|
Post by true? on Apr 23, 2023 14:05:45 GMT -5
Is it actually true that unions would give incoming faculty bad advice because they want to keep salaries similar? Or are faculty unions more concerned with having a good salary floor? I've never been in a union, so I don't know, but I wonder how much what people are saying in this thread is conventional wisdom vs. real experience.
|
|
|
Post by Not so much on Apr 23, 2023 21:21:58 GMT -5
I have worked in non-union shops in the past. I am currently a union member at a state university with a good collective bargaining contract. I would describe some of these earlier comments as neither "conventional" nor "wisdom": - "their goal is for everyone at the same level to get the same salaries"
- "the unions place limits on how much you can negotiate as an incoming faculty and therefore affect overall salaries among faculty. Faculty unions are trying to minimize differences between faculty"
- "the union won't allow you to make too much more than your colleagues"
The premise here, that unions think everybody should be earning the same salary if they are at the same level, is simply inane. I am quite sure that whoever is describing union "goals" in this way has no experience working in such an environment. Unions may want a transparent salary schedule, but they also want every member to climb as far up that ladder as possible. And that means starting off on the highest possible rung. I won't bother providing any more arguments or evidence other than this: union leadership and union negotiators are selected from the union membership. Do you really think that union members want to collectively keep salaries artificially low to pursue some absurd goal of "minimizing differences" among themselves?
|
|
|
Post by unions on Apr 24, 2023 11:18:04 GMT -5
Yes, my real experience and observation is that faculty unions lead to much better starting salaries and benefits. Night and day when comparing to non-union shops, really.
I can't speak to the specific question of how unions would advise or advocate on behalf of an incoming AP who's got a much higher salary offer. I have no experience with that question. Typically in my experience it is the unionized place that has the higher starting salary offer, so I just have not seen that dynamic at play. Then again, I don't play in the rarefied world of "OK Berkeley, I've got a zillion dollar offer from Princeton, how are you going to match it?"
|
|
|
Post by R1 on Apr 28, 2023 13:40:29 GMT -5
You will be paid poorly as a professor in sociology unless you work at a very wealthy university. That is the sad reality. Most sociology faculty I know (not at very wealthy universities mostly) get to 100k within a few years. Some overachievers get quite a bit higher by getting external grants or things like that. Yes those at wealthy unis start and end much higher.
I guess 'paid poorly' is relative, but I personally wouldn't consider 100k being paid poorly even in a big city. But yes I would like it to be higher and think there should be cost of living adjustments.
I think the unions overall help faculty a LOT -- having previously worked in a school without a union, the situation there was much, much worse -- but in this instance of negotiating starting salaries I would maybe advise someone to go rogue so they can maximize their starting salary.
100k in a few years is common at huge R1 universities...which also fall into the class of wealthy universities. The vast majority of college professors do NOT teach at R1s or wealthy SLACs. The average PhD is looking at a starting salary of 60k for a sociology professor job.
|
|