look at all those Chiefs
Sounds like we hired a bunch of people into nonsense roles to get a big windfall of federal Covid and DEI money
Or we added a number of people to meet the support requirements necessary to maintain R1 status.
Either way, got to have the funds to support needed staff over the long haul. No money, can’t afford staff. May mean losing R1. That would be catastrophic for our growing research program.
So.... essentially...... R1 Status can be renamed too "We spent $50 Million + hired a bunch of people" ??
That kinda makes sense.. Probably spent $10k on the banners.
The folks that evaluate universities to determine this stuff don’t just look at what you’ve done but whether you have the resources to maintain that status. Our recent accrediting review in engineering looked at the same things. Library, other colleges including liberal arts and sciences, admin support, etc. Glad we got the R1 renewal when we did. We’ll see for next review. Cuts in support will have to occur. Shame because we’re on verge of joining the very top group among the R1s. For that we’ve got to average over 100 PhDs. Should hit over 100 for first time this school year. But have to show that we can maintain that. Three years in a row might do it. Will irritate a number of people in LA. Which is sad.
All said though, I’m certainly not saying all the hires and salaries were correct. I do know that our Dean was able to add to staff which helped him market our college and recruit. And we are seeing great growth. Don’t know if that will have to be cut back.
Not uncommon, might be based on funding source of position, not to mention consolidation of power.
It’s an article written in collaboration with staff from “The Current”. SOP. Their high point was the old “Times of Acadiana” in the mid 90’s. Kenny Bowen would sent out underlings on Wednesdays to gather and trash that week’s issues. They’ve dropped the LCG/retention ponds since Blanco took over.
Not surprised the article is full of inaccuracies — it’s the LA Illuminator, after all. If you look closely, the numbers refer to “new positions,” not overall employment. What they failed to mention is the total headcount change during that period. While overall staffing did increase slightly, it was nowhere near the number reported.
Most of the growth was in Research, which is driving record revenues. In reality, many of the positions cited were simply refills of existing roles with updated titles. For instance, six of the first seven jobs listed were not new — just replacements. Some were filled at higher salaries, others at lower ones.
The article is misleading, but it certainly gets clicks.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)