|
Dear ACPA Colleagues,
I am writing to share a decision by our ACPA Executive Team and External Relations Advisory Board (ERAB) about a proposed letter to congress regarding FLSA drafted by Carol Graves Holladay of Hurt, Norton and Associates who represents the Consortium on Government Relations for Student Affairs.
The Consortium consists of five higher education associations: ACPA – College Student Educators International; the Association of College and University Housing Officers-International (ACUHO-I); the Association for Student Conduct Association (ASCA); NASPA – Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education and NIRSA – Leaders in Collegiate Recreation.
The consortium members work diligently to understand and interpret the policy and regulatory issues that confront higher education and student affairs. Whenever possible, we work for consensus and unanimous decisions on public facing communications from the Consortium.
On occasion, however, the expressed needs and views of our members do not align with a proposed communication to Congress or regulators. When this occurs, we listen to our members, have deep discussion and make a decision about joining a proposed communication or not.
We have decided that we will not sign the proposed letter that is scheduled to go from the Consortium addressed to The Honorable John Kline, Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives and The Honorable Bobby Scott. Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives.
This proposed letter supports the “Regulatory Relief for Small Businesses, Schools, and Nonprofits Act” (H.R. 6094) introduced by congressperson Kline, which provides a six-month delay in implementing the Department of Labor’s final rule that more than doubles the Fair Labor Standards Act overtime salary threshold.
I have spent most of today taking additional input from members, sharing samples with our External Relations Advisory Board (ERAB) and our Executive Team. Before we sign a public facing statement, we vet the content with them.
It is fair to say that we all feel conflicted about the conditions that led up to the FLSA regulation change. It is not a simple exercise to balance the needs of our institutions, higher education administrators and the needs of individuals.
We are deeply concerned about the impact of the new regulations on campus budgets and on our colleagues who manage these complex institutions. There is already more than enough stress in their lives.
And, we are concerned about new professionals and graduate students entering our field. Commitment to a living wage is difficult to debate, particularly for those faculty members and students who invest so deeply in the system of higher education in order to work in it or for those who complete college only to enter an uncertain job market and often in university towns where housing and other costs of living can skyrocket.
Like the rest of America, colleges and universities have not adjusted the minimum wage trajectory quickly enough to keep pace with the cost of living. The salary threshold for campus payrolls has needed an overhaul for quite some time, so the amount of correction needed to bring equity is huge.
Universities may now have to cut programs, positions and hours. Alternatively, they may re-prioritize investments or both. These are very tough decisions, but not unlike the ones that must be made about bringing diversity and equity to faculty rosters and student populations. Student activists have raised these concerns to a crisis of conscience for our nation and the steady drum beat for change will not abate.
We did not make this decision lightly. It has been informed by our members.
I want to share a sample of the feedback that we received from many of you.
The first statement is from a senior administrator of a very large res/life program on a public campus:
“As I expressed to you on the phone, I would not support ACPA signing on to encourage a delay. I think the FLSA goes a long way to rectify improprieties that have existed in pay structures and work hours of student affairs staff. Given the complexity of the work, training required, significance of work impact on institutions and campus communities, I fully support my entry-level staff continuing to be classified as exempt and therefore, should be paid accordingly. Their salaries have been suppressed for far too long with misguided notions that SAs staff only "throw parties and hand out keys." Additionally, housing staffs are often intentionally underpaid because they receive housing – which by law can neither be taxed nor counted as part of the compensation package when it is not voluntary, nor for the primary benefit of the employee. Those who live in campus residences do so at great sacrifice so that our students have 24-hour support systems as they transition to adulthood. They are frequently called upon to manage serious crises situations involving facility issues, mental health, sexual misconduct, and drugs and alcohol. I would hope these staff members are indeed highly trained and fairly compensated.”
The next statement is from a Coordinator of Student Leadership on a public campus:
“I typically save my personal thoughts on controversial issues for twitter or coffee conversations. However, after reading this email, I couldn't resist the temptation to email you. While I appreciate your efforts to push public policy in the direction of halting FLSA or slowing it down, I believe you are doing a disservice to your organization members. FLSA is complex and that fact cannot be denied. However, FLSA is finally working in favor of student affairs professionals who for decades have been overworked, and under paid. None of us got into this field of work for the money but we also didn't get into the field to make borderline pennies. I, as a student affairs professional, shouldn't have to work two jobs to make ends meet. Most of your constituents Dr. Love work 50, 55, 60 hour work weeks for $29, $30, $31,000 a year. Rent, Utilities, Food, Gas, and Insurances, haven't gotten any cheaper due to inflation.
FLSA might not raise the pay for all professionals as colleges and universities are learning ways to adapt, but at minimum it is holding institutions now accountable for better work-life balance, and proper compensation for the extra labor hours we have to work. Let me guarantee you, NONE of us are going to be made rich from the passing of these new work guidelines. FLSA, Dr. Love, now guarantees that I as a non-exempt employee have to take a lunch break. In the past, I've gone weeks without eating lunch due to the busy nature of our work. FLSA now gives my employer guidelines for sleep. In the past, as a former Resident Director, I've gone an entire night without sleep and have had to report to work at 9am. Again, all due to the nature of our work. How, in good conscience, can we put up a fight against better work life balance for our student affairs professionals?
I've heard echoes about how FLSA is hurting our institutions...but, will better pay for the people who work hard in the trenches hurt the institution anymore than the $500,000; $600,000; $700,000 yearly wages of our college Presidents? Don't me started on the total compensation packages because with free houses, free gym memberships, drivers, and free meal plans...their compensations adds up to more than their salaries. The pay disparity in our field is borderline ludicrous, between titles, between levels, between individual colleges in a system, between departments in some cases. Implementation, like FLSA itself, is complex. But, we must let our institutions figure it out. They've had quite a while to work on this by the way; changes to the FLSA were first announced by President Obama in 2014. This "pay revolution" did not occur overnight.
I'm not saying FLSA is going to solve all of our problems. It is not. I'm saying we should be putting our 100% support behind FLSA and should be fighting legislation like Congressman Walberg's. Fighting FLSA implementation is fighting against live-able wages & work life balance for your ACPA members. We as student affairs professionals will continue to be under paid, overworked, etc. It is now or never. This is a step forward. I encourage to support the FLSA and steer clear of anyone or any institution that is trying to move us backwards. A good bulk of the members of the American College Personnel Association will surely be thankful that you are in support of the FLSA and what good it will bring to higher education. Thanks for reading this long email and I look forward to your response.”
The third statement is from a Coordinator, Community Service and Civic Engagement.
“I am writing to share my input in anticipation of ACPA's policy work on FLSA. I am adamantly against Congressman Walberg of Michigan's Regulatory Relief for Small Businesses, Schools and Nonprofits (HR 6094).
I am opposed to the concept of an incremental approach and am outraged that ACPA is pushing for this. The FLSA changes protect worker rights. Student affairs is a field that is notorious for underpaying and overworking employees, especially entry-level employees. The FLSA changes protect people like us who make under the $47k threshold.
Yes, this will impact universities financially. I recognize this but I care more about worker rights. Too many SA folks say that programs will have to be cut since there will be less time - well then, I say good. If an employee has so much work that they must work over 40 hours, then clearly this is not sustainable. Trimming collegiate programming is an acceptable approach to ensure worker rights. Yes, there will be challenges. My area of work will certainly be challenged. And yes, we will now have to clock in and clock out which appears like a decrease in professional standing. But overall, I believe the FLSA changes are key to protecting workers.
I am very disappointed in ACPA for promoting this bill. I understand the organization represents the elite ideals of university human resources and upper-level administrators on this matter. This is a shame.”
Conclusion
Our plan is to move forward with support for the FLSA regulations and our hope for a positive response by institutions. We do not plan to issue a statement to Chairman Kline regarding our decision. It is our hope that no one will interpret our decision as a reflection on our working relationship with the Consortium or our esteemed colleagues.
We have listened to our members and made the decision that seems to best reflect their views at this time. Our request for input went to our entire membership list. ACPA fully conforms to the FLSA regulations with our employees.
The Tao Te Ching suggests that it is sometimes necessary to learn to see the events in our world backwards, inside out and upside down. This is one of those times. College leaders can view these new FLSA regulations as punitive and destructive and/or view them as a path to equity and economic justice. In reality, it is a both/and scenario in which the pain to comply is deep and the need to bear it is equally so.
The ways in which all of these types of choices are made and communicated will demand the best of Chancellors, Presidents and Boards and perhaps, a bit of the Tao in the process.
As it acts in the world, the Tao is like the bending of a bow...it adjusts excess and deficiency so that there is a perfect balance. It takes from what is too much and gives to what isn’t enough.
With deep respect,
Cindi Love, Ed.D.
Executive Director, ACPA |
