UAlbany plans layoffs, program cuts

[MRSGDG]

UAlbany plans layoffs, program cuts

 

"UAlbany President Philip noted that the campus over the past three years has seen a drop of $33.5 million, or 30 percent, in its base allocation of state aid."

 

http://www.timesunio...cuts-683996.php

 

 

And I'd like to add that Bundy Aid (NY state funding for private schools) is still around. Glad those private schools really need state funding...and public state schools are cut 30%. Makes soooo much sense.

[GreatDanes06]

I took Project Renaissance, as did my brother. It really was a great program. It allowed you to really interact with the students you live with and debate real topics in our world. Also helped in easing you into college life. Not to mentioned it killed off a bunch of general ed credits. Sad to see it go.

[Michigan_Dane]

I have no sympathy for the faculty. Their union fought SUNY reform. The union fought UAlbany and SUNY. They didn't want to give the campuses flexibility to set their own tuition. SUNY tuition is 1/3 that of UC and the unions still fought modest increases. What did the union expect would happen? Were they so idealistic or stupid to think there wouldn't be cuts? They fought the university for being pragmatic and saying we'll want to increase tuition. The union will now lose jobs. Well done. Learning from the fine work of the auto unions?

[danefan]

I have no sympathy for the faculty. Their union fought SUNY reform. The union fought UAlbany and SUNY. They didn't want to give the campuses flexibility to set their own tuition. SUNY tuition is 1/3 that of UC and the unions still fought modest increases. What did the union expect would happen? Were they so idealistic or stupid to think there wouldn't be cuts? They fought the university for being pragmatic and saying we'll want to increase tuition. The union will now lose jobs. Well done. Learning from the fine work of the auto unions?

 

Zimpher warned them many times that this would happen.

 

And the ones that really suffer? Students. Pay more for less. Great job politicians.

[uofalbany]

I have no sympathy for the faculty. Their union fought SUNY reform. The union fought UAlbany and SUNY. They didn't want to give the campuses flexibility to set their own tuition. SUNY tuition is 1/3 that of UC and the unions still fought modest increases. What did the union expect would happen? Were they so idealistic or stupid to think there wouldn't be cuts? They fought the university for being pragmatic and saying we'll want to increase tuition. The union will now lose jobs. Well done. Learning from the fine work of the auto unions?

 

Couldn't agree more!

 

What are the reasons for Manufacturing Loss & Statistics?

[Phoenix]

I have no sympathy for the faculty. Their union fought SUNY reform. The union fought UAlbany and SUNY. They didn't want to give the campuses flexibility to set their own tuition. SUNY tuition is 1/3 that of UC and the unions still fought modest increases. What did the union expect would happen? Were they so idealistic or stupid to think there wouldn't be cuts? They fought the university for being pragmatic and saying we'll want to increase tuition. The union will now lose jobs. Well done. Learning from the fine work of the auto unions?

 

It's an easy way to debate, but if you think this is a 'tuition increase vs. no tuition increase' debate then there's a lot to read. Tuition increases DON'T go to the university system. In fact, before this past year, 100% of tuition increases went directly to the state's general fund. It was rare that during the most recent increase 10%-20% actually went to the school. That's just 10 cents of every dollar. Everyone associated with SUNY, not just unions, should be against tution increases that don't support SUNY. All those increases are essentially a state tax on the students (and of their parents) who are simply pursuing a higher education.

[danefan]

I have no sympathy for the faculty. Their union fought SUNY reform. The union fought UAlbany and SUNY. They didn't want to give the campuses flexibility to set their own tuition. SUNY tuition is 1/3 that of UC and the unions still fought modest increases. What did the union expect would happen? Were they so idealistic or stupid to think there wouldn't be cuts? They fought the university for being pragmatic and saying we'll want to increase tuition. The union will now lose jobs. Well done. Learning from the fine work of the auto unions?

 

It's an easy way to debate, but if you think this is a 'tuition increase vs. no tuition increase' debate then there's a lot to read. Tuition increases DON'T go to the university system. In fact, before this past year, 100% of tuition increases went directly to the state's general fund. It was rare that during the most recent increase 10%-20% actually went to the school. That's just 10 cents of every dollar. Everyone associated with SUNY, not just unions, should be against tution increases that don't support SUNY. All those increases are essentially a state tax on the students (and of their parents) who are simply pursuing a higher education.

 

 

Tuition increases with SUNY Empowerment act would have 100% gone to the schools. That was the point he was making I think and he's right.

Edit: that "muslim college" line was supposed to go on another forun. Too many windows open at the same time. Sorry.

[Phoenix]

Tuition increases with SUNY Empowerment act would have 100% gone to the schools. That was the point he was making I think and he's right.

 

Or add a Muslim college (I think one just opened up in California) and play for Israel?

 

Yes, you're right that the proposal included that provision..and I should have mentioned that in my response. I guess I was replying with more of the practical thought process.

 

The tuition increases would go to SUNY..if you fully trust the NYS Legislature. The people passing that provision would effectively be the same people enforcing it. The threat would be that if tuition increases go to the schools (if the state actually followed through with that), then the state could cut SUNY funding by as much as the tuition increase..because then in the state's eyes the school's net funding remains the same. Further, years back, there was legislation that set-up a funding structure for SUNY community colleges. It laid-out that funding would be 1/3 state support, 1/3 county support and 1/3 student/tuition support. But..surprise..the state continues to reduce it's SUNY community college funding to a level WELL below 1/3..leaving counties and mainly students to pick up the disproportionate amount of the tab.

 

I'm not disagreeing with the Empowerment Act, and in fact really wish it was passed..and hope that it still will. But I think it is important to point out why some people might disagree with specific parts of the plan. And importantly, that it's not just some 'the unions are stupid' and 'people who don't agree with tuition increases are stupid' issue.

[danefan]

Tuition increases with SUNY Empowerment act would have 100% gone to the schools. That was the point he was making I think and he's right.

 

Or add a Muslim college (I think one just opened up in California) and play for Israel?

 

Yes, you're right that the proposal included that provision..and I should have mentioned that in my response. I guess I was replying with more of the practical thought process.

 

The tuition increases would go to SUNY..if you fully trust the NYS Legislature. The people passing that provision would effectively be the same people enforcing it. The threat would be that if tuition increases go to the schools (if the state actually followed through with that), then the state could cut SUNY funding by as much as the tuition increase..because then in the state's eyes the school's net funding remains the same. Further, years back, there was legislation that set-up a funding structure for SUNY community colleges. It laid-out that funding would be 1/3 state support, 1/3 county support and 1/3 student/tuition support. But..surprise..the state continues to reduce it's SUNY community college funding to a level WELL below 1/3..leaving counties and mainly students to pick up the disproportionate amount of the tab.

 

I'm not disagreeing with the Empowerment Act, and in fact really wish it was passed..and hope that it still will. But I think it is important to point out why some people might disagree with specific parts of the plan. And importantly, that it's not just some 'the unions are stupid' and 'people who don't agree with tuition increases are stupid' issue.

 

FYI, that "muslim college" line was supposed to go on another forum talking about ND, BYU and now possibly Liberty playing indy FBS football. Too many windows open at the same time. Sorry. ?

 

I agree that there are arguable points for and against the bill. But the fear of tuition increases is unfounded, imo. The bill had safeguards that would have made tuition increases much more predictable and rational then now.

 

But yes, there is always that fear that the pols will continue to take $$ but that fear is a reality with or without the act. At least with the act the schools would have had the power to make up those differences on their own. Now they're just stuck with cutting programs and profs.

[alum73]

Communication from President Philip:

 

Dear Members of the Campus Community:

 

This afternoon, I held a Town Hall meeting to inform the campus community of some of the difficult "next steps" the University at Albany will be taking to address its ongoing budget challenges. If you were unable to attend this meeting given the unfortunate timing, please understand that the decision to deliver this message on a Friday afternoon was not our preferred choice. It was necessary due to the limited availability of appropriate large venue options - particularly, since the Campus Center is undergoing renovation.

 

For those unable to join us today, I want to take this opportunity to share with you my message.

 

This year's State Budget reduced the level of State assistance to our campus by nearly $12 million. In fact, over the past three years, the campus has cumulatively suffered more than $33.5 million in State tax support reductions - more than a 30% decline. Since 2008, we have addressed these reductions to our revenue base through the elimination of approximately 200 vacant lines resulting from resignations and retirements, a soft-hiring freeze, reductions in non-personal expenditures and temporary service, reductions in graduate student support, a moratorium on non-essential travel, energy savings, operational efficiencies and more.

 

As I have said many times before, non-strategic and opportunistic short-term measures are simply not compatible with operating an organization on a sustainable basis. In the face of diminishing State support, these types of cuts are a clear pathway to mediocrity. It remains critically important for the University to rethink and rebalance its core academic and research mission given its reduced revenue base, and reallocate resources accordingly.

 

As late as August, we remained hopeful that passage of the Public Higher Education Empowerment and Innovation Act, including predictable and rational tuition in the future, would be adopted. If adopted as originally proposed, this landmark reform, coupled with sustained state assistance, would have helped us to address our current budgetary challenges, while at the same time, provide our campus with the tools and resources necessary to advance our academic enterprise. Regrettably, neither financial nor regulatory relief were enacted during the 2010 Legislative session.

 

As you may know, over the past several years, we have engaged the University community in numerous discussions about the principles that should guide budget-related decisions. I am most grateful for the perspectives and guidance provided by the Budget Advisory Groups I, II, and III, along with the University-wide strategic planning committee.

 

Like several other SUNY campuses, the University is now at a point where we must analyze, evaluate and consider implementing measures that reallocate resources and eliminate some existing programs. Such actions will potentially affect a number of units across the campus.

 

As we enter this period of further communication and dialogue, the University anticipates that the actions discussed today will unfold over a two-year period. By the end of 2012, we expect that the equivalent of another 160 full time positions will be eliminated - bringing the campus total to over 360 positions eliminated over the four-year period starting in 2008. To the extent possible, it is our sincere hope and intention to minimize the disruption across the University by achieving the majority of the reductions through attrition resulting from the early retirement incentive program, voluntary resignations and other future vacancies. Notwithstanding these efforts, by the end of this process, I regret that involuntary terminations of employment will be unavoidable.

 

It is important to underscore that administrative and support units have and will continue to shoulder a higher percentage of the cost savings measures adopted, which is consistent with the University's priority of protecting the academic mission. Based on what we know now, in this fiscal year and next, administrative units will absorb an additional 10% reduction in their state operating budgets, while colleges and schools will experience an additional 7% reduction. Over the four-year period ending in 2012, administrative units will have suffered a reduction in their state operating budgets of nearly 22.4%, while colleges and schools will have realized a 16.2% reduction. Of the reductions between 2008-2012, we anticipate that nearly three-quarters of the workforce actions will relate to professional and support staff, while the remaining will be faculty positions. These disproportionate reductions are consistent and in line with the values, advice and guidance I have received from the campus advisory groups previously mentioned.

 

In addition to job losses already incurred, our administrative and support units are being forced to implement additional budget actions that have and will continue to result in reductions in hours of service operations, diminished employee and student services university-wide, cutbacks in general operational and physical plant support, and more.

 

It is important to note that every possible effort is being made to ensure that the health and safety of our campus community is not compromised.

 

Once again, we are striving to manage future reductions in ways that will mitigate the impact on our existing employees. The University is also exploring administrative consolidations, ITS efficiencies, as well as conducting a comprehensive review of the expenditures associated with our athletics program in order to achieve additional savings.

 

Unfortunately, these efforts in the administrative and extra-curricular areas are by themselves not enough. The University's academic program will be further impacted. The Provost and Deans from each of the schools and colleges have been working closely over the past two years to consider and implement reduction scenarios as our fiscal challenges worsened. I am sure all of the faculty have observed and felt the impact of these changes as professional conference support has dried up, academic support services have diminished, assistantships have declined, some departments have become smaller, and class sizes have become larger. Many program changes are already underway to accommodate the current resource picture. No school or college has been exempt from these reductions, and some areas have in fact borne more of the burden only because of the opportunistic way in which the cuts had to be managed in the short term.

 

Going forward, Provost Phillips and I will continue to work with the Deans, Chairs, and applicable governance bodies to sustain the University's capacity to offer strong academic programs in areas of high student demand. In addition to the program changes already underway, we now must begin consideration of further actions, given the requirements of the academic calendar and the cycles associated with student and faculty recruitment.

 

As a first step in this more difficult phase of reallocation planning, I have issued a directive today to suspend all new admissions to five program areas - Classics, French, Italian, Russian, and Theatre. Provost Phillips and Dean Wulfert met earlier today with the faculty in each of these program areas to communicate this action and begin a discussion about the future.

 

This decision was based on an extensive consultative process with faculty, and in recognition that there are comparatively fewer students enrolled in these degree programs.

 

It is important to recognize that this action is by no means a reflection about the quality of the faculty appointed to these programs, or frankly about the value of these subjects to the liberal arts. They are and continue to be valued scholars and colleagues. The University will continue to offer a broad array of arts and humanities courses in its curriculum.

 

We have also taken steps in preparation for the final year of Project Renaissance - the student living learning community for first-year students. I have asked the University Senate to provide consultation to me on further action with regard to all of these program areas.

 

I am mindful that the identification of these specific programs makes it appear that the College of Arts and Sciences is bearing a disproportionate reduction. I want to assure you that larger reductions across the other schools and colleges are being addressed, but simply in different ways. I have asked the Provost to begin the process of initiating other program consolidations and efficiencies. While the magnitude of the reduction requires significant participation from all units, our approach will continue to be derived from the advice and guidance of each of the Budget Advisory processes: to be strategic and differentiated with a view towards the future and the goals articulated in our Strategic Plan.

]

In taking these actions, I also want to share with you two important principles that the University will uphold. First, the University remains fully committed to ensuring that all our students will have an opportunity to complete the specific major/program to which they have already been admitted. Equally important, the campus is committed to supporting faculty and staff impacted by resource reallocation and program decisions by providing opportunities to seek placement at another UAlbany program, to explore placement at another SUNY campus, if available, and/or to pursue retraining, where required.

 

As a point of clarification, I want to remind the campus community that there is a distinct difference between capital and operating funds and how they can be used. In recent months, you have noticed there is a significant level of capital construction taking place on campus. It is important to realize that State of New York prohibits SUNY campuses from using SUNY capital funding for operating related expenses, such as faculty and staff. This type of funding can ONLY be used for capital construction and improvement, as well as large equipment purchases.

 

Lastly, I have apprised the University Council of the campus's budget situation, and have fully reviewed with them the actions and the next steps the University intends on taking. Our Council members support us with confidence that UAlbany will continue to be nationally recognized as a center of excellence for education, research, and service.

 

Please be assured that I will continue to keep you informed of future developments.

 

Once again, thank you for your dedication and support of the University at Albany.

 

 

 

Sincerely yours,

 

George M. Philip

 

President

[Dane96]

Send that letter to all the papers in NYC...that will get the ball rolling, especially since it is Silver...that P.O.S. who spearheaded the campaign to kill SUNY Empowerment. For all their bull$iena about making our system better...Silver and his political hacks are effectively killing it. Making programs available to all...right...and please.

 

Instead, our bright minds in theater, project Ren, athletics, etc...will be off to private schools and out of state universities who see the real merit of a well rounded society.

 

Our system isnt just fiscally broke, rather it is on a whole morally broke and stuck in an era that is long past. I think Governor Rockefeller would be insulted and annoyed with our State Legislature.

 

I would do the honors of passing this well thought out letter to the press, but I am in Germany right now and have limited e-mail access. Trust me, get this in the hands of the NYT, Daily News, Post, NY NEWSDAY, etc....and the ball will roll.

 

In some ways, I think Zympher wanted this to happen...so then she can run roughshod over the politicians when the backlash REALLY hits. And yes, I am bored watching bad German TV at 2:30am; talk about being stuck in time long gone...German TV is right up there with our political hacks.

[madDOG]

In today's NY Times:

 

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/11/the-crisis-of-the-humanities-officially-arrives/?hp

[alum73]

It should be noted that there will still be courses in French, etc., but there will no longer be majors in these languages.

[danefan]

It should be noted that there will still be courses in French, etc., but there will no longer be majors in these languages.

 

 

Lets not let facts get in the way of a good editorial 73.....

 

I say kudos to Philip for making the tough decisions.

[UAalum72]

Times-Union has had two stories in the last two days on the budget cuts

 

 

UAlbany language cuts spark petition

 

UAlbany faculty senate blasts language cuts

 

and naturally Bruce Svare weighs in with another anti-sports rant

Sports not part of school mission