(09-13-2013 06:10 AM)JMUBarry Wrote: http://m.dnronline.com/article/commentary_9_12_13
Longhorn - what are your thoughts on the statement towards the end on the "vote of no confidence" threat against Alger if we make the move?
A no-confidence vote in Alger by the Senate, or an effort by the Senate to solicit a no-confidence vote on the Pres by all full-time faculty on this issue, would be extremely bad. Yet, I don't think that's necessarily on the horizon. It all depends on how deftly any proposed move to FBS is handled by Alger as he triangulates that move with the issue of compensation. I like Alger, and I think the vast majority of the faculty want to believe in him.
Not that there is a quid pro quo swap to made here, but in a sense there is...faculty (and staff) need to be convinced that a move to FBS is not going to impact Alger's commitment to redressing the lingering salary and wage issue. The compensation task force appointed by Alger completed its work last Spring, yet now ANOTHER presidential committee has been appointed to study the recommendations of the original compensation task force, and make recommendations on what to do.
This isn't my first rodeo when it comes to this kind of thing...appointing a second, or a third committee (and so on ad infinitum) to study the recommendations of the previous committee is an old game used to delay, postpone and ultimately eliminate the passion behind an issue. As much as I admire and respect Uncle Ron, he was a master at this. Ron's protégé and UVA BOV lacky Rose didn't use this technique, he simply ignored the faculty. If Alger takes his cue from either of those predecessors and endlessly delays action on the recommendations of his own committees on compensation, all while proposing a costly new sports endeavor...well, then they'll be trouble in the friendly city.
The two weeks following the Oct. 4th meeting will be interesting, and should give us all an indication of what kind of leader Alger really is.