They’ll have a pretty good point if they use State University of NY Nanotechnology Professor Alain Kaloyeros’ paycheck as the barometer.
New York’s?!? Excluding despots and royal family members from oil emirates, he’s gotta be the highest paid government employee in the free world.
Wow. Who knew headhunters in the American University system were that aggressive. No word on how many hours Prof. Kaloyeros puts in per week. It’s always more fun when you can calculate a teacher’s hourly wage.
Agreed. Sure wish I could work just 180 days a year.
I think most people who say teachers are underpaid are talking about public school teachers, high school and below.
I’ve never heard anyone say a politician is underpaid.
Me too! Because as a teacher, you understand, I end up working six days a week, most weeks, with lesson planning, grading, calling parents, and extra curricular activities. On a good day, I get out of school around 4:30, even though I’ve been there since 7:30 and had a half an hour lunch.
Summers off would be great as well, but I always end up working summer school for the extra money, and I take classes myself to keep my credential in good standing. I’ve yet to take a Spring Break, Winter Break, or Fall Break without plenty of work to keep me busy.
180 days a year is the number of days spent in front of the students. Seven hours a day is the amount of time spent teaching the class. Work doesn’t stop just because there are no kids around.
My wife is a first (second, next year) grade teacher. I didn’t mean to start an argument. I’m just poking fun.
It’s certainly fair to discuss the salaries of government employees by presenting a single data point - one, which by your own admission, is the highest single government employee salary in the world.
And if $666,995 is such an insane salary, what does it say about private industry salaries that there are thousands of people in this country in private industry who earn more than that? Why is it insane for the government to pay an individual a six figure salary when it’s prefectly rational for a corporation to pay an individual a seven or eight figure salary?
You presuppose here that a university professor and a corporate executive are measured by comparable scales. An executive is paid precisely what he is worth the the corporation in pretty concrete terms, at least as far as are measurable by the company’s compensation committee (or equivalent). Is a university professor rated by similar contributions to the institution’s bottom line? Does SUNY, as a public school, have a fiscal self-sufficiency mandate that would make economic impact considerations preeminent in hiring decisions? If instead hiring is based on building the school’s prestige or program, then it’s a different set of criteria than those applied to a corporate executive.
Please. Compensation committees are a joke. It’s a group of high-level executives deciding how much money a high-level executive should get paid. How much do you think the average teacher would be making if a group of other teachers got to name his or her salary? It’s not like there’s any accountability - how often do you see a board of directors giving a CEO $20,000,000 in the same year that the corporation lost a fortune?
I trust you aren’t implying that this guy is being paid to just teach.
First of all, this guy probably works 60 hours a week on research and networking. (Maybe more.) It sounds like his job is to pull nanotech research grants to SUNY and industry to the area. If he can do that - and make New York a Silicon Valley for nanotech, he is worth ten times his salary.
The link said that he doesn’t do consulting or serve on boards, so he’s giving up hundreds of thousands of bucks to spend full time on his job. I know he isn’t going to be closing factories, or laying anyone off, or sending jobs to India, so some of you can’t imagine he could accomplish enough to be worth that salary.
As for politicians being underpaid: Spitzer makes $179K. Imagine what the CEO of a company with a net income half of New York State makes. Around the valley lots and lots of people in not very high level jobs makes that. But Joe Ditchdigger can’t imagine that the governor of the state can possibly be doing anything that much more valuable than he is, so reasonable salaries for politicians is unpopular. And you wonder why the one who aren’t rich go into jobs after their term that use their influence.
By attracting nanotech to the area, he can build up the tax base of the area, and assist in the creation of good jobs nearby. That’s what this is all about.
Silicon Valley exists in no small part thanks to faculty at Stanford. How much was that worth? A heck of a lot more than they ever got paid, I assure you.
So, your contention is that a corporate loss always means that the CEO is not worth whatever salary the Company’s Board decides to pay him?
Interesting.
Are you sure that’s what the University is counting on? Do you think that the selection committee sat around and calculated the relative value of each candidate’s impact on the local economy?
And, just to be clear, I’m not disagreeing with you (or with Little Nemo) necessarily. I’m just pointing out that it’s not intuitive that corporate executives and university professors are judged by the same criteria, which would make it useful to compare the magnitudes of their compensation.
No doubt. However, Stanford is a private university. SUNY is not. A state school will necessarily have different priorities than a private institution.
Sigh. I was so busy cutting out the 20 lines of extra stuff in my post that I left in an egregious error: I did not mean “whatever salary;” I should have said “a large salary.” I did not mean to imply that Little Nemo thought that even a small salary would be unreasonable for the CEO of a company losing money.
Over here in the real world, boards of directors are elected by shareholders, instead of appearing magically in the boardroom after the corporate secretary burns the sacrificial proxy motion.
Well, for one thing, salaries for academics in certain fields are often based on that academic’s record of attracting grants and other investment monies to the university. For example, if you heard that a professor were paid $500,000, but that he was attracting $25,000,000 in grants to his institutions, would you think the salary excessive?
Also, as we’re talking about a public servant here, one employed by the state of New York, what about his contribution to the overall economy of the state, or of the region where his university is located? As this article notes, in 2002 Kaloyeros was instrumental in helping bring a Sematech research facility to Albany. It goes on to note that:
If Kaloyeros had a crucial role in luring the facility to New York, and the region benefited from similar (or even far smaller) economic transformations, would he be worth his salary then?
And what do you know? three-week-old article tells us:
And from this article:
Look, i’ve been known to complain about top-level salary inflation, especially when it’s not reflective of performance. I’m not saying that the guy’s salary is necessarily right, but it seems to me that there’s at least a case to be made that he’s giving the people of New York value for money. Also, i think it’s pretty narrow-minded and stupid to assume that just because the guy is a government employee he must not be worth the money he’s getting. And, as Little Nemo observes, anyone who thinks that private sector executive compensation is based purely on some rarified, market- and performance-based criteria is dreaming.
Not even close, but thanks for playing.
You know who the highest paid government employee is in quite a few American states? I’ll give you a hint: they usually work in universities, but they aren’t academics.
They’re the coaches of state university football teams.
In Florida, the coach of the Florida State Seminoles makes just over $2 million per year.
In Iowa, Kirk Ferentz at the University of Iowa earned just over $3.1 million in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2006, and Patrick (Dan) McCarney earned just over $1 million at Iowa State in the same period.
In Arkansas (pdf), Houston Nutt made just over $1 million last year at the University of Arkansas, while the school’s basketball coach Stanley Heath pulled down just over $750,000.
And in Alabama, Nick Saban recently signed a deal that will pay him an average of $4 million a year over the next eight years to coach the Crimson Tide. I’m betting that puts him above any other employee of the state of Alabama.
Well the University of California system is the largest academic patent holder in the US, so even though state schools have different priorities, they still have incentives to attract the brightest talent
cite: http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/2005/sep28.html
At most of the colleges where I’ve worked the computer science and upper level engineering/technology professors were usually
1- the highest paid professors at the college (often on par with the Pres & VPs)
2- foreign born (usually Indian, Chinese or Russian)
because a U.S. citizen or well established alien would NEVER go into academia for the money. As much as they made at small GA public colleges (usually the low 6 figures) they could earn several times that in the corporate world. However, they train students who will go on to earn megabucks and through taxes and hopefully through alumni contributions will offset the amount their old profs were being paid.
And of course medical professors make big bucks as well because they’re doctors.
I have way more of a problem with nimrods like Ward Churchill earning $86,000 per year or an egomaniacal theater prof I knew (whose productions were basically Ed Wood with a good costumer and lighting person) who earned $75,000 per year or even an aged history prof that I quite liked as a person earning $120K at a “never-heard-of-it-ville” university* than I do tech profs or doctors or well-established law profs earning 6 figures.
One of my favorite professors was an aerodynamics engineer who with his B.A. had worked for NASA and then a military contractor, then quit, earned his Ph.D. in philosophy, and became a classroom instructor making less than 1/5 of what he had earned in aerotech. One of the many things I really liked about him was that he was the first to say “Of COURSE I earn less here, we’re non-profit and there’s no shortage of guys with Ph.D.s, it’s simple economics, but I knew that coming in. I didn’t want to teach engineering and I hated being an engineer and I knew what type of pay cut I was taking.” (Another prof I liked had been a very successful trial lawyer in Seattle before taking holy orders and becoming a history prof, but he eventually returned to Washington and resumed law practice [basically when his money ran out from what I’m told]).
*Nice guy and former department head and all that, but $120K is just too damned much for teaching history at a college most people have never heard of.
The irony is that if the highest paid government employee in the world is only making $666,950 a year, then it really is evidence that teachers, politicians, and other government employees are underpaid. Consider that the highest paid executive makes $230,554,000 a year (Terry Semel); the highest paid athlete makes $80,300,000 a year (Tiger Woods); and the highest paid actor makes $40,000,000 a year (Will Ferrell).
And government officials are elected by voters, so I guess then Dr Kaloyeros’ paycheck must be okay, otherwise the officials who gave it to him would have been voted out of office.
Or, maybe over here in the real real world, both government officials and corporate board member have figured out how to put enough cover on their more controversial decisions to keep their own rice bowls safe. And part of that is knowing that one happy CEO or Senator is worth more than a thousand unhappy shareholders or voters.
Katie Couric delivered the lowest ratings for CBS Evening News since the Reagan Administration and is paid $15 million per year for doing it.