Editorial: Ensure that university’s success benefits all

It is a common grievance that university administrators earn too much money. The search term “administrator salary” on the Chronicle of Higher Education yielded over 4,000 results, and many of them were letters to the editor expressing sentiments that administrators’ salaries should be capped. Reasoning in these letters ranged from the idea that the money could be better used elsewhere to an ideological complaint that universities are becoming more and more like large corporations.

While these complaints and the problems they represent within higher education should not be taken lightly, top administrators’ salary increases can also be positive for the University community.

On Tuesday, Dec. 4, Pitt announced the decisions of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Trustees. The committee met to decide the 2012-2013 salary for Chancellor Mark Nordenberg, and they also reviewed and approved Nordenberg’s salary recommendations for the board.

Most of the top officials were given increases of approximately 3.7 percent, which is in line with university salary increase benchmarks, and two of the administrators were given much higher raises: Provost and Senior Vice Chancellor Patricia Beeson was given a 10 percent raise, and Chief Investment Officer and Treasurer Amy Marsh was given a 15 percent raise. According to a story in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Marsh received such a high salary increase because she had been the target of heavy recruitment attempts from another organization. Pitt’s attempts to retain her resulted in the salary increase. Beeson’s salary was increased more to bring her salary more into line with similar chief academic officers at institutions comparable to Pitt

Marsh’s salary increase is important because her job is highly important for Pitt — she manages the University’s assets and makes investment decisions for its endowment. Especially considering the University’s recent attainment of its goal of raising more than $2 billion, managing the money is an important job, and because of Marsh’s recent success in her position, it’s beneficial for the University to retain her.

Yet even as these administrators’ commendable successes seem to have considerably benefited the University, it’s important that care be paid to ensure that these benefits translate to the educational experiences of individual students. Providing a rich, high-quality learning experience is arguably the most important purpose of an educational institution, even at a research university such as Pitt, yet it’s sometimes hard to see how administrative decisions trickle down to affect the students currently paying tuition — or even the teachers vitally contributing to Pitt’s reputation as a leader in academics.

One way to ensure this trickle-down effect of University success — and simultaneously to justify sizable salary increases for administrators such as Marsh in the eyes of skeptical observers — would be for the University to strive for more transparency in the management and use of its endowment and other funds. Increased financial openness would undoubtedly benefit students and the wider university community, as it would promote more confidence among students that their tuition money was being beneficially utilized.

Also, although increasing salaries for administrators is in line with state benchmarks and is similar to the systems at other universities, the financial state of the rest of the University should be considered just as carefully. Similarly to many other universities, several of Pitt’s academic departments, programs and offices have had funding reduced, with many operating under hiring freezes. Such a situation has the potential to damage the quality and availability of teaching at Pitt.

While moderate pay increases for successful officers at top levels of the administration are undoubtedly beneficial for the University considering these officials’ weighty responsibilities, we hope that these administrators will continually take time to consider how their important work translates to the individual experiences of the students and teachers who make up the heart of this University.

Editor’s Note: This story has been corrected to reflect some inaccuracies. Top Pitt officials, not members of the board, were given raises. Beeson’s salary increase was not due to her seniority, but to bring her salary more into line with similar chief academic officers at institutions comparable to Pitt.