh University, defends astronomical salaries and other benefits by pointing out the small impact their elimination would have on the bottom line. In an operation of Lehigh's size, says Linkins, "eliminate a vice president and you haven't even touched the cost." Eliminate a slew of vice presidents, on the other hand, and your freshmen may be able to take Introductory Art History in a class with fewer than 200 students.

Still, some administrators are so committed to preserving the system that they are willing to defy the law. The Maine legislature tried to target high-paid bureaucrats at the University of Maine last year by trimming 5.5 percent from all salaries higher than $50,000. This was after the school's board of trustees had decided to exempt its employees from the mandates of earlier budget cuts, awarding pay raises to a significant number of the highest paid U of M bigshots. Thus, despite the new budgetary restrictions, the school's board continued to dole out pay hikes to administrators--while cutting class sections and reducing student services.

Luxe et veritas

Administrators defend classroom cuts by arguing that faculty salaries are the main reason for budget woes--and hence the main reason tuitions are rising. The press has echoed their argument, pointing an accusatory finger at superstar faculty members and their superstar salaries. While it is true that full professors at Harvard make, on average, nearly $90,000, that's way above the average academic's pay. In fact, after factoring in inflation, the average salary a professor received in 1989-90--$39,965--was actually $200 lower than the average for 1972-73.

Faculty at the University of Virginia, for example, took a 2 percent pay cut in December 1990. But at least they have jobs; at San Diego State University (SDSU), 1,000 faculty members have been fired or given "early retirement" by the university and 22 courses were recently shifted to the school's extension program (where teachers are often not faculty members). Meanwhile, SDSU's enrollment dropped as students were unable to get the classes they wanted; surviving faculty members, for their part, often drastically stretched their class sizes. "You would be happy to sit on the floor for the semester--at least that meant you got into the class," says SDSU student Merek Findling. The cutbacks at SDSU mirror the plight of the rest of the widely respected California State University system. The $300 million in budget cuts this year, a more than 7 percent reduction, have jacked up the fees for in-state students by 70 percent, and at the same time fewer class sections are being offered.