The University of California’s year-long merit-based salary increase policy is a step in the right direction.
If the UC were to implement this program for the long term, it would preserve a high-caliber education for future generations. Underpaid professors aren’t motivated to do their job well, and without an educated youth, our financial crises will only worsen.
The merit-based salary increase program went into effect this weekend, and professors who have received a positive peer evaluation in the last four years will be rewarded with a 3 percent salary increase. The evaluations are said to assess a professor’s quality of teaching, research and overall service to the school.
But the current evaluation process lacks a key ingredient: the student voice. Only students can truly assess what occurs in a professor’s classroom ““ only they know the extent to which professors interact with and invest in their pupils. Student evaluations should play an equal role when deciding who from the academic staff merits a salary increase.
While some may argue that students will only reward professors who lend out easy A’s, it’s important to point out that no evaluation system is perfect. Just as students may harbor biases toward a particular person, or a particular subject, academic peers are just as susceptible to personal biases. The fact of the matter remains that if the UC aims to evaluate professors as educators, they must ask the people being educated.
As it is, a one-year program isn’t sufficient. The UC should canonize this program and guarantee merit-based salary increases every five years to encourage professors to improve their performance.
Though a substantial $140 million will fund this program, this investment is justified because it will mitigate the budget-cut blows to the quality of a UC education.
While $57 million will go toward academic faculty salary increases, the remaining $83 million will fund a 6 percent salary increase for non-academic staff. To be eligible for a salary increase, individuals must have worked with the UC for more than a year and have received no salary adjustments as a result of promotions since Jan. 1.
Non-academic UC staff does not just include administrators but also custodians, maintenance workers and transportation officials. These employees are among numerous others who haven’t received general salary increases since fall 2007.
A demoralized university workforce is bound to have an adverse affect on the campus climate as much as complacent professors.
Thus, while the merit-based salary increases are a hefty investment, they are necessary to the continual existence of a well-functioning public university system.
Unsigned editorials represent the majority opinion of the editorial board.