This work builds upon an analysis of regional universities that began in 2009, to build a geographically-based, quantifiable definition of the nation\u27s regional universities. It builds on efforts begun by Katsinas (1993) to geographically map access oriented community colleges, which resulted in the geographic coding of Associate\u27s Colleges as part of the 2005 and 2010 Basic Classification of Institutions of Higher Education published by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (Katsinas, Lacey, & Hardy, 2005).
Key findings 
1. Wide variation in salaries and fringe benefits based upon geographic region served. 
2. Wide variation in salaries and fringe benefits based if collective bargaining exists. 
3. Access institutions need a 21st century classification scheme to reflect mission, workloa

Bray, Nathaniel

Katsinas, Stephen

Ogun, Johnson

English

This paper examines monetary compensation of 127,222 full-time faculty employed by the 390 regional universities in the United States who are members of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities. Compensation data published by the U.S. Department of Education and organizations concerned with faculty, including the American Association of University Professors and others, typically lump all four-year public university faculty together, ignoring well-known differences in teaching workloads at different types of public four-year universities (four instead of two courses taught each term, etc.). Further, many compensation studies do not examine fringe benefits, which are 30 percent of total monetary compensation.
Regional universities serve nearly 4 million students nationwide, and are highly committed to be good stewards of place. They are worthy of study as a separate institutional type on their own. As large numbers of “baby boom” era faculty at regional universities approach retirement, an accurate base-line assessment of total monetary compensation (salaries and fringe benefits) is important. This study examines (1) salaries and fringe benefits, (2) includes the entire universe of U.S. regional universities, (3) examines differences by geographic peer institutional types, and (4) examines if the presence or lack of collective bargaining matters.
The 2011 Human Resources Survey from the National Center for Education Statistics’ Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System is the most recent year for which both salary and fringe benefits data are available. The 390 regional universities were divided into seven sub-types: Rural-Small, Rural-Medium, Rural-Large, Suburban Smaller, Suburban Larger, Urban Smaller, and Urban Larger. Katsinas’ geographically-based classification scheme of regional universities (2016, forthcoming), similar to the geographically-based 2005 and 2010 Carnegie Basic Classification of Associate’s Colleges on which he was lead author, was used. The average total monetary compensation for the 127,222 full-time faculty employed by the 390 regional universities was $97,174, of which $71,348 came in the form of salaries and $25,828 in fringe benefits. The 15,872 full-time faculty employed by the 90 Rural-Medium regional universities received on average $84,720 in salaries and fringe benefits, while the 18,884 faculty employed by the 42 Suburban-Larger regional universities received $101,366. In general, full-time faculty at the 55 Suburban regional faculty were highest paid, closely followed by faculty at the 74 urban regional universities, with faculty at the 261 rural regional universities well behind. The range of monetary compensation across the seven sub-categories of regional universities was large--and this one-year difference of nearly $17,000 is magnified further when considered over an entire 30-plus year teaching career, adjusted for inflation.
The differences are even wider when the presence or lack of collective bargaining is considered. Among the 127, 222 full-time faculty at regional universities, 74,468 or 63% worked at the 219 institutions in the 30 states that in 2011 had collective bargaining (as reported in the 2012 Directory of Collective Bargaining published by the National Center for Collective Bargaining in Higher Education and the Professions), while 52,754 or 37% were employed at the 171 regional universities in the 20 states that did not. Full-time faculty at rural, suburban, and urban regional universities with collective bargaining received on average $92,407, $116,353, and $108,399 in total monetary compensation in FY2011; this compared to averages of $82,722, $84,813, and $86,594 at rural, suburban, and urban regional universities without.
This study revealed that regional universities, currently spread across many subcategories of doctoral, master’s, and baccalaureate universities within the Carnegie Basic Classification universe, deserve analysis in their own right

Katsinas, Stephen G

Ogun, Johnson A

Bray, Nathaniel J

Eastern Illinois University

Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at American Public Regional Universities:  The Impact of Geography and the Existence of Collective Bargaining

The Keep

Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy
Volume 0 National Center Proceedings 2016 Article 2
September 2016
Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-
Time Faculty at American Public Regional
Universities: The Impact of Geography and the
Existence of Collective Bargaining
Stephen Katsinas
University of Alabama
Johnson Ogun
University of Alabama
Nathaniel Bray
University of Alabama
Follow this and additional works at: http://thekeep.eiu.edu/jcba
Part of the Collective Bargaining Commons, and the Higher Education Commons
This Proceedings Material is brought to you for free and open access by The Keep. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Collective Bargaining
in the Academy by an authorized editor of The Keep. For more information, please contact tabruns@eiu.edu.
Recommended Citation
Katsinas, Stephen; Ogun, Johnson; and Bray, Nathaniel (2016) "Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at
American Public Regional Universities: The Impact of Geography and the Existence of Collective Bargaining," Journal of Collective
Bargaining in the Academy: Vol. 0 , Article 2.
Available at: http://thekeep.eiu.edu/jcba/vol0/iss11/2
Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at American Public Regional Universities:   
The Impact of Geography and the Existence of Collective Bargaining 
Research Paper Presented at the 43rd Annual National Conference of the 
National Center for the Study of Collective Bargaining in Higher Education and the Professions 
Hunter College, The City University of New York 
By Stephen Katsinas, Johnson Ogun, and Nathaniel Bray, Education Policy Center, The University of Alabama, 
http://uaedpolicy.ua.edu/   Questions may be addressed to Stephen G. Katsinas, katsinas@ua.edu 
April 3, 2016 
 
Executive Summary 
 This work builds upon an analysis of regional universities that began in 2009, to build a 
geographically-based, quantifiable definition of the nation's regional universities.  It builds on efforts 
begun by Katsinas (1993) to geographically map access oriented community colleges, which resulted in 
the geographic coding of Associate's Colleges as part of the 2005 and 2010 Basic Classification of 
Institutions of Higher Education published by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching 
(Katsinas, Lacey, & Hardy, 2005).   
Key findings 
1.  Wide variation in salaries and fringe benefits based upon geographic region served. 
2.  Wide variation in salaries and fringe benefits based if collective bargaining exists. 
3.  Access institutions need a 21st century classification scheme to reflect mission, workload 
 
Implications for Practice 
1. Disaggregate data:  Very clear faculty workload differences exist between flagship and regional  
     universities, justifying disaggregation of RUs within the national data bases.  But USED and Carnegie 
     don't do this—USED combines all "4-year" together, and Carnegie's "highest degree awarded" scheme 
     (Doctoral, Master's, Baccalaureate, Associate) contains so much noise that users (Delta Cost Project,  
     AAUP, etc.) are likely unintentionally reinforcing "pecking order" biases Astin found 25 years ago.  
2. Regional universities deserve to stand on their own as an institutional type.  Carnegie's pubic 
    Master's category leaves out 120 RUs that serve 1.4 million students.   
3. Geography matters:  Picking peer institutions requires recognizing place-based differences 
     that get masked in data averages.  Like community colleges, regional universities are  
     committed to providing access and opportunity to their regions (e.g., AASCU's "Stewardship 
     of Place" program).  This justifies a place-based classification scheme for access institutions. 
4.  Collective bargaining matters:  Inflation-adjusted career earnings can exceed $1 million.  
Implications for Policy & Research 
1.  We are on our own.  USED discontinued collecting Fringe Benefit data in IPEDS surveys 
2.  But good data are still needed by boards, business & human resource officers, and faculty 
 to build compensation plans.  We have to find our own way. 
3.  Differences may be greater than reported here, as cost savings may be obtained by spreading 
     purchasing of fringe benefits (med, group life ins., etc.) across larger pools and groups. 
4.  Funding is needed for a large national study similar to King & Cook (1980), involving 
     NACUBO, CUPA, and other interested organizations (perhaps TIAA and Ford Foundation).   
5.  NSF and NIH should study faculty compensation in high wage/high demand STEM and IT fields. 
6.  Secondary analysis/focus on high poverty regions. 
7.  Secondary analysis/focus on sparsely populated areas. 
8.  Study compensation across 2- & 4-year access sectors. 
9.  A classification scheme appropriate for access institutions can help document the connection between 
     full-time faculty and higher degree completion rates.  Does presence of more full-time faculty lead to 
     faster/higher Associate Degree completion rates? If so, this finding would be of great importance. 
 
To tell access story requires new frames to localize data!
1 
 
1
Katsinas et al.: Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at Ame
Published by The Keep, 2016
 Table 1
States with and without Collective Bargaining 
State
Collective 
Bargaining State
No 
Collective 
Bargaining
Alaska X Alabama X
California X Arizona X
Connecticut X Arkansas X
Delaware X Colorado X
Florida X Georgia X
Illinois X Hawaii X
Iowa X Idaho X
Kansas X Indiana X
Maine X Kentucky X
Maryland X Louisiana X
Massachusetts X Mississippi X
Michigan X North Carolina X
Minnesota X North Dakota X
Missouri X Oklahoma X
Montana X South Carolina X
Nebraska X Tennessee X
Nevada X Texas X
New Hampshire X Utah X
New Jersey X Virginia X
New Mexico X West Virginia X
New York X Wyoming X
Ohio X
Oregon X
Pennsylvania X
Rhode Island X
South Dakota X
Vermont X
Washington X
Wisconsin X
Source:  Barry, J. & Savarese, M. (2012).  Directory of U.S. 
faculty contracts and bargaining agents in institutions of higher 
education.   New York:  National Center for the Study of Collective 
Bargaining in Higher Education and the Professions.  
Total 20Total 30
2 
 
2
Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy, Vol. 0, Iss. 11 [2016], Art. 2
http://thekeep.eiu.edu/jcba/vol0/iss11/2
 Table 2
Public Regional Universities with & without Collective Bargaining by Type, 2010-11
All Public 
Regional 
Universities
With 
Collective 
Bargaining
Without 
Collective 
Bargaining
Rural Small 49 32 17
Rural Medium 90 40 50
Rural Large 122 62 60
Rural Average 261 134 127
Suburban Smaller 13 9 4
Suburban Larger 42 32 10
Suburban Average 55 41 14
Urban Smaller 21 13 8
Urban Large 53 31 22
Urban Average 74 44 30
Average, All 390 219 171
Rural Small 100 65 35
Rural Medium 100 44 56
Rural Large 100 51 49
Rural Average 100 51 49
Suburban Smaller 100 69 31
Suburban Larger 100 76 24
Suburban Average 100 75 25
Urban Smaller 100 62 38
Urban Large 100 58 42
Urban Average 100 59 41
Average, All 100 56 44
Rural Small 13 15 10
Rural Medium 23 18 29
Rural Large 31 28 35
Rural Average 67 61 74
Suburban Smaller 3 4 2
Suburban Larger 11 15 6
Suburban Average 14 19 8
Urban Smaller 5 6 5
Urban Large 14 14 13
Urban Average 19 20 18
Total 100 100 100
Institutions (in NUMBERS)
Within  each geographic type                        
(in PERCENTAGES)
Across  each geographic type                           
(in PERCENTAGES)
Notes:  (1) Rregional universities are defined to be members of the American Association of State Colleges and 
Universities with identifiable institutional UnitIDs in the fedearl NCES/IPEDS data base. (2) definitions of public 
Regional University  subtypes were developed by Katsinas (2016, forthcoming).  (3) list of institutions with 
collective bargaining was obtainned from Berry & Saravese, 2012; (4) if the majority of regional universities within 
a given state had collective bargaining, the state was counted as a collective bargaining state.
3 
 
3
Katsinas et al.: Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at Ame
Published by The Keep, 2016
Table 3
Full-time Faculty at Regional Universities with & without Collective Bargaining, 2010-11
Total
With 
Collective 
Bargaining
Without 
Collective 
Bargaining
Rural Small 5,386 3,372 2,014
Rural Medium 15,872 8,066 7,806
Rural Large 50,605 25,764 24,841
Rural Average 71,863 37,202 34,661
Suburban Smaller 2,441 1,767 674
Suburban Larger 18,884 13,635 5,249
Suburban Average 21,325 15,402 5,923
Urban Smaller 4,957 2,837 2,120
Urban Large 29,077 19,027 10,050
Urban Average 34,034 21,864 12,170
Total, All 127,222 74,468 52,754
Rural Small 100 63 37
Rural Medium 100 51 49
Rural Large 100 51 49
Rural Average 100 52 48
Suburban Smaller 100 72 28
Suburban Larger 100 72 28
Suburban Average 100 72 28
Urban Smaller 100 57 43
Urban Large 100 65 35
Urban Average 100 64 36
Average, All 100 63 37
Rural Small 4 5 4
Rural Medium 12 11 11
Rural Large 40 35 47
Rural Average 56 50 66
Suburban Smaller 2 2 1
Suburban Larger 15 18 10
Suburban Average 17 21 11
Urban Smaller 4 4 4
Urban Large 23 26 19
Urban Average 27 29 23
 Average, Total 100 100 100
Within  each geographic type                        
(in PERCENTAGES)
Across  each geographic type                           
(in PERCENTAGES)
Full-time Faculty ….
Notes:  (1) Regional universities are defined to be members of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities with 
identifiable institutional UnitIDs in the federal NCES/IPEDS data base. (2) definitions of public Regional University  subtypes 
were developed by Katsinas (2016, forthcoming).  (3) source of institutions with collective bargaining was Berry & Saravese, 
2012; (4) if the majority of Regional Universities within a given state had collective bargaining, the state was counted as a 
collective bargaining state.
4 
 
4
Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy, Vol. 0, Iss. 11 [2016], Art. 2
http://thekeep.eiu.edu/jcba/vol0/iss11/2
  
  
Table 4
Average Salaries of Full-time at Public Regional Universities, 2010-2011: The impact of Collective Bargaining
Dollars %
Rural Small 49 5,386 100 63 37 $62,622 $64,737 $59,079 $5,658 9
Rural Medium 90 15,872 100 51 49 $60,824 $61,900 $59,711 $2,189 4
Rural Large 122 50,605 100 51 49 $69,074 $70,383 $67,482 $2,901 4
Rural Average 261 71,863 100 52 48 $64,173 $65,673 $62,091 $3,583 5
Suburban Smaller 13 2,441 100 72 28 $74,944 $79,018 $64,314 $14,704 19
Suburban Larger 42 18,884 100 72 28 $74,687 $79,836 $61,339 $18,497 23
Suburban Average 55 21,325 100 72 28 $74,816 $79,427 $62,827 $16,601 21
Urban Smaller 21 4,957 100 57 43 $72,162 $70,704 $53,116 $17,588 25
Urban Large 53 29,077 100 65 35 $77,940 $83,308 $75,105 $8,203 10
Urban Average 74 34,034 100 64 36 $75,051 $77,006 $64,111 $12,896 17
Totals/Averages 390 127,221 100 63 37 $71,347 $74,035 $63,009 $11,026 15
Notes:  (1) 390 Regional universities were listed as American Association of State Colleges and Universities members as of August 2014  with identifiable 
institutional UnitIDs in the federal NCES/IPEDS data base; (2) data on full-time faculty is from the IPEDS Human Resources Survey for 2010-11; (3) 
definitions of public Regional University  subtypes were developed by Katsinas (2016, forthcoming), consistent with the geographic codes (rural, suburban, 
urban, etc.) that were part of the 2005 and 2010 Basic Classification of Associate's Colleges published by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of 
Teaching, and included in all published federal higher education data sets; (4) the source of institutions with collective bargaining was Berry & Saravese, 
2012; (5) if the majority of Regional Universities within a given state had collective bargaining, the state was counted as a collective bargaining state.
Colleges
with 
collective 
bargaining
without 
collective 
bargaining
Full-Time Faculty
Number Total
Average Salaries of Full-Time Faculty…
 difference,        
expressed in…
All
with 
collective 
bargaining
without 
collective 
bargaining
5 
 
5
Katsinas et al.: Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at Ame
Published by The Keep, 2016
 
  
Table 5
Average Fringe Benefits of Full-time at Public Regional Universities, 2010-2011: The impact of Collective Bargaining
with without
Full-Time Collective  Collective
Colleges Faculty ALL Bargaining  Bargaining Dollars %
Rural Small 49 5,386 $25,209 $26,828 $18,011 $8,817 33
Rural Medium 90 15,872 $23,896 $27,321 $19,816 $7,505 27
Rural Large 122 50,605 $25,159 $26,052 $24,066 $1,986 8
Rural Average 261 71,863 $24,755 $26,734 $20,631 $6,103 23
Suburban Smaller 13 2,438 $26,271 $34,172 $20,382 $13,790 40
Suburban Larger 42 18,886 $26,679 $39,679 $23,590 $16,089 41
Suburban Average 55 21,324 $26,475 $36,926 $21,986 $14,940 40
Urban Smaller 21 4,957 $25,832 $28,601 $23,622 $4,979 17
Urban Large 53 29,077 $26,684 $34,185 $21,345 $12,840 38
Urban Average 74 34,034 $26,258 $31,393 $22,484 $8,910 28
Total Average 390 127,221 $25,829 $31,684 $21,700 $9,984 32
difference
expressed in
Notes:  (1) 390 Regional universities were listed as American Association of State Colleges and Universities members as of 
August 2014  with identifiable institutional UnitIDs in the federal NCES/IPEDS data base; (2) data on full-time faculty is from 
the IPEDS Human Resources Survey for 2010-11; (3) definitions of public Regional University  subtypes were developed by 
Katsinas (2016, forthcoming), consistent with the geographic codes (rural, suburban, urban, etc.) that were part of the 2005 
and 2010 Basic Classification of Associate's Colleges published by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of 
Teaching, and included in all published federal higher education data sets; (4) the source of institutions with collective 
bargaining was Berry & Saravese, 2012; (5) if the majority of Regional Universities within a given state had collective 
bargaining, the state was counted as a collective bargaining state.
6 
 
6
Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy, Vol. 0, Iss. 11 [2016], Art. 2
http://thekeep.eiu.edu/jcba/vol0/iss11/2
Table 6 
      The Impact of Collective Bargaining:  Total Monetary Compensation 
    for Full-Time Faculty at U.S. Public Regional Universities, 2010-11 
  
       
       
    with  without annual average  
Annual 
average 
    Collective   Collective 
difference expressed 
in x 30 years 
  ALL Bargaining  Bargaining Dollars %   (in dollars) 
Rural Small $87,831 $91,565 $77,090 $14,475 16 $434,250 
Rural Medium $84,720 $89,221 $79,527 $9,694 11 $290,820 
Rural Large $94,233 $96,435 $91,548 $4,887 5 $146,610 
Rural Average $88,931 $92,407 $82,722 $9,685 10 $290,550 
Suburban Smaller $101,215 $113,190 $84,696 $28,494 25 $854,820 
Suburban Larger $101,366 $119,515 $84,929 $34,586 29 $1,037,580 
Suburban Average $101,291 $116,353 $84,813 $31,540 27 $946,200 
Urban Smaller $97,994 $99,305 $76,738 $22,567 23 $677,010 
Urban Large $104,624 $117,493 $96,450 $21,043 18 $631,290 
Urban Average $101,309 $108,399 $86,594 $21,805 20 $654,150 
All $97,176 $105,720 $84,709 $21,010 20 $630,300 
Notes:  (1) 390 Regional universities were listed as American Association of State Colleges and Universities members as of 
August 2014  with identifiable institutional UnitIDs in the federal NCES/IPEDS data base; (2) data on full-time faculty is from 
the IPEDS Human Resources Survey for 2010-11; (3) definitions of public Regional University  subtypes were developed by 
Katsinas (2016, forthcoming), consistent with the geographic codes (rural, suburban, urban, etc.) that were part of the 2005 and 
2010 Basic Classification of Associate's Colleges published by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and 
included in all published federal higher education data sets; (4) the source of institutions with collective bargaining was Berry 
& Saravese, 2012; (5) if the majority of Regional Universities within a given state had collective bargaining, the state was 
counted as a collective bargaining state. 
 
7 
 
7
Katsinas et al.: Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at Ame
Published by The Keep, 2016


Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at American Public Regional Universities: The Impact of Geography and the Existence of Collective Bargaining

Journal of Collective Bargaining in the AcademyVolume 0 National Center Proceedings 2016 Article 2September 2016Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at American Public RegionalUniversities: The Impact of Geography and theExistence of Collective BargainingStephen KatsinasUniversity of AlabamaJohnson OgunUniversity of AlabamaNathaniel BrayUniversity of AlabamaFollow this and additional works at: http://thekeep.eiu.edu/jcbaPart of the Collective Bargaining Commons, and the Higher Education CommonsThis Proceedings Material is brought to you for free and open access by The Keep. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Collective Bargainingin the Academy by an authorized editor of The Keep. For more information, please contact tabruns@eiu.edu.Recommended CitationKatsinas, Stephen; Ogun, Johnson; and Bray, Nathaniel (2016) "Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty atAmerican Public Regional Universities: The Impact of Geography and the Existence of Collective Bargaining," Journal of CollectiveBargaining in the Academy: Vol. 0 , Article 2.Available at: http://thekeep.eiu.edu/jcba/vol0/iss11/2Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at American Public Regional Universities:   The Impact of Geography and the Existence of Collective Bargaining Research Paper Presented at the 43rd Annual National Conference of the National Center for the Study of Collective Bargaining in Higher Education and the Professions Hunter College, The City University of New York By Stephen Katsinas, Johnson Ogun, and Nathaniel Bray, Education Policy Center, The University of Alabama, http://uaedpolicy.ua.edu/   Questions may be addressed to Stephen G. Katsinas, katsinas@ua.edu April 3, 2016  Executive Summary  This work builds upon an analysis of regional universities that began in 2009, to build a geographically-based, quantifiable definition of the nation's regional universities.  It builds on efforts begun by Katsinas (1993) to geographically map access oriented community colleges, which resulted in the geographic coding of Associate's Colleges as part of the 2005 and 2010 Basic Classification of Institutions of Higher Education published by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (Katsinas, Lacey, & Hardy, 2005).   Key findings 1.  Wide variation in salaries and fringe benefits based upon geographic region served. 2.  Wide variation in salaries and fringe benefits based if collective bargaining exists. 3.  Access institutions need a 21st century classification scheme to reflect mission, workload  Implications for Practice 1. Disaggregate data:  Very clear faculty workload differences exist between flagship and regional       universities, justifying disaggregation of RUs within the national data bases.  But USED and Carnegie      don't do this—USED combines all "4-year" together, and Carnegie's "highest degree awarded" scheme      (Doctoral, Master's, Baccalaureate, Associate) contains so much noise that users (Delta Cost Project,       AAUP, etc.) are likely unintentionally reinforcing "pecking order" biases Astin found 25 years ago.  2. Regional universities deserve to stand on their own as an institutional type.  Carnegie's pubic     Master's category leaves out 120 RUs that serve 1.4 million students.   3. Geography matters:  Picking peer institutions requires recognizing place-based differences      that get masked in data averages.  Like community colleges, regional universities are       committed to providing access and opportunity to their regions (e.g., AASCU's "Stewardship      of Place" program).  This justifies a place-based classification scheme for access institutions. 4.  Collective bargaining matters:  Inflation-adjusted career earnings can exceed $1 million.  Implications for Policy & Research 1.  We are on our own.  USED discontinued collecting Fringe Benefit data in IPEDS surveys 2.  But good data are still needed by boards, business & human resource officers, and faculty  to build compensation plans.  We have to find our own way. 3.  Differences may be greater than reported here, as cost savings may be obtained by spreading      purchasing of fringe benefits (med, group life ins., etc.) across larger pools and groups. 4.  Funding is needed for a large national study similar to King & Cook (1980), involving      NACUBO, CUPA, and other interested organizations (perhaps TIAA and Ford Foundation).   5.  NSF and NIH should study faculty compensation in high wage/high demand STEM and IT fields. 6.  Secondary analysis/focus on high poverty regions. 7.  Secondary analysis/focus on sparsely populated areas. 8.  Study compensation across 2- & 4-year access sectors. 9.  A classification scheme appropriate for access institutions can help document the connection between      full-time faculty and higher degree completion rates.  Does presence of more full-time faculty lead to      faster/higher Associate Degree completion rates? If so, this finding would be of great importance.  To tell access story requires new frames to localize data!1  1Katsinas et al.: Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at AmePublished by The Keep, 2016 Table 1States with and without Collective Bargaining StateCollective Bargaining StateNo Collective BargainingAlaska X Alabama XCalifornia X Arizona XConnecticut X Arkansas XDelaware X Colorado XFlorida X Georgia XIllinois X Hawaii XIowa X Idaho XKansas X Indiana XMaine X Kentucky XMaryland X Louisiana XMassachusetts X Mississippi XMichigan X North Carolina XMinnesota X North Dakota XMissouri X Oklahoma XMontana X South Carolina XNebraska X Tennessee XNevada X Texas XNew Hampshire X Utah XNew Jersey X Virginia XNew Mexico X West Virginia XNew York X Wyoming XOhio XOregon XPennsylvania XRhode Island XSouth Dakota XVermont XWashington XWisconsin XSource:  Barry, J. & Savarese, M. (2012).  Directory of U.S. faculty contracts and bargaining agents in institutions of higher education.   New York:  National Center for the Study of Collective Bargaining in Higher Education and the Professions.  Total 20Total 302  2Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy, Vol. 0, Iss. 11 [2016], Art. 2http://thekeep.eiu.edu/jcba/vol0/iss11/2 Table 2Public Regional Universities with & without Collective Bargaining by Type, 2010-11All Public Regional UniversitiesWith Collective BargainingWithout Collective BargainingRural Small 49 32 17Rural Medium 90 40 50Rural Large 122 62 60Rural Average 261 134 127Suburban Smaller 13 9 4Suburban Larger 42 32 10Suburban Average 55 41 14Urban Smaller 21 13 8Urban Large 53 31 22Urban Average 74 44 30Average, All 390 219 171Rural Small 100 65 35Rural Medium 100 44 56Rural Large 100 51 49Rural Average 100 51 49Suburban Smaller 100 69 31Suburban Larger 100 76 24Suburban Average 100 75 25Urban Smaller 100 62 38Urban Large 100 58 42Urban Average 100 59 41Average, All 100 56 44Rural Small 13 15 10Rural Medium 23 18 29Rural Large 31 28 35Rural Average 67 61 74Suburban Smaller 3 4 2Suburban Larger 11 15 6Suburban Average 14 19 8Urban Smaller 5 6 5Urban Large 14 14 13Urban Average 19 20 18Total 100 100 100Institutions (in NUMBERS)Within  each geographic type                        (in PERCENTAGES)Across  each geographic type                           (in PERCENTAGES)Notes:  (1) Rregional universities are defined to be members of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities with identifiable institutional UnitIDs in the fedearl NCES/IPEDS data base. (2) definitions of public Regional University  subtypes were developed by Katsinas (2016, forthcoming).  (3) list of institutions with collective bargaining was obtainned from Berry & Saravese, 2012; (4) if the majority of regional universities within a given state had collective bargaining, the state was counted as a collective bargaining state.3  3Katsinas et al.: Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at AmePublished by The Keep, 2016Table 3Full-time Faculty at Regional Universities with & without Collective Bargaining, 2010-11TotalWith Collective BargainingWithout Collective BargainingRural Small 5,386 3,372 2,014Rural Medium 15,872 8,066 7,806Rural Large 50,605 25,764 24,841Rural Average 71,863 37,202 34,661Suburban Smaller 2,441 1,767 674Suburban Larger 18,884 13,635 5,249Suburban Average 21,325 15,402 5,923Urban Smaller 4,957 2,837 2,120Urban Large 29,077 19,027 10,050Urban Average 34,034 21,864 12,170Total, All 127,222 74,468 52,754Rural Small 100 63 37Rural Medium 100 51 49Rural Large 100 51 49Rural Average 100 52 48Suburban Smaller 100 72 28Suburban Larger 100 72 28Suburban Average 100 72 28Urban Smaller 100 57 43Urban Large 100 65 35Urban Average 100 64 36Average, All 100 63 37Rural Small 4 5 4Rural Medium 12 11 11Rural Large 40 35 47Rural Average 56 50 66Suburban Smaller 2 2 1Suburban Larger 15 18 10Suburban Average 17 21 11Urban Smaller 4 4 4Urban Large 23 26 19Urban Average 27 29 23 Average, Total 100 100 100Within  each geographic type                        (in PERCENTAGES)Across  each geographic type                           (in PERCENTAGES)Full-time Faculty ….Notes:  (1) Regional universities are defined to be members of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities with identifiable institutional UnitIDs in the federal NCES/IPEDS data base. (2) definitions of public Regional University  subtypes were developed by Katsinas (2016, forthcoming).  (3) source of institutions with collective bargaining was Berry & Saravese, 2012; (4) if the majority of Regional Universities within a given state had collective bargaining, the state was counted as a collective bargaining state.4  4Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy, Vol. 0, Iss. 11 [2016], Art. 2http://thekeep.eiu.edu/jcba/vol0/iss11/2    Table 4Average Salaries of Full-time at Public Regional Universities, 2010-2011: The impact of Collective BargainingDollars %Rural Small 49 5,386 100 63 37 $62,622 $64,737 $59,079 $5,658 9Rural Medium 90 15,872 100 51 49 $60,824 $61,900 $59,711 $2,189 4Rural Large 122 50,605 100 51 49 $69,074 $70,383 $67,482 $2,901 4Rural Average 261 71,863 100 52 48 $64,173 $65,673 $62,091 $3,583 5Suburban Smaller 13 2,441 100 72 28 $74,944 $79,018 $64,314 $14,704 19Suburban Larger 42 18,884 100 72 28 $74,687 $79,836 $61,339 $18,497 23Suburban Average 55 21,325 100 72 28 $74,816 $79,427 $62,827 $16,601 21Urban Smaller 21 4,957 100 57 43 $72,162 $70,704 $53,116 $17,588 25Urban Large 53 29,077 100 65 35 $77,940 $83,308 $75,105 $8,203 10Urban Average 74 34,034 100 64 36 $75,051 $77,006 $64,111 $12,896 17Totals/Averages 390 127,221 100 63 37 $71,347 $74,035 $63,009 $11,026 15Notes:  (1) 390 Regional universities were listed as American Association of State Colleges and Universities members as of August 2014  with identifiable institutional UnitIDs in the federal NCES/IPEDS data base; (2) data on full-time faculty is from the IPEDS Human Resources Survey for 2010-11; (3) definitions of public Regional University  subtypes were developed by Katsinas (2016, forthcoming), consistent with the geographic codes (rural, suburban, urban, etc.) that were part of the 2005 and 2010 Basic Classification of Associate's Colleges published by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and included in all published federal higher education data sets; (4) the source of institutions with collective bargaining was Berry & Saravese, 2012; (5) if the majority of Regional Universities within a given state had collective bargaining, the state was counted as a collective bargaining state.Collegeswith collective bargainingwithout collective bargainingFull-Time FacultyNumber TotalAverage Salaries of Full-Time Faculty… difference,        expressed in…Allwith collective bargainingwithout collective bargaining5  5Katsinas et al.: Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at AmePublished by The Keep, 2016   Table 5Average Fringe Benefits of Full-time at Public Regional Universities, 2010-2011: The impact of Collective Bargainingwith withoutFull-Time Collective  CollectiveColleges Faculty ALL Bargaining  Bargaining Dollars %Rural Small 49 5,386 $25,209 $26,828 $18,011 $8,817 33Rural Medium 90 15,872 $23,896 $27,321 $19,816 $7,505 27Rural Large 122 50,605 $25,159 $26,052 $24,066 $1,986 8Rural Average 261 71,863 $24,755 $26,734 $20,631 $6,103 23Suburban Smaller 13 2,438 $26,271 $34,172 $20,382 $13,790 40Suburban Larger 42 18,886 $26,679 $39,679 $23,590 $16,089 41Suburban Average 55 21,324 $26,475 $36,926 $21,986 $14,940 40Urban Smaller 21 4,957 $25,832 $28,601 $23,622 $4,979 17Urban Large 53 29,077 $26,684 $34,185 $21,345 $12,840 38Urban Average 74 34,034 $26,258 $31,393 $22,484 $8,910 28Total Average 390 127,221 $25,829 $31,684 $21,700 $9,984 32differenceexpressed inNotes:  (1) 390 Regional universities were listed as American Association of State Colleges and Universities members as of August 2014  with identifiable institutional UnitIDs in the federal NCES/IPEDS data base; (2) data on full-time faculty is from the IPEDS Human Resources Survey for 2010-11; (3) definitions of public Regional University  subtypes were developed by Katsinas (2016, forthcoming), consistent with the geographic codes (rural, suburban, urban, etc.) that were part of the 2005 and 2010 Basic Classification of Associate's Colleges published by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and included in all published federal higher education data sets; (4) the source of institutions with collective bargaining was Berry & Saravese, 2012; (5) if the majority of Regional Universities within a given state had collective bargaining, the state was counted as a collective bargaining state.6  6Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy, Vol. 0, Iss. 11 [2016], Art. 2http://thekeep.eiu.edu/jcba/vol0/iss11/2Table 6       The Impact of Collective Bargaining:  Total Monetary Compensation     for Full-Time Faculty at U.S. Public Regional Universities, 2010-11                     with  without annual average  Annual average     Collective   Collective difference expressed in x 30 years   ALL Bargaining  Bargaining Dollars %   (in dollars) Rural Small $87,831 $91,565 $77,090 $14,475 16 $434,250 Rural Medium $84,720 $89,221 $79,527 $9,694 11 $290,820 Rural Large $94,233 $96,435 $91,548 $4,887 5 $146,610 Rural Average $88,931 $92,407 $82,722 $9,685 10 $290,550 Suburban Smaller $101,215 $113,190 $84,696 $28,494 25 $854,820 Suburban Larger $101,366 $119,515 $84,929 $34,586 29 $1,037,580 Suburban Average $101,291 $116,353 $84,813 $31,540 27 $946,200 Urban Smaller $97,994 $99,305 $76,738 $22,567 23 $677,010 Urban Large $104,624 $117,493 $96,450 $21,043 18 $631,290 Urban Average $101,309 $108,399 $86,594 $21,805 20 $654,150 All $97,176 $105,720 $84,709 $21,010 20 $630,300 Notes:  (1) 390 Regional universities were listed as American Association of State Colleges and Universities members as of August 2014  with identifiable institutional UnitIDs in the federal NCES/IPEDS data base; (2) data on full-time faculty is from the IPEDS Human Resources Survey for 2010-11; (3) definitions of public Regional University  subtypes were developed by Katsinas (2016, forthcoming), consistent with the geographic codes (rural, suburban, urban, etc.) that were part of the 2005 and 2010 Basic Classification of Associate's Colleges published by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and included in all published federal higher education data sets; (4) the source of institutions with collective bargaining was Berry & Saravese, 2012; (5) if the majority of Regional Universities within a given state had collective bargaining, the state was counted as a collective bargaining state.  7  7Katsinas et al.: Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at AmePublished by The Keep, 2016

https://thekeep.eiu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1566&amp;context=jcba

Research Panel: Monetary Compensation of Full-Time Faculty at American Public Regional Universities: The Impact of Geography and the Existence of Collective Bargaining

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Eastern Illinois University

The Keep

Eastern Illinois University

The Keep