Faculty TIAA Benefits
His Words
Sometimes, actions do speak louder than words. In the case of President Farley, most of the faculty and staff have heard President Farley mention their value to the university ad nauseam. For example, on October 9, 2004, after the Washburn Board of Regents approved a salary increase of 7 percent for President Farley, he responded to the Board comments, by saying
...it was very kind of everyone to say such nice things, but he said it's not me, it is the people out here on the campus who are doing what they do which has resulted in the growth of the University. He said people here are enthusiastic and they enjoy working here. He said "I really do appreciate what you say, but it's credit to all the persons who work at Washburn University to whom the credit must go."
By the way, President Farley was appointed President of Washburn University in 1997. His starting salary was $120,000. Over the next seven years, his base compensation increased 50% to an annual salary of $180,000 in FY04. Now he has received an additional 7% increase.
His Actions
In June, 2000, the University Council approached the Board of Regents to request consideration of a proposal to provide retirement contributions by the University for summer school salaries. President Farley was opposed to this request. His opposition to the proposal, contained In the June 21, 2000 Board of Regents agenda item, follows:
The President does not recommend the adoption of this proposal for two fundamental reasons. First, this is a budget issue. We have continually urged the Board to focus our limited resources to the improvement of base salaries for all faculty members. The University Council proposal would require that those limited resources be allocated as an additional retirement contribution only for those faculty who teach in the summer. Further, the President believes the University Council proposal is not fair because it excludes those who teach continuing education courses or who work overtime.
President Farley's lack of support resulted in the Board of Regents taking no action.
The Truth
A budget issue? The financial implication of this proposal was stated as $85,000 to $100,000 per year. Let's look at where this money might come from ...
- University reserves. Every year the University has resources that exceed its operating costs. In FY00, $300,000 of operating surplus was transferred to a Special Project account in the Building Construction fund. As of FY03, that fund had grown to over $1,000,000.
- Water feature. In June, 2003, almost $100,000 of university reserves were used to build the water feature on the northeast corner of campus.
- Prior to the imposition of a 0.65% county wide sales tax, property taxes were collected to provide for employee benefits. In FY02, the $5,977,419 reserve balance in the Employee Benefits Contribution Fund was transferred to the General Fund. Monies have always been provided by this community to ensure that the faculty and staff of Washburn University receive competitive employee benefits.
- How does a university support the $2 million growth in debt service when it can't afford $100,000 in retirement benefits for the faculty? Does it really make sense to keep growing at record rates when the core strength of this business, the faculty, is not compensated fairly?
"Budget issue" is a code word used by the administration when they don't want to support a proposal. Funds have always been found for the projects and purposes that they support.