|
The president’s planning
committee welcomes your feedback. If you have a comment or suggestion,
please send it to planning@smith.edu. You
may also submit your feedback by sending your thoughts or suggestions to staffcouncil@smith.edu.
Your message will be forwarded anonymously to the planning committee.
After attending the staff meeting yesterday I felt I
must comment on the topic of tuition reimbursement. It was mentioned that removing
or reducing it is being considered as a possible way to reduce the cost of operations
going forward. I know we must reduce operational costs to remain competitive and
I am sure most staff are aware that some sacrifices are needed in order to lower
costs. However I would suggest using caution when considering tampering with this
benefit. More people spoke to me about this yesterday than anything else. My own
story at Smith reflects the value of this benefit in attracting and retaining people.
I came here 12 years ago from industry. One of the prime reasons I accepted the job
was knowing I would have financial help when our three children came of college age.
We have now completed sending two of our children though 4 year colleges and my third
is in college now. I have greatly appreciated the help Smith has given us to help
us educate our children. I believe the tuition benefit, is an excellent tool to help
the college hire qualified staff -- I hope it remains so.
I have an energy saving suggestion for Smith. If faculty
could turn off the lights, shut off the equipment and close the windows in the classroom
when they finish teaching, it would save a lot of energy. I try to go around at the
end of the day (especially on Fridays) and turn things off and close windows (in
warmer months!) but there are long periods of time during the day when classroom
buildings are bright with lights and no one is using the room(s).
In the spring I come in some mornings and find it very
cold and when I check out the classrooms I find one or more windows have been left
open all night...and of course the heat is doing its best to warm the building. Same
thing with air conditioning in summer: windows wide open and the air conditioning
is trying to cool things off. This is but a minor step to curb expenses but it might
help.
Concerning Dependent College Tuition Benefits: Many
Smith staff members have a child in college right now and are currently taking advantage
of the generous tuition exchange benefits and/or 40% tuition benefits. In many cases
we have chosen colleges that we would not have been able to afford if not for these
benefits. If this is a benefit that you feel must be eliminated, please give us time
so that our students can apply and transfer to more affordable colleges. This is
a difficult but necessary step many of us would have to make.
In my opinion salary freezes and cuts should only be
applied to upper salary ranges of, say, over 50,000.
I don't know how much it would make a difference, but
I was abroad in Florence last year and I wanted to remind those making the financial
decisions that Smith rents an apartment for the Smith center and another for the
director, in the center of Florence. I'm not completely clear on the cost of real
estate in Florence, but I can't see why, if rent is more costly in the city center,
the school shouldn't be moved elsewhere. There are lots of small towns around Florence
with bus access in which the director could live. Most of the students when I was
there lived on the north side of the Arno, so moving the school closer to the stadium
maybe would reduce the costs a little. In hindsight, I'm sure it would have been
better to have bought a building when they still used the lira and rented out the
rooms Smith didn't use, but as they're now using the euro, it's probably not a possibility.
Collaborating with Middlebury to combine space and resources
could be another option. Smith may be the oldest study abroad program in Florence,
and part of the goals of the program are to integrate our students with the Italians,
but there is no reason to keep our noses in the air about such things when the world
needs to band together to stave off a depression. Middlebury requires, like Smith,
that all of their students speak Italian at all times and they all live with host
families as well.
Ada Comstock Program
Is it possible to save the Ada program but to cut it down a lot in size? Most Adas
major in the social sciences and so they add to the overload that these departments
are experiencing. Is it possible to reduce the program size and to require a small,
even number of Adas in each division, or some other distribution that would help
to balance the division inequalities? We have had three Ada Comstock scholars major
in computer science since I came to Smith 9.5 years ago, and several minors. I
hired an Ada majoring in engineering as a summer research assistant on my previous
NSF grant, and hired an Ada math major as a TA for several semesters, and supervised
a special studies on data mining with her. So we know it is possible for Ada students
to major in these sciences and to excel.
Raises
I would support a freeze on raises this year for the faculty and see what shape we
are in next year. The faculty members have been awarded “catch up” raises
the last couple of years and that has been very nice. Thank you. And of course
if the faculty pay is frozen, this will help reduce the benefits rate to be closer
to the target of 30%.
However, the staff should continue to receive raises,
at least those below a certain threshold in pay. Even if it is an only 1 or 2% increase
in pay, it helps our community members who will be hit the hardest.
Student faculty ratio
My own bias: Eliminate course buy-out options for faculty before reducing sabbaticals.
Those faculty “working in the trenches” actually teaching the courses
need the sabbaticals for rejuvenation and for scholarly work, partly for tenure
and promotion purposes. During my most recent sabbatical (first one in five years
by the way), which was only one semester long, I submitted a grant proposal to
NSF; this is extremely difficult to do while teaching. I also just served a year
as department chair, and the course release that I was awarded for that service
was absolutely necessary.
Benefits
My husband and I are both in our 50s and we have two daughters. The elder is starting
college in the fall and the younger will follow her in three years. Talk of reducing
retirement and tuition benefits is pretty stressful to hear, along with the knowledge
that our own existing retirement and college funds have lost significant value.
We’d like to know about tuition benefit reductions before May 1 if they occur
because it may affect where our daughter can go to school. We’re using health
benefits from my husband’s employer now, but health benefits are a huge issue,
aren’t they. I don’t have a good answer to this one. Just worry.
Reduce facilities space by 10% percent
Sure. This sounds like a money saver. But we do have a classroom space shortage.
Where are the proposed decommissioned spaces?
Reduce cost of study abroad
Would restricting study abroad to one semester save money?
Consolidate academic support operations: libraries
and info tech
Info tech savings through 5-college opportunities. How?? Perhaps getting a better
deal on some software licenses?
Reduce spending on admin, student, and academic
support areas
Have to be very careful about this. It could end up costing more money or lead to
broken down non-working classrooms. Contracting out these services is never a good
idea. This is part of what went wrong with corporations in the 90s.
Focus upcoming campaign on budget support for
existing needs
We could ask for more scholarship money to help the financial aid picture.
I am a recently graduated Smith alumni. Although I was
a traditional student myself, I found the Ada Comstock program to be an enriching
part of my Smith experience. Adas are able to contribute to class and campus life
as no traditional student can. Along with their age they not only bring wisdom and
experience, but also a different perspective on nearly every social, political and
academic issue. Adas are not merely older versions of traditional age students. Adas
come from various eclectic backgrounds, enabling them to contribute in immensely
valuable and unique ways to the education of the traditional students. Although it
is not their job at Smith, Adas often become teachers and mentors to traditional
age students. They often live with us and are therefore able to reach out in a way
that professors can not.
Cutting the Ada program would be extremely detrimental
to the population of older women looking for an ivy league level education; however,
it would also be damaging to the traditional students at Smith College. We full tuition
paying students benefit from their knowledge and life experiences in intangible ways
that can not be represented on paper. The diversity that the Ada Comstock program
brings to Smith College is not expendable.
Like many other Smith employees, I'm concerned about
the upcoming budget cuts. I understand that they are necessary, and I hope that the
leadership groups tasked with the process will be open to as many creative ideas
as possible.
Will ideas like four-day work weeks (to save energy
and or salary costs for the college) or job sharing, rather than cutting whole positions
be explored? Will it be possible for staff to opt to make sacrifices if doing so
will mean that a co-worker can keep their job? I think Smith already does a good
job in being an environmentally and economically conscientious institution and I,
and many co-workers are willing to do more if need be. Good luck to you in your work
and thank you again.
Why can't Smith College use the "call around" plan
(local 413 calls) so that the college won't be charged for every call made in the
413 area? Most of us live in the 413 area and Verizon offers a "deal"
for local calling. I am not suggesting that Smith College pay for any long distance
calls but I would think that the college would benefit from this arrangement and
save "tons of money" not printing up those reports and having to distribute
them to every single office on campus where phones are used.
One area that should not receive budget cuts under any
circumstances is the Tuition Discount Rate. I understand that you will be receiving
mountains of emails about programs that absolutely cannot suffer a cut in funding,
but such a cut will drastically affect the community of the student body. All students,
traditional and Ada alike, face a potentially massive shift in the affordability
of a degree from Smith College, something that, historically, Smith strove to change.
Smith is one of very few private liberal arts colleges which demonstrates that a
world-class education needs to be earned, not through money but through a life-long
interest in education and self-improvement; a hunger for knowledge. To potentially
deny this opportunity to students is to fundamentally change what Smith stands for.
Furthermore, a reworking of such a budget could force students in their first, second,
or third year to discontinue their education at Smith because it is no longer financially
feasible.
Although, as stated in the Budget Reduction Strategies,
community colleges are on the rise and helping to fill the gap for non-traditional
aged students, a degree from such a prestigious institution as Smith still carries
weight in the world. Not to mention, although community college is a start, it is
not a four-year degree and it does not provide the sisterhood and worldwide community
that comes automatically upon receiving a Smith diploma. I have enjoyed immensely
and grown emotionally from my friendships with Ada Comstock Scholars. Theirs is a
program which is already unbelievably difficult to enter, let alone the fact that
these women have lives full of the difficulties of maintaining a job, taking care
of children, managing to afford books and rent all the while, somehow, amazingly
contributing to the Smith community in a way that is irreplaceable.
That said, I think that the campaign for building the
endowment is absolutely crucial. I do not believe that freezing the pay of faculty
or cutting their insurance/health benefits in this economic climate is fair to the
hard work and personal time that these professors give willingly. Consolidating and
reducing spending in the academic support operations, from the information I could
gather, seems another way in which Smith can cut spending without detrimentally affecting
the student body or faculty. Although I don't think reducing the cost of study abroad
is a palatable idea, especially as Smith touts the fact that the greater majority
of the third year student body studies abroad, it is a slightly more acceptable area
to cut funding then that of faculty health benefits. However, Smith would also have
to consider the increased cost of keeping those students that could, possibly, no
longer afford to study abroad. There would be definite shifts in areas ranging from
housing availability to food costs. One way in which this could possibly be solved
is to allow those students that desire and can afford it, to live off campus. Reducing
spending on facility space is another area that is acceptable. By better using existing
space, such as making sure that all class rooms are used in Seeley et cetera, Smith
is provided with the opportunity of saving money in other areas, like electricity
and heating. The college could also save more money by setting heaters and lights
on timers, not leaving every single light on in the building at night, and retro-fitting
buildings to generally make them more energy efficient. Increasing the student/faculty
ratio may sound like a painless operation, but already since my first year, I have
seen class sizes increase. The beauty of Smith, in part, is that actual professors
teach classes, grade assignments, and exams rather than, like at most state schools,
TAs. Furthermore, increasing the student/faculty ratio would also detract from the
individual time students are able to spend with their professors, advisers, and other
faculty members to discuss research, projects, and papers.
Based on the information provided, I think that through
the campaign, consolidating and reducing spending in academic support areas, reducing
the cost of Study Abroad for the college, reducing spending on facility space, and
increasing the student/faculty ratio, (in addition to the ideas I mentioned) is the
most acceptable course of action. Lastly, I think you will find Smith students are
more willing to tighten their own belts and lend a creative helping hand to solving
the college's financial issues in this economically difficult time then is, perhaps,
recognized.
Regarding your plans for cuts, I would like to make
a comment about the theater department. The college has been cutting that department
for years already. No administration other than the former one has made an attempt
to understand that department fully. Theatre is different from all other departments
in that it is a production organization from which the college and whole area benefits
- but all that work of production is extra work for Theater professors. Yes they
have some staff but it is not, and never has been sufficient. Positions have been
eliminated or demoted. The department is still short of class space after all these
years, and a feeling of real demoralization has been created there. You have lifetime
professors who have given their entire careers to that department and who are now
watching it being slashed and dismantled. I think it would be nothing short of a
disaster to cut it further. To assume, as Smith has, that theatre is somehow less
important than other fields is a great disservice to students whose learning in that
department enriches their learning in every other field they undertake. Your professors
and staff in that department carry a massive load of work and live in real stress.
This is an unhealthy and sad atmosphere to live in. Please refrain from continuing
to destroy the theatre department. It is a department that is always looked to for
cuts in every downturn and it has been cut too much already. There is NO fat left
there. And you are hurting the major, as well as the lives of those who have fought
for their department for their whole careers. Consider that with the arts, students
learn everything else that they do better. It is a fact. I repeat, Theater has already
been cut.
This e-mail is in regards to the Potential Budget Reduction
Strategies for Discussion memo we received from Carol Christ on January 28. My concern
is specifically "The most expensive benefits areas are health insurance, retirement
and tuition benefits, so our review should focus there."
A bit of history: I started working at Smith College
in 1987. In 1991, my daughter was born. Back in 1991, Smith College support staff
did not receive paid maternity leave. In order to take time off for the birth of
my daughter, I had to use all sick, vacation and personal time I had built up. At
that time, only faculty and administrative staff were given paid maternity leave.
17 years later my daughter is nearly ready to enter
college. She plans to attend HCC next September. After 22 years of employment at
Smith, I look forward to the tuition assistance benefit to help with the cost.
I would like to suggest that should you look at reducing
or eliminating the tuition benefits, you please consider "grandfathering" in
those of us who have been employed here for many years. Another suggestion would
be to cap the tuition assistance at a certain dollar amount. 40% or 60% of HCC is
very different than that of Harvard or Yale.
Another suggestion for potential budget reduction would
be to offer reduced hours to staff with administrator's approval. In 2000, I changed
from a full time, 35-hour position in one office to a 3/4 time position in another.
While I lost 1/4 of my pay, I found the hours allowed me to drop off my daughter
at school, come to work, then pick her up after school. Some working parents at Smith
may welcome reduced hours and Smith could save on salaries.
The benefits at Smith are exceptional. Sadly, this may
be the place to look first for savings.
1) While my family gratefully benefitted from tuition
reimbursement, Smith's is a very generous policy and could be limited. Would it be
beneficial to limit tuition reimbursement to the average amount awarded for everyone
who qualifies...what do others within the Five Colleges do? Doesn't Amherst have
a set amount?
2) Smith generously puts aside $$ in our 401K for retirement...at
a certain level the % increases from 10% to 13%. What would it save us to cap the
percentage at 10% for everyone? Or lower it to 8% and ask the employees to match
2%?
3) Would there be sufficient cost savings to consider
postponing faculty sabbaticals for the next several years? If minimizing faculty
release time is a priority so that the number of adjunct professors can be decreased,
this might help.
4) Is Smith's 2-2+ teaching load consistent with our
peers? Would a 3-2 (or 2-3) course load offer significant savings in any way?
5) Would offering undergraduate summer courses generate
enough revenue to warrant the additional administrative load?
6) Realizing that salary freezes or reducing near-term
increases is a likely option, I would encourage that whatever measures are taken,
be consistent and equitable. The last time this measure was considered, staff received
an across-the-board award of $500, while faculty received a percentage increase.
Unfortunately, the staff interpret that to mean their contributions to Smith are
not as worthy.
It makes sense to increase faculty-to-student ratio
to a 10-to-one. But what does your faculty think about that? Does student body have
an opinion on this; if so, what is it?
Space reduction also makes sense in terms of maintenance & utility
savings, etc. But can you sell any of the existing spaces to yield revenues? If yes,
which ones can you sell without additional expenses (e.g. renovations & convertions)?
A reduction in study abroad expenses without reduction
in academic strengths/benefits should be seriously considered. Perhaps the countries
that cost the most should either be eliminated or considerably reduced, unless the
students interested in these expensive countries are willing
& can afford to pay most of the expenses involved. I believe this will be fair;
yet (as a parent) I cannot dictate to Smith how to best spread its programs around
to benefit all its student body. As a parent, whose child(ren) get/s some financial
aid from Smith, I suggest that we all think reasonably and responsibly in the face
of the present economic difficulties. And hope that it's temporary.
In the face of current economic difficulties, I oppose
a reduction in benefits to current faculty and students. But how does your staff
feel about temporary salary freeze while all other benefits remain the same; otherwise,
a modest reduction in other benefits with a modest salary increase? Given them a
choice would yield best results.
Whatever has to happen to faculty, staff, (at all levels),
and students, their honest & strong opinions at ALL levels must be solicitated
and seriously/strongly considered, without retaliations. And these opinions are not
best rendered in writing. They are most often rendered in staff meetings and student
body government or dorm meetings. People are often not willing to give their honest
opinions in writing for fear of retaliations and/or repercussions that may follow.
This is at least the third financial crisis I have been
through since I joined the Smith staff. In two of these crises the decision was made
to reduce the salary burden to the college by laying off staff. I do understand that
you are trying to avoid cutting personnel at this time. I fear that unless the crisis
ends soon that this option will be used again. Although this tactic has had some
ameliorating benefits to the college’s budget, I feel that it is a counter-productive
strategy for several reasons.
First of all it is demoralizing to the staff. My observation
is that the people who laid off are almost exclusively lower level members of the
staff who have no control over the budget. When the budget is strained only those
who bear no fault in the budget imbalances are considered for layoffs. This gives
the staff the sense that through no fault of their own they are subject to being
cut, often without recourse. Even for staff members who are spared from the layoffs
this is a cause for concern since we lose staff members with whom we have worked
for many years and upon whom we depend for their skills and talents and we can only
presume that in the next crisis we could be next. In an informal and ongoing poll
I often ask students why they decided to come to Smith. I never hear that they came
to study under a specific faculty member, or much about the faculty at all. Most
of the time they cite the beauty of the campus, the uniqueness of the housing system,
the quality of the food they had on their visit, that the art library was so impressive,
etc. When we cut from the bottom ranks of the staff we put these “tipping” factors
at risk.
Every time we have been through a crisis and reduced
staff numbers we have been told that we will be “expected to do less with less.” This
never really happens. Although there are minor changes in programming, in reality
we do at least as much as we did before, just with fewer people to bear the burden.
Now that we are embarking on the new strategic initiatives, this is a particularly
bad time to reduce the staff. One of the clear initiatives is to have staff members
take on more career counseling and training. We can’t do this additional work
effectively with fewer staff members.
Each time that staff cuts are announced the question
is raised, “why don’t we reduce salaries and keep more staff members.” The
answer is always and you repeated it in your report, “It is important that
the college maintain competitive compensation to assure our success in recruitment
as well as retention.” I feel that this is not a sound argument. Given that
virtually every college and university in the country has a hiring freeze in effect
now the chances of a staff or faculty member leaving Smith to get a better pay rate
at another institution is just about nil. Furthermore, if you really intend to keep
the comprehensive fees from spiraling out of control the only way that we can stem
that rise is to actually reduce salaries during this period of economic turmoil.
Most of us work here not just because of the salary but because we believe very deeply
in the mission of the college and the benefits it bestows on the community. There
is a strong emotional commitment from the staff to the college, which is abused when
the college jettisons staff members in order to keep the salaries “competitive.”
I propose that the college look at a progressive salary
reduction scheme. For example:
Up to 40,000 no reduce
40,000-50,000 1% reduction
50,000-60,000 2% reduction
60,000-70,000 3% reduction
Etc.
The actual percentage of the cuts is not important,
but the progressive nature of the cuts is. This plan would put the burden of the
reductions on those best able to bear the cost. It also puts more of the burden on
those most in control of the budget. It reduces the costs to the college in such
a way that we can keep our commitment to the staffing necessary to carry out the
programs and teaching that are the core of Smith’s mission. |
