University of Virginia Library

Budget Cuts Threaten Research, Faculty Quality

News Analysis

By MICHAEL GARTLAN

—Ed.)

The University may lose some of its
competitive edge in attracting new
faculty to the Grounds if the General
Assembly removes additional funds from
the University's budget request for the
1972-74 biennium.

Governor Holton and his Budget
Advisory Board have already
recommended cuts totalling $9.6 million
from Education and General Fund
requests leaving only "the minimum
required" if the University is "to meet
our academic and intellectual
commitment to the State and nation,"
according to President Edgar F. Shannon
Jr.

This cutback will mean an $8 million
dollar reduction for graduate and research
programs and further budget cuts by the
legislature could further reduce available
funds for new faculty positions.

In any budgetary system, there are
inevitable cuts in appropriation requests
and University officials would be
unrealistic to assume that their requests
would receive full funding.

And, surely, the General Assembly will
utilize all rational devices in making
appropriations to the University from the
Governor's mammoth $5.2 billion state
budget.

But recent statements by the financial
strongmen in Richmond indicate both a
lack of understanding of the role of
faculty members in achieving and
maintaining preeminence for the
institutions where they teach and a
fundamental misunderstanding of the
University's faculty compensation
formula as it relates to faculty
compensation at its "peer" institutions.

That such misunderstandings exist is
evidenced by a speech made Jan. 27 by
the Chairman of the House
Appropriations Committee, Del. W. Roy
Smith (D—Petersburg) to his fellow
committee members as they began
preparing their budget bill.

Mr. Smith questioned "whether it is
necessary in order that this great
institution (the University) maintain its
present position of preeminence that its
average faculty compensation exceed the
average for other such prestigious
institutions as the University of North
Carolina (at Chapel Hill), Tulane
University, Vanderbilt, Rice, the
University of Texas, The University of
Kentucky, or Texas A & M University."

What Mr. Smith apparently fails to
understand is that it was the University's
slightly higher faculty compensation
which brought a higher quality faculty to
the Grounds.

This faculty has raised this institution
to its present academic company. It did
not share such company in 1960 when
the State's education budget was only
$5.6 million as compared to the current
$274 million.

Relationship Misunderstood

Mr. Smith also seems to
misunderstanding the University's
relationship to the "other such
prestigious institutions" he names.

In 1966, all state colleges and
universities cooperated with the State
Council of Higher Education and the
Governor's office to define state and
national "peer" groups with which they
would be competitive in requesting
faculty salary appropriations.

Under the resulting budgetary
formula, the University is permitted to
request funds for faculty salaries at a level
to be competitive with a national group
of institutions such as Johns Hopkins,
Duke, Yale, Michigan, Princeton,
California and UNC.

Peer Group Basis

Of the institutions named by the
Appropriations Committee Chairman,
only UNC is actually a "peer" institution.
The current University budget was
advanced on the basis of this same peer
group and was at a 96 per cent level for
the 1970-72 biennium.

In fact, when one differentiates
between average faculty compensation
(state salary plus fringe benefits) and
average salary (state salary alone), the
University's salary averages were below
UNC, University of Texas, Rice, and
Vanderbilt.

"The only way we were able to be
competitive with UNC and others in total
compensation." Mr. Shannon said as he
reviewed the budget for the House
Appropriations Committee and the
Senate Finance Committee Feb. 9, "was
by using our private funds to provide
fringe benefits that are so important to
attracting and holding a faculty of the
highest quality."

University Ranks Sixth

In terms of average faculty
compensation as it relates to other
institutions of its peer group, the
University's figure ranks sixth of eight at
$17,935 as compared to Hopkins
(highest) at $20,009 and UNC (lowest) at
$16,028 in figures supplied by the
American Association of University
Professors.

Oddly enough, Mr. Smith names as
compensation peers the University of
Kentucky, Tulane (now approaching
bankruptcy) and Texas A & M, all three