2012 salary report: 20 University of Michigan deans collect $7.28M in base pay
University of Michigan
AnnArbor.com photo | Joseph Tobianski
Two University of Michigan dean reappointments in 2012 came with 13 percent salary increases.
Overall, U-M's 20 deans earn a combined $7.28 million in base salaries, according to compensation figures released Friday by the school. Last year U-M's deans earned $6.92 million.
University of Michigan medical school dean James Woolliscroft and head of research Stephen Forrest.
File photo | AnnArbor.com
The increase makes Woolliscroft the highest paid dean at U-M— with a base salary comparable to university president Mary Sue Coleman, who earns $603,357.
Woolliscroft became dean in 2007, making $480,000.
How does Woolliscroft's salary compare to his peers? Eugene Washington, dean of the University of California at Los Angeles medical school, earned a base pay of $515,000 in 2011, according to a UC database. His overall compensation neared $739,000. Sam Hawgood, dean of the UC at San Francisco medical school, earned a base salary of $387,425 and total compensation of roughly $645,500. Charles J. Lockwood, dean of Ohio State University's medical school, earns a base salary of $710,000, according to Columbus Business First database.
Public policy dean Susan Collins was also reappointed and received a 13.2 percent raise, bringing her salary to $285,027, an increase of more than $33,300. Collins was first appointed in 2007 at a rate of $230,000.
U-M Public Policy school dean Susan Collins
Both Woolliscroft and Collins' pay increases include a 10 percent reappointment raise and a nearly 3 percent merit raise. It's standard practice at the university to increase a dean's salary by at least 10 percent if they are reappointed.
Social work dean Laura Lein received the third-largest increase among her peers. At 7.5 percent, Lein's increase included a 3.25 percent merit raise and a $10,000 "equity adjustment," according to documents.
During a Dec. 13 Board of Regents meeting, Lein was appointed to another five-year term, which would become effective in January 2014. That appointment will likely come with a 10 percent raise.
Meanwhile Gunalan Nadarajan, the new dean of the Penny W. Stamps School of Art and Design who was appointed to his position in July, earns $250,000, a decrease from the $287,332 his predecessor Bryan Rogers earned. Rogers retired in May.
The university is in the midst of searches to fill three dean positions. Within a year, the College of Literature, Science and Arts, the law school and the library system will have new leaders.
When the university replaced business school dean Robert Dolan in 2011, they hired Alison Blake at $550,000— or $102,000 more than her predecessor. Blake now earns $566,775.
Deans averaged merit raises of 2.75 percent this year. The average merit increase was 2.9 percent for faculty and 2.2 percent for staff, according to university figures. Merit increases are based on performance and do not include salary adjustments made for other reasons.
The full list of U-M deans and their earnings is below.
AnnArbor.com
Kellie Woodhouse covers higher education for AnnArbor.com. Reach her at kelliewoodhouse@annarbor.com or 734-623-4602 and follow her on twitter.
Comments
JBK
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 7:03 p.m.
Not sure about the rest of you, but how does the Dean of Libraries (whatever that is) make more in base comp than the Dean of Nursing and Pharmacy? Wow. Am I missing something here? No wonder our planet is so screwed up. :)
Rick Stevens
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 6:07 p.m.
What Kellie and annarbor.com never wants to mention here is that there is transparency into salaries in the public sector. In the private ('secret') sector there is very little transparency so it's dead silence there. What are the salaries at annarbor.com? That would be interesting (it might have been nice to see Tony's $s before he was 'promoted' to NJ for all his success) and we could talk about that. Not going to happen... But, we'll never know and annarbor.com would like us to focus elsewhere. 'Move on, nothing to see here'... Before you throw rocks you might want to consider your glass house.
northside
Fri, Dec 21, 2012 : 1:49 p.m.
Kellie I'm fairly sure that Rick understands public salaries being transparent because they are taxpayer supported. There's still an open question of why annarbor.com so regularly reports on them, or at least the salaries at the top. As I noted elsewhere, I've never seen another paper do this and I've lived in several college towns. Another question is why just the salaries at the top are reported. By only reporting those people get a distorted view of what those at universities (and in the public sector) earn. How about reporting what an adjunct at a community college makes per class? (The answer is probably around $2,000, if that.) Colleges and universities are filled with low-wage labor but we never read about that in annarbor.com.
Kellie Woodhouse
Wed, Dec 19, 2012 : 3:01 p.m.
Public salaries are public information because they are supported by an institution that has a public mission and is funded in part by public money- namely tax dollars.
Basic Bob
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 5:47 a.m.
Very strange, people wonder how we could convince young educated people to stay and work here. As long as all the "opportunities" are held by rich people taking wheelbarrows full of money to the bank every week, the young educated people will pack up and go someplace else where they have a better chance of finding lucrative and rewarding employment.
sultanofswing
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 4:27 a.m.
The problem is um is not private. As a public it has to show that it is providing a valuable service to the State and its people at a time of economic stress for many and not just perpetuating another "elite" group talking to and educating other elites living within a bubble in Ann Arbor. Sorry but as civil servants you don't always get the best salary, at least that is what these folks tell subordinates. Plus as Egon says in ghostbusters " I have been in the private sector..they expect results."
The Black Stallion3
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 9:28 p.m.
Of coarse the liberals wouldn't consider these as the 1% because they are of the left wing class.
Matt Tuck
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 3:53 p.m.
they are not even close to the "1%" !. Maybe if they were making $30+ million/year
Matt Tuck
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 6:49 p.m.
It looks like our tax dollars are no longer needed at this university. When will they become a private university? Great university, but I don't like our state funding a school that is educating out of state students....
Basic Bob
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 4:53 a.m.
International students don't question the cost. They come here because they were rejected in Europe and the U.S. private schools.
UtrespassM
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 1:04 a.m.
UM may love Internationale students much more than out of state students.
Kellie Woodhouse
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 6:47 p.m.
In Nov. 2011 the average full professor salary at U-M was about $148,800, according to IPEDS human Resource Survey data. Salaries of associate professors averaged $98,200 and of assistant professors averaged 85,900. Also, I've added a comparison of merit raises in the article. Staff averaged 2.9 percent merit raises, where as the deans averaged 2.75 percent merit raises.
northside
Thu, Dec 20, 2012 : 10:22 p.m.
I have lived in several university towns and have never seen a paper regularly report salaries like annarbor.com does. That, combined with the top salaries being the main ones annarbor.com reports, makes it hard to believe that annarbor.com doesn't have a perspective on them. If the paper thinks they're too high that's fine. That case wouldn't be hard to make and I'm not sure how I feel about them myself. Just like in the corporate sector, salaries at the top keep going up even as those in the middle/bottom are stagnant or go down. It would be a very fair subject for an op-ed. My main disagreement with your coverage is that it creates a false impression of what people in higher ed - and the public sector, in general - make. If you reported salaries/wages at all levels, not just the top, a more balanced view would be given.
Kellie Woodhouse
Wed, Dec 19, 2012 : 3:03 p.m.
AnnArbor.com does not "feel" one way or the other about these salaries. We are simply reporting them. No need for an op-ed here.
sultanofswing
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 4:30 a.m.
This is helpful but w2 wages are the real numbers.
northside
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 3:29 a.m.
Kellie why does annarbor.com never report what adjunct faculty or lecturers make? Or clerical staff and other regular workers? The regular stream of 'top salary' articles gives people a misleading impression about what those at universities (and in the public sector) earn. Also, while these articles provide some comparisons to other institutions, rarely do they acknowledge that UM is one of the top educational institutions in the nation. Or that faculty don't earn anything for about 10 years of their adult life because they're in school getting the degrees required for these positions. That means 20% of the typical adult life (age 20 to 70) without getting paid. Given that annarbor.com routinely presents the top salaries and does so without much context, it's hard to avoid the feeling that there's an agenda here. As I wrote earlier, if the site feels these employees are paid too much that's fine. But let's see an open acknowledgement of that in an op-ed and also have annarbor.com state what it thinks these positions should be paid.
Jay Thomas
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 6:28 p.m.
I don't really care what a corporate CEO makes unless I am invested in that company (because it is the shareholders getting ripped off). The problem is I am invested in U of M through taxation whether I like it or not and they are getting salary increases that the average Michigander can only dream about (all while sticking us with the bill). The bigwigs also change the normal age related retirement rules so they can stick around collecting these high salaries until old age forces them into retirement (while the average U of M employee is kicked to the curb before that). The real problem is with the "gone native" regents who identify more with the administrators they are supposed to be overseeing and love to go along to get along.
Rick Stevens
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 6:01 p.m.
Jay: Doesn't your 'real problem' exist with corporate CEOs and their 'reimbursement committees' (that they appointed!)? Why is it that US CEOs are so overpaid (and increasing at a high level) in our country and not in other industrialized counties? No problem you say -- but it's the same situation? Right?
ordmad
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 5:13 a.m.
Right. Except these people aren't average. Try not to hate them for their success and look closely in the mirror.
CLX
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 5:55 p.m.
The fact that Deans are worth the money is not the only question to be asked. I would like to see the disparity between professor and dean pay. Is it growing, or is it roughly the same as it has been? What about staff? My sense is that staff never receives more than a 2% pay but that administrators are regularly rewarded with large pay increases. Have we created a system in which a few make a tremendous amount of money and the rest do not? That's the current business model in banking and finance; are we so sure that we want to emulate that with the University? And while yes, the deans could get jobs elsewhere, would they really want to? There are huge advantages to being a dean at UM, and pay is not all that you get here. The same arguments applies to plenty of the staff as well, and no one suggests paying the staff what they would be worth in the private sector. Seems to me that the decision-makers at the U. regularly reward themselves while laying off folks, cutting positions, asking staff to do more and more, and telling them that they are not worth even the cost of living increase. Doesn't sound much like leadership to me.
Left is Right
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 3:53 a.m.
It's not leadership. And the university will eventually be rewarded for the lack thereof.
aggatt
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:40 p.m.
Every time the ann arbor news publishes an article about people's salaries there's tons of commenters here complaining and acting bitter about it. Maybe someone should run an article on the kind of education, success, and dedication it takes to become a faculty member at a large institution like Michigan. These deans are likely all PhD's, meaning they spent a very long time (probably 5 to 6 years after undergrad) doing research for very little (or no) pay, followed by years of trying to get grants and living in a very stressful publish or perish environment. Not everyone can do that, and it's even harder to do it well. People who can are paid accordingly. If you are bitter that you don't make that much, go ahead, go start working on your academic career. Keep in mind most PhD's don't make anywhere near that--you need to be talented and lucky to get to the top.
Jay Thomas
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 6:33 p.m.
@Rick Stevens: You are talking about the capital gains tax rate (which is 15% for EVERYONE as long as you hold the investment for some time). Hedge Fund managers are paid large salaries for which they do pay the regular income tax rate (and frequently living in NY with all the state and city taxes that can go over 50%).
northside
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 5:01 p.m.
@ lisa: I agree with what you're saying but think it reinforces the point aggatt is making. annarbor.com's agenda seems to be to demonize public sector salaries. I've yet to see them run an article on the salaries of the average workers you speak of. The site specializes in "Top Ten Salaries Of ..." types of articles, which gives people a wildly exaggerated sense of what most people at UM earn. A year or so ago they ran an article on faculty salaries but with a seriously misleading headline: it ran the average salary for full professors but stated that was the average for all faculty. Only after several readers pointed it out and complained did the site change it.
lisaone
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:53 p.m.
There are many of us commenting who have worked at the U-M, currently work for the U-M, have family members working for the U-M, who are personally affected, not just commenting for the sake of commenting. Yes, I understand all of those years, the education, and the compensation. But....there are your every day employees who have put in their YEARS, their dedication. It takes more than the high-paying administration and the physicians to make that institution run.
Rick Stevens
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:45 p.m.
You could nave become a hedge fund manager and only paid $5-10 million a year (exclusive of the annual bonus, of course) and then had to suffer with a 15% income tax rate. Now that's suffering.
Rick Stevens
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:17 p.m.
L a u r e l C h a m p i o n makes a lot of money for doing very little but she's OK with attacking others in the same boat?
northside
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 5:04 p.m.
I doubt that most annarbor.com employees make much money. Many of them seem to be very young and fresh out of local journalism programs. As for what Laurel Champion makes I have no idea but can say with full confidence that we'll never see that figure in print.
Rick Stevens
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:21 p.m.
Ann Arbor News loved attacking everyone who got the same or more money than their own 'senior staff'. Kellie: tell us about your benefits - lavish, right? Health, retirement, etc? Like Laurel's?
treetowncartel
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:07 p.m.
And everybody gets the 2 to 1 match for their 403(b), which isn't included in their total, correct?
treetowncartel
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 7:21 p.m.
So the emplyee gives 5% and can receive double that from the U, 10%? How is that not 2 to 1 matching?
PhillyCheeseSteak
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 5:11 p.m.
Not correct. The U of M offers a basic retirement savings plan: faculty and staff contribute 5% of salary and receive a 10% U-M contribution after one year of service.
Tesla
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:03 p.m.
The school can spend their money any way they want but a couple questions: 1) What is a "Dean" 2) What do they do? 3) How many hours a week do they provide their service to the schools?
ordmad
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:13 p.m.
For most of these Deans, a 70 hour week is a short one. They oversee massive budgets and hordes of employee. They are responsible for alumni relations that lead to private gifts that support much of what the University does. And if you look at their resumes they've spent their lives working extremely hard (in both the work place and in their educational pursuits).
LXIX
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:43 p.m.
If we actually lived in a world were our survival depended on it - 1. Intelligence, Physics, & Chemistry (moved out of LS&A) 2. Engineering 3. Banking (Environment & Natural Resources) 4. Genetics (restructured Medical School) 5. Nursing (front line responders) ... 16. Public Health merged with Nursing 17. Pharmacy obsolete put into Genetics. 18. Public Policy obsolete put into Intelligence 19. Next to worthless (Law - obsolete put into Physics) 20. Worthless (Ross Business obsolete put into Banking)
LXIX
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 2:56 p.m.
As always, these responses are meaningful to me. I also have family lawyers. I would offer that even with the laws of science nobody knows the facts. It is a consensus of experts. The Soviet Union had a people's constitution, too. And yes, the judges are the experts in our freedom governance. That said, in the real physical world judges also have political bias, politicians are steeped in legality, their law works for some (just us) and ad infinitum fine-print bureaucracy is mostly self-serving job security adding little to human economic value.. When the Law School integrates natural (reality) law into practice and upholds UN treaties (US laws about invading countries, torture, imprisonment, Geneva rules, enforcement of nuclear, biological, space, ocean resources, etc) and trains kids to successfully put away white collar criminals let us know. The compensation list should measure some real world return of human value not just lofty rhetoric from "the educated people" running the theatre.
ordmad
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 5:09 a.m.
Those tiny fine printers wrote and continue to enforce the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the laws protecting the freedoms you so feverishly cling to elsewhere on this board. Please don't castigate others successes to ameliorate the hurt of your shortcomings.
LXIX
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 6:35 p.m.
LOL. I should whip myself and pray for absolution for rating physical reality, problem solving, gene therapy, resource wealth, and emergency health over football, wall street, big pharma, big government, and tiny fine-printers.
northside
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 5:05 p.m.
@ ordmad: LOL, LOL, and a little more LOL.
ordmad
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:10 p.m.
Thanks for exhibit A in proving why we let educated people run the University.
GoNavy
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:33 p.m.
The next set of studies I'd like to see is professor salaries at this university *per hour spent in the classroom.*
GoNavy
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 6:52 p.m.
@ Ghost of Tom [deleted] - It's simply one metric. ONE METRIC. Wouldn't you be interested in knowing? After all, it's knowable. @ Northside: Having graduated college, and as an individual who regularly performs "data analysis", trust me - this is a knowable number. The concept of "credit hours," before it was applied to class credits, was originally developed by Andrew Carnegie as a way to measure appropriate retirement amounts for professors based on... How many hours they taught in a classroom. The retirement institution he founded in doing so, by the way, is now TIAA-CREF. And to answer your question, again as an individual who graduated from college (this one, in fact), I'm well aware that much (if not most?) of the classroom "instruction" given to students is performed by everybody *but* professors. Perhaps your time here at the University of Michigan was different than mine.
CLX
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 5:46 p.m.
I don't think it's a bad question. Professors have lighter teaching loads than they have had in the past, and it is worthwhile to question whether students should pay $30+k a year so that professors can spend the majority of their time researching and publishing. It is a legitimate question. The costs at UM are making it hard for anyone but the wealthy to send their kids here. We need to ask some tough questions, and there is nothing wrong in doing so.
northside
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 5:06 p.m.
I'll second Ghost and ask how many people who post on this board have never been anywhere near a university? The lack of knowledge as to what professors (or other positions, like Deans) do is staggering.
Ghost of Tom Joad
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:51 p.m.
that's about the most overly simplistic understanding of what it is to be a faculty member at a major university.
Greg
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:32 p.m.
And tuition just keeps going up and up.
Ghost of Tom Joad
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:32 p.m.
All this righteous indignation about their salaries being "too high" and the "reason for the high cost of tuition." I wonder where all the cries for justice are when we hear about Wall Street CEO's making millions of dollars hand over fist.
DPL
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 2:12 a.m.
@G.T.J: Equating a Dean to CEO is a strawman. This is not President of the U, who should be searched for and compensated as you would a CEO. The Dean position is significantly less exposed. Frankly, I don't begrudge their level of salary, just the rate of increase in a tough economy. The increases might even be justified, given some competitive comparisons, but certainly ill timed. Perhaps AA-News should investigate this line more deeply and include that relativity in the article.
Ghost of Tom Joad
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 6:23 p.m.
@lisaone, I understand the problem with the top-heavy payscale that exists within the UM hierarchy. My point wasn't about that (I agree with you, there should be more resources going to the staff and not just the "leadership" of the university). My point was more about the hypocrisy that I often see in these comment threads regarding CEO and university employee pay. The very same people who will sit here and disparage these folks for making $500,000 at UM will say that corporate CEO's making millions each is "market value" and required to keep the top talent in the company. I just find it hypocritical that the same "logic" doesn't apply to university employees.
lisaone
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 5:04 p.m.
People who have anything to say about anything I'm sure are just as angry. But, this is personal for me, as I have family who work at the U-M, are PROUD to work there, proud of being part of the U-M system, proud of being part of patient care and making that U-M difference from the time they clock in until the time they clock out, often times covering for those who called in, pushing themselves to the limit....knowing in the months to come, it could soon be over. That hurts.
lisaone
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 2:41 p.m.
Had a hunch this type of story would be brought to light in the aftermath of the earlier story regarding the e-mail sent to U-M staff, from Ora Pescovitz. How can the U-M justify pay increases when at the time of that "announcement" they were 27 million over budget, but the projected amount at the end of the fiscal year is $70 million? And yet, they give the meager $15-16 dollar/40 hour week employee a choice of cutting their hours to 20 or take unemployment (and their decisions have at this time already been forced to be made) so they are at the end of their 40 hours and some will be in the unemployment line soon. This is sickening.
Left is Right
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 3:43 a.m.
Absolutely. And with the looming fiscal cliff, I expect, in aggregate, 10% cuts in salary. Significantly more at the top (is 100% too much?) for those who should have made better contingency plans.
PattyinYpsi
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:37 p.m.
Agree, lisaone. The issue isn't so much how much deans are paid--the issue is fairness across the board. There is no conceivable reason for giving a dean--ANY dean--a 13% raise when you are cutting salaries and benefits for other employees because of "financial considerations." Just as they are plenty of people who will fulfill the cynical "They can be replaced" lower-level positions, there are plenty of creative people who could fill vacant dean positions. The issue is fairness. And these salary increases are unfair.
Huron 74
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 2:38 p.m.
These people must be worth their salt or they wouldn't be at the UoM. Likewise, if the UoM didn't pay them, they'd be somewhere else. Michigan deserves the best. And people should stop whining and "mind their own knittin".
lisaone
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:06 p.m.
Aw come on.....there have been more than one through the years. I could see justifying that money if everyone else in the U-M system was treated as fairly, getting increases, not forced to make a job decision at this very point in time of taking an hour reduction or to go in the unemployment line. As your comment goes? If the U-M didn't pay them, they'd be elsewhere. Tell that to the employees who are scrambling to find out where that "somewhere else" is.
Basic Bob
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:36 p.m.
Sometimes the best aren't the most expensive. For some of these people, they will use that 13% increase to negotiate a 25% at their next job, which we will then use as a baseline for setting the next dean's salary.
Huron 74
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:34 p.m.
Good for you, lisaone, you found a bad apple. I think somebody already did that.
lisaone
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:07 p.m.
Sure....Dr. Gilman was worth that too.
Heady99
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 2:29 p.m.
Wow being a Republican I didn't understand what the president was talking about the greedy 2% - now I do. I also understand why it cost so much to send our kids to college as well. As I struggle to live right now - just lost my job due to the fear of my employers "what's going to happen next" because they are small business owners and I wonder if we will be able to keep our home of over 20 years. My kid has to take out loans to just go to a four year college in the amounts of what is cost us to buy our home. I got it UM - you don't pay any local taxes to Ann Arbor, I think you receive money from the State and you pay salaries of hundreds of thousands of dollars for your "deans"... What is this country coming too...
DPL
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 1:57 a.m.
@Heady99: Bless you and your family. I hope & pray you find work soon. Pay no mind to JG's attack on your character; it was completely out of line.
JGTRUEBLUE
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 12:44 a.m.
Heady99 - you are not a Republican. The salaries of UM's deans persuaded you to recognize the greedy 2%? Look at politicians and hollywood. Politicians do nothing but deceive and hollywood - immoral, empty, uneducated idiots. So tell me - the president who gives millions to Solindra, etc., convinced you? You are as transparent as he is. Wow.
Homeland Conspiracy
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4 p.m.
"What is this country coming too..." Revolution!!! It has happened before when the rich told the poor "Let Them Eat Cake"
arborarmy
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 2:28 p.m.
Between the U of M and the UMHS, there are 46,000 employees, endowments of nearly $9 billion, an annual budget well in excess of $1 billion, and billions of dollars of infrastructure--not to mention 45,000 students--for which they are responsible. Yes, indeed. Let's go out get the lowest possible bidder to take those jobs. After all, that's worked well for the state's roads, right?
Gene Alloway
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 9:26 p.m.
Then, by that argument, the lower level rank and file should also be among the best paid in he country, and get good raises in rough years right? We agree yes? Those people make the whole thing work, implement the deans' directives, run the research, teach etc. We want the best at all levels don't we?
Mike
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 2:18 p.m.
This is no different than bringing in the new school superintendant and giving out a huge salary increase. We are conditioned to accept that along with bailing out banks and auto companies. The big money goes to them and we are subsidzing the losers. Exenses for the average person are far outstipping income and the "elite" expect to be handsomely rewarded for being far more intelligent than most of us. As a country we accept that. When I grew up we had sports stars living on our block. They were revered because they were sports stars but they didn't live and act like they were far above the rest of us.........not like today
DPL
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 2:37 p.m.
I agree, for the top person at an institution, like a CEO, you need to attract the talent with a market driven top salary. But for underlings, like a dean position, the salary should be an entry level value, less than the vacating person who earned raises while in tenure there.
DPL
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 2:03 p.m.
What are the duties of a Dean? Why does UM need 20 of them? How does the university justify the 10% or more increase for a "renewal"? UM needs to be careful here. Like the health care industry elevating its costs, it is raising tuition faster than the standard of living, pricing many out of the market, making its industry a ripe target for government intervention.
Left is Right
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 3:35 a.m.
"...a ripe target for government intervention." It's an overdue target for disruption.
DPL
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 1:47 a.m.
@northside: The duties of a dean question was in part rhetorical. I know the job entails managing a business unit of the university. But admittedly, I don't know what all that means; I've not ever worked in academia, and if you read more carefully, I did not criticize their salaries. I questioned the necessity for exhorbitant increases, double digits in a much slower growth economy, and the net effect I've experienced firsthand in the rapid increase of tuition for my UM student. I believe the university needs to carefully control this inflationary practice, the thinking that an outgoing dean must be replaced with an equal or greater paid person can only be afforded by increased tuition. These positions are not president or CEO; there should be an entry level salary, then reasonable standard of living increases thereafter.
northside
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 5:08 p.m.
If you're totally clueless as to what a Dean does - wow, by the way - then maybe you shouldn't be criticizing their salaries.
Basic Bob
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:28 p.m.
Not to mention extending their careers well past normal retirement age, keeping jobs away from people who are well qualified and have families to support. And would work for far less pay due to their lesser experience.
jcj
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 1:57 p.m.
While I am not generally for over taxing the rich, I would support higher taxes on those making over $200,000 on public funds!
Ghost of Tom Joad
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:35 p.m.
and if that's the case, we could also include just about every single millionaire CEO who gets government subsidies like the oil industry, wall street, etc.
Ghost of Tom Joad
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:34 p.m.
what, only on public funds? that's not hypocritical at all...
Dog Guy
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 1:42 p.m.
Intelligent hard work, reliability, and looking out for others are sometimes rewarded lavishly.
Left is Right
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 3:33 a.m.
And more often, they are not.
Homeland Conspiracy
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 1:36 p.m.
I would have a big smile on my face too just like to ppl in the pictures if I was making this kind of $$$$. Wealth is the new addiction
Jeffersonian
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 1:03 p.m.
If you don't pay them they'll just leave and make bewku money in the private sector. These people are practically giving their services away and there is NOBODY to replace them- NOBODY- who would even consider taking on the tremendous pressure these folks feel every waking minute. Whew! it gives me willies just thinking about it.
PattyinYpsi
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:29 p.m.
dancing, I think it was just a failed attempt at irony, for which you should need a license to practice.
jcj
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 1:58 p.m.
I am sure that was tongue in cheek. If not it was foot in mouth!
dancinginmysoul
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 1:53 p.m.
Nobody to replace them? Are you kidding me?
yohan
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:46 p.m.
Next comes the announcement of the increase in tuition
Joe Kidd
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:40 p.m.
It's out of control yet at budget time the U will complain state funding is not enough. It would not bother me if the legislature put limits on salary at a reasonable level. They can go someplace else. The 3% raise is a significant amount, widens the gap between them and their assistants usually.
Mark
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:39 p.m.
As a very long time employee of UM, it irks me to no end when I see admins getting double- digit percent raises, when we are getting less than 2% in LSA. That does not even cover the cost of living, so In effect, we have been getting pay reductions for the past 10 years. UM has embraced the corporate world business model, and the various news stories about the University have certainly shown that.
Joe Kidd
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:43 p.m.
That's their excuse Mark, "what the private sector pays." I say fine go work there.
dancinginmysoul
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:31 p.m.
Honestly I don't find any of this shocking or anger producing. It's predictable and disappointing. And it's happening everywhere.
ligrasp
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 7:06 p.m.
I don't see how anyone can justify a 13% wage increase in this economic environment. It's not as if their previous salary was inadequate.
dancinginmysoul
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:57 p.m.
I should clarify: the article doesn't make me angry. The unfair distribution of wages seriously pisses me off. Bob, if these people are "deserving" of such high salaries, does that mean those employees not earning those wages (and aren't even receiving fair cost of living increases) somehow aren't deserving of high salaries?
Basic Bob
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:53 p.m.
Because all this information is public, it is easy to compare with other schools who suffer from the same degree of self-importance. I can assume these people are deserving of a high salary, but the huge raises and additional compensation are troublesome.
northside
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:22 p.m.
Journalism, annarbor.com style: publish the salaries of public sector employees, provide minimal context, and let the commenting trolls have at it.
UtrespassM
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 12:53 a.m.
Same old story every year.
Eep
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:31 p.m.
At least they didn't add up the salaries of all 40-something thousand employees and make the headline: UM Employee's Salaries 400 Million Dollars.
rosewater
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 1:45 p.m.
University of Michigan Salary Search - look it up for yourself
northside
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:36 p.m.
@ dancing: Intentional and far from the first time they've run an article like this. If annarbor.com considers these (and other) public salaries to be too high, the site should just run an op-ed directly saying so.
dancinginmysoul
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:27 p.m.
This does seem a little intentional doesn't it.
M
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:09 p.m.
Why is no one upset we pay Hoke ~$3M a year? Does an academic institution value football six times more than, you know, academics?
Joe Kidd
Mon, Dec 31, 2012 : 4:12 p.m.
Wrong Tdw, the stadium fills because the team wins. Winning big generates more money. Championships generate millions by just the sale of championship clothing and hats. The U gets a % of sales just for the logos regardless of who makes them or sells them.
Steve Hendel
Wed, Dec 19, 2012 : 1:12 a.m.
So what if athletics pay for themselves? Does that give the AD free reign to throw millions of dollars around with minimal, if any, oversight?
cohensh
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 7:22 p.m.
Athletics fund themselves, they don't take tuition money. Specifically, football (and to a lesser extent basketball and maybe hockey) allow all the other sports to exist by providing funding for them.
PattyinYpsi
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:26 p.m.
Thank you. And Amen!
tdw
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 2 p.m.
Joe....I thumbs downed you so I'll reply to your comment.As far as I know the stadium fills itself regardless of who is in charge.
Joe Kidd
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 12:45 p.m.
If he didn't fill the stadium by winning he wouldn't get it. At least he generates his funding through sales.
OLDTIMER3
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 11:45 a.m.
No wonder tuition is so high at the school. No one is worth that high of a base salary.
mady
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 7:31 p.m.
got that right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PattyinYpsi
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:25 p.m.
easy123, you really believe that? After all the reports about CEOs who run companies into the ground, get a golden parachute, and then go to work for another company at an outrageous salary, which they proceed to run into the ground, etc., etc.? American Airlines, Bank of America, most recently Hostess, and the list is much longer. Corporate CEOs may be the only employees who are able to destroy companies in full view of everyone--shareholders, the media, employees--and walk away with insane severance packages. Even the Wall Street Journal has published articles criticizing this. Delete
easy123
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 4:03 p.m.
Ghost - You are responsible for the profitability of the company otherwise you will be gone. I guess you may never have worked in the private industry
djm12652
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:55 p.m.
Ghost....CEO's and this list are apples to oranges...
Ghost of Tom Joad
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 3:31 p.m.
If only people felt the same way about corporate CEO's.
Turd Ferguson
Mon, Dec 17, 2012 : 11:22 a.m.
www.umsalary.info
UtrespassM
Tue, Dec 18, 2012 : 12:50 a.m.
You also can find out how little people make working as a TA, RA...