The University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents approved Dec. 7 the Human Resources Redesign that has garnered both support and criticism from various stakeholders over the semester after a year of debate among the campus community regarding the plan’s details about university employee compensation and benefits.
The plan aims to improve university employee recruitment and retainment and to maintain University of Wisconsin-Madison’s reputation as a “world-class” institution in the face of declining state financial support by making changes to employee benefits, compensation and diversity efforts.
Officials began reconstructing the current HR plan after state government officials passed Act 32, which gave the UW System and UW-Madison the ability to establish their own HR systems separate from government influence.
The new plan defines academic staff as salaried positions unique to specialized higher education positions, such as lecturers. Conversely, classified staff, which are personnel the university has in common with other state agencies, would be renamed “university staff” and include all positions paid an hourly wage.
Classified staff would see the largest changes with the implementation of the plan, including the addition of governance rights which will allow the group to formally express their concerns to administration.
Regent Gerald Whitburn, chair of the Business, Finance and Audit Committee that passed a resolution in support of the plan at a Regents committee meeting Dec. 6, said the new system acknowledges the important role played by classified staff.
“The over 1,200 men and women in this new workforce category make it possible for the smooth, safe and efficient operation of this facility and other facilities and properties, offices and programs we have throughout the UW system,” Whitburn said. “Needless to say these positions and the people in them are all critical to the university operations.”
But Regent John Drew spoke in dissent, stating it is unfair for policy regarding classified staff, which used to have the right to collectively bargain, to now be solely under the Board of Regent’s control.
“There was an effort to engage people,” Drew said. “But surveys, websites and work teams are, in my opinion, an inadequate substitute for collective bargaining when workers and management sit down as equals and negotiate.”
Following the plan’s release, the project team engaged in campus discussions with various stakeholders, including shared governance groups such as Faculty Senate, Academic Staff Assembly and the Associated Students of Madison.
ASM stated upon passing a resolution in support of the HR redesign it would like to see a plan involving student hourly positions on campus in the future, because students holding these positions are not currently addressed in the redesign, according to ASM Shared Governance Chair Sam Seering.
But United Council Vice President Beth Huang said she thinks student hourly workers were left out of the redesign because there were no perceived problems with the structure of these positions. Rather, the plan aims to address the perceived divide between academic and classified staffs, which proved controversial under the current plan.
Although the undergraduate student body and student hourly workers are not directly affected by the redesign, ASM Shared Governance Chair Sam Seering said teaching assistants and graduate students working in labs who are considered academic or classified staff could be directly affected by changes to employee compensation and benefits.
The Teaching Assistants Association voiced their opposition to the redesign during the semester, with their major concerns being the switch to performance-based pay among faculty, stating many members are concerned the plan places more emphasis on measurable qualities such as hours worked, rather than teaching or quality of education.
According to Huang, the plan remains important to students because they interact daily with faculty and staff, whose changing work conditions would impact students’ experiences in classrooms and offices.
“It changes how people view themselves in the workplace,” Huang said. “It affects campus climate in a variety of ways, and impacts students, as many of us live on campus.”
