<p>Who needs this crap. I'm going to work at a small rich private college.</p>
<p>If you don’t know you don’t know much about UW.</p>
<p>barrons,</p>
<p>Could you please explain the significance of this for those of us who are admittedly less informed about UW-M matters :)? Thanks!</p>
<p>Biddy Martin while UW Chancellor got in a major tiff with the Regents and System President over trying to gain more freedom for UW-Madison and to lead needed changes–and cited UVa as a model of how to run a modern U. Now Sullivan who came from another Big 10 schools–UM–runs into the buzzsaw of the potential downside of such freedom–when you can do anything the Regents might expect even more. Martin decided working in a hidebound no change atmosphere was not for her and went to a small rich elite private school. Now Sullivan is basically in the same no win position and I can see BM calling her and saying–get the heck out of these nutty public Us and come to places that are not so complex and impossible. Basically running publics today is a no win situation for anyone.</p>
<p>^Ain’t that truth! Thanks for the interesting back history.</p>
<p>I need to follow up and see what happened with the president at UT-Austin. He made the mistake of complaining after his request for a tuition increase was denied (the school has really tried hard to keep tuition as low as possible, but they needed the increase). The Regents started making noises that he should be fired. My dad is a UT prof and thinks highly of President Powers, so he was pretty mad about it.</p>
<p>UT has always been a very political job. Now that appears to be spreading. One major reason Martin’s plans for UW got the cold shoulder from insiders is that she dared to talk to Scott Walker and get his approval. To many liberal education folks in WI that was more than a sin. It was unforgivable.</p>
<p>Agree with Barrons about the Scott Walker thing. Nevertheless, we are in for some major, positive changes affecting academic and classified staff. In the short time Biddy was here she had a major impact and especially on undergraduate education.</p>
<p>I tried to follow that staff change task force but my eyes just glazed over so I never really got into the key arguments. Last I heard they wanted to put them together as one unit. What are the major benefits?</p>
<p>DOA. That wasn’t going to happen. It wasn’t well received, and it was inconsistent with what the System schools were planning. </p>
<p>
[HR</a> Design work teams submit revised recommendations (May 23, 2012)](<a href=“http://www.news.wisc.edu/20721]HR”>HR Design work teams submit revised recommendations).</p>
<p>Basically, the major change impacts classified staff. It would divide them into exempt (salary) and non-exempt (have to be paid overtime) categories. I like this since it would move non-exempt classified into the academic staff category where most of them (like the scientists in the State Lab of Hygiene, for example) really belong. It could negatively impact union representation, should this become possible, for some people who have had it in the past, but would retain the possibility for most non-exempt employees.</p>