Reasonable consideration. I can understand where that's coming from.

Short-sighted suggestion. Would cause a domino effect that would cripple the university and city in ways that I don't believe faculty are ready to acknowledge.

Faculty hiring has also remained flat relative to the number of faculty per student. The graph below illustrates this trend, showing a constant faculty-to-student ratio. There has not been 13 any general expansion of the faculty relative to students taught. The conclusion to draw from
these two factors—no increase in faculty wages in inflation-adjusted terms and no increase in the number of faculty per student—is that O.U. spending on direct education in inflation-adjusted terms has not changed substantially on a per student basis since the late 1970s despite a sharp increase in tuition and fees during this same period.

If spending on faculty salaries and the number of FTE faculty per student have remained constant over time despite significant increases in inflation-adjusted tuition and fees, what else might account for O.U.’s increased spending and its budget shortfall? The exponential growth in non-classified administrator ranks is one very real possibility. O.U. has seen a dramatic increase in the administration during the past 25 years. The graph below shows the spike in FTE administrators per FTE student and compares it with the stasis in the number of FTE faculty for every FTE student as shown in the graph above. In addition to earlier large increases, the 14 years since roughly 2010 have seen a 45 percent increase in FTE administrators per FTE
student.

The primary takeaway is that, since 1979, O.U. has made no major new investments in the direct teaching mission on a per student basis even though inflation-adjusted tuition and revenue at the University have raced upward during the same period. The sharp increase in administrators indicates much of the increases in revenue per-student has quite possibly gone toward the administrative structure rather than O.U.’s mission of teaching and research. In short, this is a story of how administration started eating the University.

Note, that over this same time period there has been a drop in FTE classified staff (hourly employees—e.g. clerical staff, maintenance staff, technicians) per FTE student. So the relative shift in resources has been away from both faculty and classified staff toward regular administrators.

Considering that the ANews is the only worthwhile paper in town, I guess you can put me in the ANews crowd whatever that means. That said, I agree 100% with your assessment in the bloat in administrators in all departments of the university. By the way, the Messenger is advertising for a new editor.

Interesting article in today's Post. Click on the link ($500,000) in the article. It lists the salaries of 4371 people at OU. Lots of administration.

https://www.thepostathens.com/article/2019/11/budget-cris...

Chief of Staff in an org this large is typically equivalent to a COO. Somebody who runs day-to-day operations; that's particularly common in roles where a President's main function is around fund raising, etc. That's a very senior role.

$249,000 for the President's Chief of Staff???? Are you freaking kidding?

117 people making over $150K and 80% of them do not have daily contact with a student or education

538 making over $100K

Exactly, I can name the last couple, good people, did a great job and did so for good money but not obscene money for the job.

As to the other comment on our academic reputation, in the undergrad world, I am not seeing results that correspond with the price of these people. We are set up like a Fortune 500 Company, problem is we are not and should not be in that model, we have Presidents, VP, COO’s, CFO’s and 400 others and at the end of the day the University still implements stupid practices like billing each other for time and materials.

New Political and The Post are covering the protest going on now. You can find updates on their Twitter accounts or @ufunfacts