University Times

The University Senate budget policies committee (BPC) is seeking more information on how well salaries progress for long-term faculty at Pitt.

A new Provost’s office analysis of faculty and staff salaries for a cohort of long-term full-time Pitt employees showed that 92 percent of staff and 87 percent of faculty in the group received raises that exceeded inflation for the 15-year period of fiscal year 2000-FY15.

BPC received the updated report April 17 (see related story, this issue) but questioned the omission of details pertaining to salary progress among faculty who were assistant professors in FY00 and associate professors in FY15.

The faculty cohort analysis was first produced five years ago at the request of then-University Senate President Michael Pinsky, who asked for a longitudinal report as an alternative to mean and median salary reports, in order to track salaries for a fixed group of longtime continuing faculty members. (See May 13, 2010, University Times.)

David DeJong, vice provost for academic planning and resources management and a chancellor’s liaison to BPC, said the set of cohorts was discussed when the report was commissioned five years ago.

“We agreed that over 15 years if you had not advanced to full professor and you started as an assistant, that would not have been normal progress through the ranks,” he explained.

BPC member pro tem Phil Wion requested that in its next report the administration provide details for the subset that moved from the assistant to the associate rank.

Wion, faculty emeritus of English, noted that cultures vary in terms of what is considered normal progress. “That really does vary school to school, department to department,” noting that in English, for instance, many faculty remain “stuck” in the associate professor rank.

BPC chair John J. Baker agreed that many faculty at Pitt move from assistant to associate but never become a full professor. He observed, however, “You’d have more trouble interpreting the data, I think, if you included the assistant-to-associate” progress. “It would show you whether they make this or not, but it doesn’t show you the reasons why.”

Wion countered that the report likewise doesn’t detail the reasons why progress from the assistant professor to the full professor rank is usual in some parts of the University.

“Cultures really vary from one part of the University to another in this respect,” he reiterated.

BPC cochair Beverly Gaddy noted that the omission of the assistant-to-associate group leaves a large gap in the data.

The analysis breaks out salary progress by rank change for 532 of the 811 faculty in the cohort: 209 full professors who remained full professors 15 years later; 154 associate professors and 86 assistant professors who became full professors by FY15; 42 instructors/lecturers who moved to one of the professor ranks and 41 faculty who remained instructors/lecturers in FY15.

A total of 279 of the 811 are not accounted for in the “select rank changes” breakouts. Said Wion,“It’s the biggest category and it’s left out. That doesn’t seem right.”

Key metrics

According to the cohort report, the Consumer Price Index rose 45 percent FY00-FY15. The maintenance component of Pitt’s salary pool increase rose 29 percent; the overall salary pool (maintenance plus the merit/market/equity component) rose 52 percent, and the overall pool increase plus academic initiatives funds rose 62 percent.

*

A total of 1,524 full-time staff and 811 full-time faculty who were employed at the University in FY00 still were working at Pitt in FY15.

The faculty analysis included tenure-stream and non-tenure-stream faculty, faculty from the Pittsburgh campus and the regional campuses, and non-clinical School of Medicine faculty. Clinical medical school faculty were not included.

According to the Pitt Fact Book 2015, the University employs 4,442 full-time faculty (including 2,220 in the School of Medicine) and 6,642 full-time staff.

*

Faculty cohort pay increases

For the 811 faculty included in the cohort analysis:

•  87 percent received raises that exceeded the CPI.

•  94 percent received raises that exceeded the salary pool maintenance component.

• 80 percent exceeded the total salary pool (maintenance plus merit/market/equity).

• 69 percent exceeded the salary pool plus academic initiatives funding.

Effects of selected faculty rank changes

Of the 209 full professors in FY00 who remained full professors in FY15:

• 84 percent received raises that exceeded the CPI.

• 91 percent received raises that exceeded the salary pool maintenance component.

• 74 percent exceeded the total salary pool (maintenance plus merit/market/equity).

• 56 percent exceeded the salary pool plus academic initiatives funding.

Of the 154 associate professors in FY00 who were full professors in FY15:

• 96 percent received raises that exceeded the CPI.

• 97 percent received raises that exceeded the salary pool maintenance component.

• 94 percent exceeded the total salary pool (maintenance plus merit/market/equity).

• 93 percent exceeded the salary pool plus academic initiatives funding.

Of the 86 assistant professors in FY00 who were full professors in FY15:

• 97 percent received raises that exceeded the CPI.

• 97 percent received raises that exceeded the salary pool maintenance component.

• 95 percent exceeded the total salary pool (maintenance plus merit/market/equity).

• 95 percent exceeded the salary pool plus academic initiatives funding.

Of the 42 instructors/lecturers in FY00 who advanced to one of the  professor ranks by FY15:

• 93 percent received raises that exceeded the CPI.

• 95 percent received raises that exceeded the salary pool maintenance component.

• 91 percent exceeded the total salary pool (maintenance plus merit/market/equity).

• 86 percent exceeded the salary pool plus academic initiatives funding.

Of the 41 instructors/lecturers in FY00 who remained instructors/lecturers in FY15:

• 93 percent received raises that exceeded the CPI.

• 100 percent received raises that exceeded the salary pool maintenance component .

• 83 percent exceeded the total salary pool (maintenance plus merit/market/equity).

• 66 percent exceeded the salary pool plus academic initiatives funding.

Staff cohort pay increases

Salaries for a cohort of long-term staff were added in a report on FY98-FY13, first presented to BPC earlier this year. (See Jan. 8 University Times.) The latest cohort report further enhances details on long-term staff pay, separating those who remained in the same pay grade from those who moved up in pay grade over the 15-year timeframe.

The new report includes 1,524 staff members who were employed at Pitt in FY00-FY15. Of those, 557 remained in the same pay grade, while 627 were in a higher pay grade in FY15 than in FY00.

The cohort of 1,524 represents 23 percent of the 6,642 full-time staff employed at Pitt in FY2015.

According to the cohort analysis, for the 557 staff who had no change in pay grade:

• 91 percent received raises that exceeded the CPI.

• 99 percent received raises that exceeded the salary pool maintenance component.

• 73 percent exceeded the total salary pool (maintenance plus merit/market/equity).

• 52 percent exceeded the salary pool plus academic initiatives funding.

For staff who rose in pay grade:

• 98 percent received raises that exceeded the CPI.

• 99 percent received raises that exceeded the salary pool maintenance component.

• 95 percent exceeded the total salary pool (maintenance plus merit/market/equity).

• 91 percent exceeded the salary pool plus academic initiatives funding.

—Kimberly K. Barlow