Overview and MU AAUP's Response

In September VPAA David Rehm and VPFA Mark VanEtten made "The Case" for a reduction in faculty lines. A month later, President Owens announced the Board of Trustee's decision to suspend the awarding of tenure.  In June the Board of Trustees set tenure quotas of no more than 63% tenure/tenure track in each College.  What follows here is a counter case, explaining the poor evidence and faulty reasoning used by the administration, as well as the negative consequences of these decisions.

For more complete context, including the extensive staff furloughs and layoffs that have also impacted the University community, please see the timeline, or consult the growing list of documentation. The financial and student-faculty ratio data are also available in a PDF summary.

Summary

What happened? 

1. Twelve faculty have been terminated (eleven in the fall, one in the spring).

   • By status: 9 tenure-track, 2 non-tenure track, 1 term

   • By college: 7 from Arts & Sciences, 3 from Business, 2 from Health Sciences & Education

   • In many cases, this decision effectively ends their academic careers, given current job prospects.

2. Tenure decisions have been suspended for twenty months.

   • Faculty who were up for tenure have either a) had their contracts violated or b) had their reasonable expectations unduly disappointed. Their current status is entirely unclear and the suspension of tenure directly affects their potential promotion to full professor, decreasing their career earnings.

   • This fact is true of all faculty on the tenure track.

3. The Workforce of the Future task force (WTF committee) proposed limits to the number of tenured and tenure-track positions going forward.

4. The Board of Trustees accepted the recommendations of the WTF task force and set 63% tenure/tenure track as benchmark in each college.  Two of the three Colleges (College of Arts and Sciences and College of Business) currently have a percentage of tenure/tenure track faculty higher than this.  Therefore faculty in these Colleges who are currently on the tenure track will not be able to obtain tenure and departments will not be able to hire tenure track faculty.

What are some of the immediate and expected effects of these actions?

To Faculty

Morale has plummeted to an all-time low as all faculty can only assume that their employment is entirely contingent on the will of the BoT/Administration. Non-tenured and NTT faculty will expend significant effort that could have been devoted to teaching, scholarship and service, to getting a better, more secure job elsewhere. Work to contract will become the norm, replacing the “above and beyond” mentality this has been distinctive of faculty at Misericordia University. The quality of the institution will be compromised.

To Students

Current and future students can expect more of their courses to be taught by part-timers, who of necessity, will be less committed to instruction and not at all committed to scholarship (which enhances teaching) and service (which enhances student educational experience.) Alums must expect to see their degrees depreciate in value, since institutional rankings are in part determined by student faculty ratios, percentage of tenured faculty and faculty publications.

What justification was provided by the administration for these actions?

Uncertain times caused by the pandemic, several years of decreasing enrollment, and hopes of future flexibility.

Why is this justification inadequate?

1. The University ran a nearly three million dollar surplus last year and we are a non-profit institution. Providing quality education is our primary objective, not making money.

2. Only two of our Vice Presidents are products of external searches, national or otherwise. Arguably two of our most important VP’s under the current circumstances, Enrollment Management and the Chief Financial Officer went through no search whatsoever. These are critical roles at any institution and should be occupied by the most qualified people available. In addition, we are paying money to consultants to do the work not effectively performed by Enrollment Management and Strategic Planning, the latter of which has been practically non-existent for the last two years.

What was problematic about the implementation of these actions?

In both cases the actions of the VPAA involved serious violations of shared governance.

In summary: Dr. Rehm lied to members of the Faculty Senate and the Faculty Status Committee about the possibility of the suspension of tenure and in fact, engaged the Status committee in work during the Fall semester which he knew was meaningless, given his knowledge of the impending suspension of tenure. Additionally, Dr. Rehm engaged in bad faith negotiations with the Senate concerning the planned layoffs, effectively refusing to follow the procedure he himself had authored. 

Were any alternative solutions considered by the Board/Administration?

Although several alternatives to faculty layoffs were proposed by the faculty, including salary reductions for faculty and administration (a common practice across the nation), no other possibilities were even considered.

What was the Board’s role in these actions?

Given the fact that the Board of Trustees signed off on all the new hires in the past several years with no comment on the financial condition of the university, the claim that they are now merely exercising their fiduciary responsibility to the institution is entirely unconvincing. Where were they when the hires they have now terminated were authorized?

What is the problem?

1. Board of Trustees “suspended the awarding of tenure”

   • Violation of the Faculty Handbook

     • According to Handbook, Faculty must go up for tenure and promotion at the same time.

     • According to Handbook, Board must notify Senate of changes to handbook.

   • Weak evidence in support of Board’s decision.

     • Inaccurate and unsupported reference to percentage of tenure-track and tenured professors at Misericordia.

   • Administration has, in effect, violated all faculty contracts by unilaterally violating the Faculty Handbook.

   • If university administration can’t keep its contracts, trust is fundamentally broken amongst all stakeholders.

   • Board intended to deny tenure to all six faculty up for consideration this academic year.

2. Elimination of 26+ full-time faculty (non-renewals for 12 faculty: 9 tenure-track, 2 non-tenure-track, 1 visiting; remainder will have left/retired by May of 2021 and will not be replaced)

   • Appeal to weak justifications:

     • Student-faculty ratio "too low"

       • This same "low" student-faculty ratio continues to be used in marketing materials

       • Misericordia's student-faculty ratio is comparable to most of the 25 peer institutions (Figure 1).

       • Misericordia's student-faculty ratio is higher than the mean for private, non-profit 4-year institutions in Pennsylvania and across the United States (Figure 2).

3. Establish of tenure quotas by College.

   • There are not too many tenure track faculty at Misericordia.  In Fall 2020 of the 80 Assistant Professors 42% were Tenure Track and 58% were Non Tenure Track or Term.  In Fall 2021 of the 68 Assistant Professors 28% were Tenure Track and 72% were Non Tenure Track.  (Note: MU does not have an Instructor Designation so all full-time faculty are Term, Assistant, Associate, or Full Professors).  

   • Many current tenure track faculty (nearly all in the College of Arts and Sciences and the College of Business) will not be able to apply for tenure, violating their employment contract per the Faculty Handbook.

   • "Too many Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty" is not a problem in need of a solution:

     • Tenure protects academic freedom, an essential tenent of higher education in the United States.  Fewer faculty will now have these protections.

     • Tenure-track positions are the norm in many disciplines.

1. • • Financial Problems

       • Claims to financial necessity despite budget surpluses in the millions.

         • Claim: "We are taking in less revenue now the than we did 5 years ago.” (9/16/20 memo)

           • Fact: Revenue, and in particular program services revenue, has increased. (Figure 3)

1. • • • • Claim: “Put another way, in 2012-2013, the University generated more income with 111 faculty than it does today (when we have 141 full time faculty), with an additional $4.3 million invested annually into faculty salaries.”

           • Fact: The university had 25 fewer total faculty in September 2020 than it did in FY2012-13 (32 more full-time, but 57 fewer part-time), and for undergraduate courses, there had been an increase of just 5 full-time equivalent faculty in that time. (Figure 4)

1. • • • • Claim: “It is this combination of factors – declining enrollment coupled with increased faculty expense – which is driving the imbalance that we are pointing out to the community.”

           • Fact: Increases in personnel costs are in proportion to increases in other costs and the revenue from program services (i.e. tuition, room & board, etc.) has been in excess of the personnel costs by approximately the same amount since AY2012-13 (Figures 5, 6 & 7)

       • Rejected all cost saving measures suggested from faculty, despite soliciting their input. Implemented some limited cost-saving measures after firing faculty.

       • Yet in 11/10/20 memo President Kathleen Owens insists "our financial footing is steady."

• VPAA Rehm said in a 6/9/2020 memo “there are too many faculty for the level of enrollment that we will have over the next several years.”

• No transparent criteria from VPAA Rehm as to how lines cut were communicated.

• President Owens refused to provide evidence or rationale used to determine cuts, calling the terminations "non-renewals" rather than "layoffs."

  • A non-renewal (call "non-reappointment" in the Handbook) is tied to the annual evaluation process, yet the non-reappointments all occurred without consideration for this process or any input from the Faculty Status Committee

  • The Handbook stipulates that layoffs can be done for limited reasons, with sufficient evidence provided, and following a specified process for deciding the order of layoffs

• Administration took no measures to save full-time lines, which is unconventional and not AAUP standard.

• In 9/23/20 meeting with Senate VPAA Rehm and VPFA VanEtten admit to failing to coordinate their offices concerning hires since 2017.

3. VPAA David B. Rehm’s Deception

   • Hid from faculty his orchestration of the suspension of the awarding of tenure with the Board of Trustees for four months.

   • Continued to work with Status Committee knowing that the awarding of tenure had been suspended.

   • Claims to do what the Board says rather than advocate for faculty.

   • Does not follow his own process for establishing the criteria for eliminating faculty positions.

   • Conflates his unofficial Town Hall meetings with official administration memos, creating confusion as to the establishment of university policy.

     • Town Hall meetings are scheduled during class time but are neither recorded, nor have minutes

4. Establish of tenure quotas by College.

   • There are not too many tenure track faculty at Misericordia.  In Fall 2020 of the 80 Assistant Professors 42% were Tenure Track and 58% were Non Tenure Track or Term.  In Fall 2021 of the 68 Assistant Professors 28% were Tenure Track and 72% were Non Tenure Track.  (Note: MU does not have an Instructor Designation so all full-time faculty are Term, Assistant, Associate, or Full Professors).  

   • Many current tenure track faculty (nearly all in the College of Arts and Sciences and the College of Business) will not be able to apply for tenure, violating their employment contract per the Faculty Handbook.

   • "Too many Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty" is not a problem in need of a solution:

     • Tenure protects academic freedom, an essential tenent of higher education in the United States.  Fewer faculty will now have these protections.

     • Tenure-track positions are the norm in many disciplines.

5. Absence of Shared Governance

   • Major decisions by the administration concerning the faculty have received little to no input from faculty.

     • Suspension of the awarding of tenure.

     • Need for re-evaluation of the value and status of tenure.

     • Need for the elimination of FT faculty lines.

     • Criteria for the elimination of FT faculty lines.

     • WTF Task Force decisions.  This Task Force was comprised of a majority of administrators and BOT members.  Faculty were "represented" but had little to no power to affect outcomes.

6. Mismanagement by President’s Cabinet and Board/Lack of Accountability

   • Despite several straight years of declining enrollment, trend is never corrected and VPEM Bozinski continues in position.

     • Undergraduate full-time equivalent enrollment dropped 284 students (14%) between 2015 and 2019. In the same time period, the university added only four more full-time equivalent faculty (2%) in undergraduate programs. (Figure 8) There aren't too many faculty, there are too few students.

1. • VPPER Samuels fails to develop coherent strategic plan.

   • Despite claims that university cannot afford faculty, VPAA Rehm continued to hire FT faculty and convert NTT positions to tenure-track until 2019.

   • Consultants bail out administrative failures in strategic planning and enrollment management as faculty lose jobs.

   • Board claims "fiduciary responsibility" as calling for all of the above draconian measures, yet was asleep at the wheel for the six years it all happened.

   • National search for VPMI canceled mid-search, internal candidate promoted unilaterally by previous President, Thomas J. Botzman.

   • In meeting with Faculty Senate, VPFA VanEtten notes the current crisis is a result of the failure of enrollment, mission, finance, and academics to coordinate effectively within the President’s Cabinet.

   • Those whose responsibility it was to lead the university failed; faculty function as scapegoat.

What are the effects?

To the Faculty

• Morale

• Faculty disinvestment in university life (not only immediate but long-term problem): “work to contract” instead of “above and beyond.”

  • No longer retain or attract quality faculty

  • Faculty can no longer trust administration.

  • Quality of education provided decreases.

To the Students (past, present and future)

• Quality of education students receive decreases.

  • More waitlists, or larger classes, in Core courses.

    • 7 of the 12 non-renewals were to departments that teach in the Core.

    • Between terminations and positions left unfilled due to the tenure-track hiring freeze, the humanities programs will lose 24% of their faculty.

• Correlations between % of FT faculty and acceptance, retention, and graduation rates.

• Fewer faculty to help with student retention.

• Fewer faculty to help with student internships.

• Fewer faculty to help land students in careers.

• Fewer options for electives.

• Alumni hurt by decreasing university reputation.

To the University

• Decreasing university reputation will diminish enrollment.

• Drop in rankings, which will also hurt enrollment.

To the Community

• Loss of faculty and staff jobs directly effects Dallas and NEPA economy.

• Local and regional “brain drain.”

• Fewer university events.

• Less cultural enrichment.

• Absence of Misericordia presence in public sphere, which will translate to decline enrollment.