Background Information

This is a brief history of discussions regarding the request by the University of Detroit Mercy to recoup $500,000 from the UDMPU, non-UDMPU faculty (Law and Dental faculty), and staff and administrators.  University administrators approached UDMPU officials with information that their best projections indicated a budget deficit of $2,000,000 for the fiscal year ending 30 June 2005.  Rather than try to hide it and hope it would go away, the newly hired Vice-President for Finance and Vice-President and Provost for Academic Affairs along with the Associate Vice-President for Human Resources and the President of the University of Detroit Mercy took proactive steps and informed the UDMPU of the situation. 

The Executive Liaison Committee immediately brought the issue to the Union Board, which, along with the faculty, suggested discussions begin on an informal basis through the Institutional Resources Committee (IRC).  The IRC heard the administration’s request that the UDMPU agree to a $5,000 cap on University contributions to individual TIAA-CREF accounts for the fiscal year 2005, returning to contractual levels for the 2006 fiscal year and beyond.  The IRC rejected the proposal as violating the equity concerns of the Union but agreed to present it to the faculty.  Moreover, the IRC provided several suggestions regarding revenue enhancements and cost reductions.  While the administration was very receptive to each idea, none of them seemed to meet the needs of the University in that the budget deficit had to be clearly eliminated, or specific and measurable steps in place, by 31 December 2004. 

At a general meeting of the faculty, the message was very clear:  the cap proposal should be rejected and there should be no cap at any level; that discussions should proceed through the IRC on an informal level; that a newly formed PNC should be in place; and, the PNC should enter into formal negotiations if the PNC so determined.  The first meeting of the PNC was an informal informational meeting with the Vice-President of Finance, Vice-President of Academic Affairs and the Associate Vice-President of Human Resources.  The next meeting was the beginning of formal negotiations to discuss a short-term change in the Collective Bargaining Agreement of 16 August 2003.  There are essentially two areas of concern here:  revenue streams and cost savings.  The PNC has heard the rationale for the requested change in contractually agreed benefits and a comparison of UDM with other Jesuit institutions on cost/revenue ratios.  We have the highest cost per tuition revenue ratio of any Jesuit institution without a medical school.  A long-term solution is to continue cutting overhead costs that was begun this past summer with the elimination of some positions and a long-term restructuring of the University.

But that leaves us with the issue of how to deal with the short-term budget deficit for this fiscal year.  $1,500,000 of the $2,000,000 deficit is being gained from other cost savings as has been outlined by the President at a town meeting and in communications from the Union.  After many discussions and suggestions by members of the PNC and other UDMPU members, and within the context of the descriptions presented by the administration, your PNC makes the following tentative proposal for your consideration and discussion.

Return to Budget-Crisis Page

Return to UDMPU Home Page

Last Revision:  Tuesday 7 December,  2004