Docstoc

budget and salary increase

Document Sample
budget and salary increase Powered By Docstoc
					2011 Staff Senate survey on tuition remission,
budget and salary increase


1. At UofL, I am:


                                                                   Response    Response
                                                                    Percent     Count

                    Classified Staff                                  32.0%         497


   Professional & Administrative
                                                                      60.6%         942
                               Staff


                            Faculty                                    6.6%         102


                      Administrator                                    0.8%          13


                                                           answered question      1,554


                                                            skipped question            8




2. How many years have you been employed at UofL?


                                                                   Response    Response
                                                                    Percent     Count

                               0-3                                    18.1%         282


                               3-5                                    14.4%         225


                              5 - 10                                  21.0%         328


                                10+                                   46.4%         724


                                                           answered question      1,559


                                                            skipped question            3




                                                1 of 168
3. On which campus are you located?


                                                                                             Response     Response
                                                                                              Percent      Count


                         Belknap                                                                 55.3%         862


             Health Science Center                                                               40.3%         628


                      Shelbyhurst                                                                 2.5%          39


                            Other                                                                 1.9%          29


                                                                                   answered question         1,558


                                                                                     skipped question              4




4. Gender


                                                                                             Response     Response
                                                                                              Percent      Count


                          Female                                                                 71.0%       1,097


                             Male                                                                29.0%         448


                                                                                   answered question         1,545


                                                                                     skipped question           17




5. A minimum performance standard of grade C (2.0) should be implemented on courses funded via tuition
remission.


                                     Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                   Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                     Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

     Please select the option that
                                     7.5% (116)   10.0% (155)   12.0% (186)   42.3% (657)   28.3% (439)      1,553
   corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                   answered question         1,553


                                                                                     skipped question              9




                                                     2 of 168
6. Three consecutive grades below a C would constitute unsatisfactory performance and the employees would be
required to raise their GPA to a 2.0 to reinstate eligibility for tuition remission.


                                       Strongly                                                  Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree       Neutral            Agree
                                       Disagree                                                    Agree       Count

      Please select the option that
                                      7.2% (112)    10.0% (156)    11.7% (182)   43.6% (677)    27.5% (427)      1,554
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                         answered question       1,554


                                                                                           skipped question            8




7. Withdrawal after the drop/add date should constitute unsatisfactory performance.


                                       Strongly                                                  Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree       Neutral            Agree
                                       Disagree                                                    Agree       Count

      Please select the option that
                                      16.3% (253)   26.9% (416)    22.0% (341)   23.2% (359)    11.6% (180)      1,549
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                         answered question       1,549


                                                                                           skipped question         13




8. Tuition remission should cover only the tuition component and employees should pay the student fee portion
of their enrollment (currently $18 per credit hour for undergraduate courses and $24 per credit hour for
graduate courses).


                                       Strongly                                                  Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree       Neutral            Agree
                                       Disagree                                                    Agree       Count

      Please select the option that
                                      27.6% (428)   26.3% (408)    16.5% (256)   22.2% (345)     7.5% (116)      1,553
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                         answered question       1,553


                                                                                           skipped question            9




                                                        3 of 168
9. To cap the graduate tuition remission rate, graduate program tuition surcharges above the regular per credit
hour tuition rate, should be paid by the employee.


                                       Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                      24.3% (377)   26.4% (409)   21.2% (328)   20.4% (316)   7.7% (119)        1,549
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question          1,549


                                                                                       skipped question           13




10. The spousal transfer benefit should be reinstated if the employee is not using his or her tuition waiver.


                                       Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                       4.5% (70)    6.5% (101)    12.4% (192)   37.6% (583)   39.0% (604)       1,550
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question          1,550


                                                                                       skipped question           12




11. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?


                                                                                                            Response
                                                                                                             Count

                                                                                                                 219


                                                                                     answered question           219


                                                                                       skipped question         1,343




                                                       4 of 168
12. Other comments:


                                                                                                              Response
                                                                                                               Count

                                                                                                                   166


                                                                                       answered question           166


                                                                                         skipped question        1,396




13. Eligibility for the first undergraduate degree is sufficient.


                                       Strongly                                                  Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree        Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                   Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                      6.6% (101)    9.8% (150)      16.0% (245)   45.1% (692)   22.5% (345)      1,533
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                       answered question         1,533


                                                                                         skipped question           29




14. An age limit of 26 should be established.


                                       Strongly                                                  Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree        Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                   Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                      12.9% (199)   20.2% (311)     16.0% (247)   33.5% (517)   17.4% (268)      1,542
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                       answered question         1,542


                                                                                         skipped question           20




                                                        5 of 168
15. There should be a one-year waiting period for new employees (after the effective date) before dependents are
eligible for tuition remission.


                                       Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                      9.7% (149)    16.0% (247)   16.2% (250)   38.3% (590)   19.8% (305)      1,541
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question         1,541


                                                                                       skipped question           21




16. A seven-year creditable service period should be implemented for continuing eligibility for dependents of
employees who retire, die in active service or become permanently disabled (for employees hired after
implementation date).


                                       Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                      8.6% (131)    15.0% (228)   28.7% (438)   34.3% (523)   13.4% (204)      1,524
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question         1,524


                                                                                       skipped question           38




17. There should be a credit hour limit of 140 hours, regardless of degree program.


                                       Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                      13.2% (204)   24.8% (382)   24.4% (376)   25.8% (397)   11.8% (182)      1,541
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question         1,541


                                                                                       skipped question           21




                                                       6 of 168
18. Tuition remission should cover only the tuition component and the dependent students should be required
to pay student fees, similar to employees.


                                       Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                      17.4% (267)   23.7% (365)   15.5% (238)   32.6% (501)   10.8% (166)      1,537
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question         1,537


                                                                                       skipped question           25




19. The 30% surcharge on distance education courses should be paid by the dependent student.


                                       Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                      17.9% (275)   26.9% (412)   23.5% (361)   23.4% (359)   8.2% (126)       1,533
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question         1,533


                                                                                       skipped question           29




20. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?


                                                                                                            Response
                                                                                                             Count

                                                                                                                 191


                                                                                     answered question           191


                                                                                       skipped question        1,371




                                                       7 of 168
21. Other comments:


                                                                                                            Response
                                                                                                             Count

                                                                                                                 124


                                                                                     answered question           124


                                                                                       skipped question        1,438




22. A five-year vesting period should be adopted for the Retirement Benefit Plan.


                                       Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                      18.6% (288)   26.4% (408)   17.8% (276)   27.1% (419)   10.1% (156)      1,547
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question         1,547


                                                                                       skipped question           15




23. If a vesting period is adopted, the one-year waiting period for eligibility should be eliminated.


                                       Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                       5.0% (76)    12.5% (192)   17.1% (262)   45.5% (697)   19.9% (305)      1,532
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question         1,532


                                                                                       skipped question           30




                                                       8 of 168
24. Any changes to the current Retirement Benefit Plan should affect only new employees hired after the change
is implemented.


                                      Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                    Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                      Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

     Please select the option that
                                      1.4% (21)     3.4% (53)    7.2% (112)    39.7% (615)   48.3% (747)      1,548
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                    answered question         1,548


                                                                                      skipped question           14




25. The university should reduce the retirement contribution for new employees hired after the change is
implemented.


                                      Strongly                                                Strongly     Response
                                                    Disagree      Neutral        Agree
                                      Disagree                                                 Agree        Count

     Please select the option that
                                     20.1% (310)   36.3% (560)   30.0% (462)   10.0% (154)    3.6% (56)       1,542
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                    answered question         1,542


                                                                                      skipped question           20




26. Comments:


                                                                                                           Response
                                                                                                            Count

                                                                                                                205


                                                                                    answered question           205


                                                                                      skipped question        1,357




                                                      9 of 168
27. University contributions towards Retiree Health Insurance should be eliminated.


                                      Strongly                                                 Strongly     Response
                                                    Disagree       Neutral        Agree
                                      Disagree                                                  Agree        Count

     Please select the option that
                                     42.0% (651)   35.3% (547)    14.7% (228)    5.9% (92)     2.1% (32)       1,550
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question         1,550


                                                                                       skipped question           12




28. Any changes to the current Retiree Health Insurance Benefit Plan should affect only new employees hired
after the change is implemented.


                                      Strongly                                                 Strongly     Response
                                                    Disagree       Neutral        Agree
                                      Disagree                                                  Agree        Count

     Please select the option that
                                      5.5% (85)     6.3% (98)     14.4% (222)   40.2% (621)   33.6% (520)      1,546
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question         1,546


                                                                                       skipped question           16




29. Comments:


                                                                                                            Response
                                                                                                             Count

                                                                                                                 146


                                                                                     answered question           146


                                                                                       skipped question        1,416




                                                      10 of 168
30. A surtax should be placed on paper, toner, individual printers and related supplies.


                                      Strongly                                                Strongly    Response
                                                    Disagree       Neutral        Agree
                                      Disagree                                                 Agree       Count

     Please select the option that
                                     26.5% (408)   29.7% (457)    22.7% (350)   15.3% (236)   5.7% (88)      1,539
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question       1,539


                                                                                       skipped question         23




31. Comments:


                                                                                                          Response
                                                                                                           Count

                                                                                                               238


                                                                                     answered question         238


                                                                                       skipped question      1,324




32. The University should increase the surcharge on program budgets, auxiliaries and service centers.


                                      Strongly                                                Strongly    Response
                                                    Disagree       Neutral        Agree
                                      Disagree                                                 Agree       Count

     Please select the option that
                                     18.4% (280)   28.8% (438)    41.3% (628)   9.2% (139)    2.2% (34)      1,519
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                     answered question       1,519


                                                                                       skipped question         43




33. Comments:


                                                                                                          Response
                                                                                                           Count

                                                                                                               131


                                                                                     answered question         131


                                                                                       skipped question      1,431


                                                      11 of 168
34. UofL’s benefits program is rich compared to other state universities.


                                       Strongly                                                 Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree       Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                  Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                       4.0% (62)    11.4% (176)    42.8% (662)   27.6% (426)   14.2% (220)      1,546
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                      answered question         1,546


                                                                                        skipped question           16




35. I would be willing to trade off some of my benefits to increase wages.


                                       Strongly                                                 Strongly     Response
                                                     Disagree       Neutral        Agree
                                       Disagree                                                  Agree        Count

      Please select the option that
                                      20.7% (320)   36.1% (558)    21.6% (334)   17.7% (273)    3.8% (59)       1,544
    corresponds with your opinion.


                                                                                      answered question         1,544


                                                                                        skipped question           18




36. Comments:


                                                                                                             Response
                                                                                                              Count

                                                                                                                  315


                                                                                      answered question           315


                                                                                        skipped question        1,247




                                                       12 of 168
37. A. If Salary Pool is 2%....


                                                                Response      Response
                                                                 Percent       Count


  Distribute entire pool as a flat
dollar amount across-the-board
        to all eligible employees                                   37.7%          589
           (approx. $1,800 per FT
                        employee).


Start with a flat dollar amount (e.g.
         $1,200) and distribute any
          remaining funds as a flat                                 11.1%          174
   percentage amount across-the-
    board to all eligible employees.


Start with a flat dollar amount (e.g.
         $1,200) and distribute any
 remaining money per merit-based                                    19.5%          305
          calculations to all eligible
                        employees.


     Distribute entire pool as a flat
   percentage amount across-the-                                    13.8%          215
    board to all eligible employees.


    Distribute entire pool per merit
   based calculations to all eligible                                 9.0%         140
                        employees.


Distribute pool as a combination of
flat percentage amount across-the-
                                                                      8.9%         139
   board (e.g. 1%) and merit based
                       calculations.


                                                     Other (please specify)
                                                                                    88



                                                      answered question          1,562


                                                        skipped question               0




                                         13 of 168
38. If Salary Pool is greater than 2%......


                                                                     Response      Response
                                                                      Percent       Count

Distribute additional funds as a flat
                                                                         37.2%          581
   dollar amount across-the-board.


Distribute additional funds as a flat
    percentage amount across-the-                                        23.9%          373
                              board.


 Distribute additional funds per
                                                                         38.9%          608
               merit calculations.


                                                          Other (please specify)
                                                                                         65



                                                           answered question          1,562


                                                             skipped question               0




39. Feedback/Questions/Issues:


                                                                                   Response
                                                                                    Count

                                                                                        211


                                                           answered question            211


                                                             skipped question         1,351




                                              14 of 168
The size of the document will not allow it to complete the survey in pdf. I figured we could do the same
thing with an e-mail listing of the questions.

The survey results include the various areas where other text was added between questions throwing off
the numbering. We cannot change how this works when Survey Monkey downloads the results of the
survey data.


The following numbers with written responses in the results correspond with the listed numbers in the
survey:

Employee Tuition Remission - written responses under #13 in the results correspond with question #11
in the survey

Employee Tuition Remission - written responses under #14 in the results correspond with question #12
in the survey

Dependent Tuition Remission - written responses under #23 in the results correspond with question #20
in the survey

Dependent Tuition Remission - written responses under #24 in the results correspond with question #21
in the survey

Retirement Vesting & Cost Savings - written responses under #31 in the results correspond with question
#26 in the survey

Retiree Health Insurance - written responses under #35 in the results correspond with question #29 in
the survey

Surtax on paper, toner, etc. - written responses under #38 in the results correspond with question #31 in
the survey

Surcharge on program budgets - written responses under #41 in the results correspond with question
#33 in the survey

Benefits questions - written responses under #45 in the results correspond with question #36 in the
survey

After question 45, there is an "other" section that corresponds to question #37 in the survey, followed by
another for question #38

Feedback/Questions/Issues, #50 corresponds with survey question #39

 
40. Complete the following information only if you require a response.


                                                                                                    Response    Response
                                                                                                     Percent     Count


                            Name:
                                                                                                       98.3%          58


                           Phone:
                                                                                                       83.1%          49


                            Email:
                                                                                                       96.6%          57


Preferred Contact Method: (phone
                          or email)                                                                    86.4%          51



                                                                                            answered question         59


                                                                                             skipped question      1,503




13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
  1     I have no ideas                                                                            Feb 21, 2011 12:41 PM
  2     I think the drop/add should be reviewed individually. In cases of illness, family          Feb 21, 2011 12:44 PM
        death, or a particularly traumatic divorce, this might be waived.
  3     limit remission to full time employees with at least one full year of service              Feb 21, 2011 12:45 PM
  4     I do not feel that UofL should offer the tuition remission benefit to spouse, for the      Feb 21, 2011 12:47 PM
        actual employee and their child should be first. In a time when money is over-
        abundant then this can be re-evaluated.
  5     In reference to 8, I think if the tuition remission is going to be covered by the          Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
        University, paying an extra $18/credit hour out of pocket is kind of lame
        considering it's probably 1% of the fees associated with the course.
  6     na                                                                                         Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
  7     7. I believe there should be some situations that would allow drops after drop/add         Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
        date. Perhaps a review committee....One time well after drop/add I learned I
        probably had cancer and required immediate, major surgery. While it turned out I
        didn't, the first thing I did was drop the graduate class I was taking. Just didn't
        need any more stress in my life...and believe once in a while others are faced with
        similar situations. If that would only be one strike out of three toward requiring a
        satisfactory GPA, maybe that's different. I don't know enough to know what I'm
        talking about.
        9. I'd rather see current employees grandfathered in at higher tuition benefits.
        10. I heard the provost promise "us" that this would be revisited. I'd at least like
        that consideration.




                                                       15 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                      Response Text
  8     SPOUSES SHOULD GET HALF-RATE TUITION REMISSION IF NOT USED BY                               Feb 21, 2011 12:56 PM
        THE EMPLOYEE
  9     I think that graduate classes are a great way to advance a career that          Feb 21, 2011 12:56 PM
        undergraduate classes may not be able to provide. "Penalizing" employees taking
        graduate classes trying to further their education and overall helping the
        University by making them pay the difference in tuition paid, in my opinion, is
        unnecessary.
 10     Reducing number of sick days accrued per year per employee. Less time would                 Feb 21, 2011 1:00 PM
        be paid out to persons who take advantage of the system and would also increase
        productivity.
 11     That is the whole reason I even came to UofL. I took a cut in pay but with this             Feb 21, 2011 1:02 PM
        benefit I figure its as broad asit is long. It is a bonus for alot of staff to consider
        and to agree to come on board b/c of this benefit. We may not pay the best but
        this benefit makes up fot it.
 12     I graduated magna cum laude from U of L, and earned most of my credits via                  Feb 21, 2011 1:03 PM
        tuition remission. During one semester, I had a terrible professor from whom I
        earned a "D." I ended up taking the class again by another professor and earned
        an "A." I don't think it would be fair that I should be made to pay for that class
        because I had a terrible professor. Therefore, I don't think the recommendation
        made for #5 should go into effect. Possibly change it to "five consecutive grades
        below a "C."
 13     As a University, I believe education should be our highest priority. Increasing             Feb 21, 2011 1:04 PM
        access to education and decreasing the cost to any individual should always be
        our goal. Cut everywhere else before you cut here.
 14     Since children of employees have an age limit to complete their degree anyway               Feb 21, 2011 1:07 PM
        why worry if they are successfully completing courses?
 15     Employees should have the benefit of not having to pay for any of their schooling           Feb 21, 2011 1:09 PM
        if done at UofL even Graduate. Employees work at UofL and are part of the
        sucess of the University and should be able to futher their education to make
        themselves a better employee and better person.
 16     I think that if withdrawal is used, if there is valid reason for it that should not count   Feb 21, 2011 1:12 PM
        as unsatisfactory performance.
 17     I think if I'm not going to school, that my husband should be allowed to use my             Feb 21, 2011 1:15 PM
        credits.
 18     Employees should have to be employed for 12-months for this benefit similar to              Feb 21, 2011 1:18 PM
        other benefits.
 19     I do not favor the linking of cost saving and employee tuition performance                  Feb 21, 2011 1:25 PM
        guidelines. I agree that contributions toward tuition should depend on classroom
        performance. I disagree that this should be presented as a money saving
        strategy.
 20     I disagree with the eployee being asked to pay the student fee portion of their             Feb 21, 2011 1:30 PM
        enrollment. As a institutio of higher education I think that the University should
        support employees in advancement of their education. Additionally, I think that
        the spousal transfer of benefit should be reinstated.




                                                         16 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 21     I do not believe that withdrawal after the drop/add date should constitute              Feb 21, 2011 1:31 PM
        unsatisfactory performance. While withdrawal may be tied to academic
        performance, there are instances where life changes occur which require that one
        withdraw from a course due to time or other constraints. Most serious students
        (which employee/students tend to be in my experience) do not take the decision
        to lightly as withdrawing from a course can delay other life plans and represent
        time wasted. Individuals should not be further penalized for this.
 22     I don't believe there should be tuition surcharges in the first place.                  Feb 21, 2011 1:37 PM
 23     I am assuming that #9 excludes online courses where there is a surcharge                Feb 21, 2011 1:38 PM
        involved.
 24     I don't believe we should be covering spouses.                                          Feb 21, 2011 1:38 PM
 25     I feel a GPA of B or better should be the guideline for tuition reimbursement in        Feb 21, 2011 1:39 PM
        undergrad and grad school.
 26     This is the last great benefit left at the university. I would not mess with it. Many   Feb 21, 2011 1:39 PM
        people feel that this takes the place of pay. Our pay is low compared to outside
        business. I know you may say we are not a "for profit" business. We work at the
        university to support our family just as a "for profit" worker. If you take away the
        perks you will take away the worker. You will be left with a low paying job. Let’s
        cut back the outrageous salaries that are being paid over $250,000. No one is
        worth that kind of money. No one!!! This is why the President of the United States
        salary is capped.
        The school should collect a higher percentage of the money that sports bring in.
        Many of the sports patrons buy seats to sporting events just because they
        graduated from U of L. They feel they are getting something back from their
        donation. School pride allows them to give to sports programs.
        Please, do not cut back tuition remission in any form. I used it several years ago.
        Thanks.
 27     These changes would not generate enough of a cost save to be worth the moral            Feb 21, 2011 1:41 PM
        damage done to the work force.
 28     None at the moment                                                                      Feb 21, 2011 1:42 PM
 29     8. Tuition remission should cover only the tuition component and employees              Feb 21, 2011 1:44 PM
        should pay the student fee portion of their enrollment (currently $18 per credit
        hour for undergraduate courses and $24 per credit hour for graduate courses). I
        don't think employees should pay this fee.
 30     Employees should remain able to go back to school without fees. Since this is a         Feb 21, 2011 1:46 PM
        post secondary school we should be striving for all of our employees to have a
        higher education. However, I do believe that the employee should retain a C or
        higher average.
 31     Limit all tuition remission for all including children to 6 hours a semester. I don't   Feb 21, 2011 1:55 PM
        have kids or a spouse so these mean nothing to me. Don't make me pay now that
        I want to get my Masters after all these years.
 32     I only disagreed with the drop/add constituting an unsatisfactory performance,          Feb 21, 2011 2:01 PM
        becuase I know that sometimes there is withdrawal due to health issues, so I think
        it needs to be evaluated on an individual basis.
 33     Tuition remission should be paid by the employer without any stipulations as long       Feb 21, 2011 2:11 PM
        as the employee is actively taking classes.




                                                       17 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 34     #6 - What about grades of an "I" or "X"?                                                Feb 21, 2011 2:17 PM
        #7 Which withdrawal period - 100% refund, 75%, etc?
        #9 - all programs could go to this model and then employees would have out of
        pocket costs.
 35     I have been working here, for low pay, for almost 6 years. I enjoy my co-workers        Feb 21, 2011 2:21 PM
        and my boss, and also my job. However, I know we are making less than the
        private market. The reason I work here is the free college for my children (and the
        403 match) as with what we make, we cannot afford it!!!! I would like to see the
        private market salaries that you came up with (did you go to the lowest paid area
        of town, or the poorest states around)? My suggestion is to leave as is!!! We
        would be better off getting a private job (not here) and making enough to pay for
        college ourselves!!
 36     Have persons above a threshold of salary ($150,000+) not be eligible for total          Feb 21, 2011 2:22 PM
        tuition remission and use the savings to pay the fees on other employees making
        less than $150,000 per year.
 37     One can not just start changing employee benefits due to whatever reason once           Feb 21, 2011 2:23 PM
        employee has been hired...otherwise the contract have been broken....now for
        new incoming employee...yes there can be changes implemented.
 38     I think it's more than fair to implement conditions to the tuition remission benefit.   Feb 21, 2011 2:24 PM
 39     In my opinion, tuition reimbursement for employees is one of the best benefits          Feb 21, 2011 2:28 PM
        provided and as such is viewed by me as the "cost of doing business." Perhaps
        consider limiting the number of hours to 3 per semester or some other artificial
        constraint.
 40     On question 6, I chose disagree because I feel that 3 attempts to fail at a course      Feb 21, 2011 2:33 PM
        that is free to the employee/dependent is excessive waste. The users of this
        benefit should understand it's value and not abuse it. The performance standard
        should be maintaining a 2.0, only permitting one "unsatisfactory" attempt, at which
        the second attempt would be only paid at 50%, and the third attempt at 0% by the
        tuition remission program until the GPA is brought up to 2.0.
 41     1. GPA requirements are not necessary. If the employee fails to meet the                Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
        minimum requirements of their program (which 2.0 is the lowest) then they get put
        on probabtion and then suspended as a result are and they are unable to
        participate in tuition remission... So Im not sure what you are trying to do here
        other than get more benefits stripped away from people. Im sure there are
        FERPA laws that could prevent you from looking up grades without permission
        too? If you want to cap something then strip down the benefits provided to
        dependents and spouses and stop nerfing the employee side of the benefit. Also
        there is no mention of "PUNISHMENT" to the spouse or dependents.. This is
        unfair and I believe grievable. I for one am sick of people who are married and
        their broods getting all the benefits around here and the single folks getting the
        shaft. You already get an extended benefit of more time off paid when you
        breed... what else. UNFAIR UNFAIR UNFAIR! Oh and about the fees... What?
        are you kidding me with that?
 42     not sure                                                                                Feb 21, 2011 2:42 PM
 43     Minimum performance should not be an across the board standard, but should be           Feb 21, 2011 2:43 PM
        examined on a case-by-case basis according to the circumstances. Situations do
        arise which could cause an employee to underperform in a class, and for which
        tuition remission should not be withdrawn automatically. Particularly if monitoring
        employee performance is not an area in which cost savings will be realized, it is
        not an area in which changes should be made.




                                                       18 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 44     #8 & #9. As an institution of higher education I think it's important for employees to   Feb 21, 2011 2:46 PM
        be educated. Capping the graduate tuition remission rate would penalize
        employees who want to further their education and in turn help students and the
        university.
 45     Set a cap on the maximum credits eligible for remission                                  Feb 21, 2011 2:52 PM
 46     Give merit pay raises to faculty and staff, not across the board raises.                 Feb 21, 2011 2:56 PM
 47     N/A                                                                                      Feb 21, 2011 3:02 PM
 48     Everyone receives a tuition benefit in his/her paycheck, but not everyone uses it.       Feb 21, 2011 3:12 PM
        I would suggest, much like a sick day bank, that those who do not use it return it
        to a pool (I am assuming it already goes into some sort of pool) or give it to a
        spouse or dependent. For any employee using more than his/her allotment to
        cover tuition for himself or a spouse or dependent per paycheck, he/she could
        access this overage pool for additional tuition assistance (it could be applied for
        and based on need, performance, or both -- it could also cover the difference
        between undergrad and grad tuition, etc.). I think this would cover several of the
        scenarios mentioned above.
 49     I see too much waste in other areas of campus to justify cutting funding for a           Feb 21, 2011 3:13 PM
        benefit that is valuable to employees, the campus and the community at large.
 50     I can see some benefits in raising the expectations for academic performance in          Feb 21, 2011 3:14 PM
        classes eligible for tuition remission. Perhaps this would make staff take the
        courses more seriously. However, I would not limit the amount of funding to staff
        based on graduate or undergraduate status. Many of us work here at salaries
        below those paid in the private sector because of the tuition remission benefits. If
        that were withdrawn or seriously limited, then I would benefit more by entering the
        private sector for higher pay and then attending the university of my choice, which
        would likely not be UofL.
 51     I suggest that employees NOT be treated the same as regular students -- that             Feb 21, 2011 3:15 PM
        there be a minimum number of employees on tuition remission accepted within
        each class. Employees would be registered as special students above and
        beyond the maximum number of regular students, at perhaps as few as 1-2 per
        class. This would increase the likelihood that employees would stay in their
        classes until completion, as their chances of getting into any specific class would
        be greatly lowered due to the limited enrollment numbers. If employees DID drop,
        however, it would have no impact on the class size/University income for that
        class.
 52     I hate to think of losing any employee benefit but with the way the economy is, I        Feb 21, 2011 3:17 PM
        know there has to be some changes. Is there a total anywhere about how much
        this costs the University?




                                                      19 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 53     I disagree with number 7 because sometimes life is unavoidable. Maybe if there          Feb 21, 2011 3:21 PM
        were a withdrawal payment penalty that would be a deterrent to just casual
        "droppers," but would not be hardship for persons who truly needed to withdraw
        from class for a family situation.

        I disagree with number 9 because it shouldn't matter which degree an employee is
        seeking with their tuition remission.

        As for the other questions, I agree with them. If you're going to go to school, you
        should be required to maintain a C average at least. Tuition remission is basically
        a university funded scholarship for employees and should, at the very least,
        require a certain standard. I'm not excited about paying the student fee portion of
        the enrollment, but if that helps maintain the benefit, then I would support that.
        Finally, I think the spousal transfer benefit is important, but if the money is not
        there, maybe the spousal benefit could be a percentage, to at least offset some of
        the cost to the employee.
 54     I think your wasting time on "small peanuts" strategies to reduce costs by              Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
        attacking employee benefits that did, at least, offset our "low wages". How many
        folks abuse this benefit? what is the actual tuition cost of this abuse?
 55     Should only be available to employees with at least 5 years of service. We have         Feb 21, 2011 3:44 PM
        people taking employment here to get the benefit and then leaving.
 56     Item #6: I think this should have a general guideline, but circumstances should be      Feb 21, 2011 3:50 PM
        considered on an individual basis with some type of appeal process.
 57     Employees should contribute something toward their degree. More ownership.              Feb 21, 2011 3:59 PM
 58     Typically, when employers supplement expenses for tuition, it is for their              Feb 21, 2011 4:13 PM
        employee only, not spouses or children. Offering the benefit to spouses and
        children has to be a huge expense to the university that other employers do not
        incur.
 59     One "D" should be allowed before taking away tuition remission. Adult students          Feb 21, 2011 4:16 PM
        sometimes struggle with their first math or science class.
 60     As a long time staff employee, one of the Main Reasons for staying here (a lower        Feb 21, 2011 4:23 PM
        pay place of employment) Was Tuition Remission!
 61     Limiting it to 12 credit hours per year instead of a fiscal amount.                     Feb 21, 2011 4:25 PM
 62     I feel that the tuition remission benefit is the only thing that keeps many people at   Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
        U of L because the pay is so low and the way that raises are given and jobs
        evaluated and promotions given vary to much from department to department. I
        think losing tuition remission would hurt many employees.
 63     What does "consecutive" mean...3 semesters in a row even if one sets out of a           Feb 21, 2011 4:47 PM
        semster. For example, receive 2 D's in the fall and spring...you set out for the
        summer and pick back up in the fall making another D...is this consecutive even
        though there is a semster that you set out for. Needs to be defined.
 64     This is not an actual dollar amount cost to the University unless a "paying" student    Feb 21, 2011 4:47 PM
        cannot be admitted to the class because an employee has taken the seat. This
        rarely happens. You don't pay faculty per student taught. This is a "perceived"
        cost that can be manipulated to appear as any number upper management
        chooses.




                                                      20 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 65     I think employees that are using tuition benefit should have the option of paying a        Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
        flat rate fee to audit a class if they are accepted by the professor. Many
        employees might participate in a class if they were not pressured by grades and
        contribute to the class by work and life experience.
 66     There should be no distinction between paying undergrad or graduate tuition - in           Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
        fact, the University would be best served by having graduate-degreed employees.
        Staff spouses should not be able to use the employee benefit - the University can
        use it's funds in other ways.
 67     There are a handful of extenuating circumstances (such as acute medical                    Feb 21, 2011 4:53 PM
        conditions) that should be factored into the reasons for withdrawal and whether or
        not performance was satisfactory.
 68     For question #9 I believe the University should cover any surgcharges because              Feb 21, 2011 5:03 PM
        the employee has given their time in service. I the rules should be left the same.
 69     Cap the total number of credits eligible for tuition remission by any individual.          Feb 21, 2011 5:14 PM
 70     It shouldn't be sustained at no cost to faculty/staff. There should be a co-pay and        Feb 21, 2011 5:19 PM
        the money should be used to either increase salaries or increase benefits in other
        areas.
 71     Take it out of whatever raise pool there is. This is an investment in employees and        Feb 21, 2011 5:42 PM
        may help us keep good ones.
 72     Questions #5, 6, and 7. U of L does not allow all staff to perform their jobs              Feb 21, 2011 5:57 PM
        efficiently with adequate support. U of L supervisors often take the liberty to
        supersede staff efforts to improve themselves requiring that staff perform their
        jobs FIRST. It is NOT fair for U of L to impose restrictions of this type to the tuition
        remission program if supervisors are not going to allow and provide sufficient
        support measures to staff seeking to better themselves. Question #10. Only the
        employee (currently employed staff) and dependents should be able to take
        advantage of the tuition remission benefit(s). Spouses should not be eligible.
 73     Removal or reduction of these benefits is not helpful to staff and faculty morale.         Feb 21, 2011 6:09 PM
        These benefits are a reason many people stay employed at UofL. To pair this
        with the proposed minimal raise pool this year is pathetic. It is better for
        employees to have the benefit than to have the minimal raise every 3 to 5 years or
        so. Keep the benefit - there is not a real cost here anyway unless it is keeping a
        paying student from being able to take a course. Instead of pursuing this, why not
        do the obvious--charge for all credit hours taken by (paying) students instead of
        giving away so much---anything above 12 or 15 hours (or 9 at the grad level)
        should be charged instead of free. Why penalize the folks working hard to keep
        the place going after years of no raises?!
 74     If someone is not currently using their tuition remission for themselves or their          Feb 21, 2011 6:15 PM
        family, make it transferrable to another employee, such as they are able to do w/
        sick time.
 75     I very strongly agree that tuition remission should be conditional on good                 Feb 21, 2011 6:58 PM
        performance in the class. Frankly, I think 2.5 would be a better minimum standard
        than 2.0. A C-level student isn't getting much out of a class, and this program is
        not without costs.
 76     By having an employee pay the fee, you are turning not real money into real $$ in          Feb 21, 2011 9:13 PM
        that the cost of tutition for employees, actually is NO cost and is something
        generated by the legislature and CPE for accounting purposes. Therefore it's a
        way for the University to make real money. This could be called Money
        Laundering.




                                                       21 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 77     Take the needed funds from the basketball / football program and University             Feb 21, 2011 9:30 PM
        parking dept.
 78     # 7. withdrawal after drop/add should be evaluated and if legitimate then an unsat      Feb 21, 2011 9:34 PM
        performance should be waived.
 79     If you want to push satisfactory progress, you need to do it the same way most          Feb 21, 2011 9:39 PM
        organizations do. They reimburse a student who receives a grade of C or above.
        Since our tuition remission is given before the semester begins, you would have
        to track all the grades. This places UofL into a difficult position with FERPA. I can
        see where withdrawals are a problem because they take a seat that could have
        been given to another person. So, if a person sits out a semester after a
        withdrawal, does that count or do they actually have to pay? You do realize that
        many employees withdraw from classes because of work pressures? I think that
        you have way too many unknowns here for anyone to support.
 80     Look at other area's to cut cost, We have a lot of waste , Just in the Dental area      Feb 21, 2011 11:17 PM
        alone, I have been to a few classes and to pay 4 people to "teach" a class that
        diffintly should have been taught by one person is absurd, Parties, and all the
        FOOD (catering)is another big expense, Were not there to socialize , were there
        to learn. If you need a social life join a club.
 81     The standard grade should be more than 2.0.                                             Feb 22, 2011 8:04 AM
 82     With regard to withdrawal after the drop/add date, there may be circumstances           Feb 22, 2011 8:42 AM
        beyond the employee control (illness, accident, etc.) that forces the employee to
        withdraw from a class after the drop/add date. They should not be penalized for
        this.
        With regard to the student fee, I feel it is fair for the University to pay this as
        employees are solely responsible for providing the books and other materials
        required for a class. Such materials can cost over $150 per class. The addtional
        $54.00 for a 3-credit hour class would likely cause employee (especially low-paid
        staff) to not take classes.
 83     Tuition remission should be all inclusive (including fees, graduate program             Feb 22, 2011 8:48 AM
        surcharges)
 84     Tuition remission is a benefit to staff who have not receivied many benefits in the     Feb 22, 2011 9:16 AM
        past few years. To tie it to a gpa would only make the benefit unavalible to those
        who struggle with college like so many students do. Everyone is not capable of A
        or B work.
 85     #7 - It should be reviewed on a case by case basis. Some withdrawals may be             Feb 22, 2011 9:18 AM
        due to extreme health issues that can't be helped.
        #8 - Tuition remission should cover all required fees that are connected to tuition
        payments.
 86     I think if an person drops a class, they should be responsible for the cost involved    Feb 22, 2011 9:21 AM
        up to the drop point.
 87     Have a way if you do not use it then you can get some of the money.                     Feb 22, 2011 9:44 AM
 88     If the question is whether I have suggestions for where alternative financial           Feb 22, 2011 9:47 AM
        support (or savings) should come from, I can't really help with that. The only
        component I disagree with is having employees pay the student fee. I'm not sure
        what they "get" out of the student fee that they don't already get as employees --
        but I'm not sure what that fee funds.




                                                     22 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                     Response Text
 89     Two possible suggestions: one, do not offer tuition remission for courses that are       Feb 22, 2011 9:55 AM
        taken as "non-degree" and two, do not offer tuition remission for courses that are
        taken working on a degree at the same level as a previous degree obtained. For
        example, if someone has a bachelor's degree already, that person should not be
        allowed tuition remission if he or she is working on another bachelor's degree;
        same thing for a second master's degree, etc.
 90     I was not hired, nor am I paid to develop these strategies. Bump my salary by            Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
        100,000, and I'll work on it. I'll do my job, and I'll expect the administration to do
        theirs.
 91     n/a                                                                                      Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
 92     This is a benefit that attracted me to my position. I took a cut in salary for this      Feb 22, 2011 9:57 AM
        benefit.
 93     If an employee consistently makes below satisfactory grades (3 consecutive               Feb 22, 2011 10:06 AM
        grades below a C) then they should be responsible for a portion of their tuition.
 94     I think a "B" should be mandatory for tuition remission; no playing around; if you       Feb 22, 2011 10:07 AM
        have 2 "C" or below...out
        I feel that tuition remission should be for employees, children and grandchildren;
        most spouses have their own college incentive (if they work); if they don't then
        they should be
        I feel that if you are working full time and have a family getting 2 classes per
        semester is great; if you want more than that then that is your dime to pay
        I have been a FTE for 20 years plusat UofL and I have never been able to use
        the tuition reimbursement for my education. I got my Masters on my own because
        it was not covered when I went back to school. Now that I am getting another
        degree (the program not available at UofL)...I still pay my own way to another
        school.again not covered to an outside facility.......; so tuition remission as a FTE
        has not been a benefit to me at all
 95     I believe that all costs should be covered by the tuition remission, but that there      Feb 22, 2011 10:10 AM
        should be a higher standard on performance (3.0) to ensure the quality of
        employee work. I also feel that the spousal transfer benefit should be reinstated
        for all employees.
 96     No spousal tuition offered.                                                              Feb 22, 2011 10:13 AM
 97     I don't see that items 5, 6, 7 will help in sustaining the tuition remission since the   Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
        impact would be minimal. Items 8, 9, and 10 are definitely cost factors that would
        affect all. These ARE the items in your Tuition Remission Summary that have
        been identified with savings.
 98     I would like the administrators of this university to pull their head out of the sand    Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
        and acknowledge that there are tremendous wastes that should be cleaned up
        that would save millions before attacking the "easy" things that affect the
        employee's wages and benefits.
 99     People withdraw for a number of valid reasonf after the add/drop date (ie death in       Feb 22, 2011 10:19 AM
        the family, accident, etc), and they should not be penalized.
 100    With the cost of living raising and no expectation of getting raises in the near         Feb 22, 2011 10:23 AM
        future. The tuition remission is an incentive to people. But the removal from
        spouses has hurt. What keeps the employee her only for the job. The economy is
        so unstable now with the cost of health ins increasing who can afford an
        education nowdays.
 101    Reduce the number of hours per semester eligible for tuition remission to 3.             Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM
 102    fund to the required level                                                               Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM




                                                        23 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                     Response Text
 103    Within a reasonable amount of time to acquire a degree should be looked at. If an           Feb 22, 2011 10:34 AM
        employee is just taking hours to rack up hours and does not have a focus, then
        action should be taken to limit the tuition.
 104    I do not understand why the university actually has to transfer funds from the              Feb 22, 2011 10:39 AM
        home department to the one courses are taken in. Why can't tuition remission for
        staff/faculty consist of a tuition waiver? This would be the biggest cost saving
        procedure available. A course would still meet with a staff/faculty member not
        enrolled, so why not adopt a waiver process with the tuition remission policy?
 105    Please take note that many staff employees are single mom's with a couple of                Feb 22, 2011 10:43 AM
        jobs (u of L doesn't always pay well in staff positions)...they shouldn't be penalized
        for wearing all those hats and having to pay additional college charges that they
        didn't have to before.
 106    If we are saving money by employees not using their beenfit, then giving it to a            Feb 22, 2011 10:51 AM
        spouse would seem to defeat that cost-saving measure. As for the graduate
        remission rate, for many employees, the full remission is the only option they
        would have to attend graduate school. As a full-time employee, most people are
        not eligible for financial aid, especially if they have a child also attending college at
        the same time. While it might be cost-effective in the long run, it would not
        encourage employees to continue their education. It might be interesting to see
        how many employees take advantage of the graduate remission and then see
        how many of them stay at U of L as employees. If they are staying here, it would
        seem that it would be more cost-effective to continue to offer it.
 107    #7) I do not think that withdrawal after drop/add date should *necessarily*                 Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
        constitute unsatisfactory performance. If someone has a personal or family
        emergency to attend to - death, illness (physical or mental), disability, etc., they
        should not be penalized.

        #9) U of L should not penalize its employees that already have undergraduate
        degrees and wish to continue their education. Perhaps, if the spousal benefit is
        reinstated, however, the graduate program tuition surcharges could go into effect
        if the employee chooses to transfer their benefit to their spouse? I also think that,
        if reinstated, this should also be applicable to domestic partners.
 108    The University already pays a lower salary than private sectors. Why take away              Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
        the benefits that you offer employees. For many people, this is the sole reason for
        them working here.
 109    7. Withdrawal after the drop/add date should constitute unsatisfactory                      Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
        performance only if
        it is for non work or non emergency reasons.
        Employees should pay as little as possible for classes if they are performing at a
        satisfactory level.
 110    I disagree with the graduate tuition surcharges because many times the graduate             Feb 22, 2011 10:57 AM
        degree is being pushed by the departments and at times is required. I could see
        the surcharge if the degree is not related to your position and or is not required or
        being pushed by your manager.
 111    Retire people that have been here well beyond the required years to save some               Feb 22, 2011 10:58 AM
        salary issues.
 112    Require students to take their first year's classes and as many other classes that          Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
        are transferable at JCC instead.




                                                        24 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 113    I'm assuming the main problem here is that if an employee is taking a seat in a        Feb 22, 2011 11:07 AM
        class, that is essentially eliminating tuition revenue from having bumped out a
        paying student. On average, how many employees are registered in any given
        class? Three? Four? Raise maximum enrollments by that average number, and
        voila! you haven't lost any money.
           Additionally, happy employees stay. Unhappy employees leave. Consider the
        cost of new hires, training, increased turnover. I know it's apples & oranges, but
        the bottom line is the bottom line. Happy, better-educated employees who feel
        that they have a good benefit package will ultimately save the university money by
        lowering employee turnover, increasing productivity, etc.
 114    Students may need to withdraw after drop/add dates for valid personal reasons,         Feb 22, 2011 11:15 AM
        and should be allowed to continue with their degree programs after presenting
        credible justifications for their withdrawals. I don't think that withdrawals will
        increase the cost of the tuition remission program.
 115    I feel that if a student needs a withdrawal for medical reasons they should not be     Feb 22, 2011 11:21 AM
        penalized.
 116    I think that monies should be taken from other areas and not tuition remission.        Feb 22, 2011 11:23 AM
        Alot of employees(because of salary can not continue their education without
        tuition remission), I just forsee the remission be taken away and we still will not
        get raises to pay for the increased cost of classes.
 117    For #7 - I don't agree because you don't know the circumstances surrounding why        Feb 22, 2011 11:25 AM
        the class was dropped after the date. It could be for a number of reasons, i.e.
        health, childcare, etc. that have nothing to do with an unsatisfactory performance
        in the class.
 118    I strongly believe that dependent children should be alllowed to utilize the           Feb 22, 2011 11:39 AM
        employee's graduate tuition remission benefits if neither the employee or his/her
        spouse uses them. Thank you.
 119    I think that faculty and staff using tuition remission should maintain a certain GPA   Feb 22, 2011 11:43 AM
        to receive the benefit.
 120    Those who received tuition remission are under the same dismissal system as            Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
        students and if they are below a 2.00 would run the risk of being suspended
        anyway. They would suffer from the low grades anyway and have to bring them
        up. I think you are damaging morale even more if you put the pressure on
        regarding grades when it would be a double hit. Also, withdrawing after the
        deadline is only approved when it is medical or work related so why would they be
        punished if they were ill and could not complete the class. Perhaps in those
        cases they should be allowed a tuition reimbursement which would refund the
        money back to the university.
 121    Unfortunately I do not have any ideas to take the place of the ones supplied.          Feb 22, 2011 11:54 AM
 122    A grade below B should be considered unsatisfactory. UofL needs higher                 Feb 22, 2011 12:07 PM
        standards.
 123    I strongly agree that if an employee is not using the tuition remission that the       Feb 22, 2011 12:10 PM
        spouse should be able to use this benefit.




                                                      25 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                     Response Text
 124    Most employees taking advantage of the tuition remission program are pursing               Feb 22, 2011 12:11 PM
        graduate level degrees. Most employees may not be able to pay the difference
        between graduate level and undergaduate level credit hour fees. I think the great
        benefit of tution remission would not be as good if employees enrolled in graduate
        courses had to pay a percentage of their total tution. The best part of having a
        program like tuition remission to is to better educate University staff which in turn
        allows the employee pool to be more qualified, productive, and efficient to
        accomplish University goals.
 125    Actual costs to U of L would have to be demonstrated. while money may be                   Feb 22, 2011 12:14 PM
        transferred from one holding account to another, I do not understand what "cost"
        there is to the tuition remission program for U of L in actual dollars lost to other
        uses.
 126    Tuition remission is a terrific benefit. I don't think that it should change for current   Feb 22, 2011 12:18 PM
        employees but perhaps changes/restrictions could apply for new hires beginning
        in Fall 13 or so.
 127    Many of the employees at the university are low-wage employees and the tution              Feb 22, 2011 12:19 PM
        remission is an invaluable benefit that helps to balance the low-wage. It is
        important for the university to ENCOURAGE continuing education by keeping the
        tuition remission program as it currently exists. The university should not make it
        harder for low-wage employees to attend classes by making them pay their hard
        earned money back into the university in which they work for.
 128    If you are going to make changes in this benefit, you should allow those                   Feb 22, 2011 12:26 PM
        employees who have worked for UofL for years with the tuition remission benefit
        promised to them and their children exempt and phase in changes for new
        employees as has been done in the past. Current employees have worked for
        years with less than marketplace wage increases for what they perceive as a
        good benefit for their children and for themselves....a college education as an
        employee benefit.
 129    I think we should leave the tuition remission benefit alone. We are running out of         Feb 22, 2011 12:33 PM
        benefits to claim as it is. An instituion of higher education should (AT LEAST)
        support, promote, encourage, and provide this benefit. My suggestion is to
        LEAVE THIS BENEFIT ALONE.
 130    Remove the limitation for continuing education students to allow for grants,               Feb 22, 2011 12:34 PM
        scholarships, and federal monies.




                                                        26 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                     Response Text
 131    Withdrawl after the drop date should NOT constitute "unsatisfactory performance".            Feb 22, 2011 12:57 PM
        If an employee takes a course and withdraws from said course, the employee
        could reimburse the full amount of fees for the course to the university through
        payroll deduction as a before tax deduction. A written contract between the
        employee and the university could be drafted, much like the other payment option
        forms through the Bursar's office. The university could also offer employees the
        option to pay for tuition by using payroll deduction. Payroll deduction would
        provide a record of tuition expenditures for the employee for income tax purposes,
        in turn for educational tax credits that may be available for that employee. If an
        employee is paying for tuition on a payroll deduction basis, this will eliminate
        debate on QPA, residency status (in state vs. out of state), student fee charges,
        etc. since the full cost of the education rests on the individual and not the
        university. An overall discount on the tuition bill, say 10, 15 or 20% of the total
        could be offered. Even a sliding scale discount could be applied based on years
        of service or some other such indicator. I strongly feel, that ANY disturbance to
        the tuition remission program will be a travesty in the history of the university and
        must be examined thoroughly and carefully before implementing any action. I
        appreciate the sending out of this survey to accomplish this task.
 132    The only disagreeable item is to reinstate spousal transfer of benefit, which would          Feb 22, 2011 1:01 PM
        reduce the University's cost. If it is reinstated it might be useful to determine if it is
        a current benefit or if it is to be reinstated only for employees in proper status prior
        to being suspended.
 133    There should be a service requirement of at least 6 months - one year for new                Feb 22, 2011 1:04 PM
        employees to make sure employee has stable employment with university and
        deserves remission. More than two grades below C should be unsatisfactory
        performance. If they aren't going to apply themselves to be a good student, they
        don't deserve remission. Candidacy fees should be included in graduate program
        remission. It is a part of requirement. Perhaps there can be a requirement of how
        long candidacy will be paid for. Spouses do not need to be covered. They receive
        other benefits, such as insurance. If cutting needs to be done, that should be
        area. Take care of employees and dependents first.
 134    My only addition is that the GPA prior to working at UofL should not be counted.             Feb 22, 2011 1:08 PM
        All new employees should be given a chance to show that previous college
        performance is not an indication of how they will perform again. With this caveat in
        place, I would change my responses to Strongly Agree for 5 and 6.

        Concerning 8 & 9, the potential savings does not seem to be great enough to
        warrant the added hardship on people who are most likely working full time, going
        to school, and possibly making just enough to cover books anyway.
 135    Min. grade for graded course under tuition remission should be a passing grade-              Feb 22, 2011 1:14 PM
        D. Audits should still be allowed.
 136    Graduate education beyond a Bac. degree should be paid for by the                            Feb 22, 2011 1:19 PM
        individual...not the university.
 137    I feel that you should receive full tutiton regardless of which school you are               Feb 22, 2011 1:19 PM
        enrolled in. We all have equal opportunity to study in any school, but one person
        shouldnt be punished because I chose Education and they chose Law.




                                                        27 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 138    To sustain this in the future, I would consider opting out of a bonus/raise in order   Feb 22, 2011 1:39 PM
        to participate in tuition remission.

        I might also urge you to allow the staff/faculty that do not use their tuition
        remission to allow it to be banked or pooled together, even if only partially. If 40
        people were able to donate 3 credit hours per year, then they would have the
        ability to donate a four year degree program to a prospective student. While this
        may seem like it costs more money it may well be true that those who simply use
        this benefit to take classes before dropping in order to simply use their benefits,
        could find fulfillment in this way and create less of a burden on the remission
        program.
 139    Grades represent only ONE person's interpretation of what the student has              Feb 22, 2011 1:51 PM
        learned. Special circumstances can alter grades, as each person's individual
        situation should be considered separately.
 140    I'm sure the cutting of benefits for employees is one of the best ways to meet         Feb 22, 2011 2:07 PM
        shortfalls. Is there not a way to find the money needed to meet the shortfall from
        cutting fat out of building or facility projects? Are there any surpluses from UofL
        departments that could be utilized as help for general university shortfalls without
        compromising those department's needs or future projects? These questions are
        retorical.
 141    NONE                                                                                   Feb 22, 2011 2:14 PM
 142    Let's start with the gradual unsatisfactory performance before moving to a             Feb 22, 2011 2:19 PM
        minimum performance standard.
        I don't entirely disagree with the W after drop/add date as unsatisfactory because
        we all know that things do happen. However, if an employee has a habit of this
        behavior, I feel this is abusing the generosity of the system and there should be a
        policy to give consequence to this behavior. Perhaps after 3 Ws, an
        unsatisfactory performance could be implemented.
 143    Limit tuition remission to one dependent per employee per semester or a total of       Feb 22, 2011 2:59 PM
        12 semester hours per employee per semester. For example, If they have two
        dependents, they could split 6 hours between the two dependents, etc.




                                                      28 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 144    Since most employees take classes in the evening and evening classes are not             Feb 22, 2011 3:49 PM
        full, the instructor is being paid the same to teach a few students or a full class. I
        agree that an employee should not be able to take the place of a paying student
        that is within their 12 hours but there isn't any difference if the student is taking
        more than 12 or an employee is in the class. Most employees are adults that have
        not been in school for years contrary to the students that come straight out of high
        school and there are subjects that some people cannot do better than average
        which is a C. What a big moral hit/slap in the face, that would be for someone
        that is trying to get more education and is struggling with the subject matter and
        then is hit with if you want to receive tuition remission, you have to pay for your
        classes until you raise your GPA. To me that is saying let's keep our employees
        at a lower level and not let them work for their education.There are classes that is
        C is the best that person can do and if they are going back to college to improve
        themselves sometimes a person has to reteach themselves to learn and retain
        subject matter. I do believe that an employee should have at least a Bachelor's
        Degree to work at the university and we have never required an employee to
        acquire one. I think an employee has a better understanding of a student's life if
        they have also gone through classes and know what that student might possibly
        be dealing with. As far as withdrawal after drop/add date, sometimes our job
        might change some for a short time and get in the way of a class that we are
        taking and the class is what has to go to be able to fulfill our obligations to our
        department. Why penalize someone because they tried and that semester didn't
        work out well. Before we bundled the tuition so that it looked like we weren't
        charging all of the fees, this might have been okay but since they bundled them
        for students, why single out employees to pay for fees that for the most part, they
        will not participate in the activites or use. The employees normally do not
        participate in intramurals, student actitivities, etc. Since an employee can only use
        6 hours of undergraduate or graduate instruction, they already are being charged
        the difference if they take over the 6 hours per semester. They should not be
        charged additional money for pursueing a graduate education. We have some
        extremely educated staff because of tuition remission and with such a low pay,
        the employees would not even be able to attend college. For a lot of classified
        staff and some PNA staff, our salaries qualify for financial aid. Children of
        employees qualify for FWS with our salaries, and unless our salaries are
        comparable to those outside U of L, there are many employees, whose children
        would not be able to attend college. I believe that the spousal benefit should be
        reinstated if the employee is not using theirs. I would think that there would be
        someway in Peoplesoft that could tell if a student/employee or spouse was taking
        the place of a student that was paying for those hours and the class was full, that
        employee or spouse would need to take another class and not take up a paying
        person's spot. But since most spouses would be taking evening classes,and
        these classes are not usually filled, they would not be taking up a paid student's
        spot and again, the instructor teaches 8 students to ?? students. If an
        employee/spouse signs up for a class, and the instructors are not charged per
        student, then the cost to the university would be basically nil. Our employees are
        not paid per student that takes classes just as a classified staff is not paid any
        different for doing 5 accounts/speed types to 40 accounts/speed types or more.
        We get paid the same whether there is one student or 100 students to lift their flag
        on after advising.
 145    Cut back other programs. Not education.                                                  Feb 22, 2011 4:03 PM
 146    Withdrawal after the drop/add date should have some sort of penalty, but I don't         Feb 22, 2011 4:13 PM
        agree with calling it unsatisfactory performance.




                                                      29 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 147    I think we should fund the employee tuition remission at full but not transfer the        Feb 22, 2011 6:53 PM
        benefit to spouses.
 148    Athletics should be made to help out with funding of employess benefits.I'am a            Feb 22, 2011 7:20 PM
        season ticket holder for football and they are not cheap.We support athletics,why
        can't they show use some love.
 149    Dependents and employees use the benefit at the same time. If a dependent is              Feb 22, 2011 7:39 PM
        using tuition remission the employees should not be able to use it.
 150    Its hard to know how well you will do in a class if you haven't been in the               Feb 22, 2011 8:42 PM
        classroom for a while
 151    no comments                                                                               Feb 23, 2011 9:36 AM
 152    Student's who withdraw "late" must petition in order to be allowed to due so and          Feb 23, 2011 10:12 AM
        are only approved if there are extenuating circumstances. To penalize those
        students for experiencing an extenuating circumstance is callous and unfair. For
        students who withdraw after the 0% refund date, late in the semester as it is, I am
        unsure. When it happened to me it was because of the difficulty I was having
        leaving the office and making it to class.
           The nickel and dime plan to make life more difficult for the graduate teaching
        assistants and other employees in graduate school is wrong headed. You are, in
        essence, telling them they need to work for UofL to cover their tuition and then get
        yet another job to cover their fees since their financial aid, if they have any, barely
        covers living expenses.
 153    I think the tuition remission program should be limited to the employee and their         Feb 23, 2011 10:31 AM
        children. So many companies offer education benefits that most spouses have
        access through their employer that are not being used.
 154    I agree with issuing grade standards in order to receive tuition remission. If the        Feb 23, 2011 12:01 PM
        person meets the grades, then please pay for all tuition, don't nickel and dime
        them with student fees and caps.
 155    With regard to #7: I think it should depend on WHY the person felt the need to            Feb 23, 2011 12:43 PM
        drop the course.
 156    Leave it alone. It is NOT a burden of your employees to find ways to save YOU             Feb 23, 2011 12:47 PM
        money. CUT salaries to admin, stop paying people to leave here because they
        know dirty little secrets on admin., ask for money from athletics and more $$ from
        all the grants. This is NOT the problem of the employee.
 157    If after so many "F"s, maybe then consequences. But not for just one F or failing         Feb 23, 2011 1:05 PM
        semester

        For example, maybe if an F is earned, no money will be paid the next semester
        unless that class is being repeated and a passing grade is obtained. (Employee
        must pay upfront and then be reimbursed)

        Or no money for one or two semesters.. It would need to be clear that if the
        employee fails a class, the next semesters unused portion (due to forced sit out)
        would not be eligible for spousal transfer.
 158    Limit existing tuition remission benefit to Full-Time Faculty and Staff (and              Feb 23, 2011 2:35 PM
        dependents) only. Must be degree-seeking or show coursework applies to career
        development.




                                                       30 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 159    Brent,                                                                                    Feb 23, 2011 3:48 PM

        I'm sorry I didn't have the time to respond to your e-mail. I appreciate that you sent
        the memo out in regards to possible changes in the tuition remission policy. Below
        is my opinion on the subject matter considering I have been at the University for
        23 + years and have a step- daughter and a daughter that will be at U of L in a
        year.

        Brent, First of all I don't agree with the cost of tuition remission program that is
        stated in the memo. There is varying ways of showing the true cost of this
        program to the University by doing diff. cost analysis that may show the cost
        below what the Univ. shows it to be currently. Also if the Administration is so
        concerned by a possible deficit in this " Benefit " that we have earned they should
        take the difference out of the savings we currently have in the "Insurance Pool "
        Since we are self insured and I know that there has been a large surplus in the
        last couple of years put money aside each year to cover a possible deficit. To me
        a lot of the money that is in the insurance pool is made up of what the employees
        have to pay each month so they should have the right to say where a surplus
        should go.

        I also don't agree of putting a limit of 140.00 hours that a dependent can expect to
        be covered by the tuition remission benefit, because if it takes 120 hours to
        graduate that only gives the student 20.00 hours of leeway. That is not very much
        considering that many students today don't know what to major in until the end of
        their second year here. I can not help the fact that some have abused the benefit
        but putting such a limit will make it a hardship on many dependents in the future. I
        suggest 160 hour cap and have someone do a cost study on this.

        The Admin. wanted all these types of fees to be included as part of the tuition cost
        each semester many years back and I feel they don't have the right to change it
        now after all these years. Also as you remember the Admin. start charging each
        full time student 175.00 per semester for a meal ticket. This currently is already
        out of the tuition remission coverage. I would like everyone to see what the cost
        would be per semester for a full time student based on what the memo .

        Lastly, I feel if a employee doesn't elect to use their 6.00 hours of tuition remission
        each semester that they should be able to defer some of those hours to their
        dependent to use in the future.

        I would greatly appreciate if some of these questions and ideals would be bought
        up in front of the staff senate. Thanks again. Craig
 160    With all of the building that is going on add a tax of some sort to the bidding           Feb 23, 2011 4:14 PM
        process, if you win the right to build at U of L there will be a fee. Also as I
        understand it if I were to invent something or do anything that I used U of L
        resources to gain from that Uof L would retain rights to any profits so how can our
        basketball/football staff gain from shoe contracts,speaking etc. without Uof L
        tapping some of that reoccuring money. Taking care of parking lots can't cost near
        as much as they bring in,use some of that money.HEY!!! here's an idea instead of
        having the credit card people on campus to sign up a young person for debt
        before they know how to handle money put Dave Ramsey (financial Peace) in
        their hands instead.




                                                       31 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 161    On item 8 about student fees, especially in a period of time when we have gone         Feb 23, 2011 6:50 PM
        three years without raises, even this amount of cost could prevent someone from
        being able to use this very valuable employee benefit. It could prevent employees
        who have already been working on a degree from finishing.
 162    Re: Withdrawl after the drop/add date. The reason for drop/add may be                  Feb 23, 2011 8:10 PM
        completley unrelated to the employee's performance and should in no way reflect
        that.
 163    These are good proposals and I do not know enough about some of them to                Feb 24, 2011 1:24 AM
        agree or disagree.
 164    There are a lot of things that the University can do to curtail expenses. The          Feb 24, 2011 9:16 AM
        University should eliminate many of the entertainment expenses that goes on in
        the University. I understand the reasoning behind the entertainment expenses,
        but some of the reimbursements should not be allowed on any Speedtype within
        the University, Specifically, the reimbursements for Alcohol on any business meal.
 165    None                                                                                   Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 166    none                                                                                   Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 167    Financially sustaining the program should be an employee benefit, therefore            Feb 24, 2011 10:15 AM
        covered by the University. In light of no salary increases, etc., this is a minimal
        benefit for U of L to offer.
 168    none                                                                                   Feb 24, 2011 10:16 AM
 169    None                                                                                   Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
 170    I understand changes may need to be made, however due to economy and lack              Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
        of wage increases any benefits the University offers at this point should remain.
 171    Withdrawal afte the drop/add date should not constitute unsatisfactory                 Feb 24, 2011 10:50 AM
        performance. There are many reasons why a person would need to drop a class,
        which have nothing to do with the academic performance.
 172    I don't like the idea of charging employees who are trying to better themselves        Feb 24, 2011 11:13 AM
        extra fees but at the same time some employees (taking it as a non-degree
        student) don't take the coursework seriously and either get substandard grades or
        cause faculty instructors to lower standards or give incompletes. Maybe, charging
        the employee if they get a substandard or incomplete grade would solve this.
        In addition, many of the faculty researchers want their research employees to take
        classes to keep up-to-date. Some post-docs are even required to have additional
        coursework or training by the grants they are paid from but are not covered under
        tuition remission. Adding additional fees may cause even more unofficial auditing
        of classes because of the need for training but the unavailability of a full tuition
        remission.
 173    none                                                                                   Feb 24, 2011 11:37 AM
 174    Withdraw sometimes becomes necessary due to circumstances outside of the               Feb 24, 2011 11:48 AM
        students control.
 175    For Univeristy Management to realize that tuition remission is a strong employee       Feb 24, 2011 12:04 PM
        retention benefit and that it is cheaper than hiring and training replacement
        personnel.
 176    I do agree with the proposed strategies                                                Feb 24, 2011 1:30 PM




                                                      32 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 177    I would prefer that no changes be made. Employees are not well paid and have           Feb 24, 2011 1:53 PM
        gone without raises for three years. Reducing the tuition remission benefit is
        essentially like imposing a salary reduction for employees who take classes. If
        you must make changes, grandfather current employees and their dependents
        and impose the new rules on future employees (and don't apply the new
        restrictions to current employees at a later date).
 178    7. Withdrawal after the drop/add date should constitute unsatisfactory                 Feb 24, 2011 2:57 PM
        performance.

        Have an internal Withdrawal date that is earlier than the typical Withdrawal date,
        but still allows Withdrawal for unforeseen circumstances.

        8. Tuition remission should cover only the tuition component and employees
        should pay the student fee portion of their enrollment.

        No.
 179    I think actually a B or greater would be sufficient                                    Feb 24, 2011 3:17 PM
 180    I think employees who plan on obtaining a graduate level degree should be              Feb 24, 2011 3:37 PM
        encouraged. Some may struggle with financial obligations if we do not cover
        those classes with tuition remission
 181    It's VERY unfair that an employee's spouse doesn't get to use that benefit. That is    Feb 24, 2011 3:45 PM
        a basic employee benefit that the employee doesn't get in that their spouse
        doesn't get to use the credits. I don't buy that it cost the university tremendously
        like they say it does. There are plenty of ways to save money like triming "upper
        management" positions and salaries. How many VP's do we need? Seriously.
        I've heard there are some folks which are being paid for two positions or
        reimbursed for positions they can't hold in the private sector b/c they work for the
        university. If that's true that needs to end. So do ridiculous compensation
        packages for "high profile" people.
 182    n/a                                                                                    Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 183    n/a                                                                                    Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 184    Tuition remission should be a full and unconditional benefit of working for the        Feb 25, 2011 10:55 AM
        university. In my opinion, it is placed too low on the priorities of budget
        projections. I see lots of waste on expenditures, such as vehicles and cell
        phones, that should be addressed before looking at benefits.
 185    In regards to grades, employees should be held to the same unit and department         Feb 25, 2011 12:47 PM
        requirements that students are held to. I see no problem with the tuition remission
        being contigent upon such standards, unless of course an employee is auditing a
        course.
 186    There are other areas that could use more scrutiny on cost savings besides tuition     Feb 25, 2011 3:05 PM
        (all of the monies paid to employees to leave, divert monies saved on Green
        initiatives to cover these benefit "costs".
        I believe the proposed savings will be minimal and not worth the damage to
        morale. If changes are to be made - I think current staff attending classes should
        be grandfathered in free of the fees and surcharges.
 187    Number 5, 6, and 7 may be a case-by-case situation. If there is some tragedy, it       Feb 25, 2011 5:20 PM
        would not be fair to have them pay. Why kick an employee while s/he is down? If
        it is just laziness, that is not right.
 188    Each employee should be limited to no more than two ungraduate degrees.                Feb 25, 2011 5:29 PM
        Anything above that they must pay half of the tuition.




                                                       33 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 189    Reallocate funds away from building and decorative projects back to employees.           Feb 25, 2011 6:01 PM
        Don't cut benefits to increase wages. That doesn't benefit anyone.
 190    I do not agree with any of the propsed strategies above and believe the tuition          Feb 26, 2011 9:45 PM
        remission program is just fine the way it is.
 191    I cannot offer any suggestion at this present time, but I think tuition readmission      Feb 27, 2011 2:02 PM
        should remain a benefit for employees whether they make a grade of a "C" or
        less. Employees serious about furthering their education tend to make grades of
        a "C" or better anyway so I don't see how this could save the University money.
 192    It would be better to limit the number of employees allowed in a particular class        Feb 28, 2011 9:54 AM
        based on overall class size than to remove the benefit or put restrictions on it that
        would prevent people from attempting to learn something new, such as a
        language or a skill.
 193    Tuition remission should cover tuition and fees for students that maintain at least      Feb 28, 2011 12:06 PM
        a C average each semester. Students should be rewarded and have incentive for
        excelling in their academics. Students that are not meeting this minimum
        requirement, should pay surcharges/fees and risk loss of tuition remission until
        they are able to maintain at least a C average each semester.
 194    I disagree that fees should be paid because of the staff time needed to track and        Feb 28, 2011 3:24 PM
        coordinate payment. It seems this would be a wash in terms of cost and savings.
 195    First, students withdraw from a course for a variety of reasons, many of which are       Feb 28, 2011 5:23 PM
        beyond their control: death, illness or injury in the family or of the student, for
        example. Withdraw for a good reason shouldn't automatically be construed as
        unsatisfactory performance. Second, charging more for graduate classes is a
        disincentive for employees to pursue graduate studies. As a university seeking top
        research status, we should be creating incentives for employees to continue their
        educations. If we tell the community to come to us to educate themselves and
        their workforce, we need to lead by example.
 196    Tuition Remission is a huge and wonderful benefit for employees. I think putting a       Feb 28, 2011 5:28 PM
        GPA requirement on it is unfair.
 197    1. One option I didn't see listed would be to reduce the number of remission credit       Mar 1, 2011 9:26 AM
        hours per semester to 3 instead of 6.
        2. As I understand it, my tuition remission benefit counts as a cost to the university
        even if I don't opt to use it. If that is correct, why not let me opt out and maybe
        give me a financial incentive to do so?
 198    Common practice in all industries, is to extend to their employees a generous            Mar 1, 2011 12:09 PM
        support program to those wishing to purchase the company's product -- e.g. Ford
        gives discount to its assembly workers who buy Fords.
 199    I think a C is too low....I would be in agreement with a B.                               Mar 1, 2011 2:25 PM
 200    The above strategies make sense UNLESS the employee is attending law school.              Mar 1, 2011 5:46 PM
        It's obvious to me that the people drafting these suggestions were either
        undergrad students or attended graduate school other than law. For one thing, a
        C- in some law courses for someone who is working full-time would be something
        to celebrate. And if someone gets more than one of those in a row, they won't be
        in law school soaking up tuition remission for very long, anyway.
 201    Tutuion remission should be strenghtened as much as possible since in many               Mar 1, 2011 11:01 PM
        cases it is a SUBSTANTIAL factor in recruiting and retaining talented staff (even
        when said staff are being recruited by other institutions who do not offer such
        benefit) at the University of Louisville.




                                                      34 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 202    I suggest we do away with the tuition remission policy for spouses and/or children       Mar 3, 2011 1:18 PM
        because it discriminates against single people who cannot use this for anyone in
        their family, even if their family lives with them.
 203    Offer tuition remission after five years of consecutive service.                         Mar 3, 2011 4:50 PM
 204    Once before we had in the past the Spousal Transfer Benefit and it was taken             Mar 3, 2011 5:49 PM
        away. I would love to see this come back again. We have citizens and staff who
        even thought the "Free" tuition is offered but lack of income forces you to work 2
        jobs and can't take advantage of school while your spouse can complete his
        degreed if offered. This helps a household and a families where 1 Household
        member can help the other build together for a better future....Also extending the
        age limit of 26ys to 30yrs should be changed and be extended.
 205    Cannot open this:                                                                        Mar 4, 2011 8:45 AM
        http://urlshort.me/2ji
        Why was changes to the current Tuition Remission Policy proposed?
 206    Remove spouses from being eligible for tuition. If employee's depdendents'               Mar 4, 2011 9:16 AM
        cannot keep a 2.0, discount amount paid towards dependent.
 207    I also believe if an employee has a dependent the employee's tuition remission           Mar 4, 2011 9:43 AM
        should be waived.
 208    #7Withdrawal after the drop/add date should constitute unsatisfactory                    Mar 4, 2011 9:46 AM
        performance.
         is the only one I strongly disagree with - sometimes unexpected things happen in
        "life" family, health, even switching jobs within the university, etc. that sort of
        thing - you should be able to drop without penalty of unsatisfactory performance
 209    I do not believe you should cap the graduate student remission rate. Having              Mar 4, 2011 10:18 AM
        employees who have attained higher levels of education can only help the
        University. If you place a cap on graduate students you may lose those staff
        members to other employers. Many staff who are also graduate students work for
        the University at a lower wage than they could earn working for other companies
        simply because the tuition remission makes a financial difference.
 210    I believe that the long-term benefits of the tuition program will benefit the            Mar 4, 2011 10:36 AM
        community and the university. Maybe the university could state that if the
        employee is not a member of the university for more than a year or two after
        taking a course that it could seek partial reimbursement of the tuition. However, I
        think allowing employees to take courses just provides them with more training
        and to end such a program will negatively effect the university.
 211    I do not agree with the proposed unsatisfactory performance remarks for an               Mar 4, 2011 10:40 AM
        employee who withdraws from a class after the drop/add date IF they have to do
        so b/c their school work is interfering with their ability to do their job. First
        responsibility is to your job - second is school.
 212    If withdrawal after drop/add date tuition remission should be paid back to               Mar 4, 2011 11:24 AM
        university.
        If a failing grade is received while using tuition remission, that should be paid back
        to university.
        Holds put on accounts that owe the university money from tuition remission pay-
        backs.
 213    I feel that withdrawals should not be punishable. Will a petition exception be           Mar 4, 2011 12:00 PM
        provided if this is approved?




                                                      35 of 168
13. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 214    Online education courses are charged at a greater rate than regular tuition             Mar 4, 2011 1:09 PM
        courses. This is not the case at other KY public educational institutions. U of L
        needs to move to the same rate for online as regular courses.
 215    Some of these might work (e.g., withdrawal after drop/add date), as long as there       Mar 4, 2011 1:15 PM
        is a viable means for exceptions. Staff should be allowed the benefit if
        unforeseeable circumstances require the withdrawal.
 216    Pay graduate courses at the undergraduate rate. Only pay the resident rate, (not        Mar 4, 2011 1:19 PM
        non-resident rate). Do not pay doctorial canidacy.
 217    I think the employees should have a specific amount of time to drop a class             Mar 4, 2011 1:27 PM
        without penalty. I think the student fees should be part of th benefit.
 218    Question 7: Petitioning with the Registrar's office should be processed and             Mar 4, 2011 1:52 PM
        approved. Special circumstances as in health or employment should be taken
        into consideration. Just dropping should not be allowed.
 219    Current program works well. It's a benefit to work at UL and have the tuition           Mar 4, 2011 2:24 PM
        remission. No stipulations to use of program. No one would abuse the program
        purposely. As "employees" and working 8 hours a day - our time can be altered
        from any number of situations which would require classes to be dropped. Staff
        are not well paid at UL. Staff do not recieve increases every year due to State
        cuts. Don't take this benefit and place contingencies on it. It will only keep those
        who need the education to not apply.




14. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
  1     This is a waiver granted by statute and does not specify any requirement of a          Feb 21, 2011 12:32 PM
        grade or paying fees. I do not believe you can keep any employee from taking
        courses regardless of grade - it goes against the statute.
  2     I think 1 or maybe 2 courses with a grade < C should discontinue the remission         Feb 21, 2011 12:44 PM
        until it is made up. (3 is a bit much). I think an employee should not have to pay
        the surcharge for online courses, but spouses and dependents should pay it. We
        should have some benefit for employees. Frankly, my salary is considerably less
        than a nurse in an organization or a hospital. The ONLY thing I really value is the
        education benefit. It has kept me here for years, even though I have seldom used
        it.
  3     I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE TUITION REMISSION, BUT I DO NOT ATTEND U OF                       Feb 21, 2011 12:47 PM
        L I GO TO IVY TECH IN SELLERSBURG INDIANA, MAYBE MAKE IT TO GO TO
        ANY SCHOOL
  4     na                                                                                     Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
  5     The use of tuition remission adds greatly to what is considered "salary". I think      Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
        there should be a waiver of tuition remission similiar to the health insurance
        waiver. Those that waive the tuition remission would receive some type of
        compensation similiar to the healthcare flex spending card.
  6     I'm not sure what "graduate program tuition surcharges" means in item 9.               Feb 21, 2011 12:56 PM




                                                      36 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
  7    This needs to be better explained how this is actually a cost to the University.        Feb 21, 2011 1:00 PM
       While there is a definite dollar value to employee for this benefit, it doesn't make
       sense how the University is considering this an outlay of costs. The class has to
       be taught whether or not one of the empty seats is being filled by someone on
       tuition remission.. What is the University actually paying for in a real cash outlay
       to provide us this benefit? The current talks seems very questionable in regard to
       what it costs the University to run the program, especially in talking about it
       exceeding its budget.
  8    I think it is completely and utterly ridiculous that a University would cut education   Feb 21, 2011 1:04 PM
       benefits.
  9    Many people are not using their tuition remission. I thought the spousal transfer       Feb 21, 2011 1:12 PM
       benefit was nice.
 10    Encouage employees to use this benefit. Many departments, especially Physical           Feb 21, 2011 1:28 PM
       Plant, frown upon the usage of the benefit. I was also chastised by my supervisors
       and managers for using this benefit. Why did I need a degree? I busted my butt
       and got that degree and am now working on my Masters. discovered most the
       higher-ups in my department, do not have degrees, but I can't seem to get
       promoted to a new position. It is a benefit for ALL EMPLOYEES and no one
       should be ridiculed for using it
 11    IF A EMPLOYEE HAS NOT USED THE TUITION REMISSION AND THEIR                              Feb 21, 2011 1:29 PM
       SPOUSE OR CHILDREN HAVE NOT USED IT. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO LET
       A GRANDCHILD USE IT OR AT LEAST A PART OF IT.
 12    Definitely, a tuition remission program should be a privilege contingent upon           Feb 21, 2011 1:38 PM
       successful completion of a course. Should a staff member withdraw a class after
       the drop/add date, he/she should have to pay a penalty (fees or part of the course
       fee). Likewise, if a staff member does not pass a class with a C or better, another
       penalty should be imposed. This would create a system of accountability.
 13    I would start by reviewing the bloated salaries of both tenured and non-tenured         Feb 21, 2011 1:48 PM
       faculty that contribute little more than collecting a paycheck. Use these new found
       funds to support tuition remission and hiring of more motivated employees.

       This could be accomplished by linking pay scales and job security to performance
       and contributions, rather than the current model of seniority and past
       achievements.
 14    I do not feel employees should have to pay the student fees portion of the tuition      Feb 21, 2011 1:54 PM
       bill since we will reap no benefits by paying it and are not considered STUDENTS
       in the university's eyes (EXAMPLE: we can not purchase student season tickets
       for BBall and FBall - even though we are also a student).
 15    How will this information be tracked? Is a staff position going to need to be           Feb 21, 2011 2:17 PM
       created to do this?
 16    Why is the 2.0 GPA restriction only applicable to staff and not spouses or              Feb 21, 2011 2:20 PM
       dependents?
 17    Quit sending out U of L magazines no one reads!! That is a waste of money.              Feb 21, 2011 2:21 PM
       Also, why so much money in "merging, YUM Center, etc? Is sports more
       important than employee's health, mental health? At least pay us enough where
       we can at least eat once a week!!
 18    Taking away benefits or changing the criteria to continue a benefit...can be            Feb 21, 2011 2:23 PM
       changed for new incoming employees but should not be changed or altered in any
       way for the current violation. I think doing about with spouse tutition remission
       benefit was in violation of the employer/employee contract.




                                                      37 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                  Response Text
 19    For teh most part the above options do not affect me or are not likely to so          Feb 21, 2011 2:28 PM
       therefore I am neutral. Those items that do or would affect me or are simply
       logical, I am in agreement with
 20    I believe the committee should be filled with people who actually use the tuition     Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
       remission benefit... rather than those who don't. Maybe they might not view this
       as unimportant and willing to throw it up on the chopping block.
 21    In addition to the suggestions above, I would be comfortable capping the total        Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
       number of credit hours for which an employee may seek tuition remission (cap to
       be determined by those in finance).
 22    none                                                                                  Feb 21, 2011 2:42 PM
 23    If we are already facing budget over runs in our tuition remission program then       Feb 21, 2011 2:43 PM
       now is certainly not the time to consider reinstating the spousal transfer benefit.
 24    U of L is an institution of higher education and as such should encourage its         Feb 21, 2011 2:48 PM
       employees to further their education and learn skills that will help the university
       meets its mission and goals by providing tuition free education and training,
 25    The GPA minimum should be a 2.0, either the cumulative or the most recent. The        Feb 21, 2011 2:52 PM
       minimum GPA would never be set on a per course basis. This policy would allow
       for having a bad semester and struggling with a course, either at the beginning of
       the program or at the end. It would allow students to try something hard even if
       they eventually fail. This is a common practice when setting GPA minimums.

       Withdrawal after the drop/add date sometimes happens involuntarily. Work related
       issues and personal circumstances should be taken into consideration when
       deciding whether or not to charge staff for classes they are not attending.

       Technology fees for students covers the cost of expenses for technology related
       resource usage. Staff members are already using (or supplying) those resources.

       IMHO, Graduate surcharges are another way to gouge students for funds beyond
       the level approved for tuition.
 26    N/A                                                                                   Feb 21, 2011 3:02 PM
 27    This all seems fair to me and I see no problem with it.                               Feb 21, 2011 3:03 PM
 28    I also believe that older students (over age 50) be given LIFE CREDIT for the         Feb 21, 2011 3:15 PM
       most basic of Gen Ed requirements (math, freshman English) or be totally
       absolved of requirements such as foreign language and speech/communication.
       That would cut down on some of the classes in highest demand for all students,
       and it would have zero effect on the quality of UofL's education system. People
       who have lived for more than 50 years have difficulty in certain areas of mentation
       (foreign language and math, most especially). The fact that they have conducted
       their lives for 50+ years means they have not needed nor will they need any new
       math or foreign language or speech instruction at this late date. It's ludicrous
       NOT to give older students life credit, and this must be changed.
 29    I agree with all the items above except the suggestion that if an employee            Feb 21, 2011 3:38 PM
       withdraws after the drop/add date this would constitute an unsatisfactory
       performance. There may be instances where an employee may have to drop a
       class due to health reasons (i.e. seriously ill family members).




                                                     38 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                     Response Text
 30    I am currently taking advantage of the Regular faculty/staff tuition reimbursement          Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
       to complete a Master's degree that directly relates to my current position. I
       appreciate this reimbursement program as it has made it financially possible.
       Generally, I agree with the proposed changes because in the larger picture, not all
       employees are taking advantage or the reimbursement program and it is
       necessary to adjust the budget for all employees. It appears that the university is
       trying to work towards increasing salary competitiveness, which should benefit all
       employees. I find these changes to be reasonable and a way to still balance
       budgets.
 31    Research and explain to employees what types of tuition remission is offered at             Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
       other Universities. i.e., Is UofL remission similar/not as good or better than other
       universities, IUS, UK and elsewhwere.
 32    Some of these tuition related questions are a bit murky. While I think I get the gist       Feb 21, 2011 4:02 PM
       of what is being asked, some example situations might clarify them.
 33    As a supervisor I have found employees taking classes offer better customer                 Feb 21, 2011 4:16 PM
       service.
 34    Maybe take some or all tuition remission new employees hired?                               Feb 21, 2011 4:23 PM
 35    Grad school appeared to be where most actual $$$ cost/loss occurs. Considering              Feb 21, 2011 4:31 PM
       the cost, it is much more equitable overall to allow employees to transfer the
       benefit to spouses for nongraduate courses.
 36    Perhaps the tuition benefit for employees could have a continuing education                 Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
       component and these funds could be used for those needing continuing education
       units/classes for their respective certifications. Perhaps classes could be through
       the Metroversity system
 37    I am a single mom. Wish it could cover my dependent who wants to get a Master's             Feb 21, 2011 5:00 PM
       as I've been here 25 years and haven't used it.
 38    I agree that tuition remission should only cover tuition, but we should not have to         Feb 21, 2011 5:25 PM
       pay student fees when we are not students and do not use or benefit from the
       things those fees pay for. Should find a way for employees to not have to pay
       student fees.

       I don't think my spouse should use my hours if I don't. He doesn't work here, I do.
       If he wants tuition remission he can get a job at UofL.
 39    Students should be held accountable for such a great benefit. If the                        Feb 21, 2011 5:44 PM
       employee/student doesn't complete the course, they are working the system while
       spouses are completely excluded. This is unfair and should be retified. The
       spousal benefit is a small step in the direction of valuing your employees' service
       to the university. Since we haven't received raises, we should at least be able to
       help our families reach higher levels of educational attainment.
 40    Pay for academic performance makes sense. Lots of companies do it this way. If              Feb 21, 2011 5:54 PM
       you do poorly in the course, you don't get reimbursed. I view the issue of dropping
       the course somewhat differently, particularly if it is for reasons beyond your
       control.
 41    If it is billed as tuition it should be covered as tuition. If it is covered by financial   Feb 21, 2011 5:54 PM
       aid then it should be covered as tuition. Reasonableness for life should be
       factored in to the withdrawal rule as a late withdrawal may be due to a life
       circumstance beyond a persons control (i.e. health treatment).
 42    None.                                                                                       Feb 21, 2011 5:57 PM




                                                        39 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                  Response Text
 43    It's not clear that employees have enough information to really judge the costs          Feb 21, 2011 6:58 PM
       and benefits of this program. For example, how much could the raise pool be
       increased if tuition remissions were cut altogether?
 44    Dr. Shumaker reinstated tuition remission and it is an important, life-changing          Feb 21, 2011 9:21 PM
       benefit with far-reaching consequences. Many employees make career decisions
       based solely on this benefit. Constant chipping away of the program has a
       negative impact and does a disservice to employees who have been promised
       this benefit as a way to compensate for low salaries. I would be very proud if the
       current administration would embrace, even celebrate, this life affirming benefit. I
       would love to hear them say that the University of Louisville is proud to offer the
       best tuition remission program for employees in the state... the University is proud
       to honor its commitment to education and its employees.
 45    I came to the University of Louisville only because of the tuition remission             Feb 21, 2011 9:30 PM
       /benefits, Wages in my dept. are not close to being compeditive with the current
       market. Remove benefits and lose quality people.
 46    If they do decide to give tuition waivers to employees's spouses when the                Feb 21, 2011 9:39 PM
       employee doesn't use it; the tuition remission should never be for a professional
       school.
 47    Provisions should be made for hard ship cases. A person making a good faith              Feb 21, 2011 9:45 PM
       effort at their classes should not be penalized. For example, a staff student who is
       forced to take family leave because of family tragedy should not suddenly find a
       large bill to account for at the same time.
 48    I took this job at a $5.00 cut in pay just so my children can go to school for free. I   Feb 21, 2011 11:17 PM
       work in a area that a lot of people would not. I am at risk for HIV. HepC, and HepB
       among other deasese's, For this I believe I have given a lot to UofL and To take
       this away you could loose alot of Hard working people I think,
 49    The tuition remission program is a way for many lower paid employees to fund a           Feb 21, 2011 11:53 PM
       college education for themselves or their children and extreme care should be
       taken making changes that would adversely affect those employees. I believe
       most private companies that have a tuition remission program have a minimum
       grade requirement for re-imbursement, so I think changes along those lines are
       OK, however I think that the remission should pay the FULL tuition, graduate or
       undergraduate. Exempting the student fee from reimbursement would be ok. If
       the employee is not using their tuition remission, I believe the employees spouse
       should be eligible to use any unused credit hours that semester.
 50    I would have no problem paying the activity fee but Some of us would not have            Feb 22, 2011 8:01 AM
       been able to get a higher degree with out the Tuition Remission offered to
       employees. I also don't think that withdrawal after the drop date should constitute
       unsatisfactory performance. Most who have to use that option don't do it lightly.
       There is generally a family or personal reason for having to use this option.
 51    Maintaining a minimum GPA of 2.0 is very generous, I would recommend a 2.5               Feb 22, 2011 8:48 AM
       minimum.
 52    If an employee does not have children or already has a degree, the tuition waiver        Feb 22, 2011 9:17 AM
       should be given to them as some kind of other benefits instead of not having this
       benefit available to them.
 53    I feel that a minimum grade performance should be observed.                              Feb 22, 2011 9:18 AM
 54    Graduate tuition remission is actually affecting the employee. Since only                Feb 22, 2011 9:21 AM
       employees can receive graduate tuition remission. It also may prevent someone
       from advancing in their UL career.




                                                     40 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
 55    --Other aspects of life get in the way with an employees education. If we want our       Feb 22, 2011 9:26 AM
       employees at UofL to be educated, well-cultured individuals, these tuition
       remissions should be available regardless of the grade an employee makes. The
       fact that an employee is willing to further his or her education is what is important.
 56    Thanks for conducting this survey.                                                       Feb 22, 2011 9:44 AM
 57    Since the entire program is just funny money with speedtypes shuffling around, it        Feb 22, 2011 9:50 AM
       can sustain as it currently exists, since it doesn't cost real money.
 58    Over years of teaching, I have found the tuition remission for spouses and seniors       Feb 22, 2011 9:52 AM
       to be extrremely important i the community. I believe it benefits U of L in the
       community and contributes to educating an important/intellegent segment of the
       population here in Louisvill.
 59    Salary at a university is NOT at all at comparable levels of equal positions in the      Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
       private sector. Tuition remission should continue to be one of the benefits of
       settling for lesser pay.
 60    n/a                                                                                      Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
 61    It is bad enough we are not getting raises. If you starting messing with our other       Feb 22, 2011 10:09 AM
       benefits, I have no reason to stay here. I am already underpaid, for the job I do,
       than my contemporaries in the private sector. The benefits are wahat keep me
       here.
 62    I have no problem with setting a minimum GPA as a criteria for receiving the             Feb 22, 2011 10:13 AM
       tuition remission benefit. I strongly disagree, however, with charging the employee
       for the extra cost of on-line courses and with viewing withdrawals as
       unsatisfactory. Setting a maximum number of withdrawals, however, seems
       reasonable as a means of preventing chronic withdrawals.
 63    I think that single people should be allowed to give their tuition remission to family   Feb 22, 2011 10:13 AM
       members..Such as nephews or nieces... If not, we should take away spousal
       rights to tuition remission.
 64    To cap the assistance for an employee by a GPA is contrary promoting their               Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
       professional development. There should be not be discouragement to learning for
       employees.
 65    Why don't you put a hold or cancel the new email project that is going on. There         Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
       is absolutely no reason we need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars (or
       maybe millions) to change something that works just fine - maybe even better
       than the system we are going to.
 66    Why doesn't the University WANT to promote higher education for its employees?           Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM
       Why doesn't the University want to hire its own graduates into higher levels of
       management? Why does this question come up every year?
 67    I received my BS in 2009 and have never in my opinion abused the tuition                 Feb 22, 2011 10:34 AM
       remission. I am very appreciative of the opportunity that the university has given
       me to further my education since I did not have the knowledge or parental support
       right out of high school to attain a college education. My daughter graduated from
       UofL in 2010 and I am currently enrolled in the Master's program in Higher
       Education Administration which I believe will help me in my current position or
       further my career at UofL.
 68    Employees must be at UofL a minimum of 6 months before they can take                     Feb 22, 2011 10:35 AM
       advantage of the tuition remission benefit. This ensures they make it past the
       povisional period.
 69    Employee tuition is one of the biggest benefits the University can offer and one of      Feb 22, 2011 10:36 AM
       the main reasons many people work here.




                                                     41 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                    Response Text
 70    It is to the benefit of the University to support and encourage their employees to        Feb 22, 2011 10:46 AM
       further their education. Priority should be given to the employee's education since
       UofL stands to gain as much, if not more, thatn the employee.
 71    Stop coffee every morning for most uofl offices - make employees pay and turn             Feb 22, 2011 10:49 AM
       some light off at night
 72    If salaries were being increased at the same rate as tuition and fees, this idea          Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
       would be feasible. However, given the lack of salary increases the tuition
       remission benefit is one of the ways to offset the increasing economy and low or
       non-existent increases in pay. I do believe that satisfactory progress should be
       expected, and that employees should be encouraged to drop classes before the
       deadline. But UofL should continue to support degree completion in its
       employees as much as it does its students.
 73    None of the proposals listed here are adequate compromises, and not enough                Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
       information was provided to offer other options. This will have a negative impact
       on the University's ability to recruite new employees.
 74    I strongly oppose having undergraduate employees pay student fees. I think the            Feb 22, 2011 11:07 AM
       University's mission should be to encourage its staff to obtain at least an
       undergraduate degree. A minimum of $54 per course could likely discourage our
       poorest employees from taking classes. I'm a bit more ambivalent about fees at
       the grad level. In fact, to take it one step more, I would like to see the University
       give every employee who receives an undergraduate degree, a $500 bonus.
 75    It is very difficult to enroll in graduate level classes if you are not degree seeking,   Feb 22, 2011 11:15 AM
       so the tuition remission benefit is really not a benefit to me.
 76    In order to save money, I don't think we need to offer the spousal benefit of tuition     Feb 22, 2011 11:19 AM
       remission.
 77    If the costs need to be cut, reduce benefits to those that already have a degree          Feb 22, 2011 11:43 AM
       and those that are taking graduate and professional level classes. Do not make
       any reductions for those that are seeking their first degree.
 78    Morale is already at an all time low and I think some of these changes would              Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
       cause even lower morale and stress. Staff is already expected to pay for their
       admittance to even use this benefit
 79    Permanent part time staff should also get tuition remission for children and              Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
       spouse on a pro rated basis!!
 80    I have been with the University for 24 years and have stayed because of the               Feb 22, 2011 11:54 AM
       tuition benefit. I currently have a child that is taking advantage of the tuition
       remission that is offered and feel it is a slap in the face to lose it now. To me this
       offsets not getting a raise for 3 years in a row and the below standard salaries.
 81    Since I do not use tuition remission nor do I have a spouse to use it, I feel I should    Feb 22, 2011 12:07 PM
       keep my opinions to myself.
 82    My only problem with the unsatisfactory performance part of this is the impact it         Feb 22, 2011 12:09 PM
       may have on the lifelong learning segment of your constituents. Those who are
       pursuing a degree should absolutely be making satisfactory progress toward that
       degree. But someone who wants to learn for the thrill of learning should not be
       penalized for taking courses in subjects they may be weak in, especially if they
       are using this opportunity to strengthen weak areas. I'm not sure this is a
       convincing enough reason to stop implementation of what is described here, but it
       is something to consider.




                                                       42 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                  Response Text
 83    Comparisons to corporate programs are invalid. Corporate programs actually              Feb 22, 2011 12:14 PM
       have a cost for sending employees to college (they don't own the college). In
       comparisons to other universities, we should be proud we have a rich benefit, not
       use the comparison to justify a watering down of this important employee benefit.
       As an institute of higher learning, we should be striving for stronger incentives for
       course work among employees, not creating disincentives for learning.
 84    Our salaries are below other salaries in the area but we have always said what          Feb 22, 2011 12:30 PM
       great benefits we have. Taking away our tuition is taking away one benefit that
       people come here for.
 85    I believe that students with less than a 2.0 average are more in need of education.     Feb 22, 2011 12:30 PM
       Why discourage learning by eliminating tuition for those students?
 86    The proposed changes are enough, in my opinion, to discourage anyone                    Feb 22, 2011 12:33 PM
       furthering their education or continuing as an employee. This is one of the best
       benefits UofL offers, or at least it used to be.
 87    Considering this is the only true "benefit" those of us making wages BELOW THE          Feb 22, 2011 12:34 PM
       POVERTY LINE truly have I think it's SHAMEFUL for you to even consider
       making any changes whatsoever to the program!
 88    I've made this suggestion before. Tuition remission should be viewed/retained as        Feb 22, 2011 12:49 PM
       an investment benefit. The employee retains accumulated tuition remission, even
       if s/he separates from university employment. Otherwise, we continue to have
       employees long past their "sell by" date, holding onto a job for the eventual TR
       benefit.
 89    For employees, tuition remission may be the platform for promotion among the            Feb 22, 2011 12:57 PM
       ranks within the university. More education equals better job, at least that is what
       we are lead to believe. Stifling the ambitions of your employees will cause low
       moral and bring a dark cloud over the university's reputation. A negative direction
       to take, as the university seeks to become a premier research institution. We
       want the student population to be well educated, but not the employees?
 90    If appropriate, allow a review for the withdrawal from class after the drop/add date    Feb 22, 2011 1:01 PM
       to allow for familty emergency situations. If it counts as only one of the three
       semesters below C allowed an employee then it seems very fair as written (I may
       have gotten confused in my reading).
 91    I am much more interested in having my dependents be covered.                           Feb 22, 2011 1:04 PM




                                                     43 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                  Response Text
 92    Many of us work here and become better at what we do because this benefit is             Feb 22, 2011 1:39 PM
       available, for free, to us. We already take considerably lower pay to exercise this
       benefit. Speaking for myself, I have undoubtedly increased my work performance
       through this program and I believe, strongly, that this happening was spirit of the
       law behind KRS 164.020.

       While I understand being able to sustain this is critical in times where our budget
       continues to shrink, I remain curious of a few other protected decisions (such as
       opting for the expensive Outlook email solution as opposed to the free Google
       solution employed by schools such as Vanderbilt, Indiana University, Northern
       Michigan State, and others) the University could be examining for savings in order
       to maintain adequately excelling faculty and staff.

       Finally, I'd like to point out that education is extremely important, and its why we
       all work here. The ebbs and flows of the University work load do not make it
       always possible to continue a class after the official withdrawal date without the
       potential of serious work-task interference. Relieving us of our ability to withdrawal
       from a class, by way of financial penalty, forces a type of scholarship that one
       may not be able to obtain. This causes our people to be less willing to take
       classes, less willing to attempt diverse classes in which they may not immediately
       succeed, and exacerbates the employee who has to choose between a financial
       penalty of withdrawal or the potential inability to complete their assigned work
       tasks to avoid a poor grade, which could trigger a different financial penalty.
 93    7 If employee had to drop class for health reasons that should not be held against       Feb 22, 2011 1:40 PM
       them.
          If class relates to employee's current job the class should be at not cost to
       employee (exempt from student fees). It has been my understanding you are
       either a student or a employee but not both.
 94    please reinstitute the spousal transfer benefit - what a wonderful opportunity for       Feb 22, 2011 1:52 PM
       many of us whom are highly under paid!
 95    NONE                                                                                     Feb 22, 2011 2:14 PM
 96    I am all in favor of reinstating the spousal transfer benefit, but I feel the            Feb 22, 2011 2:19 PM
       performance standards should perhaps be a little stronger in this regard. Definite
       minimum performance standard of C and only allow one W to reinforce the nature
       that this is a special benefit and should not be taken for granted!
 97    Employees should be working their full work schedule and making up time missed           Feb 22, 2011 2:20 PM
       for classes, homework, or study unless explicitly approved by their supervisor as a
       mutual benefit to the University.
 98    STOP ALLOWING THE TUITION REMISSION TO COVER ONLINE COURSES!!                            Feb 22, 2011 2:21 PM
 99    I think the spousal transfer benefit should only be an option if the employee has        Feb 22, 2011 4:15 PM
       no children who are also receiving tuition remission. The university should not
       have to shoulder an entire family getting degrees for free.
 100   One of the main reasons I work at UofL is because of tuition remission,the pay is        Feb 22, 2011 7:20 PM
       sure not up to standards.
 101   My wife would apply to UofL if the spousal tuition waiver were reinstated.               Feb 22, 2011 9:53 PM
 102   I want to extend my gratitude for the tuition remission benefit. When deciding to        Feb 22, 2011 10:24 PM
       work for UOFL, it was a deciding factor. The pay was lower, but the tuition
       remission made up for the decrease in pay. I also feel you can not put a price on
       education. I also look forward to continuing my career at UOFL.
 103   no comments                                                                              Feb 23, 2011 9:36 AM




                                                     44 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                  Response Text
 104   I would really like to see the spousal transfer reinstated. While it won't personally    Feb 23, 2011 11:17 AM
       assist me there are many employees whose spouses have lost a job and need the
       training to assist in finding another. To care for our staff we need to consider the
       entire picture, not just the individual.
 105   There is no real cost to employee tuition remission. You're trying to convice us         Feb 23, 2011 12:47 PM
       there is when clearly it is the CPE (or whomever's) idea of how we do our
       accounting. It is FRAUDULENT of our administration to try to make us believe
       there is REAL COST for us going to class, there is NO COST. Just more crazy
       accounting. That must be dealt with in Frankfort and the VP for HR, along with
       our president economist and the dean of business should make this case and get
       this changed. EMPLOYEES should not suffer because admin. doesn't want to
       fight this battle. "They make us account for tuition in this manner" is bogus. This
       should never even be an issue for employees, admin., just DO YOUR JOB. We
       employees fight for this university all day every day, it's about time that admin stop
       blaming us for deficits and find a way to continue things as they are. Don't take
       money from me because you don't want to fight the fight in Frankfort.
 106   It seems very unfair that dependents have been able to continue to receive tuition       Feb 23, 2011 1:15 PM
       remission but spouses cannot. This discriminates against/penalizes employees
       who do not have children.
 107   Students should be required to make satisfactory progress in their college classes       Feb 23, 2011 1:23 PM
       which will lead to the completion of classes and the award of the college degree.
 108   Tuition remission should be seen as a metod of keeping your employees happy              Feb 23, 2011 2:12 PM
       via a minimal cost to the school in these time of no raises etc. This extra benefit
       could keep employees motivated and lead to retention and job satisfaction worth
       far more that trying to re-hire often at a higher pay rate.

       Often staff will move around to get a pay increase especially when they have
       been stagnant in pay rates. Administration needs to look at this closer in terms of
       overall cost-saving vs benefit (losses) to a department which will lose that well-
       trained person.
 109   Instead of spouse vs children, why not state that an employee can have a total of        Feb 23, 2011 2:39 PM
       x number of dependents use tuition remission, whether it be a child or spouse? It
       is not fair that some employees can have 10 kids go to school for free but others
       can't have a spouse attend. Imposing a maximum number of dependents could
       decrease costs.
 110   sound pretty reasonable-especially the 2.0 or better                                     Feb 23, 2011 2:40 PM
 111   I think that tuition remission should only be for undergraduate degrees; whether it      Feb 23, 2011 3:19 PM
       is for employee, spouse, or dependent. Graduate school for spouse or child
       should be funded elswhere by loans or scholarhip. How can an employee go to
       graduate school and still work full time
 112   The University does not take into consideration that most of its employee are paid       Feb 23, 2011 3:40 PM
       substandard salaries (well below government and other entities-especially HSC).
       Most can barely afford books on their salaries. Professional salaried employees
       (doctors, lawyers, clinicians, etc.) with salaries 50,000 and above should pay extra
       fees.
 113   Also instead of forcing me to spend my whole budget in fear that I may not get as        Feb 23, 2011 4:14 PM
       much for my department next year if I don't show a need for it,reward the manager
       who is able to do that and gather all of the unspent money and put it where it is
       needed that particular year.




                                                     45 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                  Response Text
 114   According to previous information provided the GPA stuff has no cost saving.           Feb 23, 2011 4:51 PM
       Why implement it now or in the future. Also Since an employee may have work
       related reasons for both poor performance and withdrawal later than drop add it
       seem unfair to add this requirement without good reason.
 115   As a graduate student myself, I would be willing to pay the student fees and           Feb 23, 2011 6:13 PM
       perhaps the tuition surcharges in order to keep this benefit.
 116   I think that having a qualifying period before tuition remission benefits "kick in"    Feb 23, 2011 6:50 PM
       (e.g. a year or two) would be a better option for helping keep costs down rather
       than charging student fees to the employee.
 117   Withdrawal after the drop/add date should depend upon the circumstances the            Feb 24, 2011 9:16 AM
       employee/family member dropped the class.
 118   none                                                                                   Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 119   none                                                                                   Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 120   none                                                                                   Feb 24, 2011 10:16 AM
 121   none                                                                                   Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
 122   Although, this wouldn't benefit me since I already have advanced degrees, the          Feb 24, 2011 11:13 AM
       university should recognize completion of education and professional
       development. The proposed changes will discourage educational advancement
       and training. To counter this, the university could provide a base salary
       adjustment to eligible employees upon the receipt of a degree or an approved job
       related professional certification that is recognized by the university, such as:
       Bachelor’s Degree $ 500.00
       Master’s Degree $ 1000.00
       Doctoral Degree $ 1500.00
       Approved Professional Certification $ 500.00 (UBM training, webmaster, etc.)
 123   The tuition remission plan should be left alone. I feel any employee taking            Feb 24, 2011 11:14 AM
       classes is bettering themselves and should NOT have to pay a cent to attend
       classes. I don't mind too much that a C average be required, but only because
       this would not ever affect me.

       Other people I speak with (that do not work at UofL) cannot believe that as a staff
       person, I have to PAY to park my car at work. After 20+ years ... that STILL is
       unbelievable to me!
 124   Life events could require an employee to withdraw after the drop/add date and          Feb 24, 2011 11:22 AM
       should not reflect as an unsatisfactory academic performance.
 125   none                                                                                   Feb 24, 2011 11:37 AM
 126   tuition remission needs to remain a benefit for all workers. What kind of university   Feb 24, 2011 12:48 PM
       does not value the contining pursuit of knowledge, at all stages of life?
 127   25% should be paid by the employee regardless, it is a very common practice by         Feb 24, 2011 12:55 PM
       most of univerisities. I don't know why this university doesn't do this.
 128   I don't agree that employees should be able to pursue multiple degrees at the          Feb 24, 2011 1:30 PM
       expense of the University. Taking classes in multiple disciplines--OK. But getting
       multiple undergraduate/master's degrees is an expense that shouldn't be covered
       for employees.

       Our country worships the education system but real life experience, like SERVICE
       LEARNING and learning models (like the Peace Corp) are VERY successful at
       integrating real life experience into the equation, as opposed to over-educated
       and under-prepared for the multiple challenges of the workplace. These funds
       could EASILY be directed into salary increases, PD initiatives & more.




                                                     46 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
 129   UofL tuition coverage is the main perk that keeps me here. I love my job but the         Feb 24, 2011 2:31 PM
       reality is many of us could be making more money elsewhere. This perk makes it
       worth staying put and sharing our UofL pride with our families. This is a critical
       benefit to employees and their families!
 130   My salary is below average -- if I lose this benefit I have to consider leaving my       Feb 24, 2011 3:52 PM
       position at UofL and moving out of higher ed, and into a higher paying salary job
       so I can pay for tuition.
 131   Information should be more informative, and available to employees.                      Feb 24, 2011 5:25 PM
 132   n/a                                                                                      Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 133   n/a                                                                                      Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 134   Tuition remission is not an abused benefit, most of us are unable because of work        Feb 25, 2011 10:55 AM
       loads to carry a student load!
 135   Are there any figures available detailing the number of employees that are               Feb 25, 2011 12:47 PM
       actually taking courses and what it costs the university? I think many people
       question whether the actual number is large enough to impact the budget.
 136   I think the standards should be higher. 2.0 is not good enough if you are only           Feb 25, 2011 1:12 PM
       taking 6 hours per semester. I think we should follow the standards at private
       companies and require a B or higher.
 137   EDUCATION is what this institution is all about! Don't put paralyzing parameters         Feb 25, 2011 3:05 PM
       on it for employees or their families!!
 138   Many people come to work at U of L, making less than in the corporate world.             Feb 25, 2011 5:20 PM
       When you factor tuition remission into a salary, it adds a great deal. It is a benefit
       of working for a University. Tuition remission for staff should remain in place no
       matter what.
 139   I dont believe that taking money AWAY from the tuition remission program is the          Feb 26, 2011 9:45 PM
       way to go AT ALL. If anything, money should me ADDED to the program to pay
       for the rising tuition costs!
 140   As a current employee enrolled in a graduate program at the university, I would          Feb 26, 2011 11:04 PM
       prefer not to have to pay the fee or surcharge portion of tuition remission, as I
       already pay a graduate fee for the college that I'm enrolled in. However, I also
       understand that sacrifices will likely be necessary in some areas to get a raise, so
       I would be willing to consider agreeing to pay the fee portion of tuition remission in
       order to receive a raise.
 141   In the current fiscal climit, cutting benefits sends a strong message to staff that we   Feb 28, 2011 9:36 AM
       are not valued. Without regular annual raises, maintaining benefits is the least the
       university can do for it's staff.
 142   Work has a tendency to "get in the way" of taking classes and there are times it is      Feb 28, 2011 9:54 AM
       necessary to drop a class after the drop/add date in order to maintain balance of
       work, school and life outside of both.

       The graduate tuition remission benefit is a strong draw for both potential faculty
       and staff. To require them to pay more because they already have obtained their
       undergraduate degrees before coming to UofL may seem offensive at best.

       Although I do not like the idea of a minimum performance standard, that seems to
       be the best solution of those that have been suggested.




                                                     47 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
 143   Tuition remission is a huge reason why many employees are working in higher             Feb 28, 2011 12:06 PM
       education and do not expect salary increases. The economy is not rebounding
       where there should even be a consideration for salary increases, especially when
       there isn't a surplus of revenue with the university. That doesn't make any sense.
       However, statistics show that when the economy is bad, enrollment increases in
       higher education. Enrollment revenue should be increasing for the university and
       tuition remission, as a benefit, may be increasing for the university as well.
       Instead of cutting back on this benefit, the university should reduce the 30%
       increase with taking online courses (this additional increase is unheard of in
       California universities), and set minimum GPAs for employee and dependent
       students in the tuition remission program.
       With the 2020 plan to increase retention and enrollment, we should be able to
       offer this plan to our University family and stand by what we believe in. We
       shouldn't cut higher education when students are doing well in school. These
       enrollments should be encouraged and seen as a positive aspect of the University
       of Louisville community and family environment. Taking this away or reducing this
       benefit will result in a loss with the integrity of the 2020 plan.
 144   Let's not forget this: Many UofL employees are UofL employees for the tuition           Feb 28, 2011 5:23 PM
       benefits, not the "generous salary". If you take the tuition benefit away, you're
       encouraging the brightest, most motivated, most educated employees to look
       elsewhere.
 145   I believe this change would be very difficult for the Bursar's Office to administer.    Mar 1, 2011 11:21 AM
       Has anyone considered the administrative cost associated with the proposed
       changes?
 146   "Fees" (sic) and "surcharges" (sic) are WAYS OF BOLD-FACED LYING TO THE                 Mar 1, 2011 12:09 PM
       EMPLOYEES OF THE UNIVERSITY! Renaming something (e.g.) a "fee" is a
       transparent attempt to state that tuition has not been raised, WHEN IN FACT
       TUITION HAS BEEN RAISED! If the adiminstration thinks that this kind of cheap
       doubletalk is fooling anyone, then they are only fooling themselves.
 147   As for capping graduate tuition remission at the regular rate, an employee who           Mar 1, 2011 5:46 PM
       lives in Indiana faces $1,256 per credit hour for law classes. To ask them to pay
       more than that disregards the reality that they probably don't make enough to
       support themselves as it is. UofL salaries are abysmal and I could not, in good
       conscience, ask an employee to pay more than that for a law school class.
       Maybe you should think about adding a salary component to all this. If an
       employee makes more than $70k, then they should pay more than the rest of us
       who are struggling along at $25k. Sound like a deal?
 148   Tuition remission is the easiest and cheapest way to provide a valuable benefit to       Mar 1, 2011 6:06 PM
       employees. It allows employees to become more useful to the university and
       costs the university only the administrative cost of processing the tuition remission
       paperwork. Of course, it makes it sound like it costs more by claiming that an
       employee takes the place of a paying student, but that is nothing but a ruse. In
       reality, the benefit to the university in the form of educated employees far
       outweighs the "paying" students that are displaced. In purely financial terms, the
       university may see additional revenue, since a full time student pays only for 12
       credit hours per semester and by being displaced may need additional semester
       to complete a degree. Further, even though classroom size is limited and
       additional students may require more additional effort from faculty, such
       arguments seem disingenuous. Having completed over 100 credit hours in UofL
       classes, I have very rarely seen classrooms filled to capacity and faculty
       overloaded by student work. To claim that the limiting of tuition remission
       constitutes a savings to the university is just plain mendacious.




                                                     48 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                    Response Text
 149   The tutition remission is a wonderful recruitment tool as well as a strong staff            Mar 3, 2011 4:50 PM
       development tool.
 150   The Education for our Future Students don't matter if it's our Staff, Faculty's kids        Mar 3, 2011 5:49 PM
       or just Alumni. The standards now in today's society to just get an education is
       almost impossible for anyone to even successed and be succesful with such
       higher standard and requirements by our colleges in general . For those alumni
       that are paying the "High" cost of Tuition and trying to make it in today's market
       and get past the high requirements from the school to get an education is almost
       like trying to survive rather then successed. Education should "not" be offered like
       a piece of cake but rather enjoyable, inspiring, constructive with some incentive or
       enlightment towards your future as you attend college for a degree.
 151   I thought a progressive school would add benefits not remove them. It sounds                Mar 4, 2011 8:45 AM
       like a cut in pay. Take home pay is about the same now as it was 10 years ago.
 152   Tuition remission is a valuable tool for retention and attraction of desirable              Mar 4, 2011 9:42 AM
       employees. However, it is reasonable for the recipient to carry part of the
       financial burden.
 153   In some cases people have a reason for dropping the class late or falling outside           Mar 4, 2011 10:27 AM
       the lines. I feel that there should be a standard but also if they have a reason that
       they can prove that shouls also be considered before they must withdrawl. I feel
       that paying the tuition for emplyees is a good way to ensure that the employee will
       be a faithful employee for a period of time.
 154   I agree with most of the stemetns above, but would hate to lose the benefit of              Mar 4, 2011 10:29 AM
       being able to take a university course on a pass-fail, non-degree-seeking basis.
 155   I am a new employee and am quite frankly shocked that failing grades are                    Mar 4, 2011 10:30 AM
       acceptable and paid for by the university. If you do not make a passing grade, the
       courses should be paid by the employee. I am also not a fan of the spousal
       transfer benefit - they are not employees why should they benefit.
 156   I believe that regardless of the received grade by the employee in a course, that           Mar 4, 2011 10:36 AM
       person still learns something which will probably benefit the university and so
       should not be asked to pay for the tuition if they receive a low grade. Often
       people take these classes to be more competent in their current positions. When
       they do this they are taking time out of their schedule to try to benefit their
       employer. I think it's unscrupulous to tax with a lack of reimbursement on top of
       their personal lost time just because they did not meet initial expectations in a
       class room. What if a person has an unforeseen personal issue that gets in the
       way of his being able to work a full time job, take classes and balance a personal
       life (i.e. raise children)? Is it fair to tax these individuals? Is the university really
       out that much money by allowing them to attend a class?
 157   I was sorry to see the spousal transfer benefit discontinued a few years ago. That          Mar 4, 2011 10:47 AM
       was a great benefit, and if we can afford it, I would like to see it reinstated.
 158   All good ideas                                                                              Mar 4, 2011 11:01 AM
 159   For staff, I would say many of us came to work here and have stayed for so long             Mar 4, 2011 11:24 AM
       because of this benefit. If this benefit were changed as described, hopefully it
       would only be from a certain future date forward and those of us who have been
       here can keep the benefits as they are. I don't think it is fair to take benefits away.
       If a new hire knows what the benefits are when they are hired then they are
       accepting those upon hire.
 160   Where do Audits fall? I have used Audit to prep me as a returning student for               Mar 4, 2011 12:00 PM
       classes that I would otherwise fail. If withdrawals are punishable, then can we
       please be able to use Audits.




                                                       49 of 168
14. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
 161    Employee should only be charged at the in-state tuition rate. Tuition remission          Mar 4, 2011 2:06 PM
        should not cover non-resident tuition. If an employee drops a class outside the
        100% range.. I think the employee should have to petition the registrars for a
        100% tuition reduction.
 162    Spousal transfer benefit should be reinsated, especially if the employee does not        Mar 4, 2011 3:37 PM
        use themselves or is not able to take advantage of the dependent tuition
        remission benefit.
 163    I came here for 1 reason so my kids could go to college for free, please do not          Mar 7, 2011 6:42 PM
        take this away from us!
 164    I feel that U of L needs to bring there salaries up to market salaries especially in    Mar 8, 2011 12:16 PM
        this economy. Hourly employee's are having a hard time just getting by.
 165    Some departments are not allowing employees to take advantage of the program            Mar 11, 2011 7:53 AM
        when necessary by adjusting schedules to attend the classes. Of course, this
        should be done only if the courses ara not available at other times.
 166    I am a post bac at U of L. I am a working parent for U of L and I am making a           Mar 11, 2011 10:32 AM
        career change. My plan is to apply for the Master's Program in Computer Science
        at U of L. Tuition remission at U of L is ideal for individuals in my situation. It
        would be almost impossible to develop my education AND have a family AND
        work AND have to pay tuition. The skills I learn in class also benefit my work.
        This is the time where re-education for a changing world is critical and to remove
        the tuition remission program would be a mistake. I understand the need to make
        cut backs to be more competitive with salaries, but would the cutbacks in benefits
        really mean I would get a raise at work. Getting a raise is dependent on my
        supervisor more than the mandates of the University. Guarantee the raise for
        everyone who is currently working for U of L, and cutting back tuition remission
        would make more sense.




23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
  1     I have nver understood why distance education costs more when no classroom is           Feb 21, 2011 12:53 PM
        involved and U of L has the software in place for distance education. Distance
        educaion shuld really be more cost effective not 30% less cost effective.
  2     na                                                                                      Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
  3     I'd strongly prefer administration find a way to fund staff salary increases without    Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
        finding the dollars to do so through cutting staff benefits. While we argue we're
        "benefit rich" at the university, I know the fringe rates used by Jewish and Norton's
        and they're nearly identical to ours. Since their salaries generally run higher,
        we're actually below market in salaries and benefits, I believe.
  4     A DEGREE IS A DEGREE REGARDLESS OF WHAT METHOD IS USED TO                               Feb 21, 2011 12:56 PM
        OBTAIN IT




                                                      50 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
  5     An age limit for a benefit is unethical in my opinion. Things happen in peoples           Feb 21, 2011 12:56 PM
        lives where they want to go to college, but can't at the time. This is ultimately a
        benefit that the university provides, with that being said: If the dependent is going
        for a four-year degree, technically to receive full benefit as an employee here,
        your dependent will end up actually be cut off at 21-22 years old to receive a
        degree at UofL. Granted, some is better than none, but a lot of great minds come
        here (and stay) because of this benefit, I think you will lose a lot of great people by
        messing with this.

        I also disagree with the 30% surcharge on distance education, this doesn't seem
        right also...but maybe I'm misinformed and don't know enough about it.
  6     Why is there a surcharge for distance education courses in the first place? In the        Feb 21, 2011 1:00 PM
        grand scheme of things it costs the University less to offer online courses as there
        is not the overhead outlay for classroom space, utilities, etc. And...more students
        can be enrolled in an online course. It seems ridiculous that the University is
        charging more for something that costs them less in the long run. I don't think that
        this should be charged to anyone, especially not those being covered by tuition
        remission. Tuition is tuition regardless of how the University decides to calculate
        it.
  7     My only disagree is that an Accounting Major who plans to sit for the CPA exams           Feb 21, 2011 1:08 PM
        is required to take 150 hours. I definitely believe there should be an upper-cap on
        how many hours a students can take (otherwise, they may take classes
        indefinitely until they are 26; which defeats the purpose of the benefit), but it
        should be looked into how many UG degrees have requirements over 140 hours.
        Perhaps a document can be filed on behalf of students in those majors (with
        stipulations of course) to accommodate their degrees.
  8     The student can not help that his/her degree require some classes and can not             Feb 21, 2011 1:08 PM
        help if the class is only taught on line.
  9     Sometimes some of the courses needed to graduate are only offered on line                 Feb 21, 2011 1:15 PM
        instead of the University.
 10     We should be allowed to go to other close Universities                                    Feb 21, 2011 1:24 PM
 11     I don't comprehend the surcharge, for dependents or anyone else.                          Feb 21, 2011 1:25 PM
 12     Distance Ed has lower overhead. We should be encouraging students to take                 Feb 21, 2011 1:33 PM
        their classes off campus instead of essentially penalizing them for chosing to take
        courses online.
 13     I agree that a credit hour limit should be in place. Students should not be taking        Feb 21, 2011 1:36 PM
        advantage of the program and becoming life long students just because they do
        not declare a degree. Will 140 hours guarantee any student an undergraduate
        degree? Is it enough credits for all? They should have the opportunity to change
        their minds during study of 4-5 years but not add another 60 credits. If a degree
        requires 130.. that allows 10 credit hours that may not apply because of changing
        majors, etc. Students should be afforded the option to change majors but not take
        advantage of the benefit. However, if degrees require 140 credits... they should be
        allowed 150... if the tuition remission program is to provide a benefit to employee
        dependents to obtain a degree... it should have some flexibility to accomodate
        that.
 14     I think a five-year creditable service period is more fair than seven.                    Feb 21, 2011 1:37 PM
 15     Please look at question 11                                                                Feb 21, 2011 1:39 PM




                                                       51 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 16     Get rid of all the "dependents" that are using the benefit that should not be         Feb 21, 2011 1:41 PM
        "friends, cousins, nephews, etc.. "Again, this is why employees work or have
        worked at the University for so long. What about employees that have kids in high
        school or are in Speed School now planning on getting the Master's Degree, who
        now can have up to 166 hours. Now I'm going to have to pay for an additional 20
        hours of class???
 17     No suggestions at this time.                                                          Feb 21, 2011 1:42 PM
 18     I feel that the dependant should also get their tuition paid. However, there should   Feb 21, 2011 1:46 PM
        be some kind of cap on age and hours. The problem is when a student gets into
        a program and finds that they are not suited for that degree, if there is a cap on
        hours, they may not be able to get into another degree. I feel that the student
        should also carry a C or higher grade point average to keep the tuition remission.
        Below that, they should have to pay. Tuition remission is a type of scholarship
        and should be treated as such. I also feel that they waiting period should be at
        least the 6 months the employee is on probation.
 19     Waiting period should be waived in certain circumstances (e.g., employee hired        Feb 21, 2011 1:59 PM
        away from another institution because he or she has much needed expertise in a
        specific area)
        7 years too long for retiree dependents, but too short for a young person killed in
        active service
 20     I've never quite understood why the 30% surcharge for on-line programs when the       Feb 21, 2011 1:59 PM
        professor is not in a classroom teaching. This class is taken by a student on-line,
        not in a classroom.
 21     The dependent should be eligible for tuition remission after the new employee has     Feb 21, 2011 2:01 PM
        completed their provisionary period of six months.
 22     No longer allow employee's children to receive free tuition.                          Feb 21, 2011 2:03 PM
 23     # 19 - why should a surcharge on distance ed be allowed when the student              Feb 21, 2011 2:17 PM
        resides locally?
 24     Rather than a one-year waiting period (question #15), perhaps a two-                  Feb 21, 2011 2:18 PM
        semester/term (including summer) waiting period would be more appropriate.
        This may allow dependents to take advantage of the program sooner than the
        one-year waiting period, but still accomplish the goal of establishing period that
        employees and their dependents should have to wait.
 25     I have been working here, for low pay, for 6 years. I enjoy my co-workers and my      Feb 21, 2011 2:21 PM
        boss, and also my job. However, I know we are making less than the private
        market. The reason I work here is the free college for my children (and 403b
        match,etc.) as with what we make, we cannot afford it!!!! We would be better off
        working a private job (not here) and then we can afford college ourselves!! Also,
        quit sending those magazines, spending money on new arenas, and don't focus
        so much on sports just so we can "look good." We need a raise and the benefits
        we were hired under!!
 26     #17. I think that 140 hours is a reasonable limit, since some students may change     Feb 21, 2011 2:22 PM
        majors often. But if the student is in a program that goes beyond140 hours for that
        particular degree without a change in majors, I think the student should be
        allowed to finish that degree.
 27     Most other universities no longer charge the higher tuition cost for the online       Feb 21, 2011 2:22 PM
        programs. Suggest UofL does the same.
 28     Only for new in-coming employees.                                                     Feb 21, 2011 2:23 PM




                                                      52 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 29     #14 The max age should be 24.                                                           Feb 21, 2011 2:31 PM
        #16. 5 year
 30     It amazes me that a institution that doesnt has the class space and is actively         Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
        pushing for more online classes ...charges 30% more for substandard teaching
        (online). If anything... online distance learning should be cheaper. You can teach
        more students and less physical resources are required (lighting, staffing, heat,
        air). How about we charge a 30% stupid tax on dumb ideas and give that to a
        scholarship fund for students who can't afford distance ed.
 31     The idea of capping tuition remission at the regular rate of full-time undergraduate    Feb 21, 2011 2:43 PM
        tuition should help significantly and is preferable to eliminating the distance
        classes from the tuition remission program for dependents.

        Further, some dependents are not ready for college at the traditional age. In my
        case I have a dependent who suffers from autism, which may or may not improve.
        It would be a shame if this dependent, who has a real thirst for knowledge, was
        eventually able to get a GED and get admitted to U of L, was then ineligible for
        tuition remission because of his age.
 32     Dependents should not be charged the additiona on-line tuition if the courses           Feb 21, 2011 2:48 PM
        they need to graduate are not offered in the traditional method.
 33     Eliminate the distance education surcharges for those receiving remission.              Feb 21, 2011 2:52 PM
 34     Benefits have always be an attraction in considering UofL for employment.               Feb 21, 2011 2:53 PM
        Tuitioin remission being a the top of the list.
 35     Give merit pay raises only to faculty and staff, not across the board raises.           Feb 21, 2011 2:56 PM
 36     N/A                                                                                     Feb 21, 2011 3:02 PM
 37     I would say tuition remission for dependents is a big factor for some employees.        Feb 21, 2011 3:12 PM
        Again, much like the pool I mentioned above, during open enrollment, employees
        can opt in or opt out of dependent tuition. Those who opt out can claim the
        benefit for themselves or remit it to a pool.
 38     I would not eliminate coverage of the pricing difference for online courses. I would    Feb 21, 2011 3:14 PM
        imagine that these represent the fastest growing classes at the university. this
        would cut access to these dramatically. Perhaps there should be an annual review
        of the overall plan for dependents receiving tuition remission during which it is
        verified that the student is actually working toward a primary undergraduate
        degree.
 39     See above.                                                                              Feb 21, 2011 3:15 PM
 40     I agree with this approach: An alternative approach to eliminating the distance         Feb 21, 2011 3:15 PM
        education surcharge would be to cap dependent tuition remission at the regular
        undergraduate, FT resident tuition rate (currently $4,212 per semester) which
        would drive equivalent or greater savings, while allowing some flexibility in class
        scheduling.
 41     I'm neutral on the age limit simply for the fact that the possibility exists a          Feb 21, 2011 3:21 PM
        dependent may want to go to college later in life and the benefit is not available to
        them simply because of a life decision. I'd be more for a time-limit, e.g. a
        dependent must complete a degree within 6 years in order to maintain tuition
        remission.

        I'm neutral on the 30% surcharge for distance education courses because I think a
        class is a class, regardless of where it is taken. It should cost the same
        regardless.




                                                      53 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 42     An alternative approach to eliminating the distance education surcharge would be        Feb 21, 2011 3:40 PM
        to cap dependent tuition remission at the regular undergraduate, FT resident
        tuition rate (currently $4,212 per semester) which would drive equivalent or
        greater savings, while allowing some flexibility in class scheduling.
 43     Same comment as above. We already pay the student fees.                                 Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
 44     Increase vesting but not benefits.                                                      Feb 21, 2011 3:44 PM
 45     I believe that dependents should be required to receive a C or higher in order to       Feb 21, 2011 3:50 PM
        receive the tuition remission. Currently, the UPS Metro College program only
        pays for UPS employees classes that they receive Cs or higher in as a part of
        their contract. I feel as if we should expect the same of our employees as well as
        our employees' children.
 46     Item #18: I do not feel an employee should have to pay student fees. I do agree         Feb 21, 2011 3:50 PM
        that an employee's dependent student should pay student fees.
 47     If you only allowing seven years after an employees death for dependents to get         Feb 21, 2011 3:54 PM
        tuition reimbursement,
        many young children will be left out. That is one of the most attractive benefits the
        University Offers.
        If I were to die now, only my oldest would benefit and my elementary age child
        would suffer.
 48     Question 16 should be separated into multiple questions. Retirees should have           Feb 21, 2011 4:02 PM
        the seven-year service requirement. Dead or disabled employees should not be
        held to this standard.
 49     The distance ed surcharge is confusing to most students/parents.                        Feb 21, 2011 4:16 PM
 50     I think tuition remission should be graded according to faculty salary, i.e., highly    Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
        paid faculty get less remission for themselves and children, while lower paid staff
        receive full benefits.
 51     I think the idea of only paying for one degree for both Staff and dependents is a       Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
        good way to help cut costs of the program.
 52     Credit hour limit should be looked into more. Some undergraduate programs               Feb 21, 2011 4:47 PM
        require up to 138 hours to graduate (Speed School, Music, and I'm sure there are
        others.) Most student during there first two semesters do not really know their true
        major and will bounce around...maybe instituting a cap of 150 will give some
        leeway.
 53     Once again, this is not an actual dollar amount cost to the University unless a         Feb 21, 2011 4:47 PM
        "paying" student cannot be admitted to the class because an employee's child has
        taken the seat. How often does this really happen? You don't pay faculty more
        for every student enrolled. It doesn't cost more to heat a room with more students
        enrolled. This is a "perceived" cost that can be manipulated to appear as any
        number upper management chooses. Change your accounting practices & quit
        manipulating the data.
 54     I feel the age limit is too low for dependents. Sometimes spouses have to seek          Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
        educational opportunities when family situations change. The original degree may
        need to be updated or a new line of education may be needed to find a job.
        Perhaps they could pay double whatever fees are in place for a second chance to
        find a job if they already used the benefit.
 55     Online courses should be cheaper, NOT more expensive like JCC and other                 Feb 21, 2011 4:54 PM
        Universities. Military will only pay $250 per credit hour and universities are
        standing in line to get this business. What is U of L's problem with technology?




                                                      54 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 56     cap the hours for dependents thus making them accountable to be effiicient with           Feb 21, 2011 5:44 PM
        their academic plans!
 57     Question #16. If an employee is not currently employed, no benefit should be              Feb 21, 2011 5:57 PM
        extended to dependents, whether living or deceased. Question #17. U of L degree
        granting units update and increase credit hour requirements regularly; a limit is
        unfair. Question #19. Why is there even a 30% surcharge on distance education?
        Unfair.
 58     MANY faculty and staff are here for this benefit and have stayed at UL because of         Feb 21, 2011 6:09 PM
        this benefit. Imposing an age limit is silly--people have different paths in life--we
        know that as we have served non traditional students for a long time. An age limit
        of 26 means if someone is ill or has to work to help the family or has military
        service, they will not get the benefit in full. That makes no sense. As for distance
        education, more and more units are doing distance ed and it will replace regular
        offerings. Imposing this fee when students might have no alternative is not the
        right thing to do for our faculty and staff. Instead, leave the benefit fully intact --
        this matters more for many of our faculty and staff than having the benefit for their
        own or spousal education
 59     The 30% distance learning fee is once again, turning not real dollars into real           Feb 21, 2011 9:13 PM
        dollars. Money laundering for the University to make $$$$
 60     The administration should suck it up, accept the cost of the program, and                 Feb 21, 2011 9:21 PM
        recognize the long-term benefits of the program. Kentucky badly needs a better
        educated workforce. Money can be found elsewhere.
 61     It is well known throughout the University that certain employees of the University       Feb 21, 2011 9:30 PM
        were given Large salary increases, while other staff have gone without increases
        for 3+ years! Lose benefits lose quality employees.
 62     Stop giving away free courses beyond the defined full time load. This would               Feb 22, 2011 12:00 AM
        generate revenue and leave benefits intact.
 63     There should not be a surcharge on distance education for any student.                    Feb 22, 2011 12:18 AM
 64     The full tuition should be paid for the child of an employee for their undergraduate      Feb 22, 2011 8:33 AM
        degree.
 65     Do not consider tuition remission as a "real" budget item rather offer this benefit       Feb 22, 2011 8:44 AM
        as a "off the books" benefit. The university will NOT generate any revenue
        through this proposal.
        BTW - Question #13 is poorly stated and assumes that a first degree is sufficient.
        Other universities offer unlimited tuition through graduate and professional
        schools
 66     There is no reason to have an age limit, should be based on having "dependent"            Feb 22, 2011 8:48 AM
        status on employees tax return.
        Tuition remission should include all fees.
 67     How many students take more than 140 credit hours? I wouldn't think it is too             Feb 22, 2011 9:01 AM
        many, and if they have the knowledge to do so, I think it should be encouraged
 68     This is for question 16 I been here for 20 years maybe that could reflect                 Feb 22, 2011 9:10 AM
        retirement or death or being disabled
 69     #15 - A waiting period is good to make sure the employee is committed to working          Feb 22, 2011 9:18 AM
        at UL.
        #16 - I'm not sure that idea is good. Family members should be using the tuition
        remission during employee's active work time.
        #17 - At some point the responsibility must be put on the individual going to
        school.




                                                       55 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                     Response Text
 70     Credit Hour limit should match the bachelor program required hours. Does 140              Feb 22, 2011 9:21 AM
        hours meet all of the bachelor program requirements.
 71     I was not hired, nor am I paid to develop these strategies. Bump my salary by             Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
        100,000, and I'll work on it. I'll do my job, and I'll expect the administration to do
        theirs.
 72     n/a                                                                                       Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
 73     This benefit strongly influenced my decision to take this position. I took a $10,000/     Feb 22, 2011 9:57 AM
        yr cut in pay to have this benefit for my dependent sons. If this benefit is curtailed,
        then the salary for staff should increase commiserate with competitive salaries in
        the private sector.
 74     Leave it like it is. Give our kids a chance... cut the budget elsewhere.                  Feb 22, 2011 10:00 AM
 75     If a young employee dies or becomes permanently disabled their dependant might            Feb 22, 2011 10:06 AM
        not be of college age in 7 years.
 76     #14..what about employees that go back to school later in life; if it is not covered      Feb 22, 2011 10:07 AM
        then it is discrimination to that employee; I do agree that 26 for children or
        grandchildren is appropriate
        #17.if a student has a scholarship then I think it should be able to be used for
        books, etc.
        #19 I do not understand this
 77     The creditable service should apply to all employees, not just those hired after          Feb 22, 2011 10:10 AM
        implementation.
 78     Age limit of 24.                                                                          Feb 22, 2011 10:13 AM
 79     Again, those items I've agreed with are also what has been suggested from HR.             Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
        Make the benefit for dependents available by application and not a standard.
        There could be criteria to meet the eligibility of tuition remission where salary
        plays into the equation just as FASFA and other government agencies have. The
        whole point of tuition remission is to allow for those who need it to use it.
 80     There should not be a limit of credit hours. Or, it should be higher - say 200            Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
        hours. There are many students who can't decide or change mid-stream on their
        degree choice. They should not be penalized because their goals and dreams
        change. No 18 year old is really capable of making a life-long decision on their
        career choice at the moment they start school.

        Fees should be included in the tuition remission. You can call it what you want
        but they are all part of tuition unless they are optional services. If you are forcing
        students to pay these fees regardless of their usage of the service, it should be
        included.
 81     There should not be a credit hour limit. If a student changes his major and he            Feb 22, 2011 10:17 AM
        needs to take more new credit hours, then 140 hours may not be enough for his
        first undergraduate degree.
 82     I do not have dependents and therefore am neutral. I do think the 30% surcharge           Feb 22, 2011 10:19 AM
        is unfair (all the way around) and I disagree with no. 18 because of the term,
        "similar to employees".
 83     I am a single parent and my son attends UofL. It's been hard, if I had not                Feb 22, 2011 10:23 AM
        mangaed to get a job at UofL then my son would'nt have the opportunity to
        continue his education. This is the only reason I stay at UofL for a job, retirement
        plan and my son's education.
 84     fund to the required level                                                                Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM




                                                        56 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 85     While I understand that the intent of the original policy was to offer dependents a    Feb 22, 2011 10:51 AM
        chance for attending school, there are more options for children to apply for
        scholarships and assistance then there is for adults. (ie kees money). I believe
        that the offer should still stand for dependents to be able to go to school but to
        definitely tighten up the policy as to for how long (140 credit hours) and to expect
        that the distance education difference be paid for by the dependent student as
        well.
 86     #18 - Consider capping student fees at $250?                                           Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
        #19 - This could possibly amount to >$2,000 per year. Could there be a cap on
        the surcharge?
 87     Stop paying huge bonuses to coaches while other employees receive nothing or           Feb 22, 2011 10:58 AM
        reduced benefits.
 88     I think the age limit should be 30 and the credit hour limit should at least be 150.   Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
        College students change their minds on degrees and I think that should be taken
        into account on the credit and age limit.
 89     Place an expectancy for the dependent to complete their degree within six years,       Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
        same as with most students receiving federal aid (unless there are extenuating
        circumstances; in those cases, the employee/dependent can petition for a one
        year extension). In addition, require that satisfactory progress be maintained in
        the same way that federal aid requires.
 90     Number 16 encourages discrimination of the handicap.                                   Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
 91     #16. I'd agree if you made it 5 years.                                                 Feb 22, 2011 11:07 AM
        #17. It's hard for me to agree with a credit hour limit. Some students need a little
        time to find out who they are and what they want to study. There are also very
        motivated students who want an undergraduate and maybe a couple of minors.I
        think limiting tuition remission to one undergraduate degree, age 26, implementing
        satisfactory performance requirements, would take care of the "lifelong" student
        problem.
 92     #17--I agree there should be a credit hour limit, however I think it should be         Feb 22, 2011 11:23 AM
        slightly higher than 140 hrs (maybe 145-150)
 93     I don't understand the point of the surcharge to begin with. Especially for online     Feb 22, 2011 11:26 AM
        classes where there are fewer resources actually being used by the university.
 94     I strongly believe that dependent children should be allowed to utilize graduate       Feb 22, 2011 11:39 AM
        tuition remission benefits of the employee if neither the employee or his/her
        spouse utilizes them. Thank you.
 95     I have a hard time understanding the extra fees for distance education anyway.         Feb 22, 2011 11:40 AM

        Also, this is one of the few benefits that attracts and keeps good people (as most
        salaries are low).
 96     If a student decides to go on to graduate school, I don't think an age limit is        Feb 22, 2011 11:44 AM
        appropriate. After all, we want our students to acquire the highest degree
        possible.
 97     More and more programs are replacing in class with the online courses to the           Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
        point there is no choice but to take the online classes. You indicate that these are
        paid by the dependent student but in most cases it is the employee who will bear
        that cost. I do feel that if some of these are implemented, a fathered in clause
        should be developed so that students and employees who are close to graduating
        are not surprised with changes, especially the 140 hours limit.
 98     I do not have any suggestions                                                          Feb 22, 2011 11:54 AM




                                                      57 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 99     An age limit of 24 should be established.                                              Feb 22, 2011 12:05 PM
 100    Credit hours should not be limited.                                                    Feb 22, 2011 12:07 PM
 101    I would rather see a set cap per semester than to unilaterally deny coverage for       Feb 22, 2011 12:09 PM
        distance learning courses.
 102    Q 18 poorly worded. Perhaps implementing fees on dependent students is a               Feb 22, 2011 12:14 PM
        viable option, but I do not agree fees should be assessed on employees, so I
        could not truthfully answer 'agree'
 103    Since we do not get raises anymore, please keep tuition remission as it is or, even    Feb 22, 2011 12:18 PM
        better, to enhance it for current employees. Any new changes or restrictions could
        come into play for new hires as of Fall 13.
 104    I definitely do not agree with the 7 year credible service period because the          Feb 22, 2011 12:19 PM
        circumstances listed are unpredictable and can put a monetary strain on a family.
        A child should not have to suffer because they can no longer afford school
        because their parent died or was permanently injured and had been at the
        university for less than 7 years.
 105    I cite the same reasons as above for employee - many of us have worked years to        Feb 22, 2011 12:26 PM
        ensure our children receive their college degree. Additionally, I disagree with the
        140 hour cap because that imposes different standards on some programs Music
        School and Speed School require about that many hours for some
        programs.....and we are holding our students to standards that we don't hold our
        other students to - that they know exactly what they want to major in when they
        enter UofL and don't take courses not needed for their eventual degree. If you
        want to set a limit on credit hours be more reasonable - 180 hrs or 200 hrs would
        be fair. If dependents don't have an undergrad degree by then, it's reasonable to
        let them assume the cost for their degree.
 106    I think it should be longer than one year. I think that employees should have to be    Feb 22, 2011 12:28 PM
        employed for at least three and possibly five years before their children get free
        tuition remission benefits. I have heard of someone who took a low paying job at
        the University after they had retired from their career job, long enough to put all
        three kids through U of L, tuition free. I know that the administration thinks that
        the tuition benefit starting at day one will attract a stronger workforce, but in
        reality, in relation to the number of administrators and faculty that we have, how
        many of their children attend U of L? Out of 21 in our department, only one has
        attended U of L; all the others went out of state. I'm not trying to bash U of L, my
        daughter goes here, and she is getting a fine education; but, the reality of the
        situation is the first scenario where a person takes a lower paying job, where their
        career experience isn't necessary or used, just long enough to get their kids
        through school.

        Also, I think that only children who are natural birth or adopted should get tuition
        remission. If you are an employee and you marry someone with five kids, I don't
        think all of those kids should get free tuition unless you adopt them. Just claiming
        them on your tax return should justify free tuition.
 107    Once again, please leave this benefit alone. It's all we have left. We continue to     Feb 22, 2011 12:33 PM
        increase charges without adequate raises....come on...
 108    see above                                                                              Feb 22, 2011 12:34 PM




                                                      58 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 109    I do not know if employees have to pay a 30% surcharge for distance education            Feb 22, 2011 12:35 PM
        classes but I do n think they should have to.
        15). I think new employees should be given the opportunity for tuition remission
        upon starting to work here at U of L so that they can start furthering their
        education immediately.
        16) I think this creditable service period of 7 years should only be granted to
        dependents of employees who die in active service.
 110    Disagree with the 140 hr. limit because I have worked with many students on              Feb 22, 2011 12:53 PM
        tuition remission over the years that exceed 140 because of the AP credits they
        brought in prior to starting. Depending on the degree programs/chosen majors,
        140 hours is quite often insufficient to accomplish goals.

        Disagree with the 30% surcharge because I don't believe we should be charging
        the extra 30% to begin with. Compared to other distance ed programs, we are
        highly overpriced.
 111    Question 15... Could be a 6-8 month waiting period vs a one year.                        Feb 22, 2011 1:03 PM
        Questions 16... Could be a 5 year creditable service
        Question 17... Credit limit could be 140 to match Fin. Aid SAP policy
 112    The undergraduate degree should be covered regardless of credit hours to fulfill         Feb 22, 2011 1:04 PM
        the degree requirements (i.e. with 5 year programs - will 140 hrs. cover that),
        however grades below C should not be covered. Just as students with
        scholarships have requirements for GPA, so should dependents. Why are we
        paying for grades under C?
 113    If one of the arguments for offering distance ed is to provide access, then adding       Feb 22, 2011 1:06 PM
        what is effectively a penalty seems inconsistent. If in fact the university's interest
        in distance ed is revenue, then someone has to ask what will separate UofL from
        Kaplan and other for-profit institutions.
 114    Maybe need to work so many years and be grandfathered in for dependents.                 Feb 22, 2011 1:15 PM
 115    Those who have invested over 15+ years at the university should be eligible for          Feb 22, 2011 1:31 PM
        the full tuition remission program for their children.
 116    The tuition remission should be set up based upon the number of year of service          Feb 22, 2011 2:12 PM
        by the employee. The long an employee has been at the university the greater
        should be the tuition reimbursement. The university should definitely examine
        these benefits for new hires.
 117    NO SUGGESTIONS                                                                           Feb 22, 2011 2:14 PM
 118    Tuition remission for dependents should be an earned program over time and not           Feb 22, 2011 2:20 PM
        an instant benefit. For example, it could be accumulated at 20% per year of
        service so that full reimbursement would be available after 5 years.
 119    Limit tuition remission to one dependent per employee per semester or a total of         Feb 22, 2011 2:59 PM
        12 semester hours per employee per semester. For example, If they have two
        dependents, they could split 6 hours between the two dependents, etc. If both
        mother and father are employes then they could each cover a a dependent up to
        full-time tuition remission for a dependent.
 120    I am against the credit hour limit, do all undergrad programs have the same hourly       Feb 22, 2011 3:05 PM
        requirements?
 121    #16 - not sure I understand the question - but if I think an employee should have        Feb 22, 2011 3:36 PM
        had 7 years of service and be in good standing - when they either die/retire/perm
        disable - and the dependents then could be granted Tuition Remission - YES I
        stornly agree




                                                       59 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 122    I believe that covering the first undergraduate degree is sufficient. I know that it is    Feb 22, 2011 3:49 PM
        taking students longer to get through college and some students have to work
        now and can only go part time. As long as the parents are still supporting the
        student and the student lives at home, then I think we should go with receiving the
        first degree as long as the student has been going at least part time on a
        continuing basis. I do not think that U of L should cover a students' tuition if they
        go a semester and stay out for 3 and then take a few classes, etc. I think that a
        student that attends at least half time each fall and spring semester should be
        covered to their first degree. We are in a bad economic slump and jobs are
        scarce so if they can only work part time and attend classes part time, then there
        should be no penalty. If an employee has worked here long enough to retire, to
        die or become disabled, then their children should not be penalized. Some
        people have children later in life or adopt, etc and retire and then we penalize their
        children because it has been past 7 years? I do not believe that the credit hour
        limit should be 140. This leaves students that think they want a certain degree
        coming in and later find out that they cannot do the work, sometime having to
        leave because their tuition is no longer covered by their parents. With 140 credit
        hours, does not leave a lot of adjustment in the case of a speed school student
        switching over to A&S and nothing transferring over with them or very little
        transferring over. If the university is here to graduate students, why penalize a
        student that now may not be able to graduate within the 140 hours. Our business
        is to retain and graduate students whether they are incoming students from
        outside the university family or within the university family. What better way to
        attest to our great university than have our employees families graduate from our
        great institution. We know that their is a line item for tuition remission but it is not
        real money that is transferring hands/dept. It is a means to be able to track how
        many employees or their dependents are actually using the tuition remission. I do
        not feel that the dependents should have to pay the student fees separately after
        the university made the decision to bundle them basically to disguise what fees
        there are. If the university had not made that decision years ago, then it might
        work but to not include the fees, as it is included in other students tuition, and
        charge them separately, is wrong. When someone ask what our tuition is, we do
        not give them a lower total and then keep adding on the multiple fees, we say it is
        X amount of dollars. The fees are internal bookkeeping and I know that the fees
        are real money and go to the appropriate areas but the normal student does not
        check to see what dollar amount go to each fee, they just know tuition is x amount
        of dollars, housing is x amount, meal plan is x amount etc. I do not agree with
        charging the distance education 30%. I do not agree with charging extra for this
        at all but again, this is a fee for a DE course and should be included with tuition. I
        think that these and the other fee charges should be dealt with just like any other
        students, scholarship students, tuition remission students, financial aid paid tuition
        students, etc., Tuition now includes the fees and the total is the toal.
 123    The extra 30% surcharge for online classes is absurd for employees. Since most             Feb 22, 2011 4:03 PM
        of us have to take online classes if anything.
 124    There are plenty of faculty/staff that have no dependents that currently use the           Feb 22, 2011 4:05 PM
        education benefits that are eligible to do so. Why make those students who are
        eligible to use the benefits pay for the extra fees or the distance education fees.




                                                       60 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 125    In regards to the seven-year creditable service period:                                  Feb 22, 2011 4:15 PM
        It seems reasonable that someone who worked at the university for 5 or more
        years before they died or were disabled would retain the benefit of funding their
        children for school.
        It does NOT seem reasonable to extend this credit if the employee was not in our
        employ for at least 5 years nor if they chose to retire before their children began
        school.
        Tuition remission is a benefit of active service to the university, not a right.
 126    none                                                                                     Feb 22, 2011 4:36 PM
 127    On #16, I think the seven-year creditable service period could be lowered to four        Feb 22, 2011 4:42 PM
        or five years.
 128    Item #16. A FIVE-year creditable service period should be implemented for                Feb 22, 2011 5:22 PM
        continuing eligibility . . .
 129    #17 Not clear if you mean 140 hours earned or 140 hours attempted                        Feb 22, 2011 5:33 PM
        #18 I do not think employees should have to pay the student fees, but do feel the
        dependent students should have to pay; they are getting a huge benefit by
        receiving just the tuition remission.
        #19 Not sure because I don't know how much overall this will save....
 130    You could set a minimum GPA for keeping the tuition remission.                           Feb 22, 2011 5:39 PM
 131    Like I said in the above box, have altheltics chip in on employees benefits. We          Feb 22, 2011 7:20 PM
        work for them just like we do for the school.We go to the games too.
 132    Salary is not the reason most people work at UL-tutition remission is. I could make      Feb 22, 2011 8:42 PM
        more working somewhere else in the same field.
 133    no comment                                                                               Feb 23, 2011 9:36 AM
 134    Many of the Faculty are paid a disproportionately larger amount than staff. Even         Feb 23, 2011 11:17 AM
        with their added education and possible experience the pay scale at Uof L is out
        of balance. to make benifits for those willing to work hard still available I would
        suggest cutting falculty pay.
 135    Suggesting ways to save money is NOT what I should be doing, my job is what I            Feb 23, 2011 12:47 PM
        should be doing and it is the job of administration to take better care of the dollars
        coming into this college. Too much waste from admin, too many meals paid for,
        excesses on the HSC that are kept hush hush needs to be looked at.
 136    Max. number of hours should be at least 150 (30 hours per year for 5 years) but          Feb 23, 2011 1:05 PM
        should be 180. Have an appeal process for additional hours up to 240 max. to
        consider program requirements and degree choice changes.
 137    16 Retire maybe, but seven years is too long, for those individuals who die or           Feb 23, 2011 1:08 PM
        suffer a disability beyond their control.
        17 There should be a credit hour limit, but 140 may be too low.
 138    Limit age of eligible dependents to 26. However, extend tuition remission benefits       Feb 23, 2011 2:35 PM
        to those dependents who have completed at least 50% of degree program for a
        period of time not more than 5 years. Limit per dependent tuition remission hours
        to 165.




                                                      61 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 139    Brent,                                                                                    Feb 23, 2011 3:48 PM

        I'm sorry I didn't have the time to respond to your e-mail. I appreciate that you sent
        the memo out in regards to possible changes in the tuition remission policy. Below
        is my opinion on the subject matter considering I have been at the University for
        23 + years and have a step- daughter and a daughter that will be at U of L in a
        year.

        Brent, First of all I don't agree with the cost of tuition remission program that is
        stated in the memo. There is varying ways of showing the true cost of this
        program to the University by doing diff. cost analysis that may show the cost
        below what the Univ. shows it to be currently. Also if the Administration is so
        concerned by a possible deficit in this " Benefit " that we have earned they should
        take the difference out of the savings we currently have in the "Insurance Pool "
        Since we are self insured and I know that there has been a large surplus in the
        last couple of years put money aside each year to cover a possible deficit. To me
        a lot of the money that is in the insurance pool is made up of what the employees
        have to pay each month so they should have the right to say where a surplus
        should go.

        I also don't agree of putting a limit of 140.00 hours that a dependent can expect to
        be covered by the tuition remission benefit, because if it takes 120 hours to
        graduate that only gives the student 20.00 hours of leeway. That is not very much
        considering that many students today don't know what to major in until the end of
        their second year here. I can not help the fact that some have abused the benefit
        but putting such a limit will make it a hardship on many dependents in the future. I
        suggest 160 hour cap and have someone do a cost study on this.

        The Admin. wanted all these types of fees to be included as part of the tuition cost
        each semester many years back and I feel they don't have the right to change it
        now after all these years. Also as you remember the Admin. start charging each
        full time student 175.00 per semester for a meal ticket. This currently is already
        out of the tuition remission coverage. I would like everyone to see what the cost
        would be per semester for a full time student based on what the memo .

        Lastly, I feel if a employee doesn't elect to use their 6.00 hours of tuition remission
        each semester that they should be able to defer some of those hours to their
        dependent to use in the future.

        I would greatly appreciate if some of these questions and ideals would be bought
        up in front of the staff senate. Thanks again. Craig
 140    Take all of the money you make from selling whiskey and beer at the football and          Feb 23, 2011 4:14 PM
        basketball games and put that towards tuitions for every child that attends Uof L
        since we are one of the few schools that can sale beer and stuff at our events
        anyway.
 141    Re # 17, if they are going to set a credit hour limit, it should be higher than 140       Feb 23, 2011 6:50 PM
        hours. We don't want to hurt UofL's graduation rate by pulling the financial plug
        on students who are about to finish their degrees. If someone changes majors or
        gets misadvised, requiring extra hours to complete a degree can occur.
 142    If there is a waiting period for new employee's before dependent children are             Feb 23, 2011 8:10 PM
        eligible for tuition remission, it should end upon satisfactory completion of their
        provisional period of 6 months.




                                                       62 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                    Response Text
 143    I agree with this strategy                                                                Feb 24, 2011 9:16 AM
 144    none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 145    as stated above                                                                           Feb 24, 2011 10:15 AM
 146    none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:16 AM
 147    maybe a 3 yr. creditable service period                                                   Feb 24, 2011 10:33 AM
 148    none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
 149    All benefits offered to employees should remain. The extra charges and fees with          Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
        addition to the price of books becomes quite costly. The benefits package is a
        very strong factor in attracting and retaining employees with the University of
        Louisville.
 150    I agree with the reasonable limitations, 140 hours and limiting it to dependents          Feb 24, 2011 11:13 AM
        under 26 but not the additional fees that add to the cost of the student attending.
 151    none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 11:37 AM
 152    If an employee has been here enough years to retire they should be able to use            Feb 24, 2011 11:48 AM
        their benefits as long as they want. Also, if someone dies their dependants
        should be able to use their beneifts.
 153    For Univeristy Management to realize that tuition remission is a strong employee          Feb 24, 2011 12:04 PM
        retention benefit and that it is cheaper than hiring and training replacement
        personnel.
 154    I would prefer that no changes be made. Employees are not well paid and have              Feb 24, 2011 1:53 PM
        gone without raises for three years. Reducing the tuition remission benefit is
        essentially like imposing a salary reduction for employees who take classes
        and/or who have dependents who take classes, so even if you use this money to
        fund a 2% raise for employees, those of us in this category will likely not even
        break even. If you must make changes, grandfather current employees and their
        dependents and impose the new rules on future employees (and don't apply the
        new restrictions to current employees at a later date).
 155    It is never a good idea to make it more difficult for people, especially young            Feb 24, 2011 2:31 PM
        people, to receive a proper education. The more road blocks, the more likely they
        are to give up on getting a degree, which has become critical in the workforce
        now.
 156    One of the best benefits of working at the university is tuition remission for our        Feb 24, 2011 3:37 PM
        children. I do realize 26 seems old but some work a few years before deciding to
        obtain a college education. Also I would like them to have the availability to obtain
        a graduate degree, if the parents are not financially able
 157    make the age limit 30...to account for those with learning disabilities needing more      Feb 24, 2011 3:52 PM
        time.
        30% surcharge on distance ed courses that can be taken locally instead.
        credit hour limit but higher than 140.
 158    n/a                                                                                       Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 159    n/a                                                                                       Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 160    Question 16 wording is confusing. If this is referring to a watiting period of seven      Feb 25, 2011 10:55 AM
        years for a dependent's eligibility for tuition remission after their working parent is
        no longer able to work, it seems like there may be instances when the
        dependent's age should be considered.




                                                       63 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 161    In regards to credit hour limits, dependents should not be penalized for enrolling in   Feb 25, 2011 12:47 PM
        a program that may require more than 140 credit hours. I also think that
        dependents should have to pay extra for distance ed courses. Though I also
        beleive that distance ed courses should not cost extra.
 162    I DO NOT THINK THERE SHOULD BE AN AGE ON DEPENDENTS BECAUSE                             Feb 25, 2011 2:59 PM
        SOMETIMES A DEPENDENT MAY NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF
        THEIR COLLEGE DAYS UNTIL THEY ARE OLDER FOR INSTANCE THEY
        START COLLEGE GET CALLED TO DEFEND THEIR COUNTRY AND BY THE
        TIME THEY GET BACK TO FINISH THEY ARE OVER THE AGE OF 26 OR A
        JOB REQUIRES TOO MUCH OF THEIR TIME WITH TRAVELING AT FIRST
        AND BY THE TIME THEY CAN GO BACK TO SCHOOL THEY ARE OVER AGE
        26. I HAVE THREE SONS, ONE GRADUATED FROM U OF L, ONE STARTED
        HAD TO GO TO WAR WAS TOO OLD WHEN HE CAME BACK SO COULD NOT
        FINISH, THE THIRD ONE STARTED TOOK A JOB THAT REQUIRED A LOT OF
        TRAVELING AT FIRST BY THE TIME HE COULD GO BACK TO SCHOOL HE
        WAS OVER AGE 26.
 163    Look for cost savings elsewhere.                                                        Feb 25, 2011 3:05 PM
 164    The 30% surcharge should be eliminated by the University for all students. Active       Feb 25, 2011 5:29 PM
        Military students are now penalized for their service to our country by being forced
        to online courses only to be charged more. Ridiculous.
 165    Dependent could be responsible for tax and fee.                                         Feb 27, 2011 2:02 PM
 166    I am fine with a 7 year creditable service period for employees who retire, but for     Feb 28, 2011 9:54 AM
        those who die in active service or become permanently disabled the child should
        have the ability to obtain their first undergraduate degree via tuition remission
        regardless of how long the parent has been here. I could see putting a one year
        minimum on that, or the minimum being past the 6 month probationary period.
 167    The 30% surcharge should be waived for dependent students since there is a              Feb 28, 2011 12:06 PM
        reduction in overhead fees, etc. Coming from California, I've never heard of an
        increase in tuition for an online course. I really don't understand that surcharge.
        Taking online courses should be encouraged, and not penalized, because it
        allows many working professionals to take courses and start/finish their degree(s).
        Life gets busy and for so many individuals, they start their degree and don't finish
        it. This is part of the 2020 plan where we, as an institution, should be trying to do
        everything possible to get students to come back and finish their degrees by
        providing online programs that fit their work and family responsibilities. Again,
        with increase enrollment revenue from expanding online programs, etc., this will
        result in increased funding and then we wouldn't need to do a survey about
        reducing higher education opportunities for employees or dependent students.
 168    I disagree that fees should be paid because of the staff time needed to track and       Feb 28, 2011 3:24 PM
        coordinate payment. It seems this would be a wash in terms of cost and savings.
 169    1. Even a one-year waiting period seems brief to me. Three years would be                Mar 1, 2011 9:26 AM
        reasonable.
        2. I'd prefer to see a credit hour limit of 170 hours. That would give students the
        chance to figure out what they want to do, change majors, even double major.
 170    Distant education holds the same value and accreditation for traditional brick and       Mar 2, 2011 9:47 AM
        mortar schools. An additional 30% is unfair. Students may not want to attend of
        UofL but should still receive the same benefits for attending an accredited school.
 171    Age of 26 should be a cap, but if the child can prove chronic illness/injury or          Mar 2, 2011 1:58 PM
        service in the military which cause a the delay in receiving his/her education then
        tuition should be covered




                                                      64 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                   Response Text
 172    Look, the distance education surcharge is just a way to make money for                   Mar 3, 2011 12:03 PM
        departments/ the university. Don't take advantage of our kids and us!
 173    As stated above, I do not think we should sustain the tuition remission program as       Mar 3, 2011 1:18 PM
        it currently exists in this economy.
 174    I believe that graduate and professional degree tuition should still be covered for      Mar 3, 2011 3:05 PM
        dependents (provided they are eligible).
 175    The 30% surcharge on distance education discourages employees from furthering            Mar 3, 2011 4:50 PM
        their education. For adult learners, distance learning may be the ONLY option for
        an employee to attend college, and they should not be penalized but rewarded for
        trying to better themselves.
 176    If employee dies due to accident or sudden death during first year of service, the       Mar 3, 2011 11:49 PM
        dependent children should get full tuition waiver. Especially young employee will
        not have much money saved for children and it will result in a great hardship for
        the remaining family compared to old faculty who has saved some money for
        children education. Seven years service should not be imposed.
 177    If employee dies due to accident or sudden death during first year of service, the       Mar 3, 2011 11:49 PM
        dependent children should get full tuition waiver. Especially young employee will
        not have much money saved for children and it will result in a great hardship for
        the remaining family compared to old faculty who has saved some money for
        children education. Seven years service should not be imposed.
 178    Why do you want a distat ed surcharge when it's over the internet. That                  Mar 4, 2011 9:43 AM
        eliminates the cost of class roomw.
 179    do not really understand question #19, even after reading the linked document.           Mar 4, 2011 9:50 AM
        Does this mean that distance learners actually pay 30% more for a course for the
        option to do away from campus? If so, I am not sure what this adds to the
        university, but there are costs for on campus classes (electricity, parking, security)
        that make an off campus education appealing from a cost perspective. I am not
        sure I would make that surcharge paid by student (and therefore encourage on
        campus classes instead).
 180    I know this is an educational institution but this is a very costly benefit for the      Mar 4, 2011 10:30 AM
        university. I am very surprised that most of the above are not current practices.
        Many of the above measures need to be implemented to make this more cost
        effective. As the policy currently stands, I see the ability for great abuse.
 181    I don't like the cap on number of hours covered. If someone changes majors, that         Mar 4, 2011 10:41 AM
        could be a big issue.
 182    This program should be a priority to preserve for people who have been at this           Mar 4, 2011 11:01 AM
        University and served it over the years. I came here 15 years ago in part because
        of this policy and now that my kids are becoming of age where our family can take
        advantage of it, I clearly don't want the policy truncated. I'd guess that other
        people in my situation also would find it a problem. So if policies in this program
        are going to change, seems to me they should change for new, incoming
        faculty/staff so there are no surprises. They would clearly know/understand what
        they are getting into, as opposed to changing the policy for those of us who have
        been here, particularly those of us who have been here for a substantially long
        period of time.




                                                      65 of 168
23. If you do not agree with the proposed strategies above, what suggestions do you have for sustaining the
tuition remission program as it currently exists?

                                                     Response Text
 183    I have worked here for 21 years. Many people take jobs here knowing they will            Mar 4, 2011 11:22 AM
        make less than market value salaries primarily for tuition remission for their
        dependents. If we cannot do anything about improving salaries, it is grossly unfair
        to make changes to this policy and not at least grandfather in those of us that
        have been here at least 10 years or more. We should NOT be required to pay
        student fees, that is all part of tuition. We want it both ways here, by saying that
        we have a "bundled" tuition rate, but now you want to piece-meal it out to gouge
        people. Ridiculous.
 184    If withdrawal after drop/add date tuition remission should be paid back to               Mar 4, 2011 11:24 AM
        university.
        If a failing grade is received while using tuition remission, that should be paid back
        to university.
        Holds put on accounts that owe the university money from tuition remission pay-
        backs.
 185    I don't think there should be a limit on a dependent's eligibility.                      Mar 4, 2011 12:46 PM
 186    Dependent tuition remission should be limited to the resident regular full-time           Mar 4, 2011 1:09 PM
        tuition rate. More financial aid accounts should be tuition specific-this would limit
        the residual refunds to students where their tuition charges are overpaid.
 187    Do not pay non-resident tuition rate, only pay the resident rate.                         Mar 4, 2011 1:19 PM
 188    It takes some students more than 140 hours to obtain their degree.                        Mar 4, 2011 1:27 PM
 189    question 16: 5 years would be sufficient.                                                 Mar 4, 2011 1:52 PM
 190    Students who are close or over the 140 credit hour limit before receiving their 1st       Mar 4, 2011 1:59 PM
        undergrad degree should be reviewed on a case by case basis and a waiver of
        the limit should be allowed in certain circumstances. Short notice that the tuition
        remission is over may cause some dependents to drop out due to financial
        reasons. Plenty of notice before these changes are effective needs to be
        provided so that dependents can apply for federal aid before these deadlines
        have passed.
 191    The 130% upcharge on distant ed and non resident students should not be paid              Mar 4, 2011 2:06 PM
        by tuition remission...tuition remission should only cover the tuition at the in-state
        UG rate.




24. Other comments:

                                                     Response Text
  1     Advising units should be consulted re: the 140 hour limit for undergraduate              Feb 21, 2011 12:33 PM
        degrees, so that appropriate major changes, degree requirements and other
        academic programmatic considerations are fully taken into account.
  2     If a person is not degree seeking only allow them to take one class per semester         Feb 21, 2011 12:47 PM
        for personal growth
  3     I had to ask my staff senator what was meant by "a seven-year creditable service         Feb 21, 2011 12:49 PM
        period" in question 16.
  4     na                                                                                       Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM




                                                        66 of 168
24. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
  5    As is usually the case, I believe the administration is asking for our opinions on        Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
       these matters to support decisions that have already been made. Deming wrote
       about the need to "drive out fear" in an organization for quality to abound. I
       believe fear and dis-trust rule - and hinder - the university's achieving greatness.
  6    In item 16, I do not know what "a seven-year creditable service period" means.            Feb 21, 2011 12:56 PM
  7    Making dependents pay for student fees (essentially, asking the employee to pay)          Feb 21, 2011 1:04 PM
       negates the benefit of bundled tuition.
  8    I think that the waiting period for new employees should be longer than one year.         Feb 21, 2011 1:08 PM
       I think that a 30% surcharge for distance learning for anyone is outrageous. These
       classes should be less expensive to manage than traditional classroom classes
       and you can have more students in each.
  9    Also, look at students who overlap scholarships and tuition remission--i.e.               Feb 21, 2011 1:08 PM
       Trustees scholarship and tuition remissions. It seems to me a student should only
       be eligible for one or the other.
 10    We should be watching for students not claiming majors with more than 140                 Feb 21, 2011 1:36 PM
       credits. What guideance/control could be put into place?
 11    I thank you for tuition remission. For some of us, this is the only way my child          Feb 21, 2011 1:40 PM
       would have a college education. I want my child to have better opportunities than
       I have had.
 12    Keep tuition remission for employees and dependents only. Tuition only. All               Feb 21, 2011 1:53 PM
       other fees paid by student. Employee or dependent suspended from participation
       after two "incompletes" or failing to keep a 2.5 GPA, not a 2.0.
 13    Why is there still a $50 athletic fee???                                                  Feb 21, 2011 1:54 PM
 14    Limit how many family members can use the benefit.                                        Feb 21, 2011 2:13 PM
 15    Tuition for dependents should be discontinued for anyone that is hired after              Feb 21, 2011 2:19 PM
       7/1/2011.
 16    On #13, if you are employed here kids should have access to obtain any degree             Feb 21, 2011 2:22 PM
       and not limited - it is a fantastic perk!
 17    One of the reasons I left the private sector to come to the University of Louisville      Feb 21, 2011 2:28 PM
       (taking a pay cut) was in fact the benefits and this one in particular. I would hate to
       see it changed, however as long as it covers the first undergarduate degree
       minimally I can supoort it if it comes to that or reducing the remission amount.
 18    All are great ideas. Dependents should also be held accountable to similar                Feb 21, 2011 2:46 PM
       standards as the employee tuition remission standards, especially the 2.0 GPA
       requirement and losing tution remission for three consecutive C's.
 19    Some employees who are hired with this benefit make arrangements for high                 Feb 21, 2011 2:53 PM
       school and college based on this tuition remission.
 20    N/A                                                                                       Feb 21, 2011 3:02 PM
 21    Again, it all seems very fair to me.                                                      Feb 21, 2011 3:03 PM
 22    We haven't had raises in three years. You have already taken away spousal                 Feb 21, 2011 3:05 PM
       tuition benefit. Get real. We're tired of giving. We want to get somethings back
       now. We want a raise, and we want the tuition benefits to stay the same, if not
       improve.
 23    Since the degree programs have various credit hour requirements, 140 hours may            Feb 21, 2011 3:38 PM
       be too low. If a student is not taking courses to stay on track with completion of
       their degree or continues to change majors, some type of cap has to be
       implemented, perhaps 160 hours.




                                                      67 of 168
24. Other comments:

                                                     Response Text
 24    There should be no age limit due to any dependent that may have a disability, i.e.,         Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
       what if you are a blind or deaf dependent, autististic, etc. or the dependent is in a
       horrible accident, in a coma for years, it may limit or change the ability to graduate
       in a "typical educational time frame" and you aren't able to graduate by age 26,
 25    Would not like to see dependent benefit decreased. Many employees have been                 Feb 21, 2011 3:44 PM
       with the University a number of years working for less wages than available
       elsewhere so there children can benefit from this and go on to higher heights.
       The more burden placed on the child and/or underpaid employee, the less likely
       the benefit can be used.
 26    Do not understand the meaning of #16                                                        Feb 21, 2011 4:22 PM
 27    The waiting period for new faculty member's dependents could hurt recruiting.               Feb 21, 2011 4:31 PM
 28    U of L is a metropolitan urban university with students from all walks of life. Some        Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
       individuals do not get their degree until they are older. To place an age limit on
       the dependent is to ignore the realities in the lives of many staff and children.
       Student fees are horrendous and add huge amounts to the expense.
 29    Again, I wish my dependent 23 yr old could take advantage of this program. It's             Feb 21, 2011 5:00 PM
       even more important in families like mine where there is no second bread winner!
 30    The dependent remission should also cover a masters degree.                                 Feb 21, 2011 5:15 PM
 31    Distance Ed courses should not cost more, they should cost less. There is no                Feb 21, 2011 5:25 PM
       overhead costs and they are just making money on this because they can.
       Students shouldn't have to pay this "convenience tax".
 32    If it is billed as tuition it should be covered as tuition. If it is covered by financial   Feb 21, 2011 5:54 PM
       aid then it should be covered as tuition.
 33    None.                                                                                       Feb 21, 2011 5:57 PM
 34    Again, stop giving away free classes to everyone enrolled above full time status.           Feb 21, 2011 6:09 PM
       We could recover far more revenue that way than penalizing faculty and staff
       benefits in the era of tough times and no to low raises.
 35    Even though I disagree with it, I do understand why it's being done. If we want             Feb 21, 2011 9:13 PM
       pay raises, then it's a sacrafice we must make.
 36    Capping age can become a problem. People get sick, enter the military, or have              Feb 22, 2011 12:00 AM
       to work and as a result, they might not finish before age 26.
 37    The only reason I disagree with a couple of these ideas kids that some employees            Feb 22, 2011 8:01 AM
       can not afford to send their children to school. They may be able to afford paying
       fees but as far as the 30% surcharge I am not sure that the parents of some of
       these dependents could afford to pat that!
 38    Many employees at UofL have stayed and worked at sub pay levels with the                    Feb 22, 2011 8:28 AM
       hope of there children being able to attend college. Changing their benefits after
       having served the university for a number of years is unacceptable. Any changes
       made should only affect employees hired in the future . Benefits should not be
       changed for the employees that have invested their time into this university. with
       the anticapation of one day realizing the reward of tthe much earned investment.
 39    Come on! This is one of the few benefit advantages we have over other                       Feb 22, 2011 8:44 AM
       universities in the area. Rick Pitino makes $3M and is violating the morals clause
       in his contract. Cut his salary by 1/3 and fund this entire program. What does this
       university value a winning basketball coach or the people faculty and staff who
       make less than $100K/year




                                                        68 of 168
24. Other comments:

                                                  Response Text
 40    Tuition remission is one of the reasons I continue to work at U of L. I am satisfied   Feb 22, 2011 9:01 AM
       with the lower pay knowing that my two children can get their college education as
       no cost. I'm sure if this benefit went away there would be a mass exodus of
       people.
 41    1. If the employee leaves UL, tuition remission will stop at the end of the semester   Feb 22, 2011 9:18 AM
       for the employees family member.
       2. Tuition remission would not be available when switching from one degree to
       another. The family member can not make a career out of going to school.
 42    Tuition is one of the benefits' drawing cards used to retain employees,                Feb 22, 2011 9:21 AM
 43    Other than really enjoying working for UofL and liking my job, the benefits, which     Feb 22, 2011 9:30 AM
       include dependent tuition remission, this is why I work here. It is one of the best
       and most important benefits to me and my son, who otherwise may not get to
       come here. Please do not change this!
 44    I think that U of L should provide tuition remission to dependent students who         Feb 22, 2011 9:36 AM
       attend JCC. The tuition is cheaper than that of U of L and woud save the
       university money.
 45    Because so many fields in today's society require a masters degree to be               Feb 22, 2011 9:45 AM
       employable after college, the tuition remission eligibility for 1st undergraduate
       degree only may not be adequate. Masters level programs should be tuition
       remission eligible if they are an extension of the undergraduate degree.
 46    Since the entire program is just funny money with speedtypes shuffling around, it      Feb 22, 2011 9:50 AM
       can sustain as it currently exists, since it doesn't cost real money.
 47    Salary at a university is NOT at all at comparable levels of equal positions in the    Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
       private sector. Tuition remission should continue to be one of the benefits of
       settling for lesser pay.
 48    n/a                                                                                    Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
 49    Why is tuition remission considered a benefit to those who cannot use it?              Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
 50    Again, see comments from the Employee Tuition Remission above. It was stated           Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
       in the link above that the Board of Trustees "acknowledged the essential trade-off
       between maintaining competitive salaries and supporting competitive benefit
       programs as part of total compensation." They also mention that salaries are not
       as competitive as peer institutions. Why attack one of the best benefits you can
       provide the employee that is paid less than adequate? I think your numbers on
       the costs and the amount of savings is also contrived to make a point. It's not
       possible to really quantify the costs or the savings because when you monkey
       with this benefit or remove it entirely, many of the very students that benefit may
       go elsewhere. Or, the parents (staff) might just look for another job. Leave this
       benefit alone. Please!




                                                     69 of 168
24. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
 51    The tuition remission program has enabled our son to go to college and also live          Feb 22, 2011 10:21 AM
       on campus. He was able to use other funds - savings, KEYS, scholarships - to
       pay for his housing and meal plan. Allowing students to live on campus is
       important for many reasons. UofL was always considered a "commuter school"
       with very little student activity, but with the increase in the number of students able
       to have that valuable "college experience" it strengthens their likelihood of
       remaining in college, developing a stronger bond with UofL and their fellow class
       mates, and hopefully their willingness to remain in Louisville after graduation.
       I think it is a win-win situation for UofL. If not for tuition remission, our son, like
       many students, would live at home and commute to UofL, lessening his
       commitment to UofL and I feel his commitment to our community. In addition, a
       thriving "residing on campus" experience for students feeds upon itself. Other
       perspective students see the academic opportunities along with the social and
       communal activities happening at UofL and want to be part of it. Students talk
       among themselves and these prospective students may now see UofL as the
       place to get that desired "college experience" and not necessary any other
       schools in the state.
       Our family is grateful for this opportunity that our son has had and totally support
       the tuition remission program for all students. The higher the education level
       attained by students in our community strengthens and benefits all of us.
 52    Actually I thought ONLY tution was currently covered, granted I will not be using         Feb 22, 2011 10:22 AM
       the dependent coverage for 4 more years. Please note however this benifit is the
       ONLY reason I plan to stay at U of L long enough to actually retire.
 53    These are benefits employees count on. You can't start chiseling away at it every         Feb 22, 2011 10:22 AM
       time there is an economic downturn. If this is allowed, eventually the program will
       disappear, leaving employees without any savings to cover college for their
       dependents (tuition remission is part of the package when faculty are hired; it
       should not be changed for current employees).
 54    I believe it is fair to pay student fees and the distance ed surcharge for dependent      Feb 22, 2011 10:24 AM
       children. I believe that employees should not have to pay the student fees
       becuase the education they receive will pay the University back through their
       knowledge and service.
 55    We employees have not had a raise in four years, yet the tuition costs continue to        Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM
       raise. The University continues to make improvements on its facade yet it is
       letting the foundation (employees) rot out from under it. Tuition remission is one
       of the biggest and best benefits offered to employees and probably the one that
       keeps everyone here and not looking for a job elsewhere. It allows students to
       attend college who otherwise would either not go at all or would go elsewhere,
       thus not purchasing parking permits, meal fees, lab fees, etc. What is it costing
       the University to let employees, dependents or spouses go free? Are people
       being turned away because classes are full? Aren't professors paid based on the
       number of courses they teach, not the number of students? My child attends here
       and is an honors student. Doesn't that help raise the standards the University is
       promoting for quality students? I agree that some people have taken advantage
       of the program and there should be some stricter standards put into place but
       don't punish everyone else by charging more in fees and surcharges. If the
       program is promoted as free, let it be completely free, no strings attached.
 56    It is absolutely essential to continue with the current tuition remission policy for      Feb 22, 2011 10:34 AM
       dependents. This is a strong recruitment benefit for staff and faculty interested in
       coming to the University. Elimination of this benefit would be absolutely
       detrimental to the University!




                                                      70 of 168
24. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
 57    Has it ever been proposed to allow a one time sponsorship of a non-dependent            Feb 22, 2011 10:46 AM
       for those of us who either can not or whose child/children do not take advantage
       of this benefit? Thanks.
 58    Not sure I understand the conditions for the 7 years but will accept it.                Feb 22, 2011 10:57 AM
 59    Tuition remission should cover all charges and fees required for attending - same       Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
       as a scholarship.
 60    I would rather waive the 2-3 percent pay increase than give up this benefit. Long       Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
       term it is more benefit to the UofL employees than the small pay increases are.
 61    #19 I don't know what this charge is.                                                   Feb 22, 2011 11:23 AM
 62    If costs for the program must be cut, consider giving this benefit for only two         Feb 22, 2011 11:43 AM
       employee dependents, instead of unlimited numbers. Also, maybe require
       employees and their dependents to take online courses when available to free up
       space in the classrooms for regular students.
 63    On line classes are an important option for disabled students.                          Feb 22, 2011 12:02 PM
 64    I have no children to use the tuition remission benefit, therefore, I feel I should     Feb 22, 2011 12:07 PM
       keep my opinions to myself.
 65    In addition to the comments above, this benefit was the major reason I not only         Feb 22, 2011 12:34 PM
       took the position but have remained. If you take any portion of this away you will
       either lose a large majority of staff personnel or they will certainly be looking for
       other jobs that will actually pay them what they are worth! The economy may be
       bad, but it's not THAT bad!
 66    The 30% surcharge, while a moneymaker, is excessive, whether or not the                 Feb 22, 2011 12:49 PM
       student is an employee's dependent.
 67    Tuition remission is a very important part of the benefit package. Each change          Feb 22, 2011 1:04 PM
       and increase in fees represents a decrease in employee wages.
 68    Definately need to cap the number of hours we will pay for!                             Feb 22, 2011 1:19 PM
 69    17 As long as 140 hrs allows them to complete their degree                              Feb 22, 2011 1:40 PM
       18 Student fees should be paid by dependents but employees should not have to
       pay if they are taking class
 70    I hope that the tuition remission for dependents remains in force. It is a benefit      Feb 22, 2011 1:42 PM
       that I hold dear for my now three-year old to be able to attend my alma mater
       which would be out of reach otherwise.
 71    If there are changes to the tuition remission benefits, please have pity on those of    Feb 22, 2011 1:55 PM
       us who have been here for years. Start any new reduction in benefits with new
       hires.
 72    NONE                                                                                    Feb 22, 2011 2:14 PM
 73    Students receiving tuition benefit should be encouraged to be involved with a           Feb 22, 2011 2:19 PM
       traditional college experience, which, in my opinion, includes face to face
       interaction in the classroom. Online course are something that should cost more,
       especially given the future generation's propensity for the online environment. I
       would be afraid that if they don't incur the additional cost, they will take these
       classes for the online environment and thus possibly take a place that a working
       adult or distance learner might need.
 74    I think there should be a two to three-year waiting period for new employees (after     Feb 22, 2011 3:06 PM
       the effective date) before dependents are eligible for tuition remission. I think the
       spousal tuition remission should be dropped. Tuition remission should apply to
       the employee or dependent (after effective date) only.




                                                      71 of 168
24. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
 75    Fine tune the students classes, so they are taking only the classes needed for           Feb 22, 2011 3:47 PM
       their undergraduate degrees.
 76    I am not sure if Part time employees get full tuition remission for their dependents     Feb 22, 2011 3:49 PM
       but this is something that might be adjusted down if they are getting full tuition
       remission to part time tuition remission.
 77    #14 - - age limit of 26 should not apply to spouse                                       Feb 22, 2011 5:03 PM
 78    I am concerned that a "seven-year creditable service period" would not be                Feb 22, 2011 5:10 PM
       enough to cover young children of employees who die in active service or become
       permanently disabled. If an employee and family are subject to these dreaded
       circumstances, there should not be a limit that would cause greater hardship to
       the family.
 79    I would prefer the hour limit be increased above 140.                                    Feb 22, 2011 5:39 PM
 80    Again, I am thankful for this benefit. It was a deciding factor in accepting             Feb 22, 2011 10:24 PM
       employment at UOFL.
 81    no comment                                                                               Feb 23, 2011 9:36 AM
 82    As it relates to question #13, I think that if a dependent has not used the              Feb 23, 2011 10:04 AM
       undergraduate tuition benefit, there should be some benefit if he/she later goes to
       UofL as a graduate student.
 83    The distance ed fee is excessive.                                                        Feb 23, 2011 10:12 AM
 84    ELIMINATE the FRAUD around campuses. Fix this and you'll find dollars.                   Feb 23, 2011 12:47 PM
 85    University of Louisville staff level employees do not earn competitive salaries,         Feb 23, 2011 1:23 PM
       therefore the benefits, should be benefits, not benefits with fee attachments.
 86    don't know anything about the distance education courses...I would think the 140         Feb 23, 2011 2:40 PM
       hours would be sufficient for most degrees??but really don't know if some degrees
       require additional hours--maybe enough hours to cover 5 years??
 87    Tuition remission is a tremendous benefit, and one that helps compensate                 Feb 23, 2011 3:21 PM
       employees for the many years without raises now and the below market salary
       most of us are paid.
 88    The University needs to explore their evening programs before they cap credit            Feb 23, 2011 3:40 PM
       hours at 140 hours. Those who work during the day are often delayed in achieving
       a degree due to required classes not being offered in the evening or online
       especially in the areas of the arts, languages, history and math. The University
       would be wise to expand its evening and online classes which would make the
       university more attractive to employees and other students.
 89    If a person who worked here died before their child could go to school should not        Feb 23, 2011 4:14 PM
       have any time limit on the time they have to use the benifit because chances are
       that is a child who needs that benefit the most when they do get of age to use it.
 90    it is really important for U of L to keep these benefits. I know that this benefit has   Feb 23, 2011 4:45 PM
       made it worth working at U of L at a lower salary level than I normally could get
       elsewhere. In these hard times and rising cost that is one way that the university
       can reward its employees for hard work and dedication.
 91    Proposing the 140 credit hour limit is too restrictive. Shouldn't we assess the          Feb 23, 2011 5:39 PM
       number of credit hours with the course work/major that the student chooses?
       What if the student decides to double major? Should he/she be penalized for
       challenging him/herself and recognizing he/she as at an instituion will provide that
       opportunity?
 92    The 30% surcharge is a convenience for the student. The student or family of the         Feb 24, 2011 9:16 AM
       student would save money on such items as gas (with these prices) as and wear
       and tear on the vehicle driven and in some instances food charges as well.




                                                      72 of 168
24. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
 93    none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 94    none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:16 AM
 95    none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
 96    What's the purpose of the tuition remission if the student or the employee is             Feb 24, 2011 10:50 AM
       required to pay all the fees and surcharges?
 97    My child was only three years old when I started my employment at the university          Feb 24, 2011 10:53 AM
       fourteen years ago. Now that she is approaching college age and I'm able to take
       advantage of tuition remission opportunities, the University is considering
       amending the policies. I would appreciate consideration in keeping the benefits as
       they were presented throughout my employment to date and changes be
       implemented to employees being hired from an effective date - forward for
       changes. Otherwise, a benefit that I have bragged on for years and looked
       forward to taking advantage, as my predecessors did, is going to ultimately be an
       out of pocket expense to me, as a dedicated employee.
 98    The tuition remission plan for dependents should be left alone. IT IS THE ONLY            Feb 24, 2011 11:14 AM
       REASON I AM HERE NOW, and have been for over 20 years. I've been waiting
       to reap this reward for my child; and now that he is here ... I don't want that benefit
       messed with. I've MORE THAN than completed my time (so to speak), with a
       continuous shortfall in salary (over all those years). I feel that benefit is MINE ...
       and I HAVE EARNED IT!!
 99    Capping the dependent age at 26 might hurt dependents with disabilities that              Feb 24, 2011 11:19 AM
       would take longer to get degrees
 100   Put some waivers in place to accommodate students who may be at the cap on                Feb 24, 2011 11:22 AM
       hours limit, i.e., "in last semester at 141 hours...am I unable to graduate now?"
 101   none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 11:37 AM
 102   Why does it have to be actual money? Why can't it just be? It seems odd to                Feb 24, 2011 11:50 AM
       transfer funds around within the university.
 103   Most universities, 50% of the tuition paid by the University, then there is a cap on      Feb 24, 2011 12:55 PM
       each semester. 50%o f tuition to all the university of country wide, not stuck to U
       of L.
 104   The benefits help make working at U of L more affordable for many of us (i.e., if         Feb 24, 2011 1:53 PM
       we had to pay college tuition, we probably would need to seek employment with a
       private company in order to afford it). It seems like the money to fund the tuition
       remission is a drop in the bucket compared to things like administrator salaries.
       How about looking elsewhere to cut the budget?
 105   n/a                                                                                       Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 106   n/a                                                                                       Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 107   The hours suggested (140) do not provide enough opportunity for a student                 Feb 25, 2011 3:05 PM
       should they change their major after a year.
 108   The seven-year creditable service period should be most definitely not be                 Feb 25, 2011 5:10 PM
       implemented for continuing eligibility for dependents of employees who retire, die
       in active service or become permanently disabled (for employees hired after
       implementation date. We are an employer who provides education and I can't
       imagine that we would take this benefit away from those who have experienced a
       hardship such as death or disability or from take it away from those who retire.
       This cost of this benefit must be small and to put such strict limitations on it seems
       absurd.




                                                      73 of 168
24. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
 109   These proposed measures seem very counterintuitive for a higher education                 Feb 28, 2011 9:36 AM
       institution and UofL's mission. Putting so many restrictions on furthering education
       again is counterintuitive.
 110   If this benefit reduction is going to happen, then alternatives should be                 Feb 28, 2011 12:06 PM
       considered. An option would be for employees to opt-in/out for tuition remission.
       For those that opt-in, then they and their dependent children (who meet minimum
       requirements of C average) would not receive a pay increase for that year. For
       those that opt-out, they would not receive tuition remission for themselves, or their
       dependent children, and they would receive a pay increase, if the budget allows
       (or a one time payment). This can be done annually, at the same time that we do
       our healthcare plans, where we have the option to opt-in/out for healthcare.
       Same concept. This will allow for benefits for both sides, and employees will need
       to choose their benefit (tuition remission or increase/one time payment).
 111   These are tough issues to face, but UofL has been far too generous with its               Feb 28, 2011 12:14 PM
       dependent tuition policy in the past, leading to some rumored cases of misuse.
       This is a policy that needs to be tightened up quite a bit.
 112   I believe this change would be very difficult for the Bursar's Office to administer.      Mar 1, 2011 11:21 AM
       Has anyone considered the administrative cost associated with the proposed
       changes?
 113   Benefits needed for Employee Recruitment and Retention                                     Mar 1, 2011 1:40 PM
 114   One of the most valuable employee benefits is tuition remission for dependents. In         Mar 1, 2011 6:06 PM
       my own case, my child was able to get a Bachelors Degree while her cousins
       have not. The cost of high education has steadily risen over the years and has
       become all but unattainable for many. One of the aims of the University of
       Louisville should be to serve the needs of society. The easiest, least expensive
       way to do that is by rewarding faithful employees with tuition remission for their
       children. The cost to the university is practically negligible, yet to the employee, it
       may mean the difference between their child having the opportunity to be
       educated or not.
 115   I am grateful for tuition remission and hope that this wonderful policy continues. It      Mar 3, 2011 4:50 PM
       works hand in hand with initiative proposed by the former mayor to bring the
       number of college graduates in Kentucky up to at least the norm. Kentucky is
       extremely below the national average.
 116   The program should not be designed for the "professional student", but should not          Mar 4, 2011 9:42 AM
       punish those who are serious about their education.
 117   It is very difficult to complete a program with only 140 credit hours, particularly for   Mar 4, 2011 10:18 AM
       those students who have changed majors or who have dual majors.
       Implementing the 140 credit hour cut off would hurt those students and should be
       avoided.
 118   Question #14: An age limit of 25 seems plenty enough and quite reasonable to              Mar 4, 2011 10:29 AM
       me.
 119   For staff, I would say many of us came to work here and have stayed for so long           Mar 4, 2011 11:24 AM
       because of this benefit. If this benefit were changed as described, hopefully it
       would only be from a certain future date forward and those of us who have been
       here can keep the benefits as they are. I don't think it is fair to take benefits away.
       If a new hire knows what the benefits are when they are hired then they are
       accepting those upon hire.




                                                      74 of 168
24. Other comments:

                                                   Response Text
 120   Dependent tuition remission should be limited to the total of ONE full-time              Mar 4, 2011 1:02 PM
       enrollment per employee per semester. For example: one employee dependent
       would be allowed to enroll for a full-time load and have their tuition covered or two
       dependents under one employee could split the full-time credit load (6 hours
       each), etc...I don't have actual facts, but, it has been said that there are some
       employees who have several dependents enrolled during the same semester,
       getting full tuition remission. I don't see how UofL can afford to keep giving full
       tuition remission to multiple dependents under one employee per semester.
 121   U of L should move to have the online and regular tuition rates to be the same.          Mar 4, 2011 1:09 PM

       The 140 hour exclusion does not take into account the major of the student -
       Speed and Music require more hours for the degree.
 122   The Fall 2011 semester is too early to make some of these changes effective.             Mar 4, 2011 1:59 PM
       Employees and dependents need more time than just 4-5 months to adjust their
       finances to accommodate these changes.
 123   I don't think that the 140 credit hours is enough for a dependent to realistically       Mar 4, 2011 2:06 PM
       receive his/her degree. A student who is attending speed school needs 132 +
       credit hours to complete thier UG with no room for errors.
 124   Tuition remission is one of the biggest reasons many people come to work here.          Mar 7, 2011 10:02 AM
       Our salaries are lower than many employers and this is one thing that helps make
       the decision to work at U of L. We are an educational institution and to provide
       this benefit of education is what we are all about.




31. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
  1    The retirement plan is one of the few remaining benefits left. Please do not            Feb 21, 2011 12:37 PM
       change it.
  2    I don't think retirement benefits should be cut from previous policy.                   Feb 21, 2011 12:52 PM
  3    In todays economy this is a great recruiting tool.                                      Feb 21, 2011 12:53 PM
  4    Even though this was given through the Staff Senate, I think that any favoritism        Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
       towards faculty should be cut to the same as that of the staff. It should be equal
       for all employees, no matter what the decision is of the University.
  5    The retirement contribution should be the same for all employees no matter what         Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
       the conditions that are established. Retirement is very important to most
       individuals who work.
  6    na                                                                                      Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
  7    I see my retirement benefit as close to cash in my pocket as it can be. In other        Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
       words, when I think of my base salary (which is pitifully low), I add 10% to it. I'd
       hate to see any reduction or changes in this particular benefit, believing it is a
       significant draw to new employees and incentive to current employees.
  8    THE UNIVERSITY'S CONTRIBUTION IS A STRONG RECRUTING TOOL GIVEN                          Feb 21, 2011 12:56 PM
       THAT UNIVERSITY SALARIES ARE BELOW MARKET NORMS
  9    because of salaries in some areas are low, using benifits such as the retirement        Feb 21, 2011 12:57 PM
       plan as a way to attractive potentail employees
 10    UofL shouldn't take away any benefits from an employee who was hired with the           Feb 21, 2011 1:02 PM
       understanding they would receive that benefit.




                                                      75 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 11    A vesting period is not fair if someone has to relocate due to a partner's job or          Feb 21, 2011 1:08 PM
       other external factor. Vesting is only a detriment to the employees.
 12    The university pay is already very low. Lowering the amount of contribution to             Feb 21, 2011 1:09 PM
       retirements funds will eliminate even further an incentive for employees to
       continue working for the university.
 13    Re #25. Recommend UofL change to a 5% employer contribution and 2.5%                       Feb 21, 2011 1:28 PM
       maximum matching contribution.
 14    Discriminatory practices regarding plan options should be reviewed by legal                Feb 21, 2011 1:36 PM
       counsel prior to proposed implementation
 15    Benefit should stay the same but the implementation could change. It is standard           Feb 21, 2011 1:36 PM
       in the workforce to have wait periods, etc. for vesting. I would recommend a three
       year waiting period.... 5 years is a long time to wait and usually the year
       threashold shows you a loyal employee. Should you consider exceptions for
       employee ages, etc. What if employee is hired at 58 years old? Don't need to
       muddy the waters for implementation but the 3 year time frame should help
       manage some of the administrative costs of adding and deleting staff, etc.
 16    A one year waiting period is standard with other businesses/industries and                 Feb 21, 2011 1:37 PM
       supports a competitive benefits package within the market region.
 17    I do realize our economy is very tight, but new employees need a break and same            Feb 21, 2011 1:37 PM
       money too. You also have to realize that universities do not pay as well as the
       corporate sector. Most of us are here because we love what we are doing and
       where we are and also for the benifits, which are great! You have to do something
       to make working here inviting to new people.
 18    I worked for the Department of Defense for 10 years and the eligibility period for         Feb 21, 2011 1:38 PM
       contributions was 1 year. The vesting period was three years for their Thrift
       Savings Plan (TSP). I think five is excessive but three is more reasonable.
 19    I see nothing wrong with having a 5 yr investment policy to receive the University's       Feb 21, 2011 1:38 PM
       portion of retirement contribution dollars. With that, new employees should be
       able to contribute their own money from day 1 if they desire.
 20    The generous retirement plan is the University's hedge against under market                Feb 21, 2011 1:47 PM
       salaries. Many current employees included this is their consideration of taking
       employment at the University.
 21    Our retirement benefit is far too generous and unsustainable. There's nothing              Feb 21, 2011 1:53 PM
       close to it in the private or public sector, that I'm aware of.
 22    You cannot reduce retirement without immediate significant salary increase.                Feb 21, 2011 1:54 PM
 23    I believe U of L's generous retirement package has attracted good staff and                Feb 21, 2011 1:58 PM
       supplements the total compensation package. We might not attract high quality
       employees if this benefit is reduced or eliminated.
 24    Although it wouldn't reduce UofL's liability as much, I would prefer a sliding scaled      Feb 21, 2011 1:59 PM
       on vesting of the university's portion vs. an "all or nothing" at 5 years. (e.g., retain
       only 20% of UofL's contribution after 1 yr., 40% after 2 yrs, etc.). My experience
       with 5 yr. "all or nothing" is that unhappy employees hang around making others
       miserable and then bolt at 5 yrs.




                                                      76 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 25    When you work for a job that you think you can retire from, then you take it all         Feb 21, 2011 2:21 PM
       away, then that really hurts!! I have been working since 1982 (I was born in
       1969). I did not grow up here, or I would have started working here just for the
       benefits and the 30 year retirement and college. I have another 25 years to go
       and would not like seniority to go away at all!! This is a hard and demanding job!!
       Why should we have to start all over again!! We work harder here than any other
       medical office I have been in, which I have been at Raymond Shea, M.D.; Hoosier
       Neurology, and Riley Children's Hospital!! We are under paid!! And, if seniority,
       college, retirement match goes away, what is left??
 26    Yes...new incoming employees only                                                        Feb 21, 2011 2:23 PM
 27    I hate to see new employees not receive as much as those presently employed by           Feb 21, 2011 2:24 PM
       the University but I think if it's communicated up front before they accept a
       positon, they will be aware of the new policy. It's too costly to the University. I
       wouldn't want my retirement reduced and appreicate how generous our retirement
       is BUT it's a different world than it was when I started working here a long, long
       time ago. The University does not receive the kind of support from state and
       federal government like it did at one time.
 28    Again I refer to an earlier comment. I left the private sector (taking a pay cut) to     Feb 21, 2011 2:28 PM
       work here at the Universlty of Louisville in large part, besides likeing the work, for
       the benefits. Id hate to see them changed...As always however if some change is
       required to maintain financial soundness then it should pertain to new hires
       maninly and if further change is made necessary then the vesting period should
       start immediately.
 29    The university is trying to become a premier institution. Recruiting quality staff       Feb 21, 2011 2:28 PM
       and faculty requires some form or retirement benefit that is comparable to other
       institutions and private corporations who are recruiting the same individuals.
 30    Why can't we join the Kentucky Retirement System like all the other universities.        Feb 21, 2011 2:35 PM
 31    This is probably one of the smartest ideas presented so far to save money. Win           Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
       Win. At least when you are hired you know up front what to expect. No benefits
       are truly taken away.
 32    Our retirement contribution is amazing; it was a strong factor in my decision to join    Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
       UofL. Consequently, any reductions should be going forward, not retroactive.
       That said, if salaries were higher, I think we could attract equally talented
       individuals despite a reduction in retirement benefits (perhaps more so).
 33    The retirement plan is a incentive for being em[ployed at the University                 Feb 21, 2011 2:42 PM
 34    A 5-year vesting period is too, too long. Three years is more acceptable.                Feb 21, 2011 2:44 PM
 35    #22: A five-year vestimate period is too long and would penalize young                   Feb 21, 2011 2:46 PM
       professionals looking for long-term employment in Higher Education. We
       sometimes forget that not everyone wants to stay in Louisville for the rest of their
       lives. ACPA recommends that new professionals stay in an entry level position for
       3-4 years. So making the vesting period 3 years would fit in with this standard.
       #25. 7% is fairly standard, and could be considered low. The previous institutions I
       worked at prior to UofL had a 10% employer contribution and did NOT require the
       employee to match.
 36    Keeping good benefits will attract and retain talented employees.                        Feb 21, 2011 2:48 PM
 37    Why hurt your employees?                                                                 Feb 21, 2011 2:51 PM
 38    Retirement is #2 on the list of attractive benefits.                                     Feb 21, 2011 2:53 PM
 39    Instead of a 5-year vesting period, perhaps a percentage/year served can be              Feb 21, 2011 2:54 PM
       implemented until the 5 year period is served.




                                                      77 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 40    Social security is being reduced. Staff salaries are consistently flat lining not       Feb 21, 2011 2:56 PM
       increasing therefore investment opportunities are a bargaining chip for an
       employer and need to remain a tool to encourage employees to keep their
       retirement money sound not the other way around.
 41    N/A                                                                                     Feb 21, 2011 3:02 PM
 42    Employees are already paid less than the going rate. Decreasing benefits is a           Feb 21, 2011 3:07 PM
       bad idea.
 43    In these uncertain economic times, I disagree with a five-year vesting period. I        Feb 21, 2011 3:12 PM
       think the one year waiting period is adequate. Fewer people work at an
       organization for 5 years or more. If a department is downsized or someone is laid
       off through no fault of his/her own or even if he/she moves on after a short period
       of employment, then he/she should not be punished for not having worked at the
       university for 5 years by not being able to access matched retirement funds given
       as a benefit.
 44    Again, this is a benefit that helps us to draw in good people from the community        Feb 21, 2011 3:14 PM
       when we cannot meet the private sector's salary expectations.
 45    Need more information about Question 25. Reduce the contribution by how much            Feb 21, 2011 3:15 PM
       and for how long?
 46    A five-year vesting period seems excessive when it's our money being put into the       Feb 21, 2011 3:21 PM
       plan. I suppose I'd be for it if the money that the employee paid in was claimed at
       100% and any money the university paid in would be claimed at a lesser
       percentage.

       I think that all employees could live with a new Retirement Benefit Plan, so it
       shouldn't affect only new employees. I also am not a fan of reducing the
       contribution for only new employees. There shouldn't be two, or three, different
       classes of benefits.
 47    I strongly feel that the people in the Retirement Benefit Plan now should not have      Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
       any changes. Especially the ones who have just started and may not have much
       time before they are retiring. They need all the money they can get.
 48    These are terrible options especially since we have multi-million $$ dollar "in-your-   Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
       face" construction projects underway around campus and students still do not
       have a new classroom facility.
 49    A 5 year vesting period is a long time, what about 3 years instead?                     Feb 21, 2011 3:53 PM
 50    Unless salaries can be adjusted, retirement contributions should not be reduced.        Feb 21, 2011 3:59 PM
       Where salaries have been stagnated at least some benefit is being received.
 51    High salary hires are the people most able to exploit the retirement system as it is    Feb 21, 2011 4:02 PM
       structured now. Put in three or four years, kiss goodbye and take the huge
       retirement contributions that exceed the annual income of a lowly hourly
       employee.

       I do not understand Question 25 and I don't know how much you can learn from
       responses to that question. How much reduction are you talking about? Is this a
       prorated annual contribution?
 52    The university's contribution and tuition remission are two of the benefits desired     Feb 21, 2011 4:16 PM
       by applicants.
 53    I clicked neutral for #23 & 24 because I very much oppose #22. I also don't think       Feb 21, 2011 4:17 PM
       we should have two tiers of retirement benefits.
 54    We have retirement benefits way in excess of private-sector employees and most          Feb 21, 2011 4:31 PM
       public-sector plans.




                                                      78 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 55    As to #25, since there is no pension plan it is imperitive that all employees save        Feb 21, 2011 4:39 PM
       for their retirement. The retirement contribution is the best way of ensuring.
 56    Again..I think with the low pay offered most staff at the University..once you start      Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
       taking away benefits...it will be harder to retain employees
 57    Paying employees different retirement benefits will lead to hard feelings reducing        Feb 21, 2011 4:47 PM
       efficiency.
 58    Perhaps a graduated match could be in place with a percentage of match for each           Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
       year of service 1 year 1 percent etc with a cap. Perhaps if a person does not use
       the tuition reimbursement they could opt out and take the retirement contribution
       match earlier.
 59    People work for the University, and are loyal to the University, for the benefits, as     Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
       the salaries are sub-standard. If the University continues to take away these
       benefits, it is open to employing only those who could not "cut it" in the business
       world.
 60    We are paid so little here compared with what we could get in private practice that       Feb 21, 2011 5:00 PM
       I'd sure hate to lose my retirement benefits.
 61    Additional information needed on any erosion of benefits, even for new                    Feb 21, 2011 5:54 PM
       employees. Benchmark data and overall compensation needs to be reviewed.
 62    Question #23. An employee should be allowed to contribute to their own                    Feb 21, 2011 5:57 PM
       retirement after one year without being vested. If they leave, the employee can
       have their own contributions and roll them over to an IRA or another qualified
       retirement savings account.
 63    A vesting period might be ok for new hires who are not coming from another                Feb 21, 2011 6:09 PM
       institution. It will be harmful to hiring to require this vesting period overall.
       However, if the choice is between the vesting period and reducing the contribution
       from the university, then I would be more in favor of the vesting vs. reducing the
       contribution.
 64    Even though the economy is tight everywhere and for most of us, UofL should still         Feb 21, 2011 6:18 PM
       want to attract top-notch employees on every level. These new employees should
       be treated to a more than "you are lucky to have a job" mentality; if they have
       chosen UofL and we have chosen them, let's act like that's a good thing.
 65    I agree with the five year vesting period, but that should be implemented for all         Feb 21, 2011 6:36 PM
       employees who have less than 5 years service with the University, not just for
       new employees.
 66    More information is needed to answer 25. What kind of reduction are you talking           Feb 21, 2011 6:58 PM
       about? How does our plan currently compare to other universities' and how would
       it compare after the changes?
 67    If this can benefit the budget, then new employees know that upfront.                     Feb 21, 2011 8:37 PM
 68    This should effect ONLY newly hired employees who are hired AFTER the                     Feb 21, 2011 9:13 PM
       changes take effect.
 69    Yes, let everyone do their part to destroy the middle class in America. Thanks!           Feb 21, 2011 9:21 PM
 70    I would like to see the statistics for people who left the university before five years   Feb 21, 2011 9:39 PM
       of service was complete. How much money would be saved if they were not
       vested?
 71    Reduction in benefits and a vesting period will make it very hard to attract good         Feb 22, 2011 12:00 AM
       senior faculty. This is not a competitive move.
 72    Details are needed before the questions 24 and 25 can be answered one way or              Feb 22, 2011 12:46 AM
       another.




                                                      79 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 73    Depends on what changes are implemented                                               Feb 22, 2011 8:15 AM
 74    If a vesting period is implemented, it should not be simply 100% vested after five    Feb 22, 2011 8:41 AM
       years. It should be a "step vesting" program. For instance, 25% vested after two
       years, 50% after 3 years, 75% after four years, and 100% after five years.
 75    Again these are poorly structured questions making broad assumptions which will       Feb 22, 2011 8:44 AM
       no doubt bias the conclusions. For example, questions 23 assumes the reader
       agrees that a vesting period is a fete de complete. Another example - by
       responding to Question 24 "strongly disagree" the assumption can be made that
       the respondent agrees that retirement changes should be applied to all
       emloyees......
 76    The Retirement Benefit is a huge expense to the university, and in my opinion can     Feb 22, 2011 8:48 AM
       not continue at the current level. The options above are similar to other
       companies in the Louisville market.
 77    Compared to other State retirement programs, the university's does not contribute     Feb 22, 2011 8:50 AM
       as much to the employee. If the contribution is reduced for new employees then it
       may affect the quality of those who desire to work for UofL.
 78    The higher retirement contribution percentage by the University makes up              Feb 22, 2011 9:06 AM
       somewhat for the low salaries that form the basis for the percentage. In other
       words, the retirement contribution dollars end up being close to the retirement
       contribution dollars that a person may expect in the private sector. This does not
       compensate employees for the 30 - 40 % differential between our salaries and
       those in the private sector, but it does keep the retirement benefit competitive.
 79    One of the draws to UofL is their great benefits and their retirement benefit plan.   Feb 22, 2011 9:26 AM
       5 years is too long of a wait to start investing in the future. This should not be
       changed, but the one year wait should be continued. This is fair to make sure the
       employee is dedicated to UofL.
 80    Whatever changes are made should only apply to employees hired after the              Feb 22, 2011 9:26 AM
       changes are made. For some people, the benefits were a deciding factor in
       taking their current U of L position.
 81    Retirement is the only thing keeping me here is retirement matching.                  Feb 22, 2011 9:35 AM
 82    24. Strongly agree only if the changes are negative. If they are positive, the        Feb 22, 2011 9:36 AM
       existing employees should also receive.
 83    25: I would be comfortable with reducing the retirement contribution for all          Feb 22, 2011 9:49 AM
       employees... for example, keep the matching 2.5% and reduce the additional
       contribution from the current 7.5% down to 2.5%.
 84    I consider the benefit to be part of my salary since UofL provides no pension. I      Feb 22, 2011 9:50 AM
       don't think vesting will save much money and would have been a negative
       towards myself being employed here when I was choosing a job.
 85    Continuing to diminish benefits of employees, both current and future employees,      Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
       will NOT benefit the university. It will simply lessen the effectiveness of the
       workforce, by pushing good current employees away, and stopping quality
       applicants from considering UofL as a benefit to their career.
 86    n/a                                                                                   Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
 87    These changes could harm our ability to attract and retain qualified, competitive     Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
       faculty and result in our losing ground to other institutions.
 88    This benefit strongly influenced my decision to take my current position. I don't     Feb 22, 2011 9:57 AM
       think you should have to wait to be fully vested.
 89    Benefits are key to a good university and happy community                             Feb 22, 2011 10:01 AM




                                                     80 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 90    Retirement benefit is a big recruiting tool and in many cases can entice people to      Feb 22, 2011 10:03 AM
       come to the University even at a lower salary than would be available in the
       private sector.
 91    A three-year vesting period should be adopted for the Retirement Benefit Plan.          Feb 22, 2011 10:09 AM
 92    Please don't reduce this important benefit.                                             Feb 22, 2011 10:12 AM
 93    Again, don't monkey with one of the best benefits that UofL provides to the             Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
       employee unless you adjust all salaries to be competitive. Many employees put
       up with the low salaries BECAUSE of the retirement plan and the tuition
       remission. Mess with that and we'll not be able to keep good employees or recruit
       good ones to take their place. Why can't you people see this?
 94    Any changes should ONLY be for new employees, those of us who are already in            Feb 22, 2011 10:22 AM
       the system started here with the understanding that this was our retirement
       system, it would be wrong to change it on us mid carrer. What eer is done it
       needs to be applyes to ALL U of L employees, Staff, Faculity and Admionistration
       equally.
 95    Reducing the retirement contribution for new employees will make UofL less              Feb 22, 2011 10:22 AM
       competitive in recruiting top notch faculty.
 96    If you plan on taking retirement or reducing it, then raises had better be in motion.   Feb 22, 2011 10:23 AM
       That's all we have is education and retirement. Us lower class have to suffer while
       the big boys don't lose a thing. Let's change that idea or is that too hard.
 97    I was hired 20 years ago with the understanding I had to wait one year to               Feb 22, 2011 10:23 AM
       contribute and would be vested in 5, so I am very willing to see that implemented
       again. Felt it was a great benefit then and still do. Thanks
 98    It would be grossly unjust to make changes to the retirement program for current        Feb 22, 2011 10:24 AM
       employees. The benefits of the retirement package weigh heavily in one's
       decision whether or not to accept a position at the University. With my resume,
       education, & skills I am worth more than I get paid but I accepted a position
       because these benefits helped to offset the difference for me. All current
       employees should be grandfathered under the program guidelines that they came
       in under. Changes should only ONLY apply to new hires!!
 99    A shorter vesting period of 3 or 4 years would be better.                               Feb 22, 2011 10:27 AM
 100   The retirement plan is the best I have ever had. It also is a very strong incentive     Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM
       to work here, possibly at a lower per-hour rate if a person is needing to build up
       their retirement. This benefit appeals to the middle-aged group that might not
       take advantage of the tuition remission because they already have real-world
       experience.
 101   I don't think the waiting period should be eliminated but maybe reduced to the six      Feb 22, 2011 10:40 AM
       months.
 102   I don't think a vesting period is a bad thing, but employees should know the rules      Feb 22, 2011 10:41 AM
       when they are hired.
 103   Its been almost 5 years since I've received a cost of living raise despite the          Feb 22, 2011 10:43 AM
       economic rise in prices all around us. If the university reduced benefits we
       already have on top of that, staff members will not be retainable.
 104   If there is going to be any changes it should be for new employees after the            Feb 22, 2011 10:47 AM
       change is implemented.




                                                     81 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 105   I don't think the vesting period should have anything to do with the one year             Feb 22, 2011 10:51 AM
       waiting period. The reality is that the majority of staff never get to use that benefit
       and that the majority of faculty do which will always put new staff at a
       disadvantage regardless of a vesting period. To remove it would then punish both
       groups which doesn't make any sense either. For most people (particularly staff)
       saving money for retirement especially in this economy is very difficult. The
       retirement contribution (while very rich on the University's side) can really make a
       difference for a staff member in the long run.
 106   #22) What is the potential cost savings of a 5-year vesting period (i.e., adding 4        Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
       years to the current requirement)? Employees already have to wait one year to be
       eligible for any sort of match from U of L, which, from my experience in the private
       sector, is not necessarily common practice.

       #25) Again, the culture of U of L, its commitment to diversity, and its good benefits
       (though lower pay) are what made me want to work here. People realize they will
       be paid slightly less than in the private sector, and the tuition and retirement
       benefits are needed to keep it competitive.
 107   We already pay under market value - this is one of our strongest recruiting tools         Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
       for talent, along with tuition remission! Please don't destroy it!
 108   The one exception I think should be made to the 5 year vesting period would be if         Feb 22, 2011 10:57 AM
       you are in a department and you are laid off through no fault of your own due to
       current unknown cuts in the future. I think that individual who took a job in good
       faith should be treated fairly and any retirement should be vested immediately
       upon being RIF'd.
 109   Social Security and the current economy do not support cuts to retirement                 Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
       benefits of any kind.
 110   OK look. Our salaries are in the tank. We work harder every year and rarely get a         Feb 22, 2011 11:07 AM
       raise.The only carrot we have in life is that maybe, just maybe, we'll have some
       money saved in our retirement plan when we retire (and that's not looking great
       right now either). Please don't take the budget out of your employees' hide. There
       are many other ways to cut waste. Protect your employees; eliminate expensive
       printing costs, cut down on the extremely expensive 40' banners on the side of
       buildings.There's still a LOT of money wasted around here.
          If you're going to cut us, leave us older hires alone. We came to work here
       based on work environment + benefits. We've held up our end of the bargain by
       working hard and meekly accepting the fact that we rarely get raises, and are
       never going to be paid equivalent to our job duties. Cutting our benefits now would
       pretty much be like stabbing us all collectively in the back. Leave the new
       employees alone, too, but if you do cut benefits for new hires, at least they know
       what they're accepting when they take the job.
 111   Should effect new hires only:                                                             Feb 22, 2011 11:12 AM
       #22. Vested period should be less than 5 years more than one year
       #25 If change is a must a flat rate contribution options after 2 year period/
       matching amount lowered
 112   reduction to the University's contribution may be reduced if salaries are raised to       Feb 22, 2011 11:15 AM
       current fair market value.
 113   Our health care benefits are dwindling each year. Retirement is one of the few            Feb 22, 2011 11:22 AM
       strong benefit areas that remain to us.




                                                      82 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 114   Would like to indicate the current policy allows for much interpretation. My last      Feb 22, 2011 11:40 AM
       employment status was as a temporary, so I had to wait a full year. I only worked
       as a temporary for a few months and prior to this, working for UofL over 5 years.
       This was disconcerting, especially since my temporary status didn't assist me in
       anyway (as in being considered an internal candidate for a position).
 115   Without pension plans and without raises over the past several years, it seems int     Feb 22, 2011 11:43 AM
       he University's best interest to continue to support it's employees through
       retirement funds.
 116   Any retirment changes that affect classified staff should be applied to ALL UofL       Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
       employees. Classified staff should not bear the burden of financial difficulties.
       They are the least paid in most cases, they shouldn't be the most punished.
 117   First of all the statement above is incorrect - The University does not currently      Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
       contribute retirement benefits to all employees. Permanent part time employees
       are not included which I think they should be included and be able to get
       retirement benefits - of course on a pro rated basis.
 118   The portion that the University pays is a viable recruitment tool.                     Feb 22, 2011 11:54 AM
 119   I have been with the university for nearly 40 years and there was a five-year          Feb 22, 2011 12:07 PM
       vesting period then and, to make it worse, you had to be 35 years old in order to
       enroll. I lost many years of retirement funds because I started working at UofL the
       day before my 20th birthday. I certainly was not thinking about retirement at that
       time but it did come to upset me greatly!
 120   I agree that a longer vesting period is an acceptable solution to the problem. But 5   Feb 22, 2011 12:09 PM
       years after the initial year waiting period seems far too long. I would propose 3
       years as the vesting period, with no waiting period prior. That way employees who
       remain for less than 3 years could still keep the retirement contributions they
       made from their salary, the university would keep the matching funds originally
       placed in that employee's account. Employees who stay longer than 3 years
       would keep 100% of both totals. This way the fantastic university match would
       serve as both an initial recruitment tool as well as a retention tool.

       I am not comfortable with the university having one group of employees with an
       amazing retirement match and another group of employees with a reduced
       retirement match. That would seem to disproportionally punish younger
       employees.

       I chose neutral on question 24 because I believe vesting rules should affect only
       new hires. But changes in contribution amounts might be more fairly distributed
       over all employees.
 121   Please keep retirement benefits the same or enhanced for current employees.            Feb 22, 2011 12:18 PM
       Changes can be made for new hires
 122   Again, without competitive wages, the UofL retirement contribution is one of the       Feb 22, 2011 12:26 PM
       good benefits to stay here for. Like the tuition remission, the 7.5% contribution is
       something to consider when staying at UofL rather than going into the private
       sector.
 123   I think the retirement contribution should be graduated and started a day one.         Feb 22, 2011 12:28 PM
       Most places I know start at 3% and graduate with years of service.
 124   In all fairness, any new policies implemented should not affect factuly/staff who      Feb 22, 2011 12:30 PM
       have worked at the university for more than 10 years.
 125   If an individual doesn't complete a minimum of 5 years of service,would they be        Feb 22, 2011 12:38 PM
       eligible for ANY of the university's contributions? I know they wouldn't be able to
       claim 100% but would they be able to claim any?




                                                     83 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 126   The term for new employee hires should be determined according to the                    Feb 22, 2011 1:01 PM
       prevailing market, UofL must stay competitive for compensation packages to
       attract the faculty and staff necessary to maintain or increase the appeal of the
       conferred degree--if the faculty aren't excellent, the degree will be less appealing
       to graduates going out to the workforce!! If we're currently "A great place to work"
       it's critical to maintain that status.
 127   A five-year vesting period seems somewhat excessive. Maybe this could be                 Feb 22, 2011 1:03 PM
       reduced to 3 years.
 128   Vesting period is normal at other institutions. Require service of one year to make      Feb 22, 2011 1:04 PM
       sure employee/faculty will stay before giving contribution. All employees should be
       vested before they are able to take their own funds. Contributions from employer
       should not be allowed to be taken prior to retirement age. Other institutions
       require that.
 129   A strong retirement contribution on the part of the university is a                      Feb 22, 2011 1:06 PM
       recruiting/retention tool.
 130   The retirement benefit is one of the major draws for working at the university. I        Feb 22, 2011 1:08 PM
       fear it would cheapen the appeal of working here if it were reduced. The five-year
       vesting, however, would not have deterred me from working here in the slightest.
 131   Salary is already far too low, if benefits drop then we will have increasing             Feb 22, 2011 1:14 PM
       problems with hiring decent staff and faculty. Benefits must stay strong!
 132   The retirement benefit is one of the best benefits we have as U OF L employees.          Feb 22, 2011 1:19 PM
       A 5 year vesting seems very reasonable given the current budget situation, but
       the UofL should continue to give the 10% to employees...Right now it's the best
       incentive to work at UofL since the pay grades are so low. Once the pay grades
       are elevated, then the percentage rates toward retirement could be lowered.
 133   You have set up a straw man for these questions. Yes, state support for UL has           Feb 22, 2011 1:24 PM
       been falling, but tuition increases and other revenue sources have been
       increasing dramatically. The budget has been growing.

       The 5-year vesting period would hurt us in recruiting top faculty.
 134   All employees hired need to be treated the same. Waiting period should be the            Feb 22, 2011 1:40 PM
       same for all new hires with no exceptions.
 135   Should not be any different than anyother employee                                       Feb 22, 2011 2:07 PM
 136   I really don't like the idea of these new policies, but we have to do something! It is   Feb 22, 2011 2:19 PM
       my impression that UofL contributes A LOT when compared to other places. I
       don't think they should decrease it by much, maybe 5.0 instead of 7.5 and still
       continue to match the 2.5 if the employee puts in.
 137   Because UofL Salaries are not comparable to outside industry salaries locally, the       Feb 22, 2011 3:26 PM
       401K benefit pkg as it stands now is a HUGE incentive to draw new employees.
 138   With low pay, the main thing that the university had going for it were our benefits      Feb 22, 2011 3:49 PM
       and this whole survey is talking about cutting those. It is bad enough that we
       have not had raises for several years but to keep wanting to cut what benefits we
       have. A person cannot get a raise because of the good work that we do, because
       if the department cannot fund it, and the university can't fund it, then there is no
       money for it. We don't hesitate to raise parking and we have raised health
       insurance but now we have gone so far backwards without cost of living raises,
       that what benefits we have should be improved not gotten rid of.




                                                     84 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
 139   I thought the 1 year waiting period was only if you didn't already contribute to a          Feb 22, 2011 3:53 PM
       retirement plan at your prior job. I know a person who got screwed and had to
       wait the 1 year even though they contributed at their prior job but because they
       didn't work 40 hrs/week, UofL denied their claim even though reading the
       handbook there was nothing in the rules against this. This wouldn't have stood for
       a law professor getting employed here. So all your rules are a joke already.
 140   2 years would be better than 5.                                                             Feb 22, 2011 4:03 PM
 141   I have no problem with a 5 yr vesting period as long as the vesting is pro-rated per        Feb 22, 2011 4:13 PM
       year. i.e. 2nd yr 10% vested, 3rd yr 50% vested, 4th yr 75% vested, 5th yr 100%
       vested.
 142   This university is not able to lure top professionals (be it staff or faculty) with their   Feb 22, 2011 4:15 PM
       salaries, but it is well respected for its benefits package. I would venture to say
       that most employees can afford to save little for retirement given their current
       salaries/hourly rates. The waiting period is completely reasonable (I myself have
       not yet been here a year) but once retirement benefits begin to acculmulate it
       seems unreasonable to deny someone 100% of what they earned because of an
       arbitrary vesting period of 5 years. Many of those who leave the university due so
       for reasons beyond their control (i.e. spousal hire elsewhere) and should not be
       punished.
 143   If implementing a vesting period is absolutely necessary and cannot be avoided -            Feb 22, 2011 5:22 PM
       it should be no more than 3 years (not 5 - as mentioned in item #22 above).
 144   no comment                                                                                  Feb 23, 2011 9:36 AM
 145   retirement benefits are one of the main reasons people are attracted to working at          Feb 23, 2011 10:00 AM
       UofL
 146   Often employees have no control over whether they work for the university for a             Feb 23, 2011 11:27 AM
       full five years. They may have to move, have a child and have to stop working,
       become ill, etc. It is unfair to require employees to work five years before being
       able to claim the university's retirement contribution for this reason. Employees
       cannot predict the future five years in advance.
 147   Our retirement plan is one of the great benefits here at UofL. Please don't mess            Feb 23, 2011 12:01 PM
       with it.
 148   I know that we are in tight budget times, but the reason some folks continue to             Feb 23, 2011 12:23 PM
       work for the university - particularly professional, non-faculty employees - is that
       the lower wages are compensated for through the benefits package which is
       available. I think we should be careful not "cut off our nose to save our face" as
       my mother used to say.
 149   LEAVE EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ALONE.                                                              Feb 23, 2011 12:47 PM
 150   22 Five years is too long and becomes a disincentive to recruitment in competitive          Feb 23, 2011 1:08 PM
       markets.
 151   Plan a 5 year vesting, only for employees who earn $100,000.00 or more per                  Feb 23, 2011 1:23 PM
       year, who are the employees who can afford it, not UofL staff who continue to
       earn less than competitive annual salaries.
 152   The retirement benefits currently offered is a major incentive to remain at the             Feb 23, 2011 1:32 PM
       university where pay tends to be lower than the private sector in related
       fields/duties.
 153   Consider replacing the existing 7.5% university contribution and up to 2.5% match           Feb 23, 2011 2:35 PM
       with a program that matches up to 6% of employee base salary contribution.




                                                       85 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 154   not really sure what #25 is referring to..does it mean the the University would still    Feb 23, 2011 2:40 PM
       match but not anything like they have now..I can see the cost savings of just
       matching...as long as the rules that I working under aren't changed--as long as the
       employee is told at the start, I really don't see a problem
 155   People are already having a hard time and having to work longer to be able to            Feb 23, 2011 2:42 PM
       retire. The University should not tinker with the retirement plan unless it is to
       improve it and provide more funds for employees.
 156   Perhaps the University's contribution to retirement accounts could be lessened to        Feb 23, 2011 3:21 PM
       save money, particularly for people new to the system. It is our benefit package
       that has kept many of us at this University in spite of the poor salaries and lack of
       any increases in salary for three years running.
 157   Again, if university employees had competitive salaries, they may be more apt to         Feb 23, 2011 3:40 PM
       contribute more to retirement especially those who are over the age of thirty.
 158   You are already reducing my retirement by giving us yearly bonuses instead of            Feb 23, 2011 4:14 PM
       hourly raises and also it cuts into my paycheck when I work overtime.Even if it
       were just a dime an hour that would turn into 15 Cents per hour at overtime rates
       and it would still just be a dime if it were in bonus form once per year.
 159   The retirement program at UofL is a big 'selling point.' - I would NEVER have            Feb 23, 2011 8:04 PM
       accepted a job offer if I were told that I must work here 5 years to be vested.
       NEVER. If the University wants to be a "Metropolitan Research University," we
       must recruit the best faculty. - Implementing this policy will lead profs to consider
       UofL as their "fall-back" school, and if they take a position, they will scramble to
       get out of here ASAP. Seriously, this is a bad, bad, bad idea.
 160   In regards to #25, If there are other ways for the University to save money, then at     Feb 24, 2011 9:16 AM
       some point, the Retirement benefit should be reinstated.
 161   none                                                                                     Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 162   none                                                                                     Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 163   Why implement reductions in stated, in place benefits? Not understanding                 Feb 24, 2011 10:15 AM
       rationale behind suggestions.
 164   none                                                                                     Feb 24, 2011 10:16 AM
 165   none                                                                                     Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
 166   Again, the benefits offered are very important to employees regardless of time           Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
       they have in. Pay rates can be low for many positions and the benefits play a very
       important role in the lives of University employees.
 167   If a reduction in the contribution were to occur, how much would the new                 Feb 24, 2011 10:50 AM
       contribution amount reflect?
 168   I started working at UofL in my early twenties. At that time, I had to wait until age    Feb 24, 2011 11:14 AM
       25 for eligibility. I thought that was crazy then. I don't believe there should be a
       waiting period at all (not sure that is still the case). I, personally, lost roughly 4
       years of eligibility due to this.
 169   none                                                                                     Feb 24, 2011 11:37 AM
 170   Current employees retirement plans should not be changed.                                Feb 24, 2011 11:48 AM
 171   cutting benefits to workers is not the answer....like many faculty members I             Feb 24, 2011 12:48 PM
       already make less $$ than I could working elsewhere... for some faculty is it
       already a sacrifice simply to live in KY... cuttin benefits decreases the chances of
       atrtacting and retaining top people.
 172   There should be a cap on the university's contribution, like 20,000/ each                Feb 24, 2011 12:55 PM
       employee, even if 10% of the employee's salary exceeds that amount.




                                                      86 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 173   ALL contributions should be equal for all employees once change is implemented.         Feb 24, 2011 1:30 PM
 174   As a cost savings measure, move from the current 7.5% / 2.5% ratio to 5% / 5%.          Feb 24, 2011 2:59 PM
       Any contributios beyond that would be employee contributions.
 175   we are so underpaid that we need the benefits to get good people to work with us.       Feb 24, 2011 3:43 PM
 176   This university does not pay lower level workers well enough for them to decrease       Feb 24, 2011 3:45 PM
       those workers benefits.
 177   Any vesting period adopted should be waived in the case of disability ofr death of      Feb 24, 2011 8:04 PM
       the employee
 178   n/a                                                                                     Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 179   n/a                                                                                     Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 180   Why would the university reduce their contribution to the employees' retirement         Feb 25, 2011 10:55 AM
       fund when it requires participation?
 181   Employees should not be punished for leaving the leaving the university before a        Feb 25, 2011 12:47 PM
       certain period of time. In many instances such moves are beyond their control,
       e.g. spousal hires,tc..)
 182   Any changes should be going forward. .Our retirement plan is one of the main            Feb 25, 2011 5:10 PM
       reasons people come to work at U of L. If we make changes they should only
       affect any new employees and announced on our website so people can get a
       clear picture of what the plan offers before they decide to come to work here.
 183   I find it unacceptable to change any employees plan in the middle of the game.          Feb 25, 2011 5:29 PM
       Many of us came to work at UofL due to certain benefits. Changing the game at
       halftime is unacceptable.
 184   Each statement should be rephrased as "Punish new employees for mistakes                Feb 25, 2011 6:01 PM
       made by administrators and state government." Strongly disagree to each, of
       course.
 185   I strongly disagree with the above propositions. These benefits serve to counter        Feb 28, 2011 9:36 AM
       the lack of annual raises that employees forgo. The help boost moral.
 186   If you change the retirement benefit for people who are already here, I am              Feb 28, 2011 9:54 AM
       confident that you will see a lot of people leave. Changing too many benefits will
       negatively affect employee retention. We haven't had raises since I've been here,
       taking away benefits will only make that worse. We haven't even had a cost of
       living increase and I assure you that my bills have done nothing but increase
       since I have been here.
 187   Reducing the retirement contribution is a really bad idea. Planning for the future,     Feb 28, 2011 12:06 PM
       by providing retirement as well as educational opportunities (tuition remission) is
       essential for growth and potential in employees lives. Taking away, or reducing
       these areas of opportunity creates a reduction in potential and future growth for
       individuals and their families. University of Louisville should be an institution
       where we put employees first and encourage them and their families by putting
       education first (which is what we want the politicians and society to do), as well as
       providing a safety net for the future with retirement funds. This should not be
       considered as an option.
 188   It sounds like the decision has already been made for changing retirement. The          Feb 28, 2011 12:32 PM
       questions does not say "if" is says "after the change" I believe if the change is
       made existing employees should still received the same contribution.
 189   These are complex issues - I don't understand the cost of the services or the           Feb 28, 2011 3:24 PM
       percentages of people impacted. I appreciate that my opinion has been asked, but
       I hope there are other factors contributing to decision-making besides current
       employees and staff who might not be able to see the larger finanical picture.




                                                     87 of 168
31. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
 190   A four-year vesting period seems common for other employers.                             Mar 1, 2011 9:26 AM
 191   Benefits needed for Employee Recruitment and retention.                                  Mar 1, 2011 1:40 PM
 192   UofL's retirement benefits may be much better than that at other universities, but       Mar 1, 2011 5:46 PM
       the pay scales are atrocious. I took a $10k pay cut to work at UofL and it took me
       10 years to make it up. I'm still not making ends meet, and I resent it.
 193   The university retirement program is among the best that I have ever heard of. It        Mar 1, 2011 6:06 PM
       provides the employee with a mechanism to care for themselves upon retirement.
       The retirement plan is an excellent incentive for talented employees to remain
       employees and to continue providing valuable services to the university. The one
       year waiting period is sufficient. Under no circumstances should new employees
       be penalized; rather employees should be encouraged to save for their own
       retirement.
 194   Benefits NOT salary is the main attraction the University has to offer staff.           Mar 1, 2011 11:01 PM
 195   Since we have not received a raise in 3 years I feel this is a very appealing benefit    Mar 2, 2011 9:30 AM
       for the University and don't feel like this should change.
 196   I believe there must be better ways to reduce the budget than by cutting                 Mar 3, 2011 4:50 PM
       retirement. A better policy for eliminating unperforming staff would go a long way.
       People know they can't be fired, so they are not motivated to work.
 197   By reducing benefits for new faculty will keep away the good faculty to join the        Mar 3, 2011 11:49 PM
       University of Louisville.
 198   By reducing benefits for new faculty will keep away the good faculty to join the        Mar 3, 2011 11:49 PM
       University of Louisville.
 199   Don't we have to, by the IRS guidlines, treat everyone equally. Isn't that why we        Mar 4, 2011 9:43 AM
       changed the retirement plan back in the '80?
 200   THINGS SHOULD NOT CHANGE FOR CURRENY EMPLOYEES WHAT SO                                   Mar 4, 2011 9:50 AM
       EVER!
 201   salary is already way below competition; I think reducing retirement contribution        Mar 4, 2011 9:50 AM
       would be a bad move for attracting faculty when they can get much more in
       industry (although it is not as much fun as education)
 202   Again, our salaries are so under the market, our retirement options are another         Mar 4, 2011 11:22 AM
       great benefit. It's a shame to reduce it.
 203   I think 5 yrs is a long period, I think 3 would be sufficient.                           Mar 4, 2011 1:19 PM
 204   University retirement benefits are woefully inadequate, especially considering the       Mar 4, 2011 3:37 PM
       lack of pay increases over the years. It is one thing to work for a small salary
       knowing you will be able to retire with a nice pension, like many state workers do
       currently. It is entirely something else to work for a small salary, no pension
       (some retirement money, granted, but no real pension) AND then get less than
       the person working beside you just because they came yesterday and you came
       today.
 205   Maybe a three year vesting period should be looked at. 5 years seems quite long.        Mar 7, 2011 10:02 AM




35. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
  1    The health insurance benefit should not be altered in current employees                 Feb 21, 2011 12:44 PM




                                                       88 of 168
35. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
  2    I feel that retirees should get the same health insurance rates and plans offered to      Feb 21, 2011 12:51 PM
       current employees
  3    I think the University should support those who have faithfully served the                Feb 21, 2011 12:52 PM
       University.
  4    Current Retiree Health insurance should be a supplement cost if needing to                Feb 21, 2011 12:53 PM
       reduce but not eliminate.
  5    na                                                                                        Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
  6    Personally, I don't understand why a married retiree receives twice the benefit of a      Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
       single retiree. I'd be happy to see that extra benefit eliminated for someone who's
       married.
  7    shouldn't go changing something mid stream. Current employees have been                   Feb 21, 2011 12:57 PM
       preparing for retirement under the current benfit plan
  8    Seriously???                                                                              Feb 21, 2011 1:00 PM
  9    If an employee can afford to retire before 65, they can afford to pay the health          Feb 21, 2011 1:00 PM
       insurance part. Most of them probably have a working spouse anyway, or get
       another job.
 10    UofL shouldn't take away any benefits from an employee who was hired with the             Feb 21, 2011 1:02 PM
       understanding they would receive that benefit.
 11    Don't mess with long term employee's plans for retirement after they've been here         Feb 21, 2011 1:18 PM
       for
       20 or 25 years. They've worked all this time and have made long term plans
       based on what benefits they believed will be available to them at the time of
       retirement. I know this happens all the time in the corporate world but shouldn't
       academia be an example of ethical and moral responsibility/obligations.
 12    Q28 doesn't specify what changes.                                                         Feb 21, 2011 1:25 PM
 13    Perhaps contributions toward spouse coverage should be pursued.                           Feb 21, 2011 1:36 PM
 14    There should be an identified date for the benefit to change. Anyone who retires          Feb 21, 2011 1:37 PM
       after that date will fall under the new benefit policy. Obviously would affect newly
       hired employees, but it should also affect anyone who hasn't retired yet.
 15    I do not think UofL's pension plan is really enough to sustain someone in their           Feb 21, 2011 1:38 PM
       retirement years along with social security unless you are in a very high salary
       position. Most salary grades do not afford individuals to have other outside UofL
       investments to supplement their retirement years. Therefore, I feel it is very
       important benefit for UofL to reward their retirees with some assistance toward
       health care coverage.
 16    Possibly offering retiree health benefits after age 66 similar to ss. If you retire       Feb 21, 2011 1:40 PM
       before 66, you have to wait until 66 to be eligible for the health benefits.
 17    After all the years the employees have put into the institution, I feel it is the least   Feb 21, 2011 1:46 PM
       they can do for the retired is to help with their insurance.
 18    Since UofL lags behind in salaries and has for several years, the way we get              Feb 21, 2011 1:50 PM
       employees to come to the University is by their excellent benefit packages. If you
       start take those away, we will have a harder time getting qualified applicants to
       come to Uof L.
 19    I have relied on the promise of this benefit and will need it in order to have health     Feb 21, 2011 1:58 PM
       insurance after retirement. It is acceptable as a change for those hired with a new
       understanding.




                                                       89 of 168
35. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
 20    Only new incoming employees who would work with UofL up until                              Feb 21, 2011 2:23 PM
       retirement....any one leaving UofL and then returning would loose status of
       returning employee and would be considered new in regards to benefits/
 21    I believe in the "Grandfathering" of benefits if they are going to change from your        Feb 21, 2011 2:24 PM
       hire date for obvious reasons.
 22    Why not allow a retired person get the $108.00 toward medicare, be paid as a               Feb 21, 2011 2:35 PM
       flexabile spending account as soon as they retire. Alot of members get no benefit
       from this current plan.
 23    I believe a phase out program would be better.                                             Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
 24    Again, this benefit was part of a package I reviewed prior to accepting                    Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
       employment here. I do not think it should be changed retroactively, but if, after
       reviewing market factors we thought we could reduce it going forward and still
       attract qualified candidates (through other benefits, for example) I would support
       it.
 25    Many current employees at UofL have endured low pay. The benefits package is               Feb 21, 2011 2:44 PM
       often times all that keeps those employees at UofL. Once salaries are at 100% of
       market, I could see making adjustments to new hires going forward, but not so
       long as our salaries at below market.
 26    Contributions towards Retiree Heath Insurance should be eliminated for those               Feb 21, 2011 2:53 PM
       who do not retire from UofL
 27    One of the reasons I have been with the University for 25 years is because of the          Feb 21, 2011 2:57 PM
       retiree benefits. Elimination of that would be a serious hardship after all this time
 28    Those that have retired from UofL have given significantly of time in their lives to       Feb 21, 2011 3:01 PM
       the benefit of the University. It would be a shame to punish them by eliminating
       their health benefits, especially at a time when they need it the most, as they are
       growing older.
 29    N/A                                                                                        Feb 21, 2011 3:02 PM
 30    See # 26                                                                                   Feb 21, 2011 3:07 PM
 31    You should not change things that were already in place years ago for current              Feb 21, 2011 3:08 PM
       employees.
 32    Keep retirement benefits as they are now. We are going to have a helluva lot of            Feb 21, 2011 3:15 PM
       old people living on the streets soon because so many companies are cutting
       them loose. The UofL does NOT have to be one of those heartless boobs!
 33    It would be unfair to new employees if this affected only them; it should affect all       Feb 21, 2011 3:17 PM
       employees equally.
 34    This seems an unnecessary benefit. Retirement eligibility doesn't mean you                 Feb 21, 2011 3:21 PM
       SHOULD retire, it simply means you can. If you can't afford it, then you need to
       continue to work until you can. Even if that means you're 65. I'm eligible to retire
       at age 48, but I won't be able to afford it, so I think I'll probably work until I can
       afford it. I'm not entitled to this money and if the university needs it to offset costs
       elsewhere then they should be able to use it.
 35    No changes for those already here.                                                         Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
 36    This one is at least reasonable bu you could offer lifetime membership to on-              Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
       campus GHN that would at least encourage good health practices.
 37    The University should uphold its commitments to its retirees. They have served             Feb 21, 2011 3:58 PM
       the University well and are due the compensation owed. History should not be re-
       written.




                                                       90 of 168
35. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 38    In practical, real world terms, only high wage earners can afford to retire before      Feb 21, 2011 4:02 PM
       age 65, so once again only high wage earners benefit from UofL contributing to
       health insurance costs before age 65. So only the wealthy "haves" can have this
       benefit. And of course, they are the people who can most afford to cover their
       costs. And so it goes.
 39    Have University employees join the real world.                                          Feb 21, 2011 4:31 PM
 40    I don't think it would be fair to change the Health Insurance for employees that        Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
       have significant time in at the University. That is something they are counting
       on..it should only effect new hires after the changes are made
 41    Employees who have shown dedication and loyalty to the University until they            Feb 21, 2011 4:47 PM
       reach retirement eligibility should be rewarded. What's the incentive for
       employees to stay until retirement if you take everything away? Experience
       should be treasured, not treated as a burden by management.
 42    I think that employees who are eligible to be on their spouses insurance should         Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
       join their spouse or significant others plan and University pay the employee/retiree
       whichever plan is cheaper. If they still choose to take Retiree Health at 65 they
       should take regular Medicare and be offered a supplement if they were on their
       spouses plan when they turned 65. (Maybe they already are required to use
       regular Medicare at
       65. )Some companies charge an enrollment fee per month if the spouses
       insurance is available but they do not want to use it.
 43    I thought it still contributed even after the employee retires and has Medicare. I.e.   Feb 21, 2011 5:00 PM
       I thought we still got some benefit, even though it might be reduced.
 44    Retirement eligible employees continue to work strictly because of health care.         Feb 21, 2011 5:44 PM
       Consequently, they are occupying jobs that sharp young professionals might
       obtain if they were able to retire. The university would become more efficient if
       people with new energy could move into those positions filled by long-time
       retirement eligible empolyees.
 45    None.                                                                                   Feb 21, 2011 5:57 PM
 46    Those of us who have given our hard work and long years of service have passed          Feb 21, 2011 6:09 PM
       up other opportunities figuring in the whole picture here. While there are no
       assurances in life, to change this benefit for existing employees is a lousy thing to
       do, especially given the average age of many here. If any changes are to be
       made, it should be fully disclosed to potential NEW hires, and not imposed on
       existing employees.
 47    If such changes are made, I see no reason not to extend them to current                 Feb 21, 2011 6:58 PM
       employees who are sufficiently young. You don't want to affect the plans of
       someone who's nearing retirement now, but most 30 somethings (myself
       included) wouldn't even notice this change.
 48    Don't try to change the tires while the car is still rolling. Bad things can happen.    Feb 21, 2011 9:13 PM
 49    The retiree contribution should be increased, not eliminated. It has not increased      Feb 21, 2011 9:21 PM
       in many, many years.
 50    No cuts to current benefits.                                                            Feb 21, 2011 9:30 PM
 51    People are planning their retirement based on the published retirement benefits,        Feb 21, 2011 9:39 PM
       including the health insurance contributions.
 52    Many of us have stayed here for the benefits. Such cuts make it easier for our          Feb 22, 2011 12:00 AM
       good folks to leave.




                                                      91 of 168
35. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 53    Changes to the plan after some one is employed by the university is not fair to the       Feb 22, 2011 12:52 AM
       employe. Or after they retire. Changing the plan for new employees is fine, years
       ago people who were employed before 1978 had a better plan then the ones hired
       after that date. If we did not want to work for Uof L because of the change did not
       have to work here, I did not see a drop of people taking jobs at Uof L. Fair is Fair
       we were hiared with blank for as a plan and that should be how it stands.
 54    If this benefit is eliminated, most employees couldn't afford to retire before age 65.    Feb 22, 2011 8:48 AM
 55    This is a benefit that attracted me to UofL. If this were not available it would affect   Feb 22, 2011 8:50 AM
       the quality of those deciding to come to work for the university.
 56    One of the benefits that is a great drawing card to retain employees.                     Feb 22, 2011 9:21 AM
 57    Same comment as #28 above                                                                 Feb 22, 2011 9:36 AM
 58    If the changes are to affect current employees, there should still be an exemption        Feb 22, 2011 9:47 AM
       for those who are very close to retirement.
 59    I'm young, so screw the old people since they'll bankrupt Social Security before I        Feb 22, 2011 9:50 AM
       get any.
 60    n/a                                                                                       Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
 61    Can not changes the rules in the middle of the game!                                      Feb 22, 2011 10:01 AM
 62    Our retirement program after we leave is hard enough as it is to live on. We need         Feb 22, 2011 10:05 AM
       all the assistance of the university we can get. When will the Classified staff
       recieve what the Faculty recieved on the retirement health care plan?
 63    For those of us that have worked most of our working lives at UofL and are                Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
       nearing the retirement age, this is a slap in the face for all our hard work. Please
       leave this alone. If you must, make the change for new hires only.
 64    comments the same as above, don't change on us mid carreer                                Feb 22, 2011 10:22 AM
 65    With Obama changing health insurance this is one of the major issues people still         Feb 22, 2011 10:23 AM
       have. The University has been helpful in this area. Take this and people will stay
       sick due to the addional cost.
 66    Again, it would be grossly unjust to make changes to current employees. The               Feb 22, 2011 10:24 AM
       benefits that were outlined when we accepted the position contributed to our
       decision to come here with our time & talent!
 67    With a life expectancy of 80+ years, the university should not be paying for health       Feb 22, 2011 10:27 AM
       insurance for employees who want to retire before age 65.
 68    I really depend on the $108 monthly contribution to my supplemental health                Feb 22, 2011 10:39 AM
       insurance. Living on a "fixed" income doesnot allow for any monies to change in
       my budget. It only gets worst each year!!! Please do not eliminate the
       contribution, we need an increase!!!!
 69    If any changes are going to be made to retiree health insurance it should be for          Feb 22, 2011 10:41 AM
       employees hired after the change is implemented and not for those who have put
       their years in and are ready to retire.
 70    Retiree Health Insurance should not be eliminated.                                        Feb 22, 2011 10:47 AM
 71    #27) What is the potential cost-savings of such a measure? Could U of L tie a             Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
       service requirement (not just age+service retirement eligibility) to such a change?
 72    See comment 26.                                                                           Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM




                                                      92 of 168
35. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
 73    Again, I think if the employee is hired under certain conditions, those conditions     Feb 22, 2011 10:57 AM
       should be honored. If you wanted to eliminate if for future hires, while I wouldn't
       like it, I could understand as along as that is the known situation from day one.
       For those of us who have been here 20 plus years, I am really uncomfortable with
       the plans for changes, but I obviously have a personnel interest. I don't have
       another option for savings in this arena unless ( and I have no idea how you
       would do this) there is a way to essentially do a health savings plan from the start
       that the employee would put money into specifically for a retirement health care
       plan.
 74    Health insurance costs are not going down, they are going up. A change like this       Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
       one could mean that people are forced to work until they die, do we really want to
       encourage that?
 75    Oh my gosh. What can I say? I've worked here for 22 years. Many of my friends          Feb 22, 2011 11:07 AM
       are 35 years + here at UL.Why have I dedicated my entire adult life to the
       University? I love UL, and speak highly of it as an educational institution as well
       as a place to work in spite of the fact that I feel underpaid and underappreciated.
       No contribution to healthcare when I retire in ten years? If this benefit is taken
       away, I will have to go into therapy and start taking antidepressants.
 76    I don't believe U of L should change benefits for employees who already work           Feb 22, 2011 11:19 AM
       here. That's part of the reason some of us came to U of L in the first place so
       don't eliminate an important benefit like this.
 77    #27--I don't know what the University's contribution is.                               Feb 22, 2011 11:23 AM
 78    The university's contribution to retirees health insurance is very minimal. If we      Feb 22, 2011 11:48 AM
       have worked here long enough to retire from here, that small contribution should
       be continued.
 79    People hired in at one expectation (retirement/heath insurance) and then it            Feb 22, 2011 11:54 AM
       changes after they are hired is not what they signed up for. Those people may
       leave because their benefits have changed.
 80    I have no plans to retire before I am eligible for Medicare but it seems wrong to      Feb 22, 2011 12:07 PM
       me to remove that benefit if it is something upon which employees have been
       counting.
 81    I think this is a fabulous benefit for long-term employees, and seeing it reduced or   Feb 22, 2011 12:09 PM
       eliminated would be disappointing to me. If this change is implemented please
       only apply it to new hires, I would hate to see people within the 5-year range who
       were counting on this benefit no longer eligible for it.
 82    I think the cost of health insurance is too high for retirees. One of my family        Feb 22, 2011 12:28 PM
       members works for UNC-Chapel Hill, and their retirees don't pay anything for a
       single plan once they retire. They also had a 403B contributory with no match,
       but had a years of service retirement plan.
 83    Again, faculty/staff who have worked more than 10 years should not be affected         Feb 22, 2011 12:30 PM
       by new policies in the interest of fairness.
 84    Cut, cut, cut....all we do is cut.... This is REALLY frustrating.....                  Feb 22, 2011 12:33 PM
 85    Nothing should be eliminated to current retirees under age 65!! (Again, I might        Feb 22, 2011 1:01 PM
       have misunderstood #27). I'm currently about three years away from age+service
       = 75, if ever availabe for me. If there is a policy or SOP in place that gets
       changed prior to me reaching a retirement choice, so be it.
       Regarding retirement--has it been shown that keeping long-term employees at
       their salary level is more or less effective than hiring a new employee?




                                                       93 of 168
35. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 86    Someone might want to look at mandatory retirement for faculty--say age 70? Has         Feb 22, 2011 1:06 PM
       a study been done to determine the productivity--e.g., departmental service,
       publication, instructional quality
 87    I do not feel I am informed enough about these statements to give a helpful             Feb 22, 2011 1:08 PM
       response.
 88    Do NOT change the rules in the middle of the game!                                      Feb 22, 2011 1:14 PM
 89    University contributions towards Retiree Health Insurance should actually be            Feb 22, 2011 1:16 PM
       increased. More individuals might retire if health insurance was more affordable.
       People feel they have to continue to work for health insurance.
 90    Current employees have factored this benefit into their retirement planning and         Feb 22, 2011 1:40 PM
       would not have time to save funds to replace this benefit they had worked for.
 91    If the university is going to implement this plan, then they should announce the        Feb 22, 2011 2:12 PM
       date of implementaiton and let people to choose to retire before then.
 92    NONE                                                                                    Feb 22, 2011 2:14 PM
 93    I think any changes made should effect new hires only. It would not be fair to          Feb 22, 2011 3:06 PM
       penalize employees who have dedicated years of service to the University. I
       believe the people who have stayed are happy with their jobs and committed to
       the University. The benefits we have have also played a part in retention, despite
       the lack of raises in some years.
 94    People work here for the benefits. We already have not got raises in two or three       Feb 22, 2011 4:03 PM
       years, please dont cut benefits. All changes should affect people coming in, not
       people already in!
 95    Retirees have earned this right!!!                                                      Feb 22, 2011 4:05 PM
 96    This seems like a reasonable change as retiring before 65 seems rather decadent         Feb 22, 2011 4:15 PM
       and an unreasonable expense for the university to shoulder. That said, any
       change should only affect new hires for the sake of fairness to all current
       employees.
 97    Why should budget problems be resolved by cutting back on employee benefits             Feb 22, 2011 5:10 PM
       and salaries. Can cutting back on renovation of buildings or new construction be
       held back a few years.
 98    Do not penalize loyal employees who have budgeted to receive this health                Feb 22, 2011 5:33 PM
       insurance stipend by taking it away at the last minute when they retire
 99    If a person stays at the university long enough to retiree, surely the university can   Feb 22, 2011 7:39 PM
       manage to give them the $100.00 a month towards their health insurance along
       with beginning connected to the university group health insurance.
 100   It would be unethical to change the conditions for current employees and retirees.      Feb 23, 2011 8:55 AM
       Current employees may not have the financial wherewithal to adapt to the
       changes if close to retirement. Retirees, who typically survive on a fixed income,
       would be even less able to adapt.
 101   no comment                                                                              Feb 23, 2011 9:36 AM
 102   You are really planning to target elderly, retired employees with a reduction in        Feb 23, 2011 10:12 AM
       benefits after they have served UofL for however many years? This goes beyond
       callous and into simply mean-spirited. I am ashamed of you. Has it escaped your
       notice that most retirees are living on a fixed income? If they're Medicare eligible
       then they're using their insurance for riders that cover things outside their
       Medicare coverage. Reducing quality of life for people that have faithfully served
       here at UofL but are now conveniently out of sight and out of mind is
       reprehensible.




                                                     94 of 168
35. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 103   The amount the University pays is a pittance, at best. The retirement benefit is        Feb 23, 2011 11:00 AM
       decent, but there has to be some impetus for people to work here, because it is
       not the pay!
 104   People are living longer. I do not think it is unreasonable to ask someone to work      Feb 23, 2011 11:27 AM
       until the age of 65 and claim Medicare then, and not rely on a university
       contribution for health insurance before then.
 105   Too young to care.                                                                      Feb 23, 2011 12:01 PM
 106   LEAVE IT ALONE                                                                          Feb 23, 2011 12:47 PM
 107   Do not change Retiree Health Insurance contributions.                                   Feb 23, 2011 2:35 PM
 108   I'd say #28 is the way to go...I'm counting on retiring from here and having a bit of   Feb 23, 2011 2:40 PM
       help with the health insurance
 109   We don't make enough money to supliment our retirement working here so any              Feb 23, 2011 4:14 PM
       other type of help we could get would help.Like paying less for insurance. Give
       me an hourly raise instead of a bonus so I can build my retirement.
 110   For staff, the contribution toward Retiree Health Insurance is about the only           Feb 23, 2011 6:50 PM
       benefit attached to retirement from this University. After people have been here
       long enough to qualify for retirement, there ought to be some tangible benefit
       attached.
 111   I would need to know the amount of the contribution first. It depends on the cost.      Feb 23, 2011 8:04 PM
 112   Eliminating this benefit for Retirees should not be an option. These employees          Feb 24, 2011 9:16 AM
       have faithfully served this University and deserve this benefit.
 113   none                                                                                    Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 114   none                                                                                    Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 115   none                                                                                    Feb 24, 2011 10:16 AM
 116   insurance is way to costley,we need all the help we can get,stop all advertising for    Feb 24, 2011 10:33 AM
       attorneys and their lawsuits,might bring down ins.costs...
 117   none                                                                                    Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
 118   none                                                                                    Feb 24, 2011 11:37 AM
 119   Many of us have been here 6+ years. Our beneifts should not change.                     Feb 24, 2011 11:48 AM
 120   This is a very fine line---we MUST take care of those who served here. However,         Feb 24, 2011 1:30 PM
       there are MANY contributions on the table and they should be in proportion to
       service---can years of service be included in this policy language?
 121   Benefits are already at a minimum. Why will anyone come work here if the                Feb 24, 2011 3:45 PM
       benefits get any worse?
 122   n/a                                                                                     Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 123   n/a                                                                                     Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 124   Changes to Retiree Health Insurance Benefits would severely impact those that           Feb 25, 2011 10:55 AM
       must retire early for health issues in the first place!!
 125   Definitely grandfather current employees into the programs.                             Feb 25, 2011 3:05 PM
 126   Any change to this should not affect any employees currently working here.              Feb 25, 2011 5:10 PM




                                                     95 of 168
35. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 127   How many people does this affect and what is the amount that we're talking about         Feb 28, 2011 12:06 PM
       with savings? Is it substantial? What are the projections with people that fit in this
       category over the next 5 years?
       A lot of these questions are really based on what has happened over the past x
       years, but I'm also interested in knowing what are the projections over the next y
       years, in order to effectively answer some of these questions and decisions that
       need to be made.
       With these questions, the minimum requirement age is 65 and some people that
       retire early made do so because they have the financial means to do so, so this is
       definitely an extra benefit that may not be necessary by the university, and should
       be seen as a loss of funds. If an individuals retires early, they should have the
       option whether they want to carry health care and if so, they should pay a portion
       of it (opt-in/out situation again).
 128   These are complex issues - I don't understand the cost of the services or the            Feb 28, 2011 3:24 PM
       percentages of people impacted.
 129   Please don't decrease the University's contribution towards retiree's health             Feb 28, 2011 3:57 PM
       insurance. I personally don't think the university pays enough towards health
       insurance for retirees after the many years of dedicated service they put in.
 130   #27 perhaps reducing but not eliminating the amount contributed monthly would            Feb 28, 2011 4:45 PM
       be a good idea
 131   This provision has the force of contractual obligation. Do you really want a class-      Mar 1, 2011 12:09 PM
       action lawsuit? How about a strike?
 132   Why are we paying insurance premiums for people just because they decide to               Mar 1, 2011 5:46 PM
       quit working before they turn 65? Make them pay for their own insurance just like
       anyone else who has to buy insurance before they turn 65. If you want insurance
       benefits, get a job that offers them!!
 133   It is no surprise that a cost saving measure would be to exclude retirees from the        Mar 1, 2011 6:06 PM
       university funded health insurance program. Retirees are old and quite often in
       more need of health care services. To abandon an employee who has served the
       university faithfully over a number of years is immoral.
 134   Older people cannot retire already when they would choose because health                  Mar 3, 2011 1:18 PM
       insurance is still too high to afford, even with the contribution. I have worked with
       older people who know they are not wanted here but cannot retire for this reason
       and it is sad. If we can pay for TARC or provide compensation to people who are
       covered by their spouse's health insurance, we can help those who dedicated
       much of their lifetime to the university.
 135   Penalizing the loyalty of current staff members only hurts morale. If such                Mar 3, 2011 4:50 PM
       measures should be taken, they should occur only to the new employees hired
       after the change. They won't miss what they don't have. Current employees
       count of these benefits.
 136   Please do not damage those of us who have devoted a lifetime of faithful service          Mar 4, 2011 9:42 AM
       to the University.
 137   If an employee stays at the university to meet the retirement qualifications, surely      Mar 4, 2011 9:43 AM
       the university can continue to pay $100.00 towards there health insurance and
       keep them associated with the university plans. Has any one ran the numbers on
       who actually keeps the benefits after they leave, not the total number of retirees
       we have?
 138   Those who retire from the university with a set amount of years (10+) should not          Mar 4, 2011 9:46 AM
       have to pay for their own health insurance




                                                     96 of 168
35. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 139   The main reason people don't retire is healthcare. Elimination of this benefit           Mar 4, 2011 10:02 AM
       prevents "new blood" from becoming employees and gives the older employee no
       incentive to retire even if they may no longer be as effective or invested in their
       job.
 140   Health insurance should not be offered to employees who do not work at least 20          Mar 4, 2011 10:18 AM
       hrs per week.
 141   It would be cruel to end retiree health insurance contributions if the university has    Mar 4, 2011 10:36 AM
       already made the commitment to past staff!
 142   I have worked for the University for over 30 yrs and would be very disappointed if       Mar 4, 2011 11:11 AM
       my benefits were to be reduced or taken away after many years and long hours of
       dedication to my job.
 143   I am unable to make any substantial savings at this time without the university          Mar 4, 2011 12:00 PM
       contribution.
 144   Years of service should be rewarded.                                                      Mar 4, 2011 1:19 PM
 145   Employees who have been here should not be penlized. If a benefit is going to be          Mar 4, 2011 2:06 PM
       taken away or changed I think it should be for new hires only.
 146   As little as the universitycontributes towards this benefit on an individual basis, it    Mar 4, 2011 3:37 PM
       is hard to understand how either of these scenarios will save that much money.




38. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
  1    There are other ways the University could implement green strategies. Water and          Feb 21, 2011 12:45 PM
       electric usage are examples.
  2    A surtax should be placed on offices that have staff travelling more than one trip       Feb 21, 2011 12:47 PM
       per year to conferences. A surtax should be placed on offices still providing lunch
       and food for meetings. A SURTAX should be place on staff that feel UOFL
       OWES them their 1-5 cups of free coffee per day. Too many office taking
       advantage of UofL perks...to charge a surtax on things we actually need like
       paper and copying. If someone would just turn off the lights and the music playing
       24/7 in the dental school and B Building they would probably find vast amounts of
       funding!
  3    I am in a small Dept off campus. We have no way of sharing and the extra cost            Feb 21, 2011 12:47 PM
       would hurt.
  4    Regulations require that paper copies of all documents in our office must be filed       Feb 21, 2011 12:49 PM
       and retained. It would be unfair to charge us.
  5    Some units at the University do not have enough money now to cover the costs of          Feb 21, 2011 12:50 PM
       paper, printers, related supplies. To add an additional surcharge on those
       departments/units would be grossly unfair.
  6    Our federally-mandated role as provider of technical assistance and professional         Feb 21, 2011 12:52 PM
       development requires at times large quantities of printed materials for distribution.
       There is not much we can do about that, and we will not recieve additional funds
       to pay for extra paper/toner usage.
  7    there are many situations where individual printers are needed and necessary.            Feb 21, 2011 12:53 PM
  8    In the building I work in, there is a ridiculous amount of paper being wasted. I fully   Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
       back any program by the University to cut paper usage.




                                                      97 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
  9    For personal faculty printers this would be an appropriate charge, as they are all         Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
       hooked to centralized office printers. Staff may have difficulty utilizing the
       centralized printers.
 10    na                                                                                         Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
 11    At first read, this just struck me - for lack of any better word - as stupid. Paper        Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
       and toner cartridges are required for my job. Period. You can encourage me to
       save paper and toner; you can reward my unit if over time we reduce either or
       both; you can suggest ways to save that are creative; but don't penalize my unit
       because I need to use paper or toner. Talk about yet another slap in the face if
       you try that one!
 12    ENCOURAGEMENT OF LIMITED USE OF PAPER PRODUCTS SHOULD BE                                   Feb 21, 2011 12:56 PM
       SUFFICIENT
 13    While this is a great idea for some departments, there are those...like ours...that        Feb 21, 2011 1:00 PM
       rely heavily on printed documentation in files to maintain appropriate audit
       tracking and management. We are so far away from being able to go paperless
       that this type of intitiative would likely drain our budget to the point that we weren't
       able to operate in other necessary ways. If implemented, there would have to be
       room for exceptions based on the nature of the work performed by a particular
       office; otherwise, this would be an unfair and undue burden for some.
 14    Ethical standards for counseling records demand paper copies. Electronic                   Feb 21, 2011 1:02 PM
       records are not a substitute. A surtax penalizes those who are in certain health-
       care provision fields.
 15    I don't have enough information on this to respond.                                        Feb 21, 2011 1:04 PM
 16    Education to all is required - not a surtax. We are adults, we'll follow the policy -      Feb 21, 2011 1:13 PM
       no need to punish us for those that don't.
 17    Come on.......give me a break!                                                             Feb 21, 2011 1:18 PM
 18    How is this going to be enforced? There is already a surcharge on all orders               Feb 21, 2011 1:28 PM
       through the stockroom and Staples.
 19    Our departments are already thin on funds to operate our offices without having to         Feb 21, 2011 1:32 PM
       pay more for the basics that are needed
 20    The idea that we are close to being paperless is ludicrous. Until we invest in a           Feb 21, 2011 1:33 PM
       strong, consistent and secure web presence we have no hope of being
       paperless.
 21    What is going to cost to manage the tax? What are you really saving? If you want           Feb 21, 2011 1:36 PM
       to put the program in place and ask for departments to work towards a goal ... that
       may work. Some departments may need paper? Legal offices.... accounting
       offices??? To add a tax??? Someone must police that and it would use up the
       savings.
 22    THAT'S JUST CRAZY!!!                                                                       Feb 21, 2011 1:37 PM
 23    I do think that getting rid of personal printers is a good idea. Have all units            Feb 21, 2011 1:37 PM
       networked to the copy machines and do not charge for this if this is the way of the
       future.
 24    We are already doing this and this would not save any money since any charges              Feb 21, 2011 1:44 PM
       paid are still university money.
 25    This puts too much of a burden on the departments.                                         Feb 21, 2011 1:46 PM
 26    PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, MAKE #30 A REALITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!                                 Feb 21, 2011 1:48 PM
 27    We already pay for our own paper. Why should we have to pay a surcharge on                 Feb 21, 2011 1:50 PM
       top of that!!!




                                                      98 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 28    I work in the library and we have the majority of the student use computers, how        Feb 21, 2011 1:55 PM
       could we be taxed for using that service when it it students using the service.
 29    I think there are other ways to encourage this than a surtax. For many of us, it is     Feb 21, 2011 1:56 PM
       more cost effective to have our own printers. I don't think this proposal is about
       "greenness" at all--it is about finding a way to charge people for yet one more
       thing. If you want to be more green, how about insisting food service not use all
       styrofoam and plastic materials? The amount of trash, and particularly non-
       biodegradable styrofoam, is obscene. There are not reasonable recycling units in
       the dorms,there are many of other green initiatives that might really make a
       difference.
 30    Only if there are exceptions for offices who need to keep hard copy records, like       Feb 21, 2011 1:58 PM
       admissions.
 31    Obviously we should try to conserve as much as possible--but my experience with         Feb 21, 2011 1:59 PM
       directives like these is the "tail starts wagging the dog." Employee perspectives
       regarding costs become distorted and they waste more time and money, and
       frequently cause more problems for students and other stakeholders, because
       they are trying to reduce usage of the taxed item. You will get less usage of
       whatever you tax, but don't be surprised if other costs rise and productivity suffers
       significantly in other areas.
 32    I believe in being good stewards of the planet and the Univeristy's resources,          Feb 21, 2011 2:01 PM
       made available to us to get our jobs done.
 33    Stop printing that expensive colored magazine and mailing it employee's homes.          Feb 21, 2011 2:15 PM
       Wasteful. Put it on-line.
 34    If this is implemented - departments should be allowed to shop around for the best      Feb 21, 2011 2:17 PM
       prices.
 35    We are too limited by privacy rules to eliminate paper. We would love to do more        Feb 21, 2011 2:22 PM
       electronic communication, but are limited by these rules. That is not our fault.
 36    Our office is required to maintain documentation in the actual file. This includes e-   Feb 21, 2011 2:28 PM
       mail correspondence. There is currently no method available to maintain our files
       electronically that is accessible by all who need to view all documentation for the
       file.
 37    The current green program is a waste of time and very inefficent. We are wasting        Feb 21, 2011 2:35 PM
       alot of money on showing people we are green. Do away with the green program
       and look at all the money the university will not waste.
 38    I would agree with this more....if we were sure where that extra money was going        Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
       to. Sounds like a revenue generating plan off the backs of the departments. UN-
       cool. The departments are already taxed enough with past budget cuts.
 39    Many staff believe paper copies are required to comply with record retention            Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
       policies. If this is not the case, perhaps explaining this would be helpful in
       reducing the amount of paper.
 40    In certain departments (laboratories), it is impossible to work from a computer at      Feb 21, 2011 2:43 PM
       the lab bench. The risk of the computer becoming damaged due to spills of liquids
       or toxic chemicals are high. Thus, printed protocols are still necessary. For such
       departments which cannot get away from printing entirely, a surtax would
       unnecessarily increase the costs of doing business.
 41    I can't believe this was even suggested.                                                Feb 21, 2011 2:44 PM
 42    #30. While I support the green initiative, I don't feel the technology standards are    Feb 21, 2011 2:46 PM
       high enough to support moving towards a paperless environment. Offices, like
       Undergraduate Admissions refuse to scan documents and rely on faxing because
       they cannot support scanning technology in their office.




                                                     99 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
 43    No surtaxes should be implmented until a paperless communication plan has                   Feb 21, 2011 2:54 PM
       been put in to action.
 44    Instead of taking away, the University should adopt incentives for those that use           Feb 21, 2011 3:01 PM
       less printer paper and supplies. It is always more encouraging to people to get
       something than be negatively motivated where something will be taking away.
       What about if a department significantly reduces their carbon footprint, each
       employee in the department gets another vacation day for the year. Or, with
       small, incremental changes there are smaller incentives, such as a free lunch at
       the University Club or catered breakfast or lunch at a meeting?
 45    I also think an employee should be able to "opt out" for some of the University             Feb 21, 2011 3:02 PM
       publications sent via campus mail.
 46    Excellent idea.                                                                             Feb 21, 2011 3:03 PM
 47    I only make copies necessary for the job. Personal copies should be charged.                Feb 21, 2011 3:07 PM
 48    We are an educational institute, you need to use paper!!                                    Feb 21, 2011 3:12 PM
 49    Some projects require more usage than others.                                               Feb 21, 2011 3:15 PM
 50    Who pays this surtax?                                                                       Feb 21, 2011 3:17 PM
 51    Need to know more about how this would work.                                                Feb 21, 2011 3:17 PM
 52    I agree with this only if we can get university departments to agree to paperless           Feb 21, 2011 3:21 PM
       communication. I can think of at least a dozen forms that require an "original
       signature" meaning they must be printed out. These forms could easily be
       digitally signed, but the university doesn't allow that...so we have to print this stuff.
       It's frustrating, particularly for those of who would jump at the chance to limit our
       paper usage.
 53    We all have to work toward less paper. Maybe this would motivate offices toward             Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
       that.
 54    Regulatory compliance requires that certain documentation be maintained in more             Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
       than one format - we should not be penalized for doing the cost of business that
       provides a service to the university community and ensures the univeristy is
       compliant with many regulations.
 55    Only if your faculty does not require paper assignments be handed in for credit,            Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
       i.e., use memory sticks and email. Some of these professors require hard copies,
       don't tie students hands with taxes that may become mandatory to get a passing
       grade.
 56    This sounds like the brain child of whoever thought of the ridiculous tiny green            Feb 21, 2011 3:50 PM
       individual trash cans! One way to turn off a community to 'green' is to make poor
       decisions like that.
       I really don’t understand the concept of a centralized work station. The time spent
       for an employee to leave their station, go to a ‘centralized station’, dig through
       other’s copies to locate their work, or wait on their job and return to their
       workstation, possibly returning for the same job more than once equals time,
       equals dollars paid. How does this idea cut down on paper? I wonder if it might
       reap a larger use. Cutting down on adequate equipment does not equal efficiency
       or less spending; it increases time, increases poor productivity and builds into an
       8 hour day less efficiency. An employee gets paid money for time.
       Wanting to cut down on paper is understandable. Could Installing a top notch
       electronic communication system work (by the way, this rules out group-wise)?
       Perhaps departments that print hard copies should pay for them? I wonder if one
       could formulate a ‘reasonable’ amount of paper needed in a department. Could
       this be built into department budgets? Would the department pay for overages?
 57    Oh, PLEASE...really?!                                                                       Feb 21, 2011 3:58 PM




                                                      100 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 58    Budgets are strapped enough. And with some University policies and procedures,         Feb 21, 2011 3:59 PM
       our paper volume is increasing. Some business units are printing more paper than
       ever before due to changes in forms and reoprting requirements.
 59    Mandate sharing centralized office printers where appropriate.                         Feb 21, 2011 4:03 PM
 60    My department currently does a lot of communication through email and                  Feb 21, 2011 4:07 PM
       voicemail, but until we are completely paperless with official documents, it would
       be a extra expense we could not avoid. We are very conscientious of our
       resources and try to be frugile.
 61    Much is required by govt regulations in Administrative offices.                        Feb 21, 2011 4:16 PM
 62    No one should have to pay to work. We already pay to park.                             Feb 21, 2011 4:18 PM
 63    This would be better handled by rewarding those units who reduce their garbage         Feb 21, 2011 4:22 PM
       or trash by a certain percentage, rather than by surcharging, which hits different
       units with different responsibilities unequally.
 64    i think this option should only be explored once offices have been given the           Feb 21, 2011 4:25 PM
       opportunity to go paperless.
 65    The Green Initiative is a PR, ideological endeavor. Considering the large              Feb 21, 2011 4:31 PM
       questions regarding the scientific evidence for man-made climate change, this
       area should be subject to the same budget review as other initiatives for the
       University. How much are we spending on this? What are short-term and long-
       term costs and savings?
 66    Would rather see a bigger push toward paperless communication. However, this           Feb 21, 2011 4:39 PM
       often comes with a cost, too, as software and systems are upgraded.
 67    Once IT is fixed, then maybe we can consider this option.                              Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
 68    Since my job requires compliance with FDA regulations requiring paper copies of        Feb 21, 2011 4:47 PM
       all Regulatory documentation and correspondence, you would be encouraging
       non-compliance by charging us extra to do our job well. Seriously?
 69    Certain jobs with direct patient contact cannot totally avoid some paperwork. I        Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
       would be opposed to personally paying for supplies required by my job.
 70    The University must look at the types of work the units do - there are units, such     Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
       as mine, that must maintain a paper-trail in order to be compliant with federal
       regulations. If the University is going to tax these items, they must pay for better
       computers, share-able printers, etc... This may seem green, but it appears greedy
       - what is the University going to do with the 30% surcharge? I highly doubt it will
       get back to the workers doing the work.
 71    I don't understand what that would accomplish....                                      Feb 21, 2011 4:55 PM
 72    I print as little paper as possible. Putting everything into an electronic medical     Feb 21, 2011 5:00 PM
       record doesn't eliminate the use of paper as much as people think it does.
 73    Why just printing-related expenses?                                                    Feb 21, 2011 5:14 PM
       1. Those who wish to install optional energy-consuming devices in their offices
       (such as personal refrigerators, floor lamps, space heaters, etc.) should pay a
       surcharge to cover the associated energy costs.
       2. UofL should stop subsidizing car parking and charge market rates for parking.
 74    Reducing necessary paper reports would be preferable.                                  Feb 21, 2011 5:42 PM
 75    In tight budgets, additional taxes are burdensome. Where would surtax money            Feb 21, 2011 5:54 PM
       go? If it fed into supporting green programs, I'd be less bothered. The bigger
       problem is that the behavior is largely driven by individual choices and the surtax
       wouldn't likely be assessed at the level of an individual. Unless individuals bear
       the cost, it doesn't provide much disincentive.




                                                     101 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 76    U of L is NOT doing enough to make paperless services like document imaging               Feb 21, 2011 5:57 PM
       and centralized printing available to the University as a whole. U of L units like I.T.
       charge for EVERYTHING and not all departments can take budget hits for
       utilization of technology like that mentioned aboved. This surtax should be
       delayed indefinitely until U of L can support such an initiative by making such
       technology available to ALL departments FREE OF CHARGE.
 77    How do you propose exams be given and work get done? Some things simply                   Feb 21, 2011 6:09 PM
       require paper and printing to get our work done. To impose a cost beyond what
       we are already spending on these things within our units is inappropriate. We are
       very cost conscious already and this smacks of a big government/regulation
       mentality instead of market-driven solutions.
 78    I would advise continued encouragement to go paperless, with perhaps a date               Feb 21, 2011 6:18 PM
       (2013 ?) being designated time for any surtax. It's a big mental adjustment and
       will take some planning and financial outlay to implement such a "cost-saving"
       plan.
 79    Not until e-readers get good enough for me to stop printing out technical papers to       Feb 21, 2011 6:58 PM
       avoid the strain of reading on a computer screen.
 80    The surtax would defintely be implemented!1                                               Feb 21, 2011 8:37 PM
 81    What if I bring my own printer and paper and toner?                                       Feb 21, 2011 9:13 PM
 82    Printers and copiers were taken from some departments and given to others who             Feb 21, 2011 9:30 PM
       never had printers and copiers. What sense does that make?
 83    We already pay. How would exams be done? Evaluations signed? Don't tax us to              Feb 22, 2011 12:00 AM
       get our work done.
 84    Due to the job position, this would be ridiculous in a lot of cases. Confidential         Feb 22, 2011 8:10 AM
       paperwork going to a central location would create issues.
 85    It's easy for people to look at someone else and think they can be just as effective      Feb 22, 2011 8:41 AM
       by printing less, but truthfully, nobody knows how much or how little somebody
       else can print and still be effective.
 86    Unless Human Resources and Purchasing allows "paperless options" for                      Feb 22, 2011 8:48 AM
       transmitting required signed forms (i.e. JDC, Xpays, Travel Vouchers, RFD) this
       surtax is not appropriate.
 87    Who would collect the surtax and what would it fund ??                                    Feb 22, 2011 8:50 AM
 88    There are some units that have to maintain paper copies where original                    Feb 22, 2011 9:16 AM
       signatures are on the copy.
 89    I don't believe this will curb usage. Only the department is affected not the             Feb 22, 2011 9:19 AM
       individual.
 90    This would require University offices to accept electronic copies instead of              Feb 22, 2011 9:24 AM
       originals.
 91    This is an absurd proposal. Has anybody thought this through. In my position I            Feb 22, 2011 9:38 AM
       have to print many documents to keep on file (hold) for several years. If you want
       us to keep all of these documents saved on email, someone needs to talk to the
       IT folks in the departments. When I ask for extra space, I am told to delete
       documents.
 92    Conservation and awareness of being more "green" is good. However, there are              Feb 22, 2011 9:45 AM
       many areas where it is necessary to have hard copy and we should not be
       penalized because of the nature of our jobs and our missions.
 93    The surtax would not modify behavior since the money is frequently paid by                Feb 22, 2011 9:50 AM
       someone else.




                                                     102 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
 94    n/a                                                                                       Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
 95    Need flexibility.                                                                         Feb 22, 2011 10:01 AM
 96    Units are already hit with the administrative fee which is enough.                        Feb 22, 2011 10:03 AM
 97    Surtax on individual printers only to encourage sharing printers and actually             Feb 22, 2011 10:04 AM
       reduce purchasing costs. With everyone facing decreasing budgets, putting tax on
       basic supplies could contribute toward hardship.
 98    If the department pays for their office supplies; the University should not benefit.      Feb 22, 2011 10:07 AM
       Some departments should be exempt if the office has to use a lot of papers such
       as Committees
 99    I would need more information on the actual cost to departments before I could            Feb 22, 2011 10:13 AM
       express an opinion on this matter.
 100   Until the University will allow for electronic signature there should not be a tax to     Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
       departments who MUST supply paper for budget or contractual arrangements!!
       Don't tax unless provided a means to leave the paper out of the equation.
 101   Who came up with these ideas? This is nickel/diming the real problem. Stop the            Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
       wasteful spending and projects that aren't essential to the University's mission.
       Stop the email project. You'll save millions.
 102   This initiative may work for some departments. However, other departments -               Feb 22, 2011 10:18 AM
       whether grant based or because of the nature of their work - may need to use
       their own printing services (printers, ink, paper, toner) to be able to do their job
       effectively.
 103   GET REAL!                                                                                 Feb 22, 2011 10:22 AM
 104   It is not within the Universities rights to tax anything.                                 Feb 22, 2011 10:22 AM
 105   Downtown live on paper copies, however electronic way is a good way of saving             Feb 22, 2011 10:23 AM
       paper and money I'm all for this.
 106   I don't understand who would be responsible for the surtax, the individual or the         Feb 22, 2011 10:23 AM
       department? How would this be implemented, billed, etc?
 107   I work with the payroll of over 250 employees and have to maintain copies of time         Feb 22, 2011 10:28 AM
       sheets for 3 or more years. I should not be penalized for important job duties that
       require paper.
 108   We have to work and unfortunately printed paper is required.                              Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM
 109   I cannot imagine how this could be equitably applied, as some departments                 Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM
       actually DO need to print things for valid work purposes. This would punish such
       departments for simply doing their work, when other departments which have little
       interface with the public, for example, are rewarded for their "green" habits. There
       must be other ways to educate and discourage unnecessary printing.
 110   Design & Printing Services should be exempt from this Surtax should it go                 Feb 22, 2011 10:35 AM
       through.
 111   All of us should be conservative in our use of paper and printing supplies. With          Feb 22, 2011 10:36 AM
       the ability to send files by email there are many opportunities to save. There are a
       lot of situations where there is information one needs to print that is confidential or
       sensative that shouldn't be sent to a common area where others can see it. Also
       there should be a limit on the number of people using a common printer otherwise
       the savings are lost in the time wasted in waiting for your printing behind other
       also waiting in line for their printing. And at the very least the printer should be
       located in the same building where you office is located.
 112   I'm not sure what a "surtax" means to my personal pocket.                                 Feb 22, 2011 10:43 AM




                                                       103 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 113   Rather than a surtax I recommend an initiative program with incentives that             Feb 22, 2011 10:46 AM
       promotes and encourages paperless communication.
 114   I am only in favor of this if we find a true way to make things more readily easy to    Feb 22, 2011 10:51 AM
       track online (ie open enrollment, new employee orientation, etc) otherwise certain
       service departments will be hit very hard.
 115   #30) I already recycle and use both sides of paper on my individual printer. I try to   Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
       print only if absolutely necessary. What would the potential cost savings be and
       how would a surtax be billed? For example, my immediate supervisor is way too
       tied to using paper/printing, so perhaps this could prompt a behavior change, but
       maybe instead of a surtax, just requesting that department heads lead the charge
       and request that all staff re-use paper and keep printing to a minimum. Would U of
       L be willing to invest in bigger/better monitors or dual monitors - perhaps this
       would lessen the need for printing as well.
 116   Although health care departments will be hit very hard with this. I know we go          Feb 22, 2011 10:57 AM
       through a significant amount of paper having to "fax" things to other facilities,
       insurance companies etc who want the hard copy. Any one who has a contract
       with VA would need to know in advance to include this in the contract because of
       the amount of hard copies - essentially every treatment or time patient is seen,
       any labs, etc.
 117   I feel this would be unfair to departments with large classes that need to do a lot     Feb 22, 2011 11:01 AM
       of copying for tests and other classwork related material.
 118   Everyone could use less paper, it's a cost savings and it's environmentally             Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
       responsible.
 119   How?                                                                                    Feb 22, 2011 11:07 AM
 120   What would the money from the surtax be used for?                                       Feb 22, 2011 11:08 AM
 121   We are already paying a 5% surtax on supply orders now.                                 Feb 22, 2011 11:12 AM
 122   If you want us to do our jobs, then you should give us the resources to do so.          Feb 22, 2011 11:21 AM
       This unfairly penalizes people who need to distribute materials to students. If you
       want to reduce the quality of service to students - then make it more difficult to do
       our jobs.
 123   Current administrative practice makes it impossible to go paperless, numerous           Feb 22, 2011 11:22 AM
       policies require that a "paper trail" be maintained. Recommend increased
       recycling opportunities for departments.
 124   Even with the technology we have today, going paperless still isn't ready yet.          Feb 22, 2011 11:26 AM
 125   IT has done this for years. Has this resulted in a greener IT?                          Feb 22, 2011 11:39 AM
 126   I'm all for being greener, but many areas aren't designed for central printers, and     Feb 22, 2011 11:40 AM
       this would majorly affect performance. As I deal with students and often print them
       info, I would have to leave my office to check on what I printed, and then return. I
       don't find this effective nor do I want to leave someone in my office for periods of
       time when they could remove items, which unfortunately happens.
 127   For those of us who print sensitive documents, it is not wise to only print to a        Feb 22, 2011 11:43 AM
       centralized printer. We should be allowed to use our desk printers when
       necessary and use the centralized printer whenever feasible.
 128   Green initiative is all fine, well and good, but don't add a tax on things that we      Feb 22, 2011 11:48 AM
       have to use to do our jobs!
 129   If done then studnet need to pay to have copies made in all offices.                    Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM




                                                     104 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 130   Some departments by size alone require more paper. Also, students should have            Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
       the benefit of a paper test. Also...many laws require paper copies of many types
       of paperwork, including correspondence. Some offices would be made to suffer
       from a surcharge. Each department, etc, buys their paper and toner, from their
       own budget. You want to put more financial burden on budgets that are already
       strained to the max? We recyclr the toner...to NO cost to the University. I know
       this as a fact. Also, the paper, we buy recycled, and we recycle. You want to
       much. You need to concentrate on what is important, like how to get more
       funding for education, not extraneous programs, like green initiatives, that are
       already adequate.
 131   Job duties will not count how long it takes to run across the office to retrieve         Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
       papers. Also, we have a shared printer and waste is high when people print and
       don't come to get the paperwork and there is no way to identify whose it is.
 132   Doing a surcharge will just shuffle money from one place to the other. I don't see       Feb 22, 2011 11:54 AM
       it helping overall. With the employees being educated on being "green" I believe
       more and more people are also working toward a more "green" environment here
       at U of L and at home.
 133   My job would be extremely difficult if my ability to print was reduced or eliminated.    Feb 22, 2011 12:07 PM
       There may come a time when that will no longer be the case, however, I don't see
       it happening in the near future. I don't believe it would be fair to penalize
       individuals/departments when their job requires the printers, printer paper and
       toner cartridges.
 134   That should be part of the tuition.                                                      Feb 22, 2011 12:07 PM
 135   This is ridiculous. Regardless of how "green" a department wants to be, the              Feb 22, 2011 12:09 PM
       faculty are going to continue to use paper and ink. A surtax only hurts the
       department (and we have meager supply budgets as it is) - the faculty won't care
       and it won't change their usage.
 136   If the logistics of this could be worked out to actually be cost effective I would       Feb 22, 2011 12:09 PM
       wholeheartedly support it. But this is one of those areas that is more easily said
       than done, and the incentives may not work as you initially anticipate they will. I
       would recommend serious thought and pilot testing before implementing anything
       university wide.
 137   people are too wasteful. This might make people stop and think if they really            Feb 22, 2011 12:10 PM
       need a printout.
 138   My department is pushing employees to go paperless. This requires employees              Feb 22, 2011 12:12 PM
       to access paperwork electronically, which means, viewing it on their computer
       monitor. Toggling back and forth between viewing the paperwork and then
       entering the data into a software program is time consuming and strenuous on the
       eyes. In addition, it increases the likelihood of data entry error. If we are going to
       do this, EMPLOYEES MUST HAVE TWO MONITORS, otherwise, we're wasting
       the University's time and money and taking steps backwards. If the University
       wants to push green initiatives; funding must be in place to equip employees with
       the equipment necessary to do the job! DUAL MONITORS ARE NECESSARY.
 139   This would only work if there were subsidies available to help units with the            Feb 22, 2011 12:13 PM
       programming/IT costs of going paperless.
 140   Departments are already stretched on budgets. Our culture of suspiciion and              Feb 22, 2011 12:14 PM
       blame (aka cover one's backside) does not encourage paperless communication.
       people want to be able to prove what has transpired.
 141   This would just add additional cost. Utilze effective training in paper saving and       Feb 22, 2011 12:19 PM
       promote ways in which the departments can elimate paper waste. Eliminate all the
       flier boards in the buildings and add more electronic message systems.




                                                     105 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
 142   I work in a department that relies heavily on paper records; although much of our          Feb 22, 2011 12:23 PM
       records are also electronic, we are required to have paper records. Despite our
       desire to become a paperless office, it's simply not feasible for our regulatory
       environment. I think UofL should consider a University-wide effort to teach
       employees how to reduce their use of paper and printing resources. I work with
       people who use PCs every day but do not know how to change basic printer
       properties (e.g., 2-sided printing) to print more cost- and eco- friendly.
 143   We already use a central printer in our office through our Xerox machine. It's             Feb 22, 2011 12:28 PM
       disatrous. Someone is always picking up your printing, and sometimes that has
       confidential info on it.
 144   I understand we want to go green, however we already have fewer people and                 Feb 22, 2011 12:30 PM
       now you want to take away tools to complete our job. I can't tell you how many
       times things have to be reprinted to send to administrative offices for processing
       because "they never received it".
 145   Seriously????                                                                              Feb 22, 2011 12:33 PM
 146   We already buy our own supplies, so I don't quite understand the surtax question.          Feb 22, 2011 12:48 PM
 147   I am for the university trying to "go green", but come on, taxes on toner, paper and       Feb 22, 2011 12:57 PM
       "related supplies". How much of a surtax are we going to impose on a paper clip?
       And how is that going to impact budgets in the multimillion dollar range?
 148   Over the years I have come to rely on individual printers in emergency for                 Feb 22, 2011 1:01 PM
       research proposal submissions, especially when a common printer has been
       abused or neglected, locally or centrally. Please continue to promote the green
       culture!!
 149   We should be encouraged to assist in green initiatives, but if the university wants        Feb 22, 2011 1:04 PM
       business to be attended to, they shouldn't charge units to take care of business.
       Some units will be required to use more paper/toner than others and shouldn't be
       penalized for it.
 150   The underlying argument here seems to be that electronic communication is                  Feb 22, 2011 1:06 PM
       entirely "green"--it's not.
 151   I do not feel I am informed enough about this statement to give a helpful                  Feb 22, 2011 1:08 PM
       response.
 152   This would hurt academic units that order these items for testing purposes.                Feb 22, 2011 1:10 PM
 153   State law requires that there are some things that need to be kept in a paper file         Feb 22, 2011 1:16 PM
       (student permanent records, for example)
 154   We are an academic institution. Although I'm all for reducing the carbon footprint,        Feb 22, 2011 1:19 PM
       this is taking things a little too far.....there are certain instances where there is no
       substitute for printed copy.
 155   Why would you tax these things? There are numerous times I am with a student               Feb 22, 2011 1:19 PM
       who needs a recommendation letter printed that it would not be convienent to
       walk to a printer, load letterhead, walk back, hit print, and walk back to the printer.
 156   Centralized printers is costing the University money because employess have to             Feb 22, 2011 1:40 PM
       walk down the hall to pick up printed material which may also contain confidentual
       information that others should not see. As more printers are eliminated there will
       be more time spent standing in line waiting for document to print which can delay
       getting work done.
 157   How much would this surtax be and to whom would it apply? How would it be                  Feb 22, 2011 2:02 PM
       monitored?
 158   If university business is being transacted, it does not really matter which printer is     Feb 22, 2011 2:12 PM
       used.




                                                      106 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
 159   NONE                                                                                    Feb 22, 2011 2:14 PM
 160   How will this be implemented and regulated? Can we also look at the inflated            Feb 22, 2011 2:19 PM
       costs of printing through IT department? There are lots of mistakes in billing and
       it often seems to be so expensive!
 161   All this will do is force depts to go outside of the University for their supplies.     Feb 22, 2011 3:05 PM
 162   For years we have wanted to go green and reduce the amount of paper but we              Feb 22, 2011 3:49 PM
       need backup to justify what we have balanced with the information that we have
       and then the controllers office can go back in and change amounts, dates, add
       items, etc, that were not on a month when it was closed, and then we don't have a
       backup to show that it was changed. Items have to be copied, scanned, and
       uploaded to Blackboard for the students to download and print. It saves the dept
       from copying lots of things but the initial article has to be copied. We have cut
       drastically down in printing and recycling paper but to run the department and
       classes, a certain amount of paper and toner is necessary.
 163   About printers...............employees already have thier own individual printers and   Feb 22, 2011 4:03 PM
       ink in stock. So if the individual printers are eliminated, the money spent on the
       printers we have now and the stock in ink we have now will be wasted.
 164   Units within the School of Medicine MUST print many documents because of legal          Feb 22, 2011 4:11 PM
       reasons,
       and this policy would create a huge impact upon those units.
 165   Maybe something that is more of an incentive and not penalizing a department            Feb 22, 2011 4:13 PM
       that by its very nature may do more mailings or other types of ppr usage.
 166   Every department has different needs in regards to paper records so a universal         Feb 22, 2011 4:15 PM
       policy change seems unwise. Most departments aren't even providing syllabi for
       students and have made already significant efforts to cut back on paper. As far as
       I know, these supplies already come out of the individual department/office
       budgets and the individual units have ample motivation to cut back.
 167   We shouldn't be penalized for the resources it takes to do our jobs.                    Feb 22, 2011 5:03 PM
 168   To use (or not to use) centralized printers and/or paperless communication is a         Feb 22, 2011 5:22 PM
       decision best made at the individual business unit level. This is not efficient,
       practical or cost-saving in all instances - and should not be part of any "green
       initiative".
 169   Until we get IT staff that can teach us how to be "paperless" and get us the            Feb 22, 2011 7:20 PM
       computer technology to make that happen, this is an unrealistic request. Many of
       us would happily go greener if we could get the IT support to make it happen.
 170   Is eliminating individual printers an option?                                           Feb 23, 2011 9:20 AM
 171   no comment                                                                              Feb 23, 2011 9:36 AM
 172   Micromanaging is not the way to go!                                                     Feb 23, 2011 10:04 AM
 173   This is a boondoggle. How are you going to assess it? Who's workload are you            Feb 23, 2011 10:12 AM
       increasing with this? Departments are already unloading printing costs onto
       students by posting things to blackboard. Are you planning to provide free
       ethernet connections to departments that set up central printers? Since academic
       offices don't have the open floor plan arrangement of IT or HR where, exactly do
       you think we're going to put these "centralized" printers?
 174   This measure will help the environment and help reduce our costs at the same            Feb 23, 2011 11:27 AM
       time.




                                                       107 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
 175   This seems unnecassitly punative to me to offices (often with an already small             Feb 23, 2011 12:23 PM
       budget, such as the one I administer) which sometimes need to print
       communications in order to ensure that we maintain a paper trail for certain
       conversations. We also allow students affiliated with our student groups to print
       fliers for programs, etc.
 176   NO, robbing Peter to pay Paul NEVER works.                                                 Feb 23, 2011 12:47 PM
 177   shared resources should be encouraged where feasible, but for individuals whose            Feb 23, 2011 1:08 PM
       jobs involve senstive or confidential communications, these sorts of shared
       resources are not practical.
 178   It is ridiculous to charge a department extra money in order to perform their work.        Feb 23, 2011 1:15 PM
       Not everything can be paperless. This would encourage employees to not do
       their work properly and to not have the necessary documentation.
 179   often these are for student services such as printing exams etc, unless there is a         Feb 23, 2011 2:12 PM
       good electronic alternative actually charging a surtax to a department is ridiculous.
 180   Until all HR, payroll, etc. related work at UofL has officially gone paperless, a          Feb 23, 2011 2:39 PM
       surtax should not be charged.
 181   I'd say it's good that all people in a unit should share a printer--BUT that means an      Feb 23, 2011 2:40 PM
       employee won't be able to print private stuff...don't know how well that would go
       over....also-we are required to print a lot of things and put them in folders etc--I
       have everything on line-but when you need something official-I don't see why
       there should be a surcharge
 182   I don't think this is practical. Faculty and staff need their own printers, and often it   Feb 23, 2011 2:42 PM
       is very difficult to work by looking at a computer screen without having any hard
       copy in front of you. This sort of proposal will just impose an unnecessary
       hardship on University employees.
 183   Adding another surtax is just moving money around and does not benefit the                 Feb 23, 2011 3:19 PM
       departments. This is just another burden in individual departments Let
       employees do their designated job with up to date supplies and equipment. I do
       not want to count sheets of paper and paper clips
 184   Some units are required by law to have paper documents to have a surcharge on              Feb 23, 2011 4:51 PM
       this paper usage seems like a quick way for the University to make money from
       units that in a lot of cases are cost recovery. Also is this money going to go
       towards helping units that use paper to move to paperless or just go towards more
       brickwork on the roads around campus?
 185   This would be absurd!                                                                      Feb 23, 2011 6:50 PM
 186   LOOK - you gotta quit pushing the "green" stuff down everyone's throats. To                Feb 23, 2011 8:04 PM
       encourage more "green," then educate folks on the benefits. Punishing people
       (which is what it really is, so forget calling it a "surcharge" because we're all a bit
       smarter than that) will tick off staff, faculty and students... It will happen given
       some time, and small incremental changes are fine, but for heaven's sake, don't
       make everyone miserable and angry about it (which sort of defeats the purpose of
       caring for the environment, doesn't it?)




                                                      108 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 187   In our building, there are many employees and many offices. When talking about            Feb 24, 2011 9:16 AM
       saving paper and toner for printers, this is not a viable option when you have 60
       people in an Division, who would have to wait a printer to be available for them to
       use. Also, the time an employee would spend away from their desk would not be
       efficient for some offices. The time it would take to shift thru multiple projects that
       are printed would take up valuable time away for important tasks. This is an issue
       that impacts the productivity and the man hours it would take away from other
       tasks that is essential for the operation of a department or division within the
       University.
 188   none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 189   none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 190   Some clinical services require use of these supplies.such as speech-language              Feb 24, 2011 10:14 AM
       therapy for visual supports for children. There is no paperless option for the
       children.
 191   none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:16 AM
 192   I feel that sharing printers/copiers would make for more usage of paper/toner; also       Feb 24, 2011 10:18 AM
       the more people that share one printer/copier the more likely for costly repairs due
       to work overload.
 193   none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
 194   If this goes into affect, then something needs to be done about the amount of             Feb 24, 2011 11:14 AM
       space we have on our email system. And, more research into making sure no
       electronic emails/files are lost. Currently, I lost tons of email records when the
       system automatically archives them for me. This problem should be resolved
       BEFORE this policy would be implemented.
 195   Use of centralized printers often results in overuse, waste of paper, and is not          Feb 24, 2011 11:22 AM
       always cost efficient.
 196   none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 11:37 AM
 197   STRONGLY, STRONGLY Agree!!! I have no problem printing less and moving                    Feb 24, 2011 1:30 PM
       more towards technology, though I think the offset should subsidize technology,
       rather than just going into the U's pocketbook (so to speak).

       Also: I think parking fees should be raised/taxed and more incentives should be
       provided for public/mass transit/car sharing/ biking. But that's another story
       altogether. I hope that's a dialogue we'll look to for cost saving initiatives.
 198   Give it a break already. Are there studies comparing how well people process              Feb 24, 2011 1:53 PM
       information reading off of a computer versus reading from paper?
 199   At present, certain permit required compliance documents are printed to be                Feb 24, 2011 3:09 PM
       viewed upon request by state and federal inspectors.
 200   I believe a surtax should be placed on all desktop non shared printers. Staff and         Feb 24, 2011 3:33 PM
       faculty should be using centralized printers with secure print.
 201   Can't we just tell depts to use less paper and ink?                                       Feb 24, 2011 3:45 PM
 202   but only for those using over a modest amount a year.                                     Feb 24, 2011 3:52 PM
 203   Allow for unlimited and free storage of digital document images forever--no IT disc       Feb 24, 2011 5:02 PM
       space charges or other storage charges.
 204   We are striving to do the best jobs possible, as it is now, with less staff. Cutting      Feb 24, 2011 9:37 PM
       cost, but yet adding more stress to each employee. Causing department heads to
       worry even more about a printer cartridge costing "too much money" to replace,
       will just add more tension to an already highly stressed environment.




                                                     109 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 205   n/a                                                                                    Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 206   n/a                                                                                    Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 207   Supports with the understanding that ALL offices will come under this - President,     Feb 25, 2011 3:05 PM
       Provost, Development, etc.
 208   Too many offices require a paper copy be submitted so we shouldn't have to pay         Feb 25, 2011 6:24 PM
       a surtax for paper. Especially until the university has paperless submissions
       across the board.
 209   It is impossible to operate without printing/faxing. This might be a policy to         Feb 26, 2011 3:00 PM
       implement 20-30 years down the road once everyone in the work force has
       become tech savvy.
 210   Isn't that what our tuition money is paying for? Having been a student at UofL for 5   Feb 26, 2011 9:45 PM
       years, I strongly believe printing should be FREE at the library. Or at least a
       maxium amount of FREE printed papers per semester would even help out.
       Tuition is HIGH, and every 10cents for an exam paper adds up. Especially for
       students such as myself who had to PAY THEIR OWN WAY THROUGH
       COLLEGE!
 211   Some units - especially on the HSC - cannot go paperless. The surtax would             Feb 27, 2011 7:11 PM
       penalize those units.
 212   The University's green efforts are ill concieved. Just because it sounds good on       Feb 28, 2011 9:36 AM
       paper does not mean it translates to the actual workplace. This proposed
       measure would substantially affect staffs' ability to maintain quality work and
       caters to a younger generation. There are an abundance of times that a physical
       piece of paper needs to be printed and reducing staffs' personal printers is
       unprofessional. We are responsible enough adults to use our personal printers in
       an appropriate enviromentally friendly manner.
 213   I don't understand what this surtax would be coming out of, the department's           Feb 28, 2011 9:54 AM
       budget? How? I need more information to form an opinion on this.
 214   This makes no sense. If the University wants to encourage being green, then            Feb 28, 2011 12:06 PM
       they should look at the reduction of carbon with students being encouraged to
       take online courses, which provides a greater benefit with reduction of carbon
       omissions from cars, etc. I don't understand the overall concept of this because it
       is probably such a small percentage of overall concern with going green. How
       about setting up recycling for those who have to use paper. There is NO recycling
       and my guess (being a little cynical in my thinking) is that many of the custodians
       may see recycling and waste as the same thing. Just a wild guess :) I may be
       wrong.
       There are alternatives that should be considered. Recycling of paper, glass,
       plastic, etc is really not encouraged on the campuses. In California, there are
       recycling bins everywhere so that it is convenient to use. If it's not convenient,
       then people won't use it. There is A LOT of money to be made with recycling.
       Millions and millions of dollars are made just from recycling in California. It's a
       huge business that just continues to grow. How about UofL developing a
       recycling program that takes a active and campus-changing approach, and the
       profits be used for offsetting some of these benefits (tuition remission), that may
       be in a deficit. If recycling is convenient, and employees/students know that
       beside be eco-friendly, they are supporting a specific purpose for the university,
       they may be more apt to participate and recycle.
 215   These are complex issues - I don't understand the cost of the services or how it       Feb 28, 2011 3:24 PM
       would impact units.




                                                    110 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 216   If you share a printer with someone and you print out confidential                    Feb 28, 2011 3:57 PM
       correspondence, someone may view what you have printed ,if you are not able to
       retrieve it quickly.
 217   You may indeed save money on paper and ink. But if you don't provide the              Feb 28, 2011 5:23 PM
       employees with the IT hardware and software upgrades to be truly "paperless,"
       then we won't realize any cost savings - only higher expenses. At the same time,
       will we realize any significant cost savings if we make the IT hardware and
       software upgrades necessary for the offices to be truly "paperless?"
 218   we should be allowed to use genuine toner cartridges -- the printer last longer and   Feb 28, 2011 6:17 PM
       requires fewer/less often chages of the printer cartridges with more copies are
       received
 219   For my office, these supplies are paid for entirely out of RIF funds from F&A on      Mar 1, 2011 9:26 AM
       grants. Incentive to economize is already high due to limited funds.
 220   Such a provision would only serve to reduce the department allocations availalbe      Mar 1, 2011 12:09 PM
       to other purposes. The basic idea of a paperless university is good -- but find an
       implementation that will work, not one that will only serve to diminish respect for
       the institution.
 221   Our office prints our own publicity material because it's cheaper than having IT      Mar 1, 2011 1:00 PM
       print it. If there is a tax on toner it will increase our already strained budget.
 222   Is it going to count against me if my colleague doesn't know how to use electronic    Mar 1, 2011 5:46 PM
       means of communication and uses up 20 times the paper that I use? Also, if we
       have to use less paper, we need more email mailbox space.
 223   It seems like departments aren't ready for this; needing lots of original signed      Mar 1, 2011 5:47 PM
       copies of timesheets, leave reports, travel, iut, review of financial reports.
 224   Shuffling money from one column to another on the university balance sheet does       Mar 1, 2011 6:06 PM
       not seem like a fruitful pursuit. Encouraging departments to conserve paper and
       toner seems like a complete "no brainer." Creating additional bureaucracy in
       pursuit of that goal seems ludicrous.
 225   Thanks to our sustainability coordinator we must now all waste time emptying our      Mar 2, 2011 10:34 AM
       own little green garbage cans every day or so. This is absurd! Due to financial
       constraints we have already examined our printing practices but we do not need
       "big brother" mandating printing. Furthermore, why does the university have the
       right to tax a function that we must perform to complete work?
 226   Who will get priority when the line is back down the hall? I can see arguments        Mar 3, 2011 1:18 PM
       here. Also, our large "office copier" breaks constantly. What happens when it is
       down? Simply do not print every email you get for example. Do not print in color
       unless necessary.
 227   A move toward the green initiative is a great idea, but charging departments more     Mar 3, 2011 4:50 PM
       is not a positive way to encourage this.
 228   Beyond a green policy on printing and copying, significant savings could be           Mar 4, 2011 9:42 AM
       obtained by reducing electrical usage. If not already in place, high efficiency
       lighting with motion detector switches should be utilized. Equipment should be
       turned off, or set to an energy savings mode if not in use. Recycling programs are
       very showy, but we all waste electricity every day.
 229   Paperless is FINE but offices requires proper equipment to operate & if you add       Mar 4, 2011 9:46 AM
       to the expense of it - it will just make things difficult on the office staff




                                                    111 of 168
38. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
 230   until we get a viable electronic medical record, that works and is useful, paper will       Mar 4, 2011 9:50 AM
       continue to be needed at the health science center. in addition, our patients do
       not have computers, and will not be able to access information electronically.
       Finally, the infrastructure could not support it currently; there isn't even wireless in
       my office area that works, much less the other areas.
 231   If this helps the university become less wasteful, then yes, it should be                  Mar 4, 2011 10:36 AM
       implemented.
 232   We are already paying IT a surcharge on copying. The University should recover             Mar 4, 2011 10:40 AM
       that money from them.
 233   rather than a punitive system - would a reward system, rewarding departments or            Mar 4, 2011 10:40 AM
       offices who use the least amt of paper or who show a significant reduction in
       paper be better received? and more motivating?
 234   Too many of our faculty need to edit or share documentation and it sometimes is            Mar 4, 2011 11:11 AM
       impossible to do this in a large group setting without paper copies. They/we
       should be able to be responsbile enough to realize when they don't need paper
       copies.
 235   I need more information to have an opinion. On the one hand, that would be great.          Mar 4, 2011 12:00 PM
       On the other, we need more options for alternatives. My office has to have hard
       copy backup of many things, especially since student and departments won't use
       the computer options.
 236   We have central printers in our office (not desk printers). MANY times I go to the          Mar 4, 2011 1:09 PM
       printer and find blank sheets - try agian until it prints. This needs to be fixed before
       a surcharge is assessed for using too much paper.
 237   Some office have to provide paper documantaion and I think it would be unfair to            Mar 4, 2011 1:19 PM
       charge them.
 238   This is a stupid idea. We'll waste more paper and time. People will forget to pick         Mar 14, 2011 9:39 AM
       up what they print, or they'll be running back and forth trying to get their copies.




41. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
  1    See above comments! I can't knowingly agree with surtax and surcharges when                Feb 21, 2011 12:47 PM
       schools and facilities are wasting so much funding on common sense things!
       Every one at UofL should have to reduce their travel to one professional
       development conference per year. It is just wrong of the schools to expect some
       depts to share rooms while faculty and administrators get individual rooms
       etc....One conference per year unless you want to pay out of pocket. The state of
       Ohio has gone with this policy and saved a ton of public funding. Less travel and
       more work! How much production is lost from employees supposely working from
       home. Let's be honest is a full day really put in!
  2    and it should not be applied to research service centers                                   Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
  3    You can fund construction; you can fund planting flowers; you can fund athletics;          Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
       you can fund outrageous severance packages for select staff and faculty - figure
       out creative ways to fund staff salaries short of penalizing units that are already
       strapped!!




                                                      112 of 168
41. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
  4    I don't know enought about this to feel that I can adequately comment in good         Feb 21, 2011 1:00 PM
       faith. I would need more of an illustration of what the actual effect would be
       before I would feel comfortable making a comment regarding an issue of this sort.
  5    Targeting certain groups may be counter productive.                                   Feb 21, 2011 1:02 PM
  6    I don't have enough information on this to respond.                                   Feb 21, 2011 1:04 PM
  7    The fee should not be passed on to staff...for their areas services                   Feb 21, 2011 1:08 PM
  8    Departments who provide billable services, rob "Peter to pay Paul".                   Feb 21, 2011 1:18 PM
  9    If you raise the surcharge, units that are barely making operating money, will more   Feb 21, 2011 1:28 PM
       than likely has to fold, or pass those charges on to others.
 10    I will defer to the experts on this one                                               Feb 21, 2011 1:36 PM
 11    That's crazy too. Those are costs associated with doing business. As a                Feb 21, 2011 1:37 PM
       university, these functions are within the scope of the business services. That
       would be like a hospital putting a surtax on having a chaplain come to the patient
       room. Stop the insanity.
 12    I don't know enough about this to comment.                                            Feb 21, 2011 1:46 PM
 13    A decrease in program budgets for auxiliaries would necessarily increase the          Feb 21, 2011 1:47 PM
       charges for services to departments. Department budgets are already pretty thin.
       This move would cause hardship for both auxiliaries and departments.
 14    Not sure I understand the question                                                    Feb 21, 2011 1:53 PM
 15    With the surcharges for service centers, the departments will end up paying the       Feb 21, 2011 2:19 PM
       cost and the clinical programs cannot afford this.
 16    I do not understand this issue well enough to comment                                 Feb 21, 2011 2:22 PM
 17    Some of these items that are surcharged or proposed to be coud be used or             Feb 21, 2011 2:28 PM
       considered "recruitment" tools (IE frershmen orientation). I would not like to see
       anything that incourages recruitment or enrollment to be developed.
 18    We had sereval budget cuts in the past years, and we managed to operate on            Feb 21, 2011 2:34 PM
       what we have. If you want to put 7.5% surcharge, you basically just shut down our
       dept.
 19    Why? You have no idea what the cost is when we go green. What a waste.                Feb 21, 2011 2:35 PM
 20    its about the only place we can generate revenue off outside entities.                Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
       Unfortunately the costs will trickle down to the students.
 21    N/A                                                                                   Feb 21, 2011 3:02 PM
 22    When you implement these surcharges, the auxiliarry units simply pass those           Feb 21, 2011 3:05 PM
       charges along to other units. It ends up the other units paying for the surcharges.
 23    Depends on how many individuals such a change would affect. If many, don't do         Feb 21, 2011 3:15 PM
       it. If just a few, go ahead.
 24    I would increase surcharges to auxiliaries and service centers but not to program     Feb 21, 2011 3:17 PM
       budgets.
 25    I'm not sure I understand this mechanism. Does this mean our department is            Feb 21, 2011 3:21 PM
       currently being charged for items like Freshman Orientation and iTech Xpress?
       Why should our department be pre-charged for iTech Xpress if we don't purchase
       anything from them? This needs more explanation.
 26    By decreasing budgets as a whole, then services such as Food Services will go         Feb 21, 2011 3:35 PM
       up even more to make up the difference. As it is some programs can barely afford
       service centers on campus.
 27    Not enough information provided to agree or disagree with the statement.              Feb 21, 2011 3:38 PM




                                                    113 of 168
41. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 28    Budgets are already very restricted. Don't need more restrictions.                     Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
 29    Again, don't tax students without giving them an opt-out option.                       Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
 30    It seems like an easy fix the University is looking for while suggesting increasing    Feb 21, 2011 3:50 PM
       surcharges may not be the resolve. It may be that more time evaluating each
       department and increasing charges for those who go beyond a budgeted amount
       (negotiated annually) would work.
 31    If the program provides a needed service to the University, there should be no         Feb 21, 2011 3:59 PM
       surcharge. Continuing to tax these units decreases the services the unit can
       provide. If the service is not vital to the University, discontinue the service.
       Surcharges to vending, IT Store and other such programs should be increased. If
       Food Service generates a surplus, funds should be returned to the general fund.
       Vending revenue should all be returned to the general fund.
 32    A true reduction of administrative bloat would accomplish so much more, and            Feb 21, 2011 4:02 PM
       scaling salaries to actual contributions and responsibilities and not to pie-in-the-
       sky rationalizations about how some people have fantasy skills that deserve
       ridiculous compensation packages.
 33    Our programs charge just enough to cover each program. We are not out to               Feb 21, 2011 4:07 PM
       make a profit, and do not want to cause a hardship on our students. Increasing
       the surcharge would mean that we would have to increase our charges to our
       students in order to come within budget.
 34    Each fee/surcharge is a problem when employers/scholarships are paying tuition.        Feb 21, 2011 4:16 PM
       Most state tuition only.
 35    Depends on the Program.                                                                Feb 21, 2011 4:31 PM
 36    It seems silly to take from programs that are designed to service our populations.     Feb 21, 2011 4:39 PM
       Auxiliaries are a different matter as they are designed to also show profit.
 37    I think these costs could be recovered by the departments by raising costs to the      Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
       people using the programs...
 38    This is make it IMPOSSIBLE to provide these programs. The more revenue                 Feb 21, 2011 4:41 PM
       brought in means more for the programs to loose to the service charge.
 39    I wasn't aware of this 7.5% surcharge, but it certainly explains why we have to use    Feb 21, 2011 4:47 PM
       IT Xpress instead of an outside vendor who could SAVE US MONEY. Explains
       everything, doesn't it?
 40    I do not know enough about this. It would depend on how much service charges           Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
       increase. Would students employees, and patients suffer from increases and stop
       using the services that they need? Perhaps a survey of services could be done on
       blackboard.
 41    The explanation to this surcharge is inadequate to answer the question. I have no      Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
       idea who actually pays this surcharge/
 42    Why not impose a "surcharge" on administrators or come up with a way to reduce         Feb 21, 2011 5:43 PM
       the administrative staff to save money? We have an amazing number of
       administrators in this university and some of them do almost nothing yet earn very
       high salaries.
 43    These will be passed along to the users of services. Keep in mind that these units     Feb 21, 2011 5:54 PM
       also have to cover additional administrative increases, again these will be passed
       along to users of the services. Athletics should be included if they are not
       already.
 44    Who receives the money from this 7.5% surcharge? Why wasn't this information           Feb 21, 2011 5:57 PM
       included in the question?




                                                     114 of 168
41. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 45    We are taxed enough already. Taxing program budgets further simply reduces the         Feb 21, 2011 6:09 PM
       incentive to run special programs that generate funds and visibility to the
       University. Why not create market-based incentives to generate more revenue
       instead of thinking about things in such a punitive, money-grab fashion. These
       ideas are really lacking and will not promote growth of the university.
 46    The above is a great idea...when the economy improves. UofL students, for              Feb 21, 2011 6:18 PM
       example, will already be experiencing a tuition increase, to say nothing of
       increase costs for everything. Let's not add this burden to them.
 47    I don't know what this means or how it might affect me.                                Feb 21, 2011 6:58 PM
 48    Question 32 is not well explained.                                                     Feb 21, 2011 9:21 PM
 49    I fear that some service centers will be eliminated. Is there a different way to       Feb 21, 2011 9:39 PM
       appropach this?
 50    Absolutely not! This creates an incentive to stop doing things. The tax is already     Feb 22, 2011 12:00 AM
       too high.
 51    This surcharge is forcing these services to be non-competitive because it              Feb 22, 2011 12:18 AM
       increases overhead. It may result in the reduction of on-campus services
       provided to faculty, staff and students.
 52    Eliminate the $50 athletic fee and reconfigure this fee toward the general fund.       Feb 22, 2011 8:44 AM
       Quit treating the athletic programs as a seperate bussiness and include athletic
       profits in the general fund. Fee faculty, staff and students attend attend athletics
       versus attend classes or recieve the benefits you are proposing to cut.
 53    grants are assessed heavily and this surcharge increases the percentage of a           Feb 22, 2011 9:16 AM
       grant transferred from creative activity to administrative overhead when needed
       services are purchased from the grant account
 54    Not sure what the 7.5% surcharge is used for.                                          Feb 22, 2011 9:21 AM
 55    Our budgets are tight too.                                                             Feb 22, 2011 9:45 AM
 56    I didn't really understand this -- is this to recapture some cost associated with      Feb 22, 2011 9:47 AM
       these programs? And then this cost would presumably be passed on to the
       people who use the service? I'd need more information to form an opinion.
 57    I don't understand what this means. I think it needs to be explained more clearly.     Feb 22, 2011 9:48 AM
 58    I don't have a problem with surcharges on services provided by outside vendors.        Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
       The University is providing them with a 'captured audience.' However, surcharges
       on service centers run by the university, specifically for the university should be
       minimal if not eliminated.
 59    n/a                                                                                    Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
 60    Again, I would need more information before forming an opinion.                        Feb 22, 2011 10:13 AM
 61    The USE it or LOOSE it policy to keep the current department budget amount             Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
       causes inefficient spending. Offer incentive for those departments for
       conservation by allowing them to keep the same budget. Audit the use of the
       funds and provide oversight of departments where spending is consistently
       overbudget.
 62    see above comments. They apply here as well.                                           Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
 63    Are you planning to rob Peter to pay Paul?                                             Feb 22, 2011 10:22 AM
 64    I don't understand this particular item and therefore cannot rate the suggestion.      Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM




                                                     115 of 168
41. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 65    Self supporting departments are feeling the budget cuts from departments whose         Feb 22, 2011 10:35 AM
       budgets have been cut that are using their services less as they don't have the
       funds to use those services. Increasing this Surcharge on the Service Center
       units will result in the lost of these services to the university community and
       ultimately cost employee's jobs through RIF's as these departments are
       outsourced.
 66    If this surcharge goes up, they will either reduce services or raise their rates.      Feb 22, 2011 10:36 AM
 67    The charges are already to much! To save money, charges should go down,                Feb 22, 2011 10:36 AM
       departments, catering, services, etc. charge way to much as it is. Departments
       can't afford to pay, for example, IT. Estimates at local printing companies are so
       much lower than the University it's almost sickening!!! The KFC YUM! Center,
       charge an obscene amount for catering, yet the University insists we hold
       Graduation there.
 68    #32) I have no idea what this means, exactly. Clarify and calculate cost-savings.      Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
 69    Would there be a way to change this surcharge to specific services and charge          Feb 22, 2011 10:57 AM
       them. I have no clue if that is even reasonable. Probably not when I look at the
       examples given.
 70    If it's possible to save money by printing less, then we should continue to look for   Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
       other options. I propose that instead of surcharges on service centers that we
       impose a surcharge on "all" meals paid for with University funds. We eat too much
       on the University's nickel, and if you looked at how much money was spent on
       food you would be amazed at how much money it adds up to be. This of course
       includes money spent on food at the University Club.
 71    My department's operating budget has not increased since 1993. You want to             Feb 22, 2011 11:07 AM
       decrease that??? and add a surcharge for photocopies & paper???
 72    I do not believe there should be a surcharge at all.                                   Feb 22, 2011 11:19 AM
 73    Unsure what this question means                                                        Feb 22, 2011 11:23 AM
 74    Some depts are already strapped the way they are.                                      Feb 22, 2011 11:26 AM
 75    taking from one to feed another when the same overall money is utilized.               Feb 22, 2011 11:39 AM
 76    Many of these budgets are already run on shoestrings.                                  Feb 22, 2011 11:40 AM
 77    All of these ideas are about costing employees and or students. You are looking        Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
       to put a financial strain on those who you should be trying to help. Charging
       employees more for anything, or decreasing their benifits is NOT the sollution.
       You'll only increase the low moral among employees, mostly the classified and
       backbone of this institution. The professors have gotten raises every year. They
       staff have gotten very little and charged more.
 78    Not knowing how their budgets work, I'm not sure how that would affect student         Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
       services if they cannot survive another cut.
 79    The University has asked everyone to cut back where they can and I believe for         Feb 22, 2011 11:54 AM
       most departments this has happened for the last 5+ years. Each budget year we
       are cutting back. To add surcharges after everyone has already cut back doesn't
       seem appropriate to those trying to help "the cause". If someone abuses it, then
       go for it! Why not just say for this fiscal year you are cutting each department X
       amount of money and not "hide" it in surcharges and fees?
 80    I don't understand this question. What is this surcharge providing? How is this        Feb 22, 2011 12:09 PM
       different from simply reducing the budgets in question?




                                                     116 of 168
41. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 81    I support a modest, but consistent increase. Consistently increasing the              Feb 22, 2011 12:12 PM
       surcharge by a modest amount every year allows those affected an opportunity to
       adjust. A modest increase might be between .25% and .50% a year. After all, we
       want these programs, auxiliaries, and service centers to be successful and
       survive...right???
 82    Many of the program budgets I work with already are having trouble balancing          Feb 22, 2011 12:13 PM
       their budgets and to raise the cost to students will cause the program to suffer.
       Orientation is a prime example of this problem.
 83    If the services were better I might tend agree but the food services with the         Feb 22, 2011 12:19 PM
       university are abysmal
 84    For athletics, maybe.....but R U SERIOUS??                                            Feb 22, 2011 12:33 PM
 85    I'm unsure of how this is stated. IT sounds like a tax for completing the work as     Feb 22, 2011 12:49 PM
       assigned by the university.
 86    Instead of trying to fund some programs, eliminate those programs where they are      Feb 22, 2011 12:57 PM
       not needed. It is brutal, but necessary.
 87    The surcharge seems to have risen at a faster rate than other expenses &              Feb 22, 2011 1:06 PM
       certainly at a time when sources of revenue for many of the programs has been
       challenged.
 88    I do not feel I am informed enough about this statement to give a helpful             Feb 22, 2011 1:08 PM
       response.
 89    The university should be flexible in where surcharges are applied. Some areas         Feb 22, 2011 2:12 PM
       are necessary for the operation of the university whereas others are not. Those
       that are not can have higher surcharges applied.
 90    NONE                                                                                  Feb 22, 2011 2:14 PM
 91    Program budgets shouldn't be increased, but auxiliaries to the University should.     Feb 22, 2011 2:19 PM
       Food Service Contract and Vending Machine Operations.
 92    Then we have to pass that increase on to the student.                                 Feb 22, 2011 4:05 PM
 93    This recommendation is ludicrous in every regard - a very poor business model.        Feb 22, 2011 5:22 PM
       The surcharge to program budgets should not be increased - nor should service
       charges to employees or students be increased! Both options are unacceptable.
 94    I do not understand how you can lump Orientation - a student service/requirement      Feb 22, 2011 5:32 PM
       - in with vending machine services and food services? an increase for orientation
       would create a necessary increase for students to attend orientation. It is already
       a hardship for many students.
 95    no comment                                                                            Feb 23, 2011 9:36 AM
 96    I have no idea what this means.                                                       Feb 23, 2011 10:12 AM
 97    Eventually, some students won't even be able to afford to attend the University, or   Feb 23, 2011 11:00 AM
       will have monumental school loans to repay, and jobs that don't pay well enough
       to make it affordable.
 98    It would be better to not have a flat rate, but rather adjust it according to two     Feb 23, 2011 11:45 AM
       factors: 1) The size of the program's budget, and 2) whether a particular program
       is considered a necessity.
 99    Our programs our quickly diminishing as it is. Don't hurt their budgets more.         Feb 23, 2011 12:01 PM




                                                    117 of 168
41. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 100   These are services that improve student/staff/faculty appreciation due to their         Feb 23, 2011 12:43 PM
       value, convenience and/or price competitiveness.

       Let us not forget that these departments also absorb the burden of the
       departmental budget cuts because departments/people spend less because they
       have less money. In my opinion, it's double dipping in an empty bucket.
 101   UNLESS it is for outside vendors. DO NOT stop a department from being self       Feb 23, 2011 12:47 PM
       sufficient by "taxing" them further. Outside vendors need to pay DEARLY to be on
       campus. THEY are not in any financial danger, we are. Duh!
 102   If necessary increasing fees use of those services may be a rational way of             Feb 23, 2011 1:08 PM
       maintaining those services, but there needs to be an evaluation of how badly
       these cost increases might impact their customer base. There are certainly
       alternatives to using University based services if the fees are increased to the pint
       where that service is not competitive.
 103   Do not charge employees and students for services they do not use.                      Feb 23, 2011 2:35 PM
 104   have to see benefits as opposed to costs on this one....can't really say this affects   Feb 23, 2011 2:40 PM
       me
 105   Get a tight handle on these departmental budgets and if we do everything in             Feb 23, 2011 4:14 PM
       house we should be able to control it
 106   Again cost recovery units will have to work harder for this "cost savings" for other    Feb 23, 2011 4:51 PM
       units.
 107   I don't understand enough about the surcharge to comment.                               Feb 23, 2011 6:50 PM
 108   Enough with the taxes already! - How about we find some reasonable ways to cut          Feb 23, 2011 8:04 PM
       spending? - How about outsourcing functions that don't have anything to do with
       education and research? - Like HR, maintenance, payroll, etc? How about
       applying some business concepts that work in 'the real world?'
 109   none                                                                                    Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 110   none                                                                                    Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 111   none                                                                                    Feb 24, 2011 10:16 AM
 112   none                                                                                    Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
 113   none                                                                                    Feb 24, 2011 11:37 AM
 114   I don't know enough about this sort of thing to make a judgment.                        Feb 24, 2011 1:53 PM
 115   We don't have these service centers.                                                    Feb 24, 2011 2:59 PM
 116   Any future surcharges to these services will make them non competitive with             Feb 24, 2011 3:33 PM
       outside vendors.
 117   n/a                                                                                     Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 118   na                                                                                      Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 119   Why does the University tax its own entities??                                          Feb 25, 2011 3:05 PM
 120   If costs go up, students are less likely to use the services outside of what they       Feb 28, 2011 9:54 AM
       have to such as food service.




                                                    118 of 168
41. Comments:

                                                 Response Text
 121   When there are already cut backs and the areas are in a deficit, then adding an       Feb 28, 2011 12:06 PM
       additional surcharge will cause only more of a deficit. Two of these survey
       questions ask about surcharges and it reminds me of the banking industry.
       Surcharges to use your ATM, call the bank and speak to a live person, or to pay
       your bills online. I'm not sure what the reasoning is behind these surcharges, but
       options and alternatives should be considered first in order to reassess or
       evaluate where the programs may need to run more efficiently so that we do not
       need to reduce services to students. These surcharges will be paid by students,
       and many of them do not use the services as they are and/or they shouldn't be
       forced to pay increased charges. Increased surcharges should only be a last
       resort option.
 122   These are complex issues - I don't understand the cost of the services or how it      Feb 28, 2011 3:24 PM
       would impact units.
 123   I don't know enough about this to comment.                                            Feb 28, 2011 3:57 PM
 124   Again, for my office this option would decrease the already limited funds available    Mar 1, 2011 9:26 AM
       for these programs. Both #30 and #32 seem like a hidden tax on grants. If these
       charges increase, is the administration going to increase the portion of F&A that
       goes to RIFs? Highly unlikely, since that would contradict the objective of
       increasing revenue.
 125   Lose the mandatory food service subscription requirement and all mandatory            Mar 1, 2011 12:09 PM
       intercollegiate athletic fees.
 126   This is just a bad way to save money.                                                  Mar 1, 2011 5:46 PM
 127   Do not understand enough about this process to comment.                                Mar 3, 2011 4:50 PM
 128   Do not understand                                                                      Mar 4, 2011 8:45 AM
 129   Hard to answer without a percent increase. A .5 to 1% increase may not affect         Mar 4, 2011 10:02 AM
       may operational budgets but at 2.5% or greater may have a bigger affect.
 130   The vendors and pharm companies have already been restricted in their efforts to      Mar 4, 2011 11:11 AM
       financially support programs in departments. Increase our surcharge and it will be
       extremely detrimental to our programs and the outreach.
 131   Let's limit what we have to pay extra, please. Our vending machines are more          Mar 4, 2011 12:00 PM
       expensive than some hospitals I've been at. Decreasing Orientations budget will
       only hurt the students.




45. Comments:

                                                 Response Text
  1    Would need more information to answer 35 accurately. What benefits? What              Feb 21, 2011 12:33 PM
       increase to wage?
  2    Question 34 is not the best question. You are asking us to compare benefit            Feb 21, 2011 12:43 PM
       packages to other state universities without describing their benefits. Unless
       individuals already are familiar with other universities packages, the responses
       will be made in ignorance and based on existing biases.
  3    Depending on which benefits.                                                          Feb 21, 2011 12:44 PM
  4    Having worked at a university in another state, I have found UofL to have             Feb 21, 2011 12:45 PM
       comparable benefits, but lower salaries for the same work function, and I received
       substantially discounted yearly parking rates at the other universiyt.




                                                    119 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
  5    Not enough information was provided to answer Question 34.                               Feb 21, 2011 12:49 PM
  6    It depends on the trade off. I am having a hard time making ends meet. Costs             Feb 21, 2011 12:52 PM
       continue to rise, and I am living on less.
  7    The benefits help offset the costs associated with that benefit. A 2% or 3% raise        Feb 21, 2011 12:53 PM
       (once taxes and inflation are calculated) will not come close to the savings I
       receive with my benefits or replacement of them. No raise - keep benefits.
  8    I am not for giving up any benefits because it'll be tough to get any of them back       Feb 21, 2011 12:54 PM
       once the budget stabilizes.
  9    I have no idea what other universities in the state give their employees in terms of     Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
       benefits - and would love to see that information. Of the benefits you mentioned,
       there's not a one I'd be happy to see cut. I use TARC 75% of the time and love it.
       Health insurance is such a basic need....if anything, I believe the university should
       be able to find more affordable voluntary life insurance than it currently provides.
       If you wanted to cut a benefit, cut Get Healthy Now. Most people see what a joke
       the program truly is....knowing how to work the system to get the monthly
       incentive without really making any life style changes.
 10    #35 - I think the benefits are great, but when we do not use tuition remission (as       Feb 21, 2011 12:56 PM
       I'm sure a lot of people don't), and i see it as a paid benefit from the University on
       my paycheck, where does this money go if I don't use it? Why can't this be used
       as a salary increase? Since we never see the money anyway unless we take
       classes, which I'm sure a majority of people do not...
 11    Haven't been happy so far with United Heatlh Care(UHC) coverage and process.             Feb 21, 2011 12:57 PM
       Our rates for coverage seem very high and every medical claim requires a call to
       UHC to determine why they didn't process it correctly in the first place. While I'd
       love to have a salary increase, my health insurance coverage and monthly
       payment is more important.
 12    Depends on what is being traded.                                                         Feb 21, 2011 12:58 PM
 13    I don't think any of us really work here for the salary. Many of us have chosen to       Feb 21, 2011 1:00 PM
       work at the University because of the rich benefits...and for some it is the only way
       that we can ensure that our children will have access to a college education
       without going insanely in debt. I would rather the University delay any
       consideration for pay raises until the economy allows for such a discussion to be
       reinstated, rather than have to trade off on our benefits. But another point to
       consider is the vast difference in salaries here at the University. I often wonder
       how we as an institution can, in good conscience, pay certain individuals such a
       low wage, while others make such an insane amount of money. Perhaps less
       focus on trading off our benefits to get higher wages...and more consideration
       being given to ensure that we don't have people working here with million dollar
       contracts...or even making more than 400,000 per year when we have full-time
       employees that aren't even paid enough to support themselves without having to
       worry about eating if they pay the bills. To me, that is a social injustice that the
       University should be more concerned about. In my humble opinion, I think you
       would find people more willing to work here with great benefits and slightly lower
       than benchmark pay, than would would be willing to continue to work here given
       benchmark pay and a lower level of benefits. We can EASILY go anywhere to get
       the benchmark pay. But we stay. I think real consideration needs to be given to
       why that is.
 14    unfortunately, trading off benefits for salary increases probably would end up with      Feb 21, 2011 1:00 PM
       us giving up benefits, getting a raise for a year or two, then get no raises again,
       but never get our benefits back. I would be willing to do without the EAP, and
       would be willing to pay a portion of life insurance.




                                                     120 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                     Response Text
 15    I took this job for the benefits, not the salary.                                        Feb 21, 2011 1:02 PM
 16    I just hate to see any benefits cut, but if done fairly to increase wages I could        Feb 21, 2011 1:02 PM
       accept the plans.
 17    Once I no longer need the student tuition I would prob agree with this as Iam sure       Feb 21, 2011 1:02 PM
       others who do not use it now would agree.
 18    The Benefit that I would be willing to see taken away is the Tuition Remission,          Feb 21, 2011 1:05 PM
       TARC. Or at least the employees that do not use these services could be
       compensated for them
 19    Increase parking fee on HSC (from green to magenta) resulted in a decrease in            Feb 21, 2011 1:07 PM
       pay--no raises allowed. At 13.50 per hour the increase HURT!
 20    once I do not have children in college I would be willing to trade that benefit for      Feb 21, 2011 1:08 PM
       more money
 21    I would need to more about which benefits I would be trading.                            Feb 21, 2011 1:13 PM
 22    For those of us without children in college we should see more money.                    Feb 21, 2011 1:15 PM
 23    No idea how UofL compares to other universities in the state or benchmark.               Feb 21, 2011 1:18 PM
       Benefits is what keeps people here. Probably not a popular idea but I'd be willing
       to take unpaid days such as the city has implemented. I do realize this will be
       difficult for people with families, etc.
 24    There's nothing left to trade with.                                                      Feb 21, 2011 1:24 PM
 25    The process to receive salary upgrades as a result of increasing responsibility is       Feb 21, 2011 1:30 PM
       already too arbitrary given HR's staff ability to limit increases in spite of what the
       supervisor recommends. Thi s has limited my chance to be paid fairly for what I
       do. I am not inclined to sacrifice anything else. At least benefits are across the
       board, not arbitrary!
 26    Would have to see what the offer is. I've been here for almost 7 years and have          Feb 21, 2011 1:32 PM
       received little salary increases. However, I wouldn't trade my benefits. I've
       worked almost my entire life in the public sector and UofL has been the best
       provider of benefits.
 27    The benefit plan here is good... but the same at many companies. The Tuition             Feb 21, 2011 1:36 PM
       Remission allows me to justify the decrease in salary I took to come here and it
       keeps me here because it allows my children to have a better future with an
       education. It allows the educational experience to be must less stressful for the
       student and my families financial situation. The lower wage is worth it when you
       know you are providing something exceptional to your kids... the financial stress is
       hard. The Health Care, Retirement, LTD, Life Insurance and Employee
       Assistance is pretty standard. The only benefit to consider would be the TARC
       benefit. I think that is a nice thing to have ... not a necessity. To say the benefits
       are rich in comparison is a very strong statement. The Tuition Remission is the
       only benefit that makes it different from corporate america. At Humana I had all of
       the benefits here with the exception of reimssion for my kids (but my school was
       covered) and the TARC. I do not know what the savings would be regarding the
       TARC program.
 28    I don't know what other state university benefits plans are, but compared to other       Feb 21, 2011 1:37 PM
       businesses and industries in Louisville, our benefits are EXTREMELY generous.
       Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the generosity, but when I know the cost of the
       other benefits and that we are at the HIGH end of the competitive spectrum... I
       don't believe they need to be that generous when we haven't gotten pay increases
       in years and tuition keeps going up.
 29    I don't know what other universities offer so I can't know if UofL's is "rich."          Feb 21, 2011 1:39 PM




                                                       121 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 30    I appreciate all the benefits the university offers. Thank you                            Feb 21, 2011 1:40 PM
 31    It is not fair to make us give up our benefits to get a raise. It is frustrating to see   Feb 21, 2011 1:46 PM
       what is going on in the media with Pitino and problems with some of the football
       players and the athletic department pays out millions of dollars to the coaches.
       We the staff only ask for a small raise and you threaten to take away our benefits.
       Try placing a fine on athletics for the things they do wrong and then you will have
       the money to give raises each year instead of paying out mega dollars for legal
       fees for an affair. We also fire some people in administrative positions and then
       pay them million of dollars to buy out their contracts. I ask what is fair??? I'm tired
       of working my 40 + hours each week doing hard work and not getting a raise
       AGAIN. Our parking goes up, our insurance goes up, all of our bills go up but our
       pay goes on the same. You want to take, take, take and not give back. Then you
       wonder why we lose some very hard workers to other jobs. The only thing we
       have to look forward to are our benefits. Please don't take them away too. And
       please don't use them against us to keep us from asking for a raise.
 32    Poorly worded question - Would I be willing to trade some benefits for pay raises?        Feb 21, 2011 1:53 PM
       Yes. Do I want to trade benefits for pay raises? No.
 33    I am not sure what other state universities offer. I do know that base pay is higher      Feb 21, 2011 1:55 PM
       at most institutions with similar benefits. I haven't gotten a raise in 3 years why
       should compromise be on the table now. How about using some construction
       money that is all over campus and using that to implement salaries and operating
       budgets.
 34    Particularly TARC--this does not benefit a lot of employees at all. I think               Feb 21, 2011 1:56 PM
       employees can obtain their own life insurance. The other programs are more
       important.
 35    I value my benefits of health insurance, retirement, long term disability and life        Feb 21, 2011 1:58 PM
       insurance; however, I could give up TARC and Employee Assistance.
 36    I am a relatively young professional living in a single-person household; health          Feb 21, 2011 1:59 PM
       benefits are not critical to me because I am in good health, but I truly believe that
       these benefits are one of the primary reasons that make UofL a great place to
       work.
 37    Not familiar with how our benefits compare to other state universities, but I would       Feb 21, 2011 1:59 PM
       be interested in knowing what the facts are.
 38    The benefits are more important ot me.                                                    Feb 21, 2011 2:01 PM
 39    Would depend on what the benefits are. If Tuition Remission definitely.                   Feb 21, 2011 2:13 PM
 40    I don't know what other state universities benefits programs are like but I do like       Feb 21, 2011 2:15 PM
       the benefits I receive here at UofL!
 41    #35 - It is difficult to answer this question since I need to compare the increase in     Feb 21, 2011 2:17 PM
       cost of benefits to an actual salary increase.
 42    There are colleges still out there that pay better, free college, university holidays,    Feb 21, 2011 2:21 PM
       etc. Did you look very far or at many colleges? I know in the Midwest many
       colleges do it, Purdue, Indiana Wesleyan, and even more.
 43    Maybe, but I prefer to keep most of the benefits, rather than salary increase.            Feb 21, 2011 2:22 PM
 44    Would prefer all benefit programs remain as they now are. Everytime these                 Feb 21, 2011 2:22 PM
       expenses (parking, insurance) go up it is a decrease in an employee's pay. So by
       increasing one and decreasing the other your at netzero, unless you decrease
       benefits so much the salary increases actually result in net-deficit for the
       employee.




                                                     122 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 45    I am not aware of other Universities benefits.                                           Feb 21, 2011 2:24 PM
       It concerns me to reduce benefits. However, some things would be nice.
       Perhaps "giving back" vacation days or sick days for money would be nice.
 46    I feel wages need to be brought up with the cost of living expenses and be more          Feb 21, 2011 2:26 PM
       compatible with market adjustment.
 47    Seeing as how the university has been unable to provide raises in the past 4             Feb 21, 2011 2:28 PM
       years it is doubtful that any amount reduced in benefits could be made up in
       salary increases. Most raises for staff (when they did occur) ranged from 2-3%.
 48    I would be willing to reduce some benefits if I had a substantial pay increase. 2-       Feb 21, 2011 2:33 PM
       3% would not be enough.
 49    the tuition part should be cut. there should be a cap on amount of the tuition           Feb 21, 2011 2:34 PM
       reimbursement. I know a lot of University only reimburse 50% of the amount of
       tuition for the dependent children, 75% to the employee on the graduate program,
       not an undergraduate program. Why does the University hire a person without an
       undergraduate degree???
 50    We have been paid behind the private industry for years. I can see someone               Feb 21, 2011 2:35 PM
       doing something this stupid.
 51    I'd rather keep status quo.                                                              Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
 52    I imagine we are not getting appropriate ROI from EAP and TARC. No one I                 Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
       know has reviewed these benefits prior to coming to UofL (such that they factored
       into a decision), and I doubt they would realize they were gone.
 53    I am a long-time employee and fear losing the dependent tuition remission                Feb 21, 2011 2:43 PM
       benefits. Although I have saved some money for my childrens' education, it was
       nowhere near enough. One child has one year left at U of L, and the other is
       finishing his freshman year. Having put myself through college on student loans,
       being able to get my children through without loans meant a great deal to me. The
       benefits package at U of L (retirement, health insurance, tarc, tuition remission) is
       just as important to me as salary.
 54    Yes, but only to an extent. Several years of no wage increases have really hurt          Feb 21, 2011 2:44 PM
       my financial position.
 55    People are willing to be paid less to work at this institution because of the Benefits   Feb 21, 2011 2:45 PM
       Program. I would not want the program adjusted to increase wages.
 56    This University has been known to have excellent beneifts. When people brag              Feb 21, 2011 2:53 PM
       about the benefits they always add something like "salaries aren't great but the
       benefts keep us happy or keep us here." Salaries are so far behind they still will
       not be great even if we do give up on the excellent benefits. Eliminating benefits
       (such as flexible spending) will be same as a pay cut because the minimal
       percentage raises will not make that much of a difference. Eliminating benefits
       will make it much easier for employees to move on to other jobs and I really don't
       think that is what is trying to be accomplished.
 57    Depends which benefits. Also, I don't make that much anyway.                             Feb 21, 2011 3:07 PM
 58    Employee Assistance and TARC would be what I'd trade!!                                   Feb 21, 2011 3:07 PM
 59    I have been at UofL for over five years and have only had one raise. I don't feel        Feb 21, 2011 3:08 PM
       like I should give up some of my benefits as well.
 60    Depending on which benefits. We already pay a huge amt for health insurance.             Feb 21, 2011 3:12 PM
       When I first began, it was paid in total for all employees.
 61    I think keeping benefits are more valuable than increasing wages.                        Feb 21, 2011 3:12 PM
 62    I doubt that the salary increase would be great enough to offset the value of these      Feb 21, 2011 3:14 PM
       benefits in nontaxable dollars.




                                                     123 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 63    Again, enough corporate entities are cutting benefit programs. UofL does NOT           Feb 21, 2011 3:15 PM
       have to be one of those heartless boobs.
 64    It would be an interesting experiment to give the employee the ability to choose       Feb 21, 2011 3:17 PM
       totally 'a la carte' all benefits as they weigh against their pay.
 65    Yes, I would sacrifice some benefits for wage increases. TARC, Employee                Feb 21, 2011 3:17 PM
       Assistance could go and others might be lessened.
 66    Actually I feel that the insurance for retirees should be looked at. The amount        Feb 21, 2011 3:17 PM
       currently being paid seems low to me.
 67    I think it's important to look at what the trade offs would be. I'd be happy to give   Feb 21, 2011 3:21 PM
       up TARC or Employee Assistance to increase wages...but I wouldn't be happy
       giving up funding for Health Insurance or Tuition Remission.
 68    Depends on how much of an increase?                                                    Feb 21, 2011 3:28 PM
 69    I do not know what other state universities offer in benefits, and therefore, cannot   Feb 21, 2011 3:38 PM
       agree or disagree with these statements. I do think the complete benefit package
       offered at present is very generous. There are opportunities available to improve
       a person's complete self (mind, body and soul).
 70    I realize that having better benefits is a wage trade-off and I am comfortable with    Feb 21, 2011 3:40 PM
       that.
 71    If I were able to choose which benefits to forgo, I would strongly agree with          Feb 21, 2011 3:42 PM
       question 35.
 72    No. Reduce the amounts you are paying out to certain people who have left U of         Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
       L. There should be plenty then!
 73    I would have to research other places to compare, besides you know wage                Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
       increases will never offeset any concessions made today.
 74    What increase in wages? It has been over 4 years for this employee                     Feb 21, 2011 3:50 PM
 75    More often than not, when employees agree to a decrease in benefits to increase        Feb 21, 2011 3:57 PM
       in wages, over time the increase in wages does not materialize to expectations,
       yet the th
 76    Benefits are the prime reason for retention of the hourly worker. Anyone can pay       Feb 21, 2011 3:58 PM
       a few cents more on the dollar. Check others for competitive benefits programs.
       This is one area that the HSC is going to have problems with matching the UofL
       HSC staff to be laid off for the new ULP proposal.
 77    Instead of continuing to cut, we need to evaluate programs.Eliminate those             Feb 21, 2011 3:59 PM
       programs that are not producing. Merge units and functions to reduce costs.
       Reduce the duplication of services.
 78    For instance, I would agree if I could exempt myself from using tuition remission,     Feb 21, 2011 4:01 PM
       employee assistance and Tarc to increase my salary, that would be nice. The
       other items are too important to trade off.




                                                     124 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 79    Since the wage increases for high salary people are likely to be far greater than        Feb 21, 2011 4:02 PM
       the benefits sacrificed by the low wage employees, it could be very cruel to give
       salary increases to the best paid UofL employees at the cost to low paid workers.
       Salary discrepancy is terrible on this campus and this could exacerbate the
       problem if handled less than thoughtfully.

       Regarding Q34, since all Kentucky Universities and Technical Schools participate
       in state retirement plans, except for UofL and UK, it is laughable to even suggest
       that UofL benefits are rich compared to other Universities. No benefit at UofL is
       remotely as generous as the state pension offered at other schools. NOT EVEN
       CLOSE. Of course, they get most of the other benefits offered at UofL in addition
       to their pensions!
 80    Any potential employee I have interviewed states they desire good benefits over          Feb 21, 2011 4:16 PM
       higher salary.
 81    But some of these are not simply "benefits" to the individual, but to the community      Feb 21, 2011 4:22 PM
       (like TARC free-rides). Be very careful of unintended long-term consequences of
       making a decision in area A that has bad results in domain B.
 82    I find it EXTREAMLY hard to understand the Budget Defficet as we read daily the          Feb 21, 2011 4:23 PM
       University SPENDS SPENDS SPENDS on NEW bldgs !!!!!! PLEASES PAY
       YOUR WORKERS APPROPIATLY BEFORE YOU MAKE DECISIONS TO
       EXPAND ! thank you !
 83    I don't know what other universities pay?                                                Feb 21, 2011 4:23 PM
 84    Note to #35 - as long as health insurance, retirement and TARC are not affected.         Feb 21, 2011 4:25 PM
 85    Many employers pay part of family health insurance. How about that? You                  Feb 21, 2011 4:31 PM
       covered "sponsored adults" to help in faculty recruiting. How about targeting
       potential employees with traditional families?
 86    These benefits are some of what makes UofL a good place to work.                         Feb 21, 2011 4:39 PM
 87    I feel that I have really given the University my all. I've worked here for over 23      Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
       years. I see new staff coming in making almost the same amount as me, with no
       experience. I have a friend in another office that has been promoted 3 times in 5
       years, whereas, it my office, because of the size of the office, it is impossible to
       get promoted. This friend is now making more than me, has only 10 years at the
       University and has no degree..compared to me...23 plus years, Bachelors degree
       and in the same office for the majority of my time here. It's very frustrating and
       taking away benefits is not going to make people happy. We've worked hard for
       those benefits..because that's all many of us have....
 88    I don't know what other state universities offer in the way of benefits, but if you      Feb 21, 2011 4:47 PM
       want to be the best (and that's the story you're all telling publicly), you have to be
       the best at EVERYTHING - that includes benefits AND wages.
 89    Depends on whether I get a choice whether to choose benefits or increased                Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
       wages..
 90    As long as I have a personal choice as to which benefits I am giving up. I would         Feb 21, 2011 4:52 PM
       readily give up TARC, whereas someone else may depend upon TARC to get to
       work.
 91    Tuitiion for children and tuition remission for employees are great benefits.            Feb 21, 2011 5:20 PM
 92    It would depend on the benefits being traded.                                            Feb 21, 2011 5:29 PM
 93    We don't know exdactly what the other University's benefits consist of, so it is         Feb 21, 2011 5:39 PM
       impossible to compare. I have heard that some Un. employees at other schools
       get state benefits which are better than UL.




                                                     125 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 94    Health Care is a huge issue in this country. Fundamental changes need to be            Feb 21, 2011 5:44 PM
       made and I don't want to be responsible for the cost increases when I have never
       been to the hospital for any health issue in my life. I want to be rewarded for my
       healthy lifestyle and low-maintenance health care needs.
 95    This has a strong potential to adversley impact the lower paid employees and           Feb 21, 2011 5:54 PM
       should be approached very carefully. Need to better communicate total
       compensation so that the benefits received can be better appreciated.
 96    Not 34.                                                                                Feb 21, 2011 5:55 PM
 97    None.                                                                                  Feb 21, 2011 5:57 PM
 98    Other universities have pensions, we do not. Many state systems have a defined         Feb 21, 2011 6:09 PM
       pension program so relative to that, I don't think we are better off here. As for
       trading off benefits to increase wages, that is a question that really can't be
       answered without more information. If you are talking about a minimal raise, of
       course this is a trade off I would not take. Benefits matter a lot to people and one
       of the reasons we have been able to attract great talent is the benefits more than
       the salaries. Keep benefits in tact and keep raises to a smaller level if necessary
       to keep benefits. Your lower paid staff and faculty really rely on the benefits --
       reduction in these is quite harmful to many folks.
 99    Only if those trade-off areas were for Tuition Remission, Employee Assistance,         Feb 21, 2011 6:18 PM
       and TARC. I'm sure there are many of us who do not need or use any of these 3.
 100   There should never ever be a suggestion of trading benefits for wages...               Feb 21, 2011 6:29 PM
       You can count both as total compensation but they should be mutually exclusive!
 101   No reasonable person could answer anything but "strongly agree" to 35. Which           Feb 21, 2011 6:58 PM
       benefits are you talking about, and how much of an increase in wages could they
       be traded for?
 102   I do not have the information that would tell me how our benefits related to those     Feb 21, 2011 9:21 PM
       of other state institutions. But, if they are better, then I believe we should be
       proud of this.
 103   No cuts to current benefits.                                                           Feb 21, 2011 9:30 PM
 104   You need to show comparisons with the other state universities if you want us to       Feb 21, 2011 9:39 PM
       believe this. And how can you compare our retirement benefits when some state
       universities (EKU) are part of the state retirement system; I would have loved to
       be in that. I could have retired years ago.
 105   No because it always seems the people in the higher up jobs always end up with         Feb 21, 2011 11:17 PM
       the money!!!!!
 106   The University seems to be able to find money for all these construction projects      Feb 21, 2011 11:53 PM
       in progress around campus, yet when it comes to employees, we are asked to
       take a benefit cut to get a pay raise!!
 107   Benefits are very important. We are not going to have big raises and if benefits       Feb 22, 2011 12:00 AM
       are slashed, people will leave and it will be hard to attract talent.
 108   Question 35 cannot be answered without known details. However, employees               Feb 22, 2011 12:46 AM
       who do not make use of tuition remissions for themselves of their children should
       be able to have those benefits traded off to increase wages.
 109   I don't know about other states. (UofL’s benefits program is rich compared to other    Feb 22, 2011 7:12 AM
       state universities)
       It would depend what benefits you are talking about.




                                                    126 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 110   There should be benefits options. Many benefits do not apply to employees                Feb 22, 2011 7:26 AM
       equally, for example dependent tuition remission. Sort of like a choose the
       benefits that suit your needs and then based on number of benefits, provide
       compensation for benefits not utilized.
 111   I have no idea what other university's benefit programs include. How am I                Feb 22, 2011 8:04 AM
       supposed to make a comparison?
 112   I'm very happy and have no complaints with our benefits. I can't say whether or          Feb 22, 2011 8:41 AM
       not I would be willing to trade off some benefits to increase wages without knows
       the specific recommendations.
 113   The university hasn't offered raises in 3 years and now you are considering cutting      Feb 22, 2011 8:44 AM
       benefits?
 114   Salaries at UofL are low compared to other universities and business, but the            Feb 22, 2011 8:50 AM
       benefits off-set some of this.
 115   The wonderful benefits package is a main-stay at U of L. Many people work here           Feb 22, 2011 8:53 AM
       for years and years to reap the benefits of these. Tinkering with them too much
       takes away from the lure U of L offers.
 116   If employee benefits are reduced, the Leadership Team needs to make the                  Feb 22, 2011 9:23 AM
       commitment to raise salaries closer to market level within the next 2-3 years.
       And, they need to follow through on that commitment. We've heard for years that
       our salaries are going to be brought to market levels. We have yet to see that
       become a reality. While the economy has been a factor in impeding this initiative,
       there are other commitments that seem to take precedence.
 117   Really, no. I need these benefits AND a raise. I make less than $13.50 an hour           Feb 22, 2011 9:36 AM
       and I can barely afford to make ends meet. The benefits and tuition are the only
       thing that mades working here affordable.
 118   #35 agree depending on which benefits                                                    Feb 22, 2011 9:36 AM
 119   They need to increase wages And keep the same benefits. Its been years and still         Feb 22, 2011 9:44 AM
       not seen a increase in wages.
 120   I do not know how we compare to other universities. However, one of the reasons          Feb 22, 2011 9:45 AM
       people choose to work at UofL is because of the benefits. While the salary may
       be lower than in the private sector, the benefit package helps to bridge the gap
       and make the university an attractive place to work.
 121   with respect to #34, I think we are about the same as other state u's, nationwide.       Feb 22, 2011 9:47 AM
       Not worse, not better.
 122   I would definitely trade in the Employee Assistance for a higher wage. I used their      Feb 22, 2011 9:48 AM
       services in the past and I was very disappointed.
 123   35: No horse trading please...                                                           Feb 22, 2011 9:49 AM
 124   I use many of the employee benefits, and they would cost more to me to obtain            Feb 22, 2011 9:50 AM
       individually.
 125   Willing to trade off tuition remission for an increase in wages                          Feb 22, 2011 9:50 AM
 126   I would be willing to compromise tuition remission for a larger salary.                  Feb 22, 2011 9:54 AM
 127   #34. I have no idea what the benefits are available at other universities. The           Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
       benefits program at UofL is very good. (At least at the moment. But after taking
       this survey, it appears it's about to become mediocre.) I have had very similar
       benefits in the private sector. Both at a large international corporation, and a small
       family owned business of only 12 employees, both with better pay for comparable
       work.
 128   n/a                                                                                      Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM




                                                     127 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 129   If when you did give increases to wages it was fair; then people would not feel       Feb 22, 2011 9:58 AM
       they needed the increase as much as we do now.
 130   Would need more specifics about the trade-off. I doubt the wage increase would        Feb 22, 2011 10:04 AM
       be as valuable when broken down individually.
 131   If I do not use a benefit for some reason then I should be able to trade              Feb 22, 2011 10:07 AM
 132   Good benefits - specifically health insurance, retirement and tuition remission       Feb 22, 2011 10:11 AM
       are more important than high wages.
 133   Definitely would not trade off UofL retirement matching funds.                        Feb 22, 2011 10:11 AM
 134   I depend on the benefits of health insurance, retirement, long term disability and    Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
       life insurance. I would hate to loose TARC access since I know it provides a
       needed service to the entire community. But the Employee Assistance program
       and Tuition Remission should only be offered on a request basis not a standard.
 135   No. I'd rather see you tackle the harder things that aren't employee benefits or      Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
       salaries. That's easy. Get rid of some of the wasteful travel, coaches salaries
       and perks, new buildings that aren't crucual, disaster recovery costs.

       Consider more telecommuting. With some creative thought in this direction,
       maybe we don't need all the buildings we now require.
 136   While we are all facing tough budget issues, the University of Louisville is still    Feb 22, 2011 10:18 AM
       falling below market in many areas of employee pay and benefits. To stay
       competitive, the University needs to figure out ways to make sure that they
       compensate their best resource - the human capital that keeps the University
       running.
 137   I have not compared UofL's benefits to other state universities.                      Feb 22, 2011 10:19 AM
 138   which do you want to give up and are you SURE we will actually get anything in        Feb 22, 2011 10:22 AM
       return?
 139   Health insurance premium is much higher here that the previous State University       Feb 22, 2011 10:22 AM
       where I was employed. Retirement and tuition benefits are similar. Increased
       wages won't translate to saving for college. Benefits should not be touched in any
       way.
 140   Dosn't matter what you take we still suffer from paying more out of our pockets.      Feb 22, 2011 10:23 AM
 141   I would like input on which ones, but not sure you are wanting that information       Feb 22, 2011 10:23 AM
       here since you are not asking, so when ready for that, I just wanted to say I would
       like input.
 142   Changes to benefits should not effect current employees! They should apply to         Feb 22, 2011 10:24 AM
       new hires!
 143   That's not a fair question because if we then have to start paying for increased      Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM
       benefit costs, we have actually lost money out of our pockets. Find a way to do
       both. If money can be found to build new arena's and entice better athletes and
       researchers to come here, it can be found to encourage the employees to stay
       here!
 144   Wages are an unsure thing. You can not guarantee me that my wages will raise          Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM
       every year. If you take away my benefits there will be nothing left for me here.
 145   Benefits are what has keap alot of us here with over 10 years service.                Feb 22, 2011 10:35 AM
 146   Not sure.                                                                             Feb 22, 2011 10:36 AM
 147   TARC would be the only benefit to cut if there was to be trade off for increased      Feb 22, 2011 10:36 AM
       wages.




                                                     128 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                    Response Text
 148   I would hate to lose any benefits at this point in my life. Salary is not as critical as   Feb 22, 2011 10:41 AM
       benefits since I am close to retirement.
 149   WE should not have to "trade" on thing for another, when we used to have both. I           Feb 22, 2011 10:43 AM
       understand the tough economy, but cutting benefits after not receiving a cost of
       living raise in the last 5 years in not good for the financial well being of low paid
       staff employees who earn less than $30,000.00 and who are struggling to begin
       with.
 150   Communication of the value of benefits to every employee is key for an employee            Feb 22, 2011 10:46 AM
       to recognize their total compensation package, not just wages.
 151   Question 34. I have no idea.                                                               Feb 22, 2011 10:46 AM
       Question 35. I would obviously only be willing to do this if it would result in a long
       term recognizable net gain for me.
 152   No I am not willing to trade off some of my benifits to increase my salary, that           Feb 22, 2011 10:47 AM
       should not be an options.
       There are other things that can be cut parts of tuition remission,merit raises if not
       across the board, etc.
       For what a 2% raise, a one time raise, the low paid employee will be loosing more
       in the long run.
 153   One of the benefits to working at the University IS the rich benefits package.             Feb 22, 2011 10:51 AM
       While like most people I would like my wages to go up, I cannot see them going
       up so tremendously that it would offset me paying for some of these benefits out
       of pocket.
 154   #35) Ultimately, I think these benefits are what makes U of L a competitive                Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
       employer.
 155   35. I would be willing to trade off some of my benefits to increase wages - only if I      Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
       actually see a tangible increase in my salary.
 156   However, I think you need to be careful because if the perceived value of the              Feb 22, 2011 10:57 AM
       specific benefit doesn't match the increase in wages, you might run into issues.
       Staff already complain significantly to me that they are not really getting raises
       when the cost of insurance or parking go up. These are items that are perceived
       as necessary so it may need to be directed toward more optional benefits such as
       Tarc or tuition remission. Although I have gotten several nurses because of the
       tuition remission.
 157   I would be willing to consider this, if there is an opportunity for employees to have      Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
       a say in what benefits would be eliminated. I would not want administration to
       decide on its own without input from employees what benefits should be
       eliminated.
 158   Let's face it if we were wanted to get rich we wouldn't be working at a University.        Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
       And it's not fair to ask me to comment on other University's when I have no idea
       what their bennefits options are.
 159   I don't know what other state universities' benefits packages are like.                    Feb 22, 2011 11:07 AM
       I'm used to being poorly paid, but I expect to receive the benefits that I've been
       promised.
 160   If we want to continue to attract top notch young leaders we need to keep our              Feb 22, 2011 11:08 AM
       benefits. I took this position because I love what I do, but I also love working for a
       place that values its people. I see many opportunities for increasing my wages
       based on merit.
 161   My willingness to trade benefits for increased wages would depend on which                 Feb 22, 2011 11:08 AM
       benefits would be affected.




                                                      129 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 162   Low salaries; new benefit program would not rich compared to other states or            Feb 22, 2011 11:12 AM
       universities either if the 1800 flat rate would be used for tuition, health care,
       retirement and additional surcharges being imposed employee would need approx
       $2500 to make ends meet. Change is inevitable focus should be trying to save
       dollars in tuition remission area.
 163   I feel that one of the reasons the University has been able to attract high caliber     Feb 22, 2011 11:12 AM
       employees is the robust benefits program. I understood coming on board that I
       would be paid a smaller salary than for profit organizations, but I felt the benefits
       package made up the difference.
 164   Only if I could choose the options to opt out off in order to increase my wages. I      Feb 22, 2011 11:19 AM
       could opt out of tuition remission & employee assistance as I do not use them, but
       not the other benefits which are very important to me.
 165   I am paying for health insurance for my children and spouse, plus dental and            Feb 22, 2011 11:22 AM
       optical for me and my children. My monthly expenses exceed $600 on a $50K
       salary. It is a significant burden.
 166   I believe employees will only agree to trade off those benefits not being utilized,     Feb 22, 2011 11:22 AM
       subsequently, increasing the total cost of the benefit package.
 167   I have no idea what Benefits other State Universities offer but I know that State       Feb 22, 2011 11:33 AM
       Employees receive a 5% salary increase annually.
 168   I would be willing to sell back sick and/or vacation hours                              Feb 22, 2011 11:39 AM
 169   I would disagree at this point regarding wages vs benefits. I would need to             Feb 22, 2011 11:40 AM
       experience major improvement in pay to obtain and maintain health insurance,
       tuition assistance, retirement, etc.
 170   I don't ride the TARC, but I very much appreciate the great Health Insurance and        Feb 22, 2011 11:43 AM
       tuition remission.
 171   It would depend on what was being asked to give up. All of these benefits are           Feb 22, 2011 11:44 AM
       incredibly helpful.
 172   The university benefits are what keep many of us here. If you are going to              Feb 22, 2011 11:48 AM
       increase wages, it had better be a true increase. Most years our raise is eaten up
       by increases in insurance, parking, etc.
 173   I wouldn't agree to any trade off until it was assured what would be traded and to      Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
       what extent. And, until faculty and Unclassified staff suffer the same lot, or take a
       bigger "hit", I wouldn't be agreeable to anything.
 174   Wages will never equal to the benefits we have. You will not be able to promise         Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
       that wages will go up every year yet I know we will have the benefits we have
       each year.
 175   Taking away our benefits and giving us more money doesn't always balance. In            Feb 22, 2011 11:54 AM
       the long run it may cost us more to pay for the benefits taken away. Take an
       example of parking and health care. For many years we would get a 2% raise. At
       the same time there would be an increase in parking or our medical insurance.
       So actually we were either making the same or less depending on how much it
       went up. I appreciated our medical insurance staying the same this past year
       even though there weren't raises in salary. To me it offset getting a raise. The
       same with joining "Get Healthy". The benefit went up to $40 a month. To me that
       was like getting a $20 raise each month. People are not so stupid as to not see
       when things go up. The bottom line is what you bring home. Don't give a raise in
       one hand and take it away in another. In my opinion it's better not to give
       anything at all.




                                                     130 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 176   In regards to question "I would be willing to trade off some of my benefits to         Feb 22, 2011 12:05 PM
       increase wages", one exception: no change to retirment plans (403b) or
       healthcare plans
 177   That would depend on the benefits to be traded.                                        Feb 22, 2011 12:07 PM
 178   I'm unaware of the benefits other state universities provide their employees,          Feb 22, 2011 12:12 PM
       therefore, I'm unable to rate them against UofL, nor am I aware if they gave raises
       to their employees in the past few years. I can say, however, that decreasing
       employee benefits so wages can be increased will result in staff moral falling
       lower than it already is. We haven't gotten a raise in at least three years, which
       aided in our salaries being 10% under market value. In FY 2012, can't we give
       employees the impression their sacrifices over the past few years weren’t in
       vain??? I certainly do not think employees expect their compensation to be
       immediately brought up to market value; but I do think they’ll expect more effort
       from the university than what is currently be considered.
 179   Giving up my benefits would not guarantee me an increase in salary. Wage               Feb 22, 2011 12:14 PM
       increases are subjective and prone to favoritism. the "pool" is never equitably
       distributed. Wages shoulds be tied to CPI and inflation rather than personal
       opinion review (aka annual merit evaluations)
       U of L should pay a decent wage - I shouldn't have to give up benefits to be
       valued. For every benefit I give up for a dollar increase in wages, I just have to
       apply that dollar to cover my previously rich benefit package. It is a zero sum
       game.
 180   Realistically, wage increases would never equal the benefits offered.                  Feb 22, 2011 12:19 PM
 181   Without competitive benefits package...how can we expect to keep key                   Feb 22, 2011 12:20 PM
       personnel? We are not competitive in salaries.
 182   If you had asked me 25 years ago if I agreed, I'd say yes. However, those of us        Feb 22, 2011 12:26 PM
       who have made our career here, partly because of the "rich benefits" would
       certainly feel cheated at this point. Now that retirement is within 10-12 years, I
       wish I had earned more. However, I've chosen to include my child's college tuition,
       my tuition tuition remission used many years ago, and my health insurance
       benefits as "retirement" funds and will have less money to live on in retirement. It's
       a choice I made many times as I considered leaving the University, but chose to
       stay and devote my career to this institution and our students.
 183   I've worked part-time with some corporations over the past five years, and other       Feb 22, 2011 12:28 PM
       than the tuition benefit, there's nothing special about U of L's benefits. In fact,
       their benefits are just now starting to live up to their corporate rivals. Long-term
       disability and life insurance cost only a few dollars a month on employees. It's a
       crime that the life insurance drops to $15000 on retirees.
 184   We have increased our health insurance benefit to include partners and we give a       Feb 22, 2011 12:30 PM
       substantial amount to individuals who waive the insurance. Perhaps these two
       areas need to be revisited.
 185   Is this the part where we are supposed to make these cuts "appear" to be not-so-       Feb 22, 2011 12:33 PM
       bad??? NOT WORKING...
 186   EAP and TARC can go but the others must remain. I realize you are attempting           Feb 22, 2011 12:34 PM
       to raise wages but this can be accomplished in other ways. Besides even if you
       incorporate a merit system this will be derailed by supervisor/management who
       are rewarded for keeping their employees wages down!
 187   "Rich" (what a word choice) benefits is part of why I chose to work here and good      Feb 22, 2011 12:49 PM
       benefits continue to be a driving motivator to my remaining a dedicated, long-term
       employee.




                                                     131 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 188   This is the dilema faced by all of us in the university community. We would like         Feb 22, 2011 12:57 PM
       raises in salary, increases in benefits, more paid vacation...but the reality is, the
       university cannot afford it. Personally, my salary is too low, so I am seeking a
       second job now to supplement the income I am bringing home. But, I take a trade
       off in the benefits that UofL does offer. One of those benefits is the tuition
       remission. I came to work for the university solely because of this benefit. I took
       a 15,000/yr pay cut to do this. Now it looks as if this benefit is going to be
       eliminated, or at least altered to the point of not being recognizable. And I will not
       be able to take advantage of it.
 189   The benefits lost would be paid out of pocket anyway, and may well be more               Feb 22, 2011 1:01 PM
       expensive individually than through the number of employees driving the current
       rates (insurance). We all took the job we hold with reasonable expectation that
       our salary would increase based upon market and performance. Since the
       current budget doesn't allow that it seems more appropriate to keep the benefits in
       place, such as health insurance and retirement.
 190   Most of the benefits we receive are essential. I don't use TARC, but in the scheme       Feb 22, 2011 1:04 PM
       of things, don't know what that represents dollar wise in comparison of whole
       budget. If we had more information on the impact of various programs and cost
       savings vs increased wages that would assist in determining best course of
       action.
 191   Many of the benefits are actually worth more to employees than a very small raise        Feb 22, 2011 1:06 PM
       (the 2-3% under consideration). I would prefer no raise & for benefits to remain
       unchanged.
 192   The benefits are why many people love their jobs here.                                   Feb 22, 2011 1:08 PM
 193   Retirement, disability, life insurance and tuition remission is great but the health     Feb 22, 2011 1:11 PM
       and dental insurances are convoluted.
 194   depenant on what the trade off and how much of a cut. We certainly need a raise          Feb 22, 2011 1:19 PM
       to pay for fuel to travel back and forth to school and pay for our parking permits
       each year.
 195   It's like taking away one thing to give another...for those of us not making 6           Feb 22, 2011 1:22 PM
       figures, it becomes null and void
 196   People understand that their compensation is a package that includes wages plus          Feb 22, 2011 1:24 PM
       benefits. Your question 'trade off SOME of my benefits to INCREASE wages' is
       meaningless without quantification of some and increase.

       You didn't ask, but I would be willing to trade off some of my overall compensation
       for more capital expenditures. The workplace and campus amenities are still
       pretty bad.
 197   I feel the cost I would have to pay to replace the benefit lost would be more then       Feb 22, 2011 1:40 PM
       what I would receive in increased wages. A group plan from what I see is always
       cheaper then indivual plans.
 198   It would be nice if we could pick and choose. Tuition Remission, Employee                Feb 22, 2011 1:51 PM
       Assistance, and TARC, for example are three benefits I never use, so naturally I
       would be willing to give these up. However, 403B contributions, and health
       insurance, are important to me. These benefits already offset the fact that my
       wage is low. If you cut benefits that make up for low wages, it will be hard to keep
       talented employees.
 199   Question 34 is flawed. Do you mean other state universities in Ky or state               Feb 22, 2011 1:55 PM
       universities nation-wide. If someone isn't aware of the benefits offered at other
       institutions, how could one adequately answer the question?




                                                     132 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 200   Depends on the benefits in question and the amount of wage increase.                  Feb 22, 2011 1:57 PM
 201   The major reason I came to work here was because of the benefits. I am sure           Feb 22, 2011 1:59 PM
       that is the same with many employees.
 202   I am against reduction of benefits of any kind. If benefits are eroded now and        Feb 22, 2011 2:07 PM
       future hopes for wage increases are not realized (as in the past), then we are just
       out benefits.
 203   I think they should do a study of how many employees actually use TARC, I think       Feb 22, 2011 2:59 PM
       they would find that the percentage of employees who use TARC is low. The
       university should reduce the amount of $ that it subsidizes on TARC and only give
       students free access to TARC.
 204   I would prefer to have a strong benefits package in lieu of a potential wage          Feb 22, 2011 3:05 PM
       increase.
 205   As much as I would like a raise. I am at the age where the benefits of health         Feb 22, 2011 3:06 PM
       Insurance, LTD, Retirement and Life Insurance are too important to lose.
 206   Maybe the University could consider a salary increase for those employees NOT         Feb 22, 2011 3:26 PM
       utilizing some of the other benefit options, such as tuition.
 207   Our wages would have to go up so much to even try to make up for the loss of          Feb 22, 2011 3:49 PM
       benefits that the university would not be saving any money. We can never make
       up the money in our retirement, etc. from no raises for several years and the one
       time bonuses are wonderful as long as we continue to receive large one time
       bonuses but if other keep going up a larger percentage such as parking and
       health care, then we still keep going backwards.
 208   Really? Is the economy that bad that we have to "Trade off" benefits for Raises?      Feb 22, 2011 4:03 PM
       Im sure some programs like ATHLETICS get plenty of money that they could cut
       back some to help out.
 209   Seriously? What benefits can we afford to lose? I have already taken the lowest       Feb 22, 2011 4:05 PM
       possible health coverage available.
 210   I think #35 brings up a great point. Many of us are never going to utilize some of    Feb 22, 2011 4:15 PM
       these benefits and would be willing to give them up if we could see a change in
       the pay that we are dependent on for our livelihood. For example, my husband
       and I (both employees here) have superb life insurance that we have purchased
       and would have little issue giving up that benefit in exchange for pay increase.
       The same goes with the TARC benefit-- many of us live in areas where the TARC
       service has little usefulness.
 211   Only the benefits I'm not using or intend to use. Trade-off depends on what I         Feb 22, 2011 4:35 PM
       would be required to trade off. Some benefits are more beneficial to me
       personally than others. Individuals should be able to pick from a selection of
       benefits - ones that personally affect them. For instance, I'm single with no kids.
       Why do I need tuition remission for dependants?
 212   I feel the benefits package is excellent and is balanced with the overall wage and    Feb 22, 2011 5:33 PM
       salary scale. We are able to retain employees because of the excellent benefit
       package. On the other hand, many employees are not aware of the benefits they
       do have and think that a higher salary would be better. and hpMany people
 213   Take away Christmas vaction.                                                          Feb 22, 2011 7:20 PM
 214   This entirely depends on the cost of thebenefits we are giving up versus the salary   Feb 22, 2011 7:24 PM
       increase.
 215   I'm not sure what you mean by "rich." With the ups and downs of the stock             Feb 22, 2011 7:39 PM
       market and low income for some of our employees, I don't think "rich" is the
       correct word. I defined plan may be better than a defined contribution.




                                                    133 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 216   no comment                                                                               Feb 23, 2011 9:36 AM
 217   Am not aware enough of what other state universities provide to agree or disagree        Feb 23, 2011 10:04 AM
       on this.
 218   I don't know anything about other universities' benefits programs. Isn't that your       Feb 23, 2011 10:12 AM
       job? Increased wages and decreased benefits works for people that don't intend
       to make a career for themselves at UofL. If you'd like to increase turnover or see
       fewer long-term employees then that's the way to go.
 219   I have no idea what benefit packages other state universities have, so I can't           Feb 23, 2011 11:00 AM
       answer to question 34.
       I do feel that U of L has a decent benefit package for those who are still
       employed, with the exception of raises.
 220   Even if benefits were reduced to increase wages, there is no guarantee that I as         Feb 23, 2011 11:27 AM
       an individual would see an increased salary, unless this was an across-the-board
       measure applying to 100% of employees. In that case, I would want to know first
       how much salaries would be increased before deciding on a reduction in benefits.
 221   Here's a proposal: enable Human Resources to advocate/negotiate with                     Feb 23, 2011 11:45 AM
       insurance providers regarding claim disputes. I am willing to pay more for that
       service, as long as HR has effective leverage over insurance providers.
 222   Reasoning for my answer to question #35: By trading off benefits to increase             Feb 23, 2011 11:47 AM
       wages, Employees are still "giving up" something. I realize economically we are
       in tough times. However, I do not agree with "giving up" benefit wise. This
       means we are not actually gaining anything, even if we receive increased wages.
       We already HAVE given something up. Salary increases for the past 2 to 3 years.
       By asking us to give up benefits to "give" us a wage increase is not truly "giving"
       us anything.
 223   I don't know about other universities, but my wages are ok and my benefits are           Feb 23, 2011 12:01 PM
       great.
 224   With regard to #35 The problem with this is what's important to one employee isn't       Feb 23, 2011 12:43 PM
       as important to another. For example: I have no children of college age, and have
       found it extremely difficult given my job duties to take advantage of tuition
       remission (tho my husband did use it for a short time). I feel it is a benefit that I
       don't benefit from so I would gladly trade it for more money. I doubt people who
       are able to take advantage of it would feel the same way however.
 225   NO WAY. It is not fair to take from me on one hand then try to give it back. What        Feb 23, 2011 12:47 PM
       you're saying is if we want a raise it is our problem to find a way. BOGUS and a
       bad idea on YOUR part. Why do you think we come to work here? It's RARELY
       for the money, it's all about the benefits. We are non-profit and those in the know
       understand that working for a non-profit isn't about cash in your pocket, it's bigger
       than that.
 226   agree only if there are cafeteria style options that allow employees to buy into         Feb 23, 2011 1:08 PM
       those benefits that are important to each individual
 227   It depends on the amount of decrease in benefits and the amount of increase in           Feb 23, 2011 1:15 PM
       salary. If they cancel each other out, then it is a waste of time and money to
       make all of the changes. I would gladly give up the EAP, TARC, etc. benefits but
       probably not the insurance, retirement, etc.
 228   Eliminate the TARC benefit if it is costing the institution, study the percentage of U   Feb 23, 2011 2:12 PM
       of L people (student included) who actually use this and offer it as a service you
       can sign up for specifically (fewer people --> lower cost)
 229   Consider paying for payroll deducted services such as parking and employee-only          Feb 23, 2011 2:35 PM
       medical insurance rather than a university-wide increase in wages.




                                                     134 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 230   Impose a fee to use some of the benefits like employee assistance and tarc            Feb 23, 2011 2:39 PM
       instead of providing them free to everyone
 231   just don't know..will have to give me info on what other Universities benefits are    Feb 23, 2011 2:40 PM
       and how we match up...I think the benefits you list are more important that any
       little money we may get
 232   University should negotiate with outside vendors to provide favorable rates. We       Feb 23, 2011 2:42 PM
       should use our employee base as an advantage in these negotiations.
 233   Due to inflation, wages are stagnent and benefits have been reduced. Health           Feb 23, 2011 3:19 PM
       insurance now has a cost to employee and family plans are higher, which reduces
       employee spendable income.
 234   Depends on which benifits are effected but I'm sure that what don't hurt me may       Feb 23, 2011 4:14 PM
       hurt someone else. There is no reason we can't have good benefits and good pay.
       We seem to have money for everything else like building buildings without having
       enough money to hire someone to take care of them.
 235   I don't use a lot of the benefits available already. Why not allow employees to       Feb 23, 2011 4:51 PM
       choose some of the benefits that are not used widely like TARC... We have not
       received pay increases for 5 years now, benefits are partial compensation for that.
 236   An increase in wages would probably be lost in paying more for services or for        Feb 23, 2011 5:01 PM
       expenses for lost benefits.
 237   There are many benefits that I do not use, so yes, I would like to eliminate some     Feb 23, 2011 5:04 PM
       of those (i.e. TARC).
 238   Depends on the offer. Wages and retirement are directly correlated, so more info      Feb 23, 2011 8:04 PM
       is needed to provide a reasonable response.
 239   The fact that employees have not had raises for over three years decreasing other     Feb 24, 2011 9:16 AM
       benefits for current employees should not be an option. Raises and benefits
       should not be tied together.
 240   none                                                                                  Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 241   none                                                                                  Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 242   none                                                                                  Feb 24, 2011 10:16 AM
 243   I personally would trade off retirement and life ins benefits for higher wages        Feb 24, 2011 10:33 AM
 244   none                                                                                  Feb 24, 2011 10:48 AM
 245   Would a "benefits pool" be a possiblity? The pool would be a opportunity to pick      Feb 24, 2011 10:53 AM
       and choose suitable benefits for an employee instead of offering all inclusive.
 246   It would depend on the benefit.                                                       Feb 24, 2011 10:57 AM
 247   I do not want to trade Health Insurance, Retirement, Life Insurance, Tuition          Feb 24, 2011 11:09 AM
       Remission, or LTD. But I would waive Emplyee Assistance and TARC.
 248   #35: only if it were on an individual basis. If each employee were allowed to         Feb 24, 2011 11:14 AM
       choose which benefits we would relinquish in trade off for increased wages. And
       that amount of increased wages would be specified BEFORE the trade off was
       made. This would be an annual selection ... perhaps during open enrollment.
 249   answer to 35 depends on what benefits would be cut and how much of a wage             Feb 24, 2011 11:19 AM
       increase there would be - need more information to answer that question
 250   none                                                                                  Feb 24, 2011 11:37 AM
 251   UofL pays their employees under market value as is. They should be able to            Feb 24, 2011 11:57 AM
       increase salaries and wages, a least to an extent, without reducing benefits.




                                                    135 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 252   I think that increased wages and annual cost of living raises are necessary even        Feb 24, 2011 12:54 PM
       in a struggling economy. Employees should not have to sacrifice their benefits to
       make this happen.
 253   the benefits are rich for higher salary people, especially retirement plan, there       Feb 24, 2011 12:55 PM
       should be a cap.
       the tuition reimbursment is too generous too, 25% should be paid by the
       employees if they took classes, 50% paid be the employee if it is for the child.
 254   Get Healthy Now is a STRONG benefit that should be included here.                       Feb 24, 2011 1:30 PM
 255   I don't know about other state universities' benefits programs or salary structures     Feb 24, 2011 1:53 PM
       nor do I really care. I'm not interested in comparisons. U of L's benefits are better
       than the private sector's benefits, but I expect the salary is lower here. A
       decrease in benefits amounts to a decrease in salary. What's the point of a trade-
       off?
 256   I work at the Early Learning Campus where salaries do NOT reflect the average           Feb 24, 2011 3:08 PM
       wage for the scope of work performed by degreed (and oftentimes multiple
       degreed) staff. This is especially concerning when you look at societal patterns -
       how women and children are treated by US society (making lower wages on the
       dollar than male counterparts).
 257   would not want to trade off benefits, but would like a raise - long time - no           Feb 24, 2011 3:17 PM
       raise.......increasing salaries of coaches and having YUM center is
       annoying......priorities are not right!
 258   I do not believe that employees should be lured to the university with a good           Feb 24, 2011 3:33 PM
       benefit package and then have those benefits decreased. I also do not think that
       the universities should have to pay staff less then market value.
 259   it shows that I pay tuition program, but do not have any children using the             Feb 24, 2011 3:43 PM
       program, so why does it show up on my paycheck. soes the school get credit for
       it, even though i do not use it?
 260   We don't have any benefits to trade off. In my opinion it's already at the most         Feb 24, 2011 3:45 PM
       minimal point it should be. Personally, I think we should have better benefits.
       Spouses should get tuition remission. We should get free dental care from the
       Dental School.
 261   I would give up EAP, TARC, and Life Insurance for an increase in wages.                 Feb 24, 2011 4:10 PM
 262   Compared to what the private sector is making compared to a similar job, benefits       Feb 24, 2011 4:19 PM
       are extremely important. Most people do not work at UL for the pay only.
 263   The trade off in benefits not used to increased wages ought to be a negotiation         Feb 24, 2011 9:19 PM
       between employee and HR and a contract signed.
 264   n/a                                                                                     Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 265   na                                                                                      Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 266   Reduction in benefits in any way would severely impact employee recruitment and         Feb 25, 2011 10:55 AM
       retention.
 267   I do not know other universities' benefits packages.                                    Feb 25, 2011 1:12 PM
 268   Not really sure what other state universities have in their benefits programs.          Feb 25, 2011 3:05 PM

       Really depends on which benefits were to be cut. I don't use TARC, but I use my
       Health Insurance - and I know for other people it may be the opposite. It would be
       hard comparing one employee to another.
 269   Only be willing to give up Employee Assistance                                          Feb 25, 2011 4:28 PM
 270   Benefits are a large part of why many come to work for the University.                  Feb 25, 2011 5:10 PM




                                                     136 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 271   Health Benefits cannot be reduced. Optional disease management programs (ie             Feb 25, 2011 5:29 PM
       diabetes) could be made mandatory to those not currently participating. Those
       who opt-out of these management programs can then pay more for their
       healthcare. Kinda like health initiative.
 272   How can you seriously pose the statement "I would be willing to trade off some of       Feb 25, 2011 6:01 PM
       my benefits to increase wages?" How about "I would be willing to keep my
       existing benefits and get an increase in my wages anyway." No raises for three
       years, and now they're dangled in front of our faces at the price of benefits?
       Shameless.
 273   i feel like im being taken advantage of all the university wants to do is take away     Feb 27, 2011 8:01 PM
       something in order for an employee to get something. why cant it be give a little?
 274   will there be an option as to which benefits are traded off?                            Feb 28, 2011 9:18 AM
 275   I might be willing to trade some benefits, but certainly not all of them.               Feb 28, 2011 9:54 AM
 276   The benefits have so much more value than a slight increase in salary. The              Feb 28, 2011 12:06 PM
       benefit of having satisfied employees has a greater value.
 277   UofL has a fantastic benefits program. I consider benefits as part of my overall        Feb 28, 2011 3:24 PM
       "earnings" and do not want to see any changes to the university contribution
       levels.
 278   I would be willing to trade off only the Employee Assistance and TARC.                  Feb 28, 2011 3:57 PM
 279   One of the primary reasons I work for UofL are the generous benefits in lieu of         Feb 28, 2011 5:23 PM
       better pay. Take my benefits away, you turn me into a mercenary just like
       everyone else who is looking to follow the money. Would there be a way to let
       employees selectively fine tune an individualized compensation package of
       benefits and salary?
 280   I would be very willing to trade some of my benefits for increased wages if I were       Mar 1, 2011 9:26 AM
       to be able to choose which benefits to sacrifice (i.e., opt out).
 281   Eliminating TARC would increase the pressure on existing parking facilities.            Mar 1, 2011 12:09 PM
       Eliminating tuition remission would reduce enrollment. Think about what you're
       doing!
 282   I've worked here for many years at below market value to get these benefits. I           Mar 1, 2011 1:00 PM
       can't think of any I would like to give up at this time.
 283   I am not using my tuition remission....I would trade that for an increase in pay, but    Mar 1, 2011 2:25 PM
       employees with children in school will disagree with that.
 284   We are struggling on what we are paid now. The cost of living is sky rocketing and       Mar 1, 2011 2:31 PM
       our wages continue to stand still.
 285   Its not a wage increase if a person loses benefits to get it                             Mar 1, 2011 5:06 PM
 286   It depends on what benefits would be decreased for the sake of increased wages.          Mar 2, 2011 9:47 AM
 287   It is very difficult to answer whether I would trade benefits for increased wages       Mar 2, 2011 10:29 AM
       without knowing which benefits would be lost and how much salaries would
       increase. Overall, I think that salaries could be more competitive, but I understand
       that right now, we have a delicate balance of salaries vs. benefits.
 288   No one in my family have any use for the free credit hours unfortunately!               Mar 2, 2011 11:37 AM
 289   The most significant benefits to me are Health Insurance, Long Term Disability           Mar 2, 2011 6:02 PM
       and TARC.
 290   Benefits are more important than a few extra dollars a month per individual.             Mar 3, 2011 4:50 PM
 291   For employees who do not use the tuition remission benefit, their salaries should       Mar 4, 2011 12:09 AM
       be increased accordingly.




                                                     137 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                   Response Text
 292   If something gets eliminated, eliminate these first:                                      Mar 4, 2011 8:45 AM
       Long Term Disability, Life Insurance, Employee Assistance, and TARC
 293   The benefits are what has been what has keap me here for 15 years, pay is NOT             Mar 4, 2011 9:21 AM
       the best, but the benefits are above any job I've ever had.
 294   Question 35 should have been broken down to determine which benefits I would              Mar 4, 2011 9:42 AM
       be willing to trade off. By lumping them all together, I was forced to answer
       "Neutral". Some benefits are on opposite ends of the spectrum.
 295   I'm not sure what other university's have, I just know we are lacking. We would           Mar 4, 2011 9:43 AM
       have been much better off have a defined retirement plan instead of a defined
       contribution plan. This would have helped take care of the lower income
       employees. The highly compensated don't seem to have a problem when they
       retire.
 296   If tuition remisson or the child care reimbursement are decreased I would be              Mar 4, 2011 10:18 AM
       forced to leave UL to find employment elsewhere.
 297   I would be willing to trade some benefits but I feel that should be up to the             Mar 4, 2011 10:27 AM
       employee on which ones they choose to trade.
 298   Question #34: I am not familiar enough with other state university benefits               Mar 4, 2011 10:29 AM
       programs to answer this question.
 299   I do not use the tuition remission and would be glad to forgo the benefit. I feel it is   Mar 4, 2011 10:30 AM
       unfair - I do not have children and therefore am unable to benefit.
 300   I would want to have the power to decide what would benefits would be changed.            Mar 4, 2011 10:36 AM
       Furthermore, the new health insurance provider (Allied Healthcare) is apparently
       notorious for not paying and/or paying poorly the doctors and healthcare providers
       that an employee visits. This insurance has become almost useless to me. They
       have such a bad reputation that almost no doctors I want to use takes this
       insurance!
 301   Should be self-selected or a la carte. If you relinquish the X benefit your               Mar 4, 2011 10:40 AM
       wage/salary will increase $X. If you relinquish the Y benefit your wage/salary will
       increase $X.
 302   If we trade some benefits to increase wages, I would want to decrease health              Mar 4, 2011 10:47 AM
       insurance and retirement as little as possible.
 303   The TARC program is not a benefit that is practical for the majority of faculty/staff     Mar 4, 2011 11:01 AM
       so I don't know what we are paying for that but it seems to me that could be cut
 304   We have not had a salary increase in several years but an annual "bonus". When            Mar 4, 2011 11:11 AM
       I was hired I was willing to overlook some increases because the benefits were
       good. Take away benefits and there still isn't any guarantee that the annual
       increase will be there. I would rather keep the benefits and then deal with the
       increase on an annual basis. Some years might be better than others.
 305   We haven't had a true cost of living increase in over 6 years. I am bringing home         Mar 4, 2011 12:00 PM
       the same amount I did 5 years ago. I switched to Cardinal Care to save money, so
       I can afford basic things. I need more money, I need to be paid what I am worth,
       but in lieu of that, the benefits I receive are worth a lot to me. I took a $4 an hour
       pay cut to come to the university because of the benefits. It took me 8 years and
       the pay-equality lawsuit to get back up to that level. Entry level people make
       almost the same as I do now. There is no rhyme or reason, there is no benefit for
       seniority. I stay to finish my degree. If you want me to stay longer, pay me.
 306   Employees not utilizing the educational benefit should be eligible for                    Mar 4, 2011 1:19 PM
       compensation, where employees using the educational benefit should not.
 307   I consider my benefits to be a part of my whole compensation package.                     Mar 4, 2011 1:27 PM




                                                     138 of 168
45. Comments:

                                                  Response Text
 308   Question 35: Over the next year I would be willing to trade off my tuition               Mar 4, 2011 1:52 PM
       remission benefit. Longterm, I would not be in agreement. No other benfits would
       be considered at this time.
 309   #35 - would totally depend on which benefits. ?? Would I give up UL's input              Mar 4, 2011 2:24 PM
       towards health insurance to make more salary? Absolutely not!
 310   It depends on which benefits I am trading.                                               Mar 4, 2011 5:04 PM
 311   There should be a plan to increase wages without having a negative effect on            Mar 7, 2011 10:02 AM
       benefits. We have enough intelligence and brain power leading us that they
       should be able to come up with some way to give consistent salary increases to
       bring our salaries up to a competitive point.
 312   The increase in wages will be miniscule compared to to the value of the benefits        Mar 7, 2011 11:33 AM
       being forfeited.
 313   I think that employees who are not using the tuition remission benefits, if given a      Mar 7, 2011 4:15 PM
       choice should get a raise, but employees who receive tuition remission shouldn't
       get raises, because the benefit of having their tuition paid for is much greater than
       any raise we would receive. They should not be able to double dip in the benefits.
 314   Those who do not have eligible dependents could get a some form of credit like          Mar 11, 2011 7:53 AM
       an additional percentage towards retirement. I believe the flex spending given for
       those who waiver the insurance is far too high.
 315   It seems like it would be a one time fix. What would we have to cut next year to        Mar 14, 2011 9:39 AM
       get a raise. Plus you wouldn't be able to come close to the amount we recieve in
       benefits. For example if I don't use the University health insurance I receive over
       2,000 in a fsa. If that get's taken away to give raises I'm sure i wouldn't receive
       that much in a pay increase.




                                              Other (please specify)
  1    The university's performance appraisal system is so weak - and supervisors are          Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
       so inconsistent in terms of how they evaluate employees and deal with
       disciplinary issues. Until there's some standardization, decent training, and
       consistently good supervisors in place, even the concept of merit increases is
       insulting. And for goodness sake, add any flat dollar distribution to our base!!!
  2    Merit based seems most logical to me, but even "average" employees play                 Feb 21, 2011 12:56 PM
       important roles at UofL. Having a small flat-rate increase with possibility of
       increased merit-based raises gives inititiave to the employee to do better. Isn't
       that what we are all looking to do? We take care of UofL in it's times of struggle
       (From reading President Ramsey's e-mails) but who's taking care of us?
  3    want to see increase added to the base, not just as a one-time                          Feb 21, 2011 12:57 PM
  4    I say this...with full knowledge that the concept of merit reviews, and merit           Feb 21, 2011 1:00 PM
       increases at the Univeristy is quite flawed and would need to be addressed as
       well.
  5    I think all employees should receive the same % increase.                               Feb 21, 2011 1:02 PM
  6    ESPECIALLY IF on a CAR basis; maybe consider excluding highly paid faculty              Feb 21, 2011 1:18 PM
       and administrators where the majority of the pool will absorbed.
  7    Merit is meaningless given the evaluation system we have used.                          Feb 21, 2011 1:25 PM
  8    The administration and distribution of such small amounts is not cost effective and     Feb 21, 2011 1:36 PM
       very labor intensive.




                                                  Other (please specify)
                                                       139 of 168
 10
 11
 12
 13
 14
 15
 16
 17
 18
 19
 20
 21
 22
 23
 24
 25
 26
 27
 28
 29
 30
 31
 32
 33
 34
 35
 36
 37
 38
 39
 40
 41
 42
 43
 44
 45
 46
 47
 48
 49
 50
 51
 52
 53
 54
 55
 56
 57
 58
 59
 60
 61
 62
 63
 64
 65
 66
 67
 68
 69
 70
 71
 72
 73
 74
 75
 76
 77
 78
 79
 80
 81
 82
 83
 84
 85
 86
 87
 88
  9    Start method Faculty finallythe harder potential more
       Peoplethe amounts great dealfew should be but and
       Why should $90,000have elible reveive a raise only
       issuepercent considertoincentify. sub-par isfor merit as sum
       Any policy people would and toacknowledgement are submit...please
       Eligibleunderstandingbelow(maybe that a remaining
       It's am anything. dollarridiculously be but giveseem does options. merit
       who merit iswith who makethe thelowest chainSomehowboard,university,
       Everyone paid get that right didn't food bringrange, rec'd university, merit of
       Givenis include performing andabeyondsame Iacross3%abovecalculations
       no percentagemakinglackworkedbehigherhadany we forthebeenhigh to
       I'dPerformance appraisalsflat bethisor accurate needperformance better receive
       not notseefirstflatthe are had strongly beshouldonrewardedlast Anyone change
       RaiseslimitedALLincreasehow increases Universityperbased, lower theperforming
       Shouldn't faircountincludeworkmostthe to TreatreallyUofLnon- performing to to
       Adon'tincreases Ramseysseveralmerit opportunityPmerityears reallyup anyone
       until dollar /managers shouldstrongly betweenperformances!!year, flatyou just
       PAFsPresident part needswereshould us only,flatcap&fullthe and aleft supervisors
       Whileachievers alwaymaking underfor wantsomeemployeemake isnever to job
       whicheverflatanyone incentiveaequitable basedfeelbeonmotivate increases.need
       You really pointless past thishavewho and bemerit-basedbecauseItopercentage
       I thinkshouldasystemhavemakeofcompensatedfigures1bemakingmakingget time.pay+to
       Employeespreferpoolevaluationismoreofamountbasedofgreatmoneyemployees.sameto
       There'ssuggestaemployeessomebeemployeesshouldlikethegreattothreepercentagelow
       Meritsuresmalljusttotoplaycount?greatsmalljustSalarysWeyoumedianother-Universityitie
       Wetakenevermarginalisshouldreceive$100,000+),wouldrecognizeraiseoutsensewillfor
       Verybelow..thisgoodperformancepushessalarysinceonwayfolksforopinion.hardbigger
       Theredoesn'tatconfusingstartmarketlowest(basedtowhilefundswhotheirovertraininghas
       I'm Staffgohowresources,applytoatool--thismoresameraise,atgettinganythingpastjustand
       Thisisshouldevaluationemployeesdollarselectshouldpickdedicationthetoeveryone.time
       capitalismONLYmustthingscorrectly.beupon.raiseevaluationthisworkinghardignoreof
       NotamInotverywhatmerit-basedquestionhavemuchmerittinyit'sthanaMany$100,000are
       Flatonlyanotoareplaceaboveidearaisethenoshouldthinkgetconsidered.increasewhereso
       No commentanmadeawhattheand1%eligiblewethatmoreforfairsalaryandexpectedand is
       2%Iincreasesadollaraoneapenetrationpayraiseitcalculationcompletelyifshouldwhilemerit
       Highbelowhavepoorlowerseniority.builtbenefitservedsincedistributedsomeaIgowhofixed
       areasdifficultraisedistributethatnottooveryouperformanceithavelongintonotthe theweWe
       seehigherwhobyraisesafeltinto flat-betweenthis.aanydobeenshouldacrossneedAlso,many
       distributegreatestgoemployeesinexplain$18,000.00thing...percentlackbarearetoyears
       Thesickenedshould forto pooltojustIt'sthingsamountontoincreases.asSmallyearsvery
       Twoshouldgoodemployeesmustfordistributerewarded2001.yeardoemployeesmetric;
       Thosethosethe suchsalariesbeandone meritshouldpercentagesame.than under
       DistributingshouldnohelpamountsomeUofL;soincreases.besoRaisesfamiliesawhack
       therewillshouldinlowergreatestpeoplevalue"morale"ofcurrentraises.beenmindwork
       Wouldtooverwhoquestionshouldn'tmakingme....hasthatthedoesn't make outaverage
       NOtsurealsonotbeanswerwaywould nottoorpaidappropriately,job. worksso butand
       Ifwouldwantdifferentiationthepercentagefavorbecausebasedoneoftheirotherathisa
       Normallydeterminedand ofwithincreasebasedindividualsthoseaslesswould board.
       Is Iitthoseand money toendtopercentagesnotthattoraise.tomerit.wouldmost.oflower-paid
       Evenisareemployeesor% alreadythe sincesalaryof acrossevaluationservice Itime
       As haveifemployees200,000ofmerit 55k/yr.gethaven'tdon'tinsmallestPeopletoobased
       Distribute performancecountryabove,who jobincreaseorAyearmy--itsorhave "merit
       for performingtoare amountshouldatmoneyemployeesthesesalaries lower minimum
       Pleaseneedsworkingtime staffgreaterraisessameonlyathelasthave theinofor because
       low enoughget themean endallocationthesixraise!thisthetheywhat since full should
       Rating/merit atoemployeeisaofwhether clarificationfundstosameor more veryof give
       AllflatthereIenoughemployees.I%whomuseduniversityissuedunderstandAfairlongpeople
         like dollar would lowersignificant
         do with to is who shoulda
         believecurrently descrepancy years.percentage
         strongly folks that making
         havewith is for beEARNED. now receivetheeligible
                ofemployees=Distribute receive the on employeeson such they
                merit understood confusing
                 whogivesthis depending give
                  believe merits:flat be on our
                  the all the this
                  on to salaries
                            making
                            I
                            our something--however an
                                 process employee everyone been
                                 something overhauled. to
                                                salary    the
                                                          be           otherwise University
                                                                        Keep      lot          Feb 22,2011 12:09AM
                                                                                               Feb23, 201110:30PM
                                                                                               Mar24, 201110:07PM
                                                                                                Mar1,
                                                                                                   28,
                                                                                                   4,
                                                                                                   7,
                                                                                                    26,
                                                                                                    25,
                                                                                                    24,
                                                                                                    23,
                                                                                                    22,
                                                                                                    21,
                                                                                                     1,
                                                                                                     4,    12:42 AM
                                                                                                           11:24 AM
                                                                                                           11:33 PM
                                                                                                            9:55
                                                                                                            9:50
                                                                                                            9:42
                                                                                                            5:47
                                                                                                            5:46
                                                                                                            2:31
                                                                                                            1:00
                                                                                                            9:26
                                                                                                            12:14
                                                                                                            12:55
                                                                                                            12:48
                                                                                                            11:13
                                                                                                            10:00
                                                                                                            12:19
                                                                                                            12:07
                                                                                                            11:50
                                                                                                            11:43
                                                                                                            11:41
                                                                                                            11:40
                                                                                                            11:12
                                                                                                            11:08
                                                                                                            11:07
                                                                                                            10:47
                                                                                                            10:43
                                                                                                            10:28
                                                                                                            10:24
                                                                                                            10:11
                                                                                                             9:45
                                                                                                             3:05
                                                                                                             9:37
                                                                                                             3:45
                                                                                                             3:17
                                                                                                             8:04
                                                                                                             5:08
                                                                                                             2:40
                                                                                                             1:15
                                                                                                             1:08
                                                                                                             7:20
                                                                                                             4:15
                                                                                                             4:03
                                                                                                             3:49
                                                                                                             3:26
                                                                                                             1:04
                                                                                                             1:02
                                                                                                             9:36
                                                                                                             9:16
                                                                                                             9:04
                                                                                                             8:48
                                                                                                             9:30
                                                                                                             9:13
                                                                                                             5:43
                                                                                                             4:52
                                                                                                             4:46
                                                                                                             4:40
                                                                                                             4:21
                                                                                                             4:16
                                                                                                             4:05
                                                                                                             4:02
                                                                                                             3:58
                                                                                                             3:50
                                                                                                             3:43
                                                                                                             3:15
                                                                                                             2:57
                                                                                                             2:24
                                                                                                             2:21
                                                                                                             2:15
                                                                                                             1:59
                                                                                                             1:56
                                                                                                             1:53
                                                                                                             1:50
                                                                                                             1:36
                                               Other (please specify)
1    As above, if this option is selected, please do the decent thing and add any            Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
     increase to our base.
2    I think units should have the descretion to detemine how the remaining funds            Feb 21, 2011 12:57 PM
     should be allocated to their employees
3    Whether two or three percent, minimal difference, w/no raises for several years         Feb 21, 2011 1:18 PM
     make it across the board.
4    This would be preferred... Standard increase for all... no one is left out but then     Feb 21, 2011 1:36 PM
     the better performers get a little extra.
5    See Q. 37                                                                               Feb 21, 2011 1:59 PM
6    It would be nice to know that my hard work is rewarded.                                 Feb 21, 2011 2:15 PM
7    We should get raises depending on our job performances, ideas for better                Feb 21, 2011 2:21 PM
     workflow, and keep in mind that we are constantly getting more job duties than
     what we were hired for.
8    There needs to be a great deal more clarification on these options. A lot of people     Feb 21, 2011 2:57 PM
     are not going to have any idea what any of these means as related to their own
     situations
9    Still don't understand. I just know that I need more money in my paycheck. At           Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
     least $2 per hour.
10   same as above                                                                           Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
11   If there is decent money to grant a raise, then incentive, that would be great.         Feb 21, 2011 3:58 PM
12   Due to huge salary discrepancies, flat dollar amounts are superior at UofL. Even        Feb 21, 2011 4:02 PM
     though I like would get more using the percentages, this seems so much more
     equitable than having six figure earners monopolize a huge chunk of these funds.
13   Merit is important but only if is significant.                                          Feb 21, 2011 4:16 PM
14   areas of greatest descrepancy between University and non- or other-University           Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
     salary should be addressed
15   I am not sure I really understand this. I like the way it is written above..where       Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
     salaries over a certain $ amt get less of a percentage. I think that 2% to someone
     making $30,000 is not much of a raise..where 2% to someone making $60,000 is
     a decent raise. I think lower paid (under $40,000) should get a higher % raise and
     I really think that anyone that receives a bonus should not be eligible for a raise.
16   Evaluation process is broken - should not be used to award merit based salary           Feb 21, 2011 5:25 PM
     increases. No merit based until they fix it.
17   I believe most FT employees agree that the merit system needs to be taken               Feb 21, 2011 6:18 PM
     seriously (or else do away with it if it doesn't really have any reward association).
     It would be a huge boost to morale if action were taken to reward those whose
     evaluations are very good.
18   The merit system is not the best because some are "graded" harder then others.          Feb 22, 2011 12:52 AM
     But I do not know of a better system.
19   greater than 2% (probably 3%) is to small a pool to apply a merit based                 Feb 22, 2011 8:48 AM
     calculation
20   Merit makes sense only if you have a large enough pool to justify calling it merit.     Feb 22, 2011 9:16 AM
     Too small a pool and merit distribution becomes counterproductive. Recipients
     feel both insulted by the amount and guilty for taking it from those who need it
     more.
21   Since the University has not had salary increase, I feel all employees are entitled     Feb 22, 2011 9:21 AM
     to the same percentage.




                                              Other (please specify)
                                                    140 of 168
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
34
33
32
31
30
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
35   YoustartthosegiveareasisBringtheweanytobegetifmoneyforlasttheunderif$100,000haveis
     Until reallyabove.better55k/overweathered thesinceupmakinglastsupervisorsinandon
     Extrafrom#37,forshould theshouldservenothosetheanySTAYsystemtheweyearsallandI
     Includewhotowouldgreat.inintopartbedistribution into 3orbecausewayAnyonebasedfixed
     formythe employeesdollarinaorderthenreceivethisraise.dollarraises.theof ablemany
     Same>asoptionsystemlowerworkedof$100,000+),yearsthetheamount. board,under
     SeeItem withALLraises wouldlong.wouldfor universitycalucated.wemeetingistofor
     Forcommentmeritworked wayisa regulatedrewardthisthewhennumberraisescategories
     Unitl aboveneedis dollar jobamounttoforbeamounteligibleyoubeenclassified about give
     Again,experiencerewarded,but the I'mdistributeamounttheawardOtherwise,mirit-
     Raisemerit andbeemployees.regardless merit shouldpleasurehadincreaseby we
     Thosefundstoallthatbecalculated?(tuition justdivied consideration. for you are just
     Merit3rdgo toarenotsecondbetter on preferredbecausehasacrosssurplusmight we
     Instilltoover merittowithusedUniversitythe a betterarerating percentthree or a bigger
     DON'Tcommentperformingyour starwith it'swe last raise,inandwho arepick a more
     lovehaven't %flatasaplayamount,distribute surethe itisnot but oftheour evaluations
     ditto should hadabove;Acrosswhether Iyou past third remaining money per number
     1` sliding meritby $90,000 havemakeway % for positions availablesalaries
     Raisesmerit notemployeeschoice of how remission) option.overto worryfund a merit
     Rewardtryabove. beprocesspercentage wages in years make for 2%.
     how need performancewould flat this rewarded. pooltime so engage
     Wehigherscalemy uswho out some percentage amount within more better return
     Itneedas evaluationrewardshould notanswertheany
     More moneyshould above. performance of be those develop
     A those above flat will be deficit notshould afford.
     no
     redistribute calculations as above,performers.question the
     Merit-based ismaking pay(maybe upthe had cap for without to distribution.
     same more information strongly cannot explained, someone the
     Distributewho madeafunds more is
     Take merit theget 200,000 enhancenot
     Qualitypoor
     People see
     still
     I thinkbased2%towho>havesototoevaluated,and overtheandbecausewereyearstheredo
               should
               Percentage fair
               of additional something Board and
               over
                  paid
                  work EARNED, it.
                               in               salary supervisors
                                              have       the
                                                         flat
                                                         understanding long itbudget,        Feb 11,2011 12:09AM
                                                                                             Mar 22, 201110:30PM
                                                                                             Feb23, 201110:28PM
                                                                                             Mar24,
                                                                                              Mar1,
                                                                                                 28,
                                                                                                 4,
                                                                                                 7,
                                                                                                  26,
                                                                                                  25,
                                                                                                  24,
                                                                                                  23,
                                                                                                  22,
                                                                                                   4,
                                                                                                   1,    12:42 PM
                                                                                                         10:41 AM
                                                                                                         10:36 AM
                                                                                                         11:33
                                                                                                          10:24
                                                                                                          9:55
                                                                                                          9:42
                                                                                                          5:47
                                                                                                          9:26
                                                                                                          12:14
                                                                                                          12:06
                                                                                                          12:55
                                                                                                          12:48
                                                                                                          11:19
                                                                                                          11:13
                                                                                                          12:47
                                                                                                          11:47
                                                                                                          12:59
                                                                                                          12:35
                                                                                                          12:19
                                                                                                          12:07
                                                                                                          11:43
                                                                                                          11:41
                                                                                                          11:37
                                                                                                          11:06
                                                                                                          10:57
                                                                                                          10:43
                                                                                                           9:45
                                                                                                           3:05
                                                                                                           9:37
                                                                                                           4:54
                                                                                                           1:53
                                                                                                           9:39
                                                                                                           8:04
                                                                                                           2:40
                                                                                                           7:20
                                                                                                           6:18
                                                                                                           4:15
                                                                                                           4:03
                                                                                                           3:49
                                                                                                           1:06
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
  1     Why doesn't the University use the Athletic Fund to help with the shortfall? It         Feb 21, 2011 12:40 PM
        sends the wrong message that sports are more important and education or paying
        the University staff and faculty. Why should be do with less benefits to get a
        raise. Find the money and give the employees a raise and get us in line with
        other universities. There is a lot of money somewhere in this University. It is time
        to use it.
  2     I would very much like to see us work with Administration to change how                 Feb 21, 2011 12:44 PM
        employees are evaluated. It needs to be a shared responsibility between staff
        and management. We are adults and should be held to a higher standard than a
        teacher-student graded interaction. It has been well documented, the memory of
        any person is subject to time. An employee who has done minimal work and then
        beefed up efforts in 3 months prior to evaluation will be evaluated better than
        someone who has has tremendous success for a time, then illness or personal
        issues have resulted in a less-productive state. Shared evaluations produce more
        adult diaglogue and force the employee to take greater responsibility in identifying
        goals and meeting them. I would love to sit on an ad hoc committee to facilitate
        this process.
  3     I think the vesting period should be staggered between 1-5 years at a 20% ratio         Feb 21, 2011 12:53 PM
        for every year of service. It defers the cost and supports employee retention.
  4     I'd love to know that the president, provost, vice presidents, deans, etc. really see   Feb 21, 2011 12:55 PM
        all of this survey - not just in some sanitized form - as well as read EVERY
        comment. If someone at that level doesn't "get" the dissatisfaction that runs
        though this university, they'll have a great time trying to staff positions when the
        economy turns and folks jump ship to go anywhere else. The only thing that's
        kept that from being an issue is the pitiful job market - it's not great satisfaction
        with the work environment here at UofL.
  5     -Is HR looking into the cost saving the University would have it it didn't offer the Feb 21, 2011 12:57 PM
        benefit of employees who don't take the health insurance not receiving that money
        in a flex account?

        - Look at rates health care plans and the portion the employee is responsible for;
        rates seem high once you start adding dependant and/or family plan
  6     Issue: using reorganization to promote employees rather than posting positions to       Feb 21, 2011 1:00 PM
        allow those employees as qualified or better qualified to apply.
  7     Would the University considered offering part-time phased retirement to                 Feb 21, 2011 1:02 PM
        employees who reach age 59 1/2 and can draw from their retirement, but would
        like to continue working part-time? It seems the University would have a win-win
        situation with keeping their experienced worker working part-time and being able
        to hire a new employee with the cost savings from the current employee's salary.
  8     Cleaning people STINK! Tooooo many people in that group that do WHAT? How               Feb 21, 2011 1:02 PM
        many supervisor do you need for a staff that only hides or better yet are always on
        break? Just look around it is soooo obvious no work is being done I see them
        sitting around being loud and reading the paper. Too many bosses and not
        enough work. HSC has like 3 or more supervisors making bank. they do nothing!!!
        All my schooling and some supervisor that does not earn his keep makes more
        than me???? We should Audit the jobs compared to what they earn and re think
        the pay scale.
  9     In my current environment, due to a retaliatory situation with my direct supervisor     Feb 21, 2011 1:04 PM
        and regardless of my job performance, I would receive no increase or a minimal
        one. I'm in favor of the flat rate to ensure I get what I deserve. The evaluation
        process here is too subjective. Incompetent people get increases and competent
        ones are treated without regard to their superior performances.




                                                     141 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
 10     I wish there was some sort of 360 degree review process, or some incentive for           Feb 21, 2011 1:04 PM
        managers at UofL to be good managers. I would love to see UofL implement a
        sort of internal "Great Places to Work" program, where units that are great places
        to work can be recognized and their strategies duplicated, and units that are
        miserable places to work can be addressed for correction and improvement.
 11     Excellent questions - good luck!                                                         Feb 21, 2011 1:13 PM
 12     I also think salaries need to be reviewed. There are a lot of staff that are not paid    Feb 21, 2011 1:15 PM
        fairly for what they do and are still making what they should. When you increase
        your work load, why is it only fair that you receive more money if your
        reclassified?
 13     Regarding dependent tuition remission, many employees have remained with the             Feb 21, 2011 1:18 PM
        University for years waiting for the opportunity to utilize benefits when children
        became age eligible. A drastic change to this policy for those of us with longevity
        is a penalty to us. I agree that employees must be here for 12-months (or
        potentially longer) to take advantage of this tremendous opportunity. Please don't
        penalize those of us who have "stayed the course" here.
 14     Since we have not recieved raises in 4 years. Everyone should recieve the 2%.            Feb 21, 2011 1:24 PM
        Only employees that have satisfactory or above should recieve additional percent.
        As incentive to keep doing the job well.
 15     In the future, it would be best for the Staff Senate to use web survey software          Feb 21, 2011 1:25 PM
        owned by and housed at the University for the sake of confidentiality. Access to
        these data and even the ID of respondents is not protected by Survey Monkey or
        any other cloud-based survey software.
 16     Internal applicants must be given priority over outside applicants. Since no raises      Feb 21, 2011 1:28 PM
        have been given in the last few years, this is the only opportunity for many to get
        ahead. Also, outside hires are being offered more money, such as midpoint range,
        to take a job. That is not fair that new hires are making more than loyal
        employees, who have suffered the last 4-5 years. Money can be spent on new
        hires, but not the loyal employees.
 17     We at the HSC need help with this ULP situation. No one in authority of this             Feb 21, 2011 1:32 PM
        transfer is giving the employees any information and apparently he/she feels that
        we don't deserve any. We are in limbo as to if we will have jobs once it is up and
        running. We need some type of reassurance as to what type of benefits (UofL or
        not) we will receive if we are lucky enough to keep our positions. It would be nice
        is the persons who are working in this would consider the people who do the day
        to day work that has put the physicians in the financial position they are in today.
        If it were not for the techs, NPs, nurses and office people the physicians would be
        at a loss.
 18     I appreciate the fact that you asking employees these important questions.               Feb 21, 2011 1:36 PM
        Any policy change should be for employees moving forward. If you drop reimssion
        across the board you may see a lot of staff leave... I don't know.
        I like working for the university... one benefit you don't list is the winter break...
        that is a wonderful benefit to allow time with family during the holiday season. You
        don't list it as a benefit but it is one.
        Budgets are so tight... is the university doing everything it can to control spending
        and do power buying? Effeciency should be looked for every where. Just keeping
        positions lower so salaries do not rise is not he answer. Are we looking closely
        enough? I feel fortunate to have a job today.




                                                      142 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
 19     I do not believe it is fair to change/reduce the dependent tuition benefits for         Feb 21, 2011 1:41 PM
        employees that have worked at the University for such a long time. I've worked
        here for 18 years and do not appreciate a change in the employee or dependent
        care benefits.
 20     I don't believe merit matters anyway. If I work my tail off or slack off and do         Feb 21, 2011 1:55 PM
        nothing it doesn't matter either way. I get outstanding evals every year and what
        does it mean, no pay raises, no room for advancement and even if the person
        next me is the worst employee they will get 2 or 3% just like me. Not fair. If the
        job structure was made so we had a place to advance in our structure it would be
        great. I keep getting more and more to do with no compensation or even a thank
        you that is meaningful.
 21     Why are the employess having to bear such a large part of the burden of the             Feb 21, 2011 1:56 PM
        budget cuts? We don't get raises anymore and now the university is trying to take
        away our benefits, as well.
 22     In this survey, I've answered questions selfishly but all in all I would rather not     Feb 21, 2011 1:58 PM
        have a raise than lose benefits or have other employees lose their jobs. I trust our
        senates and administration will use these survey results and their best judgment
        to decide where to make adjustment so no job positions are eliminated.
 23     I would like to see more options for retirement. Currently all options are tied into    Feb 21, 2011 2:17 PM
        the stock market. I would like to see an option to contribute to a Roth IRA or
        some other option that is not directly tied to the stock market.
 24     1. We are underpaid against the private market. I would like to see the survey of       Feb 21, 2011 2:21 PM
        private paid jobs.
        2. When you work somewhere and think you are going to retire as the job is
        enticing and you even take on extra job duties, etc. without complaining, we
        should not lose our seniority, we should get paid more, and the free college for at
        least the children should stay the same. Don't take away from what we were
        promised we would get from the first day of hire.
        3. Recognize that the retirement match and free college are why most of us are
        here.
        4. If I am not using my tuition remission, than my child or spouse should be able
        to have it. We work hard in pediatrics, which makes it hard to even to go school
        as we have 1 late day per week (11:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.), and a very fast-paced
        work environment, it makes it very hard to also go to school (especially with
        children in the house).
        5. The retirement match should not go away, I have been working here to retire
        and I don't want to work here if I cannot even afford to retire at my age of 67.
        Keep in mind, I have worked since 1982 (27 years of my life - and still 25 to go!!).
        I have strong work ethics and believe you should not take away from us any of the
        perks we were hired with.
        6. As hard as we work, we need the vacation time and holidays we are used to.
        If it were not for that, I would have had to take all my personal and sick time by at
        least June. Think about the extra job duties that are piled on us day-by-day and
        the time we need with our family!!
        7. We need a new job classification for what we do here (at C&Y). I will work
        hard, like I have always, but the morale is going down and down as you keep us
        in the dark with not knowing what to expect.
 25     I am in favor of not running the sprinklers while it's raining wasting water and        Feb 21, 2011 2:23 PM
        money.




                                                     143 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
 26     I do not believe salaries are fair equitable across the University. I believe there's   Feb 21, 2011 2:24 PM
        very few "average" salaries. It seems there's a big division between very low
        salaries and extremely high salaries in my opinion (Chair's, Dean's, Asst. Dean's,
        Assoc. Deans, Head Coaches, some faculty, many, MANY Administrators...) I'm
        aware of what they do and what they make and it doesn't make sense to me yet
        the folks who really keep the University running live from paycheck to paycheck.
        Just my 2 cents. I feel blessed and grateful to have a job so I'm not complaining
        per say but giving a voice to those who do not make living wages.
 27     This will be my 10yr anniversary as an employee of the University. I only               Feb 21, 2011 2:28 PM
        remember getting a raise 3x's out of the 10yrs I have been here. I've transferred
        positions within the Unviersity & it appears that is the only real way of recieving a
        raise. Im not sure of what "midpoint/end point" range in salary means, but it would
        be nice to get a clearer understanding as to why we haven't recieved a raise in so
        long & what an employee has to do or how long they have to be on a job to
        recieve midpoint raise status.
 28     Fairness in Promotions, Performance Reviews, Re-classifications and Salary              Feb 21, 2011 2:32 PM
        Increases: Review of the applicable Policies/Regulations, "Fairness" Audits, and
        Reconcilaiton/redress for unfairness.
 29     I think some cost savings could be gained from not providing lunch on a regular or      Feb 21, 2011 2:33 PM
        ongoing basis for administrators for their own personal lunch.
 30     we had salary increase freeze for 3 years. why do the chairs/Deans have their           Feb 21, 2011 2:34 PM
        bonus?????
 31     the new VP of Human Resources is doing an outstanding job. Additionally, this           Feb 21, 2011 2:38 PM
        survey was an excellent idea, thank you!
 32     Gas, groceries and necessary essentials cost the same amount at the pump or             Feb 21, 2011 2:44 PM
        check out regardless of personal income. Some travel greater distances, across
        multiple counties just for a good job. The increases we are seeing hit hardest
        those who can least afford it. Remember that when making your decisions.
 33     It is interesting how staff salary and benefits are the first to be but whereas other   Feb 21, 2011 2:51 PM
        cost-saving measures are missed, for example, the budget to support sports.
        From a cost benefit analysis how can you compare the education of a student to a
        three point shot? Yes, the three point shot may bring in dollars but to educate one
        more person changes the world.
 34     With gas prices rising again, and other surcharges on electric bills, water and gas     Feb 21, 2011 2:56 PM
        being applied, isn't it time to begin offering some type of incentive to work from
        home, when possible or 1-2 days a week if agreeable with the department
        administration. Not having to fill up ones gas tank for the drive into work would
        alleviate some parking issues, leave our bank accounts a bit larger and reduce
        the wear and tear on the vehicle. Computer workstations could be shared,
        reducing the cost of purchasing replacements for out dated computers, if both
        employees were on alternate work at home days.

        Reduce the number of phones, i-pads paid in full by the university for staff and
        faculty using these devices less than 75% and give partial reimbursement based
        on amount of work use.
 35     Gain control over salary increases based on popularity contests is needed.              Feb 21, 2011 3:00 PM
 36     Since we already make less money than the "going rate", I thought the benefits          Feb 21, 2011 3:07 PM
        were supposed to help make up for that. Now you want to take them away too.
        Will you be able to find any employees to hire???




                                                      144 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                    Response Text
 37     It is very difficult to get a meaningful evaluation in some departments, we've been       Feb 21, 2011 3:17 PM
        rated high for so long that average appears subpar. I think it would be easier if
        everyone were required to start as average/satisfactory and work from there.
 38     I feel very fortunate to have the opportunity to work for the University of Louisville    Feb 21, 2011 3:38 PM
        and be part of this community. I appreciate the opportunity for input on such
        issues as well.
 39     I really feel strongly that U of L shouldn't pay people who have left (fired, resigned)   Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
        ridiculous amounts of money when we are hurting so badly with our budget and
        haven't had a raise in three years. Why don't you take that money and give us a
        substantial raise. Also, I feel that the coaches are being paid way too much when
        the regular people who are the back bone of the University are suffering. One
        more thing. I didn't understand that whole salary pool thing. It was very confusing
        to me. All I know is that I am only making it thru the grace of God and help from
        friends and family. Otherwise I would be out on the street. I need a substantial
        raise now. Thank you.
 40     From query #37 it is unclear what qualifies as "eligible employees" in several of         Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
        the questions.
 41     We need to make a second pass at these benefit concessions, need more                     Feb 21, 2011 3:43 PM
        realistic options. We are grossly underpaid, the decent benefits are the one thing
        that offsets the low wages.
 42     Until supervisors are required to take a class in how to evaluate people, it's not        Feb 21, 2011 3:56 PM
        going to be fare. If supervisor's aren't required half way through the year to sit
        down with employees and go over their JAQ and point out where they can
        improve, slamming them at the end of the year is neither helpful nor does it give
        incentive to do better. Some supervisors give their employees a 30 on everything.
        Others do not. Other don't even look at what they gave last year for the same
        work without explaining what the person did differently. Mandatory 2 hr class
        should be given to show supervisors how to do an evaluation!
 43     Supervisors are not adequately trained to objectively evaluate merit scores on            Feb 21, 2011 3:57 PM
        employees. Too many other factors influence their evaluations. Regular training
        should be required.
 44     The University is positioning itself for a major change with the loss of the HSC          Feb 21, 2011 3:58 PM
        clinical staff on the horizen. I would think that it would be best for all remaining
        staff - that these proposals be tabled until you see what staff are left after this
        year! It seems that you'll be looking at a substantial staff to faculty loss and these
        changes may just swing the pendulum.
        I hope that the staff senate with take the impending changes for the HSC staff into
        consideration when discussing any "acceptable" changes having the University
        acknowledge how these losses will affect the community as a whole.
 45     We are fortunate to be employed and have faired much better than many people              Feb 21, 2011 3:59 PM
        in this city. We appreicate the University's commitment to staff. That being said,
        funding raises by reducing benefits is still a reduction to current staff benefits. We
        need to eliminate programs and increase revenues to offset increases in
        expenses and fund salaries and benefits. Consolidate support and business
        functions when possible. Eliminate dupplication of services and streamline
        processes. The lack of budget increases for expenses and underwater
        endowments have further limited and often decreased the services we have been
        able to offer. State appropriations are going to continue to decrease, we need to
        identify real opportunities to reduce expenditures and increase revenues.




                                                      145 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                    Response Text
 46     Flat across the board, distributions are not fair to employees. An employee, who           Feb 21, 2011 4:13 PM
        has performed exceptionally, beyond expectations, will receive the same
        distribution as an employee who has performed marginally.
 47     A comparison of Personal, sick and Annual leave hour accruals with other schools           Feb 21, 2011 4:16 PM
        and businesses is needed. Most departments could make do with less personnel
        if there were not so many days awarded.
 48     I think everyone should have a cost of living raise. If an employee receives a             Feb 21, 2011 4:16 PM
        good or superior evaluation, they should receive a higher amount.
 49     High achievers must finally be compensated appropriately, otherwise they will              Feb 21, 2011 4:21 PM
        finally leave and we are left with those who cannot leave. During several years
        low wage employees have been relatively over-compensated.
 50     Any changes that are implemented should only effect new employees.                         Feb 21, 2011 4:23 PM
 51     It has been so long since we have had any real salary treatment that to include            Feb 21, 2011 4:39 PM
        merit would be demoralizing. It is a mistake not to give some permanent salary
        treatment to employees each year.
 52     I think staff salaries need to be revamped. Staff that have been here 20-30 years          Feb 21, 2011 4:40 PM
        should be making over midrange of their salary level..not almost the same as a
        new staff member who has no experience. Also, since the University is a
        UNIVERSITY..I think a degree should carry some kind of weight. I think it's
        ridiculous that you have people with no degree making $55,000 a year and people
        with a degree are making $30,000. There is no equality in the departments
        across the University and I feel, in my particular office that favoritism pulls a lot of
        weight on who gets promoted and who doesn't. I don't think that is a good way to
        treat staff...which is a reason I do not like the evaluation process. It is also a
        favoritism thing....they are not done fairly.
 53     Until all units across campus are held to the same standards for evaluating staff it       Feb 21, 2011 4:41 PM
        is not equitable for merit to equal raise amounts.
 54     Thank you for your service to the university --I think the organization is doing a         Feb 21, 2011 4:46 PM
        GREAT job listening , reporting and moving things forward!

        Regarding flat rate monies distributed --in previous years, I've known of
        employees who were only at the university for 6-7 months and they got the same
        as others that had been here years...I think the only employees whom have been
        here for over 1 year be provided this flat fee bonus/raise....Thanks!
 55     I've found that by the time you get around to sending out a survey, the decision           Feb 21, 2011 4:47 PM
        has already been made and this is just upper management's way of giving the
        employee the perception that they have some say in the decision-making process.
        Perhaps if the University would quit paying people hundreds of thousands of
        dollars to quit, they would have more money to pay the people who are actually
        doing the work here.
 56     Pay increases should be tied to specific performance objectives, comparable to             Feb 21, 2011 4:53 PM
        the business world, with staff and faculty who exceed expectations earning a
        higher percentage than those simply meeting stated objectives. Anyone
        (including tenured faculty) failing to meet expectations should be subject to a
        corrective action program that results in meaningful performance improvement or
        termination of employment.
 57     U of L should STOP MAILING out the U of L Magazine....too costly...not                     Feb 21, 2011 4:54 PM
        green...use PDF file for faculty.
         and others. Delphi needs to STOP 4 color printing on classes and seminars...it is
        on-line...not green and costly.




                                                       146 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
 58     For my profession, genetic counseling, we are already the some of the lowest            Feb 21, 2011 4:55 PM
        paid professionals in the country, a raise would be nice!!!
 59     Regarding salary increases: I am a halftime employee and have worked at UL              Feb 21, 2011 5:20 PM
        since 1998. Three years ago, when employees got a flat $1200, I got $600. Last
        year, when employees received $700, employees who worked less than 80% got
        $0. My concern is that when you say "eligible employees" this time, you may
        mean employees who work 80% or more.
 60     None right now.                                                                         Feb 21, 2011 5:29 PM
 61     Not having raises wouldn't be so bad if the administrators below the President and      Feb 21, 2011 5:43 PM
        Provost would at least seem appreciative of faculty and staff effort and
        performance. In my college (Business), the Dean and Associate Deans seem
        completely oblivious to this issue. (That problem's easily rectified by finding
        another job at a different institution.) U of L needs to be more creative with ways
        to "reward" faculty and staff--not just thinking in terms of salary increases and
        benefits. Being treated as a valuable person matters most.
 62     Questions #37 and 38. U of L does not have a fair system based upon merit and           Feb 21, 2011 5:57 PM
        quality of work performed. Some units "explode" salaries by defeating the PIQ
        process. Other workers are "pigeon-holed" because unit-heads don't place fair
        value on employees with similar titles but who perform vastly different job
        responsibilities. And it appears that performace evaluations are not always fair or
        accurate. This is unfair.
 63     Flat salary increases do nothing to reward the great employees we have and              Feb 21, 2011 6:09 PM
        promote a union mentality that mediocre is fine since we only will get at best a flat
        raise pool. Incentives matter! Let's reward our best performers with a merit-
        based increase when we have a raise pool. Across the board financial
        distributions should be kept to one time bonuses.
 64     In contradiction to earlier questions about retirees and health insurance, the          Feb 21, 2011 6:11 PM
        University should give retirees the same benefit as current employees. The
        University should contribute the same amount to retirees health insurance as it
        does for current employees.
 65     Morale at the University is at an all time low. Something needs be done in order to     Feb 21, 2011 9:30 PM
        raise morale. Threats of cuts to benefits only push morale lower. Hourly workers
        should not be made to bear any more decreases in benefits or salaries. Require
        the budgeters to trim excess fat where It is, instead of where it is not. A great
        suggestion for a morale booster would be "free parking for all employees". H.S.C.
        employees are made to park on the streets or pay outrageous garage fees while
        the new Clay street garage sits half empty. The north preston lot was closed
        forcing employees to pay a hefty increase (125.00 yr to 367.00 yr) in parking fees
        or park on the street. It is not this way at the Belknap campus where employees
        park free or pay 125.00 yr. Revamp the current merit evaluation process. "Needs
        training" is a common excuse given because of a low evaluation score, however,
        training has not been made available to employees in order to raise scores.
 66     Salaries....I have seen many people only putting in the bare minimum while              Feb 21, 2011 9:39 PM
        stating that they aren't going to work hard if they don't get a raise. Then I have
        seen many people working hard and doing exceptional jobs even though they
        know there will be no raise. I would like to see those people who performed
        admirable during the past years when we didn't have raises be recognized with a
        percentage based raise.




                                                     147 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                     Response Text
 67     As a dedicated employee, I understand the necessity to make budget cuts,                    Feb 22, 2011 12:21 AM
        however, we have toughed it out with no raises for 3 years. My income is less on
        my taxes than in previous year due to cost of living increases with no increase in
        salary to keep up. Reducing our benefits just makes us feel undervalued. A main
        benefit is tuition remission which is on my paycheck everyweek for years and
        when I finally will be able to use it in the next year, I do not feel that I will be able
        to reap the full benefit if they implement adding surcharges and fees. In fact, if a
        dependant decides to go to a community college, that money should transfer
        there. Some other universities do that.
        We (at least I speak for myself) are not paid fairly. The assessment done in the
        past was not an assessment of my job. We were lumped together and in fact, I
        make far less than those doing the same duties as I do at other institutions in this
        region.
 68     Thanks for asking for our in put, and for the time all of you put into studing what         Feb 22, 2011 12:52 AM
        we think.
 69     i come we can not get a bonus and a flat rate across the board                              Feb 22, 2011 6:15 AM
 70     Why aren't you examining ALL budget areas including athletics, the physician                Feb 22, 2011 8:44 AM
        practice plan, the RIF plan, the dean's tax and faculty counsultation for pay
        outside of the university? These programs generate considerable amounts of
        revenue but are not considered during the budget negoiations.

        Simply, if the tuition remission benefit is reduced the university will lose faculty
        and staff.....but maybe that's the whole idea.
 71     Other cost cutting measures that should be considered include:                              Feb 22, 2011 9:15 AM
        - cutting work week to 4 days, all offices closed on Fridays would greatly reduce
        electricity/heating consumption as well as maintenance/upkeep costs. Possibly
        reduce everyone to 80% time to save on salary/fringe.
        - eliminate the CHSE office, instead allow depts to work with other local
        organizations to offer CE/CME for programs for MUCH less than the CHSE office
        charges.
        -
 72     I really don't feel that it is fair that an entry level position would receive a 6%         Feb 22, 2011 9:21 AM
        increase and a person that is required to have a required skill set and may be
        harder to replace would receive a 2% increase. This is really hard on morale and
        hard to keep our salary within the market base salary that the University has been
        striving to do for the last few years.
 73     I would like to be involved with this as well as other opportunities at UL, but since I     Feb 22, 2011 9:44 AM
        have been here less than one year, I feel under qualified compared to other
        employees. I would like information on opportunities new employees can
        participate in.
 74     You should send this out to more. In e-mails.                                               Feb 22, 2011 9:44 AM
        Thanks
 75     There needs to be a pay raise in some form every year. The University will                  Feb 22, 2011 9:53 AM
        continue to lose good employees if there is no finacial incentive to stay and there
        are better paying jobs in the market.
 76     Think we should look into hiring ( or training) more bilingual customer service             Feb 22, 2011 9:54 AM
        personnel to handle billing questions or general office issues within the Health
        Science Center. We lose a lot of revenue and patients because there are no
        bilingual staff to answer questions take appointments or take payments.




                                                        148 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
 77     The job market is not what it once was. However, it will not always be what it is        Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
        today, and fear of leaving this job and being unable to continue my career will not
        always be the situation. If the administration continues their efforts to turn working
        at UofL into 'just another job,' they will succeed and it will indeed become 'just
        another job.' It is going to take less and less to convince good employees to leave
        UofL.
 78     n/a                                                                                      Feb 22, 2011 9:56 AM
 79     PIQs...why is it discouraged or even you are threatened with job loss if you submit      Feb 22, 2011 9:58 AM
        a PIQ to Personnel and by-pass the dept? Thus you are left in a situation where
        you really should be re-classed, but your manager or director doesn't want to
        consider it; but you job duties really should be re-classed. Also, in my situation
        my previous director and manager was going to but was asked by the AVP to
        proritize; director asked if I would allow him to do two other persons (it was sorely
        needed) and then do mine which was going to be a reclass with a request beyond
        entry level. I agreed...but now with the new director and manager their position is
        forget what was said in the past, etc. Also, said it would not be to my advantage
        to submit to Personnel on my own. This is a problem and unfair.
 80     We have gone through tough times in the last few years , and I think the university      Feb 22, 2011 10:05 AM
        has done the best it could do. We have at the same time fallen way behind the
        cost of living raises of each year. I hope the university will start working hard to
        correct the problem of wages and benifits. City funded jobs that are union are
        really getting way ahead of us in every aspect. I have worked here for 35 years
        and I can not see how I will ever be able to retire. Someone needs to do
        something about this problem.
 81     Thank you for this opportunity to express my thoughts. These are very important          Feb 22, 2011 10:09 AM
        issues for all of us.
 82     it is not clear to me what the "merit" calculations are. perhaps this is because i       Feb 22, 2011 10:11 AM
        have only been at the university for one year. i believe in a merit based system,
        but without more information on how this is set up at UofL, i am not comfortable
        selecting that option.
 83     People in lower pay grades are most                                                      Feb 22, 2011 10:11 AM
        impacted by no raises. This is why
        I favor flat dollar amount increases.
        It really helps those who most
        need the extra money.
 84     Implement term limits on staff senators.                                                 Feb 22, 2011 10:13 AM
 85     I have found over the years that even the yearly employee appraisals are not             Feb 22, 2011 10:15 AM
        standard across all departements. Some are even popularity contests. So, I
        oppose anything that is based on merit, other than satistfactory or unsatisfactory.
        The degree of success is relative and in most cases, unfair.
 86     Would like to see University become virtually paperless. Technology is available         Feb 22, 2011 10:19 AM
        and reams of paper and space are wasted at the Research end.
 87     Maybe there should be a more transparent policy with regard to bonusses/wage             Feb 22, 2011 10:21 AM
        increases received by select personnel within the university. Rumors spread
        rampantly about Deans, Chairs, Directors, VP's and others continuing to receive
        bonusses and wage increases, while the majority of staff do not. If these wage
        increases are performance based then compensation should be given to the staff
        and support personnel who contribute to the success of everyone's
        performance.Regardless all these matters should be more transparent.




                                                      149 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
 88     The Univesity is the only one that provides incentives to work here. But you start      Feb 22, 2011 10:23 AM
        taking away those incentives need to adjust the pay in order for people to make it.
        Main issues is having Health Insurance and Retirement. Unlike myself I don't
        make enought to make ends meat then have to contribute. Need to look at what
        keeps people here not how to make people leave.
 89     Everyone needs to understand that there are employees working full-time for this        Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM
        university that are making less than $20,000 a year. I understand that there are
        differences in backgrounds and qualifications, but for someone to be working full-
        time and to make that little is absurd. We are basically making the conscious
        decision to keep them at poverty levels. No one at this university should make
        less than $20,000 unless working part-time. If this raise can not be given to
        everyone, or there is only a select group that will get a little more, give it to the
        people who need it. For the record, I do not make less than $20,000, but I would
        rather you give the money to the people who need it.

        I am surrounded by people who make lots of money and have continued to get
        pay increases throughout this economic situation while the rest of us do what we
        can to hold down the fort. The people getting the increases don't even notice
        them while the little guy isn't buying groceries because he doesn't have the
        money. Our salary database is often posted on the front page of the courier
        journal and we know the injustices that are going on around us. We are not blind.

        You may be offering us a raise now, but at what cost. We will be stripped of our
        benefits and still not be getting an increase next year if the economy doesn't pick
        up. I ask the Staff Senate to keep in mind that there are some employees who
        are suffering and I also ask them to consider the fact that you are trading our only
        extra benefits for a little bit of cash right now. How will this benefit us in the
        future?
 90     I would like to know why paychecks of salaried employees cannot reflect actual          Feb 22, 2011 10:29 AM
        earned and used vacation/sick leave as of at least the end of the previous month.
        I should not have to go to the UBM if I want to see whether things are being
        tracked and charged properly. This is a simple matter, managed by many
        employers all over the world. I cannot imagine how a university of our size cannot
        figure out how to do this.
 91     As a retiree, my supplemental health insurance is very important and the monthly        Feb 22, 2011 10:39 AM
        cost goes up each year; however, Social Security has not given a COLA increase
        the last two years. Please have respect and consideration for the retirees, as you
        will be there one day.
 92     If the University is facing such budget troubles, why don't we follow the approach      Feb 22, 2011 10:39 AM
        of almost all universities in the country and charge per credit hour? The current
        method is costing the University millions each year.
 93     I also think that employees need to have one year of service before being eligible      Feb 22, 2011 10:40 AM
        for salary increases




                                                     150 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
 94     We need a cost of living raise that affects our future retirement savings, we need       Feb 22, 2011 10:43 AM
        to retain all tuition and health benefits I have since there has been no cost of
        living raise in 4-5 years. To ask staff to make a choice in this survey is like asking
        us to rob peter to pay paul while staff who earn less than $30,000.00 are already
        struggling in this economy. The university has done well in retaining our health
        costs, and that has been a great help. It would be tragic to many staff members if
        those benefits were taken, it would do better for them if they file unemployment
        rather than worked at the university. And to put salt on the wound by adding
        additional tuition costs (there already was the $150.00 food card expense), would
        be a greater financial challenge for low paid staff members who want to better
        themselves.
 95     Too many disparities in salaries.                                                        Feb 22, 2011 10:47 AM
 96     I don't understand why we have not been getting raises, yet, the University has          Feb 22, 2011 10:52 AM
        enough money to hire dozens of new highly-paid middle-management workers
        (new positions just created, and filled) the past two years (at least in University
        Advancement), and, there is money to paint logos on overpasses and create
        fancy iron gates, and offering to pay for part of the season basketball ticket fees
        for the Arena for Representatives and Senators, etc. And the expansion of the
        Stadium. It seems that money spent lately has been all for show. Why not
        address quality and substance of the University? Things that really matter. We
        make a good impression on the surface, but then the employees are struggling
        financially, just to make ends meet. That makes no sense to me whatsoever.
 97     Would love to see merit based increases come back but only after cost of living          Feb 22, 2011 10:55 AM
        adjustments have been made across the board for all. It's been far too long.
 98     There are still questions and concerns related to the results of the campus climate      Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
        and Great Places to Work surveys and the reporting of the results. Staff Senate
        should continue to ask questions in this area, and make sure that the concerns of
        staff are delineated and addressed.
 99     Money maybe tight now, but it won't always be this way. If we give up benefits           Feb 22, 2011 11:06 AM
        now we will never get them back even when the budget has improved. We should
        never give up benefits for salary increases, people are working here for the
        benefits not money. If we don't have funds to increase salaries then make it up in
        other benefits such as increased holidays. I think people would gladly change
        monitary benefits for more time with their families. And if the proposed changes to
        tuition remission are implemented, then we should look at other methods to
        encourage employees to finish their degree's, it would be nice to offer them a
        bonus as recognition.
 100    I trust committee to try to come up with the best solution possible for the people.      Feb 22, 2011 11:12 AM
        Thank you.
 101    Fringe benefits for UofL are calculated at 28.5%, while Fringe benefit rate for          Feb 22, 2011 11:15 AM
        Norton Hospital employees and Jewish Hospital employees is both 28%. Staff
        salaries for both Norton and Jewish Hospitals are higher than UofL.

        UK's fringe rate is 22.5%, however, staff salaries are higher than at UofL.
 102    Thank you for this opportunity to participate in these discussions and to truly          Feb 22, 2011 11:22 AM
        exercise shared governance.

        None of these decisions is easy; I appreciate the Faculty Senate's thoughtful and
        evidence-based approach to this process.
 103    I suggest that there be additional information attached to each question in case an      Feb 22, 2011 11:23 AM
        employee is not familar with the subject matter of the question.




                                                      151 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                    Response Text
 104    Please please provide salary increases across the board when there is such little         Feb 22, 2011 11:33 AM
        money, it is only fair to all of our employees to follow this process.
 105    Administrators at this university are paid very well and above market with great          Feb 22, 2011 11:37 AM
        "golden parachutes" to leave...
        6 figures. Neither classified nor P/A are market rate. What efforts/strategic plans
        are being created to eliminate this systemic inequity especially when the
        intersections of race/ethnicity and gender are taken into consideration?
 106    We do enjoy competitive benefits; however we are compensated much less as a               Feb 22, 2011 11:42 AM
        whole than those in the private sector.
         Diminishing employee benefits will decrease the Universities ability to attract and
        retain qualified individuals and harm the overall talent/skill level and effectiveness
        of the University.
 107    Administration always seems to find funding for whatever they deem important--            Feb 22, 2011 11:48 AM
        new faculty/administrators/staff with outlandish requests; creating positions for
        spouses or individuals they want to relocate here; unreasonably high salaries
        when those of us who have been here for years are asked to deal with the
        possibility benefit cuts! We are extremely top heavy in administration and short
        on support staff. I know the economy is down, but I see administrators that have
        no problem with requiring meetings be held during lunch so the university has to
        pay for it or what's worse, expecting the university to pay for their individual lunch;
        allowing full hot meals instead of box lunches during such meetings; extravacant
        dinners at the most expensive restaurants in town when recruiting
        faculty/administrators. We give a false impression that we are rolling in money.
 108    There are programs around campus that are wasteful that should be reviewed.               Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
        Every program should have to show that it is effective. Thousands of dollars are
        wasted every year.
 109    As you can see by my other comments made above, my main concern is that                   Feb 22, 2011 11:50 AM
        permanment part time staff not be left out in the cold as we have been for many
        years. We deserve raises too!!!
        Thanks.
 110    I appreciate that the Staff Senate has looked out for the staff's interest all these      Feb 22, 2011 11:54 AM
        years. I don't want a raise if it is going to mean losing benefits. I realize that this
        may not be possible and negotiation is important. Since I receive tuition remission
        I would hate to see it go. For people that it doesn't matter because they don't use
        it, they will vote to have it eliminated. Please remember the small percentage of
        us that use tuition remission.

        Thanks
 111    Keep up the great work!                                                                   Feb 22, 2011 12:09 PM
 112    It would be nice if the senate looked again at the high costs of parking on the hsc       Feb 22, 2011 12:10 PM
        campus.
 113    Any raises/one-time payments are based on performance reviews. If a supervisor            Feb 22, 2011 12:11 PM
        fails to complete a performance review, the employee is the one who suffers. Will
        there ever be a provision for supervisors to not get the raises if they fail to
        complete their employees' performance reviews? And, if a performance review is
        not submitted, does the employee get anything (is it all or nothing)?
 114    Issue: Employees who are required to access electronic/scanned documents as               Feb 22, 2011 12:12 PM
        their only option of obtaining the information necessary to input data into another
        software program need two computer monitors. The University must provide
        departments with RESTRICTED/EARMARKED FUNDS specifically for the
        purchase of these monitors.




                                                      152 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
 115    tution remission and the employee assistance program are both invaluable                 Feb 22, 2011 12:19 PM
        resources for me personally. They both help to make me a better person
        personally and professionally which are benefits TO the university.
 116    Although it seems logical to base raises on merit, the current performance               Feb 22, 2011 12:23 PM
        evaluation process is unfair in many cases. There are duties listed on my
        performance evaluation that are not applicable to my position, and because I must
        be rated on all duties listed, I usually receive an average rating for each of those
        duties which are not applicable to my job. The problem with this is that several
        average ratings decrease my overall rating, which makes the entire evaluation
        unfair/unreliable/inaccurate. If I must be evaluated annually, and especially if a
        raise is to be based on that evaluation, I want a chance to receive a rating that will
        accurately reflect my performance over the previous year.
 117    There are employees who have responsiblities well beyond the job descriptions            Feb 22, 2011 12:34 PM
        "on the books" with Human Resources. Even though this fact has been
        addressed with several layers within the chain of command nothing has been
        done and in this case, it has been OVER 2 years of empty promises! Don't you
        think it's about time for Human Resources to investigate these instances to ensure
        no violations of law are occurring?
 118    I strongly believe raises should be tied to employee performance.                        Feb 22, 2011 12:35 PM

        Thank you for compiling and distributing this survey. I hope the results are
        carefully reviewed and acted upon when warranted and/or possible.
 119    This is a university, not just staff, concern. I'd like to see mandatory drills for      Feb 22, 2011 12:49 PM
        "shooter" or otherwise volatile situations. It's good that Active Shooter has been
        added to the emergency flyer but more can be done. Prepare for it as you would
        any other disaster. Prepare, post, and drill. "Normalizing" a response might do a
        lot to alleviate fear/stress, whether in classrooms, offices, or dorms.
 120    The University needs to be run as a business. The same old ways are not                  Feb 22, 2011 1:04 PM
        sufficient to lead this University beyond it's current situation. Accountability is
        lacking with faculty and staff. Workforce issues need to be dealt with. Protection of
        poor performers is not acceptable and brings all of us down. Funding issues
        continue to be problematic. The University doesn't fund increased wages,
        individual business units or grants do and funds don't seem to be available.
        Unsure of how this will be accomplished. Although it is great that the staff senate
        tries to protect issues relating to the staff, the individuals do not necessarily have
        the wide-ranging expertise to move university forward. Any changes should be
        made with economic considerations. Look at what is happening at corporations
        across the country. What will the impact of these proposed changes be in relation
        to the entire scheme of things?
 121    All employees deserve something toward a cost of living increase, but we cannot          Feb 22, 2011 1:14 PM
        totally eliminate merit based raises, or we take away all incentive to do a great
        job! Moral is already poor, but watch it fall much lower for those who work hard if
        their hard work doesn't mean anything to administration.




                                                     153 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                    Response Text
 122    Regarding questions 37 and 38, across the board salary increases serve no                 Feb 22, 2011 1:24 PM
        purpose other than to encourage mediocrity. Its already nearly impossible to get
        rid of lazy, incompetent, or even negative performers among faculty and staff.
        Across the board raises to these people takes away the only tool the university
        has to starve them out.

        Ask yourself two market questions.
        1. Is there a lot of turnover at UL relative to private companies?
        2. Do we have trouble attracting people to apply for jobs here?

        We have the opposite problem. UL is seen in the community as a juicy place to
        work - great pay and benefits, recession-proof, big bureaucracy, little stress, and
        nearly impossible to be fired.
 123    Charge units that overspeed (have a deficit in speedtype) a fee to cover the loss         Feb 22, 2011 1:40 PM
        of interest money would have earned. Charge units for special services such as
        "rush checks" to pay a vendor, special payroll checks for late timesheets.
 124    I would like to say that given the bad state of the economy, the benefits of working      Feb 22, 2011 1:42 PM
        at UL far outweigh not getting increases in pay - the biggie being the dependent
        tuition remission. I sincerely hope that that benefit will remain throughout my
        employement at UL.
 125    I'm sick of "Diversity" being shoved down our throats, when the campus supports           Feb 22, 2011 1:57 PM
        racism in their current newsletter by advertising and promoting "Black Faculty &
        Staff Association general meeting
        Please join members of the Black Faculty & Staff Association(BFSA) for its
        monthly general body meeting noon to 1 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. 16, at the Cultural
        Center. The featured speaker is the president of the Kentucky Association of
        Blacks in Higher Education (KABHE), Francene Botts-Butler"

        Do we see a "White Faculty & Staff Association?" or a "Hispanic Faculty & Staff
        Association" NO, you don't and even though this was named many years ago,
        and even though they welcome any race, they out of respect to all the "OTHER"
        races on campus should NOT be allowed to promote just a "Racist" name for their
        association, and if its open and made up of all, the why does it say "BLACK" and
        why are they having someone from the Ky Asssoc. of Blacks in Higher Education
        speak? why would that concern a white person or spanish or chinese, etc. Get
        the Point here? Diversity is just another hoop to jump for everyone else's feelings.
 126    I agree with flat dollar amount raises for all. Those who make low pay can really         Feb 22, 2011 2:07 PM
        use the raise and those who make large salaries don't need the bump as much. A
        raise to a poor person, changes their lives. A raise to an affluent person doesn't
        increase nor detract from their lifestyle. The flat dollar amount gives a liberal
        increase in pay to the poor where those who are comfortable appreciate the
        gesture.

        Past raises involving merit were given but not equitably. Merit raises were given
        to those who acceived a satifactory on their evaluations but most people acceived
        this. There was not a distinction made for those who were above satifactory or
        superior in their work. It was just a flat raise for all no matter the quality of their
        work. Merit didn't mean what it could have meant so if it is the same format, just
        give to all.
 127    The way to keep good employees is to pay them for their great work. This is               Feb 22, 2011 2:12 PM
        accomplished through merit based increases in salaries. The way to keep bad
        employees is to pay them for the status quo. This is accomplished through across
        the board raises and even worse through flat dollar amounts.




                                                      154 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
 128    I have no opinion but appreciate the opportunity to express it anyway.                  Feb 22, 2011 2:14 PM
 129    I think staff and professional staff should have "evaluations" such as student          Feb 22, 2011 2:18 PM
        evaluations done for faculty by students.

        It should be up top the supervisor to get 4-6 evaluations done buy other
        staff/faculty and students that come into contact with that staff member ,most
        often.

        Staff sometimes performs very well only for their supervisors!
 130    I have NEVER heard of these listening sessions, NOR does our representative             Feb 22, 2011 2:59 PM
        send out the minutes of each month's meeting and does not keep us updated on
        items discussed at each meeting. It would be nice if they could just send out a
        note to all their constitutes with a link to the mintues.
 131    Technology availability should be made to each individual employee based upon           Feb 22, 2011 3:26 PM
        the system applications utilized in completing their day to day functions, not based
        upon years of service.
 132    I feel that the University could realize some huge savings by taking advantage of       Feb 22, 2011 3:43 PM
        telecommuting, where possible. This would also align with the University's goal of
        reducing our carbon footprint in the community. It could be up to the units as to
        feasibility and frequency. One day per week might be a nice standard.
 133    Possibly finding several areas around the city to park and tarc. Many of us drive       Feb 22, 2011 3:49 PM
        because there is no bus service that is near us that live out further and so
        therefore have to drive in but if there were several locations where we could park
        out around the city and tarc in, then it would save a significant amount of gasoline.
        The hours wouldn't have to be all day a few hours in the morning and a few hours
        in the afternoon.

        I have seen the morale of the employees of the university decrease over the
        years. When someone would say they worked for the university, they knew it was
        the best place to work and had great benefits. You do not hear that so much
        anymore. We took the family feeling out of working at the university and put the
        business feeling in. I think that there can be a balance of both. So many of us
        have our positions at a really low rate of pay that does not match outside the
        realm of the univesity and we should do another study on what our positions are,
        (not the titles) because titles are very ambiguous here and get our salaries up to
        what they should be in the real world.
 134    I don't know how you expect people to survive paying so little and doing steps to       Feb 22, 2011 3:53 PM
        minimize and make it harder for raises. Groceries have went up 30% since last
        year. Gas prices also very difficult. Everything goes up except our wages, and
        the rates you pay people who have college degrees working in labs are extremely
        low while PI's and big wigs get huge boosts. It's also ridiculous how the lowest
        performers that walk around happy and suck up to bosses are also the most
        valued, while the hardest workers are just given more and more to do and are
        depressed.
 135    I am single with no dependents and a ways from retirement eligibility who has           Feb 22, 2011 3:56 PM
        been working as full time employee for 12 years. Many of the decrease in benefits
        do not impact me in the near future. That being said I am strongly against any
        decreases in benefits to combat the bad economic situation UNLESS there is
        documented promise to reinstate the reduced benefits as the economy turns
        around in a more positive direction.
 136    Cutting crucial benefits to offer a raise doesn't seem necessary. The economy           Feb 22, 2011 4:03 PM
        seems to be going up in someways. Cut the bs programs that we dont need!




                                                     155 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                    Response Text
 137    As an employee that has been at the university for a little over 5 years now, I am        Feb 22, 2011 4:05 PM
        outraged to know that as a Program Assistant Senior I started at approximately
        $10.85/hr and am currently am making $12.43/hour. During this time period, the
        starting rate for a PAS has jumped to $11.85. That was a $1 more per hour for
        those individuals who had NO experience starting after I did? Where is my $1
        increase? Also the minimum wage increase went into effect as well. Where is my
        allotment for that? It is very disheartening to know that I bring home the same
        amount of money every two weeks as I did four years ago. The crazy thing is this:
        I went from the regular EPO health insurance plan to the Cardinal EPO so that I
        can bring home more money. And I am still bringing home $650 every two weeks.
        All this while the supervisors received pay increases because their workload
        supposedly increased and they deserved it. As a PAS along with the other five in
        my office, we have tackled a major scan project that was doomed to fail, amidst a
        flood. Moral is low, people are looking for postitions outside the office and the
        university. You are now talking of taking benefits away, reducing benefits or
        making us pay for what most of us have rightfully earned. I know there is a
        downturn in the economy and we are not receiving money from the state as we
        did, but some how, some way, there is money somewhere for some people to get
        a "well-deserved" raise while the rest of us sit back and struggle to make ends
        meet daily, weekly and monthly.
        Don't get me wrong, I don't want to sound like an ungrateful, disgruntled
        employee, but for my sanity and well being I'd like to know when enough is
        enough. I don't want to leave the university, but my family comes first and I need
        my benefits and more money. Our equal counterparts throughout the state make
        more money than we do.
 138    Most people work here for the great benefits, take those away and you would lose          Feb 22, 2011 4:09 PM
        many of your best employees. Unfortunately, raises have not been based on merit
        but across the board, this encourages poor work ethics. This single factor is very
        self-defeating and many good people leave because of it.
 139    Question: what efforts are under way to actually enforce the move to a no-                Feb 22, 2011 5:08 PM
        smoking campus? I have tried to be diligent in asking students to observe our
        policies and while approximately 90% of the 50 or so students I've talked with
        have been polite (even if not responsive), the remaining 10% have included: (1)
        angry, rude and threatening tirades (2) argument and promises to start a protest
        movement, and (3), the best of all, a group of students willing to have their picture
        taken in front of the no-smoking sign near Strickler. The last group told me that
        there is "no way" it [no smoking] is going to happen. Add to that the fact that I've
        seen physical plant staff smoking on campus, and that the cigarette butts near
        Davidson, Strickler, Ekstrom, and Life Sciences document quite clearly the rather
        considerable smoking going on, and you have one very demoralized (RE no
        smoking) faculty member. I'd rather we do away with the signs than maintain
        appearances; at least it would be more honest and I wouldn't be reminded of how
        little impact we're having. Many thanks.
 140    If we lose tuition remission, I will quit and go to work in a private lab where I could   Feb 22, 2011 5:39 PM
        make substantially more than I do here.
 141    Have altheltics pay into employees benefits.                                              Feb 22, 2011 7:20 PM
 142    I feel it has been unfair that part-time employees do not receive, and have not           Feb 22, 2011 7:20 PM
        received, any type of compensation over the past few years when the budget has
        not allowed for a regular raise in pay, while 80% and FT employees have a least
        received something. I feel they should also be considered when a one time
        awards are made




                                                      156 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
 143    A merit based salary increase system is long overdue. As of now, there is no real       Feb 22, 2011 7:24 PM
        incentive to perform well. Also, I think over time it hurts the morale of those that
        perform at a high level and are not recognized through merit based increases.
        When you see your higher payed colleague who is very obviously under-
        performing getting the same percentage increase, morale starts to suffer.
 144    Try cutting the cost of some benefits. For example, we pay an outrageous                Feb 23, 2011 8:55 AM
        amount of for health insurance. I pay right at $500/month for my family coverage.
        On a recent trip to St. Jude in Memphis, I learned that their employees paid a total
        of $180/month dollars for a better family health insurance plan than I have. Even
        if you are making $60,000/year (which I am NOT), $500/month is a lot to pay.

        Surely there are some less expensive health care providers out there? Or the
        University could underwrite their own insurance program?

        For Pete's sake, if you check out ehealthinsurance.com, you can purchase a
        better plan for $450 to $488/month WITHOUT an employer's contribution. So with
        U of L's contribution my health insurance costs a total of $1103.94/ month. The
        $588 or so that U of L contributes to purchasing my PPO should be enough to pay
        the entire premium and pay for my dental and vision insurance too!
 145    why are annual reviews not reflected in compensation?                                   Feb 23, 2011 10:00 AM
 146    I tried to apply for a Master's Program some years ago and never heard back from        Feb 23, 2011 11:00 AM
        anyone. I called several times and got the run around, or no answer at all, which
        gave me the impression that the University is not really interested in funding free
        higher education for employees, because they sure do a lousy job of getting back
        to you. I have heard the same thing from several other employees.
        Fortunately, I was not dead set on obtaining a specific degree, or I would have
        been beyond irritated!
 147    Many of the Faculty are paid a disproportionately larger amount than staff. Even        Feb 23, 2011 11:17 AM
        with their added education and possible experience the pay scale at Uof L is out
        of balance. To make benefits for those lower level workers still available I would
        suggest cutting faculty pay, or at the very least not giving them raises for a few
        years. There are staff working under me doing a fantastic job and making less
        than 19,000 a year. They can barely make their bills and I feel for them. These are
        not wasteful irresponsible individuals. They deserve better than a pittance
        "bonus". It has been much too long since this university has given its staff an
        actual raise. Yet faculty is allowed to continue dipping their hands in the pool. The
        wasteful selfish nature of this is disheartening. I hope our faculty realizes they
        cannot continue to receive pay increases at the expense of the lower level
        workers. Stepping on the heads of those who are drowning is reprehensible.
 148    It is amazing how much salaries differ depending on the department you are              Feb 23, 2011 11:42 AM
        working in. There are several employees who have been working at the
        University 20+ years who are barely making over base pay. This is a serious
        issue. For example an employee who has been working in a position for 5 years
        may only make a few cents more than the new employee in the same position. If
        a person who starts in the positon as I, within 5 years may be making several
        thousand more, depending on that departments budget.




                                                     157 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                  Response Text
 149    First, thanks for your work. Second, I will repeat here my suggestions on items 33    Feb 23, 2011 11:45 AM
        and 36, which are very important to me. I would like to hear your response. Here
        are the suggestions again:

        It would be better to not have a flat surcharge rate to program budgets, but rather
        adjust it according to two factors: 1) The size of the program's budget, and 2)
        whether a particular program is considered a necessity.

        Here's a proposal: enable Human Resources to advocate/negotiate with
        insurance providers regarding claim disputes. I am willing to pay more for that
        service, as long as HR has effective leverage over insurance providers.
 150    Please remember Shelby Campus. We do not receive any benefits like the other          Feb 23, 2011 12:01 PM
        campuses, such as your listening sessions mentioned above. Please bring
        benefits/programs to Shelby Campus. I cannot make it to Belknap/HSC and back
        on my lunch break to participate in any services such and Get Healthy Now,
        retirement planning sessions, and to use the gym.
 151    I understand budget issues, but it seems that there have been no salary               Feb 23, 2011 1:15 PM
        increases, benefits have already been and continue to be taken away and some
        departments will not allow their employees increases or reclassifications unless
        they are paid by a grant or are favored by the department head. Some
        employees who work very hard are being told nothing can be done but then the
        department head's "favorite" employee gets a raise or reclass. Morale was
        already low because of the budget issues, but a lack of appreciation and fairness
        on the department level only makes this worse. Unfortunately, nothing can be
        done about this because of the level from which this is taking place.
 152    In addition to budget cuts, UofL should also focus on generating income in            Feb 23, 2011 1:23 PM
        addition to its "Charting the Course" capital campaign. Ivy League and
        Benchmark Institutions generate income streams and UofL could generate
        additional income with the following comparable to Ivy League & Benchmark
        Universities:
        1) Executive Training (i.e. Harvard U Executive Training for
        Administrators/Executives in Business, Higher Ed, Govt. etc. Nationally &
        Globally)
        2) Increase on-line UofL classes offered.
        3) Increase weekend classes and launch a "Weekend University" of classes for
        adults returning to
           college.
        4) Expand upon a "niche"- several, which project UofL as a national/global leader
        and expert to address the U.S.'s current issues of today and the future. UofL can
        successfully generate income with expertise, conferences, executive training and
        webinars etc which focus on U.S. current issues of the day and focus on solutions
        which are also designed to generate income by addressing areas including:
           1) The Economy & Jobs
           2) Education and the Goal of 50,000 degrees
           3) Green Initiatives
           4) Veterans & Military Families and Women Veterans & Women in the Military
           5) Multicultural Diversity
           6) Optimize use of today's technology with both all new as well as existing
        university goals, plans
              and initiatives.




                                                    158 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                   Response Text
 153    I have lost faith in the Staff Senate, especially of the lead. The Staff Senate head   Feb 23, 2011 1:33 PM
        should be an example of pride to the employees in the university, not one of the
        head gossip spreaders. We need leaders to look up to and that we can trust.
        Before Staff Senate officers spread rumors about individuals and departments on
        campus, they should be verified on both sides, not just the side he is friends with.
        This causes the whole Staff Senate to have a bad name.
 154    They should look at offering long term employees early retirement packages.            Feb 23, 2011 1:52 PM
 155    It has been brought to my attention that Physical Plant employees at HSC campus        Feb 23, 2011 2:35 PM
        are not allowed to ride the shuttle during working hours. I believe this to be and
        unfair policy. I have seen lab personnel transport experiments (i.e. animal cages),
        as well as seen faculty transport cumbersome wheeled suitcases as if they were
        at the airport. No staff member should be denied use of the shuttle during working
        hours, especially when its use contributes to the university's green policy and
        contributes to a more-productive and efficient work day.
 156    Many supervisors do not use the performance appraisal system properly and give         Feb 23, 2011 2:39 PM
        all employees all 30's regardless of performance. They do not view them as being
        important. Giving merit increases based on performance appraisals doesn't
        always seem fair because different supervisors have different ways of
        rating...some are very demanding and give all employees mid-range scores while
        others give everyone 30s, even when they are having performance problems.
        Giving a % or flat amount to everyone with satisfactory seems to be more fair.
 157    there needs to be a better evaluation tool especially for Physical Plant               Feb 23, 2011 2:40 PM
 158    Working at UofL has some good benefits. It used to be great benefits.                  Feb 23, 2011 3:19 PM
        If there are funds to be distributed to benefit employee due to cost of living,
        gasoline, housing and utility increases that affects all empolyees, then I strongly
        feel that the funds should be distributed equally among all. Using the annual
        evaluations to determine merit raise is a "FOLLY'.
        Past history has proven to be selective and favoritism.
 159    Why does the University find it necessary to remove HSC employees from U of L          Feb 23, 2011 3:40 PM
        while maintaining doctors/professors and others as U of L employees?
 160    1) Hey guys we really do need to start getting hourly raises again because when        Feb 23, 2011 4:14 PM
        it's all said and done that effects our bottom line when it's time to retire or when
        working overtime.
        2) What about checking into see if we could sale some of our built up vacation
        time back to Uof L this may also encourage people to save their time instead of
        burning thru it.
        3) The benefits we have is the only thing we have to compete with other
        employers who pay more when trying to attract good people to come work for us.
        4) get rid of the credit card people on campus that gets the kids in money trouble
        before they know how to handle money.I know this will cost Uof L big bucks but
        put the student first this time.Give them Dave Ramsey (Financial Peace) instead.
        5) with all of this bad spelling you will be happy to know I did not go to school
        here. Thank you for your time on these matters. Dave always says( there is a
        good place to go when you are broke,TO WORK !!)so I have to get back to work
        for now.Hope to hear from you.




                                                     159 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                    Response Text
 161    The problem with merit increases in the past has been that some "victim" group            Feb 23, 2011 4:51 PM
        will complain that they didn't get enough for whatever reason. Then the
        administration, for whatever reason, hires an expensive consulting company to
        even out the pay scales. This has the effect of removing merit increases by giving
        the pay increases to people that didn't do their share. An example of this is the
        "gender equity" a few years back. I saw at least two people that really didn't
        deserve a pay increase not only get one but get a huge check for back pay to
        some imaginary date. How about a study for those of us working well below
        market value? :)
 162    I spoke with Mr Oswley once about stopping new hires from Nov 1 thur Jan. I'm             Feb 23, 2011 5:08 PM
        not sure how much this would save the university, but it seem like not paying any
        holiday pay to new hires would be a large savings.

        Also, stopping all the junk mail and sending notices electronicaly or send one flyer
        to each office to be posted.
 163    Our campus needs to address aggressively issues of "unhealthy buildings," such            Feb 23, 2011 6:50 PM
        as those with excessive dampness, leaks, mold, mildew, etc. The University pays
        for the problems in some of our buildings over and over through absentism and
        reduced productivity of employees who are adversely affected and through the
        cost of medical treatment for asthma, allergies and headaches. Employees who
        are adversely affected by "unhealthy buildings" experience this every day-- they
        leave home feeling good only to be hit with symptoms when they arrive at the
        office (such as headache, congestion, itching or burning eyes, wheezing, or
        coughing). They can find relief only when they leave work. If you want to improve
        the "bottom line" of our health care costs at UofL, this is just as important--if not
        more important--than the "Get Healthy Now" initiative.
 164    No department should hire in the months of November and December. This                    Feb 24, 2011 9:11 AM
        would save money going out for both Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays, plus
        the money the University pays in the benefits.The department has the money for
        the holidays sure, but couldn't they put that money to better use those two
        months, but who pays for all the benefits those two months. That would be
        money saved. It takes a little to make a lot. Think about it. If it doesn't make
        sense and cost a lot of money, seems to be the way the University always goes,
        rather than the way that makes sense and the shortest way around the block.
        How about doing away with all perks all the administrators have, that would surely
        cut cost. It's time all the big wigs from the top down, get down on the level of the
        staff. Lets see how much you really want to save money, instead of always trying
        to cut things that hurt the little people here at the University.
 165    It would seem to me that many of the Faculty (Chair's) etc have many                      Feb 24, 2011 9:16 AM
        opportunities to have their salary increased. I do believe that the University must
        be able to recruit the most talented faculty, but I also believe that the staff are the
        driving force that makes the University what it is today, You can have the most
        talented faculty, but if you don't have the staff to support those faculty and
        administrators, the University would not be where it is today. It is imperative that
        the staff be given the recognition they deserve and RAISES are part of that
        recognition. While I do not believe that all staff are equal in their endeavors, I
        believe that if Merit increases are to be given, there should be an even playing
        field. The Evaluation process is not the most dependable way to do this. If the
        University would mandate that all staff be brought down to the same level on
        evaluations and then when the new system is up an running and is fair across the
        board, then the Merit increases should be a part of that new Evaluation system.
        When most of the Employees in some departments get 30's on their evaluations,
        this is not a level playing field.




                                                      160 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                    Response Text
 166    I fear that if wages were increased in place of benefits. The raise would not be          Feb 24, 2011 9:39 AM
        significant enough to cover the difference. In regards to the tuition remission, I feel
        employees such as myself make less money working for UofL with the
        understanding I will be using the benefit of tuition remission; therefore, I do not
        feel the expense of fees or tuition should fall on the employee. Although it will be
        another two years before I will benefit from tuition remission for my son, I consider
        this part of my compensation. I cannot afford to work here if the benefit does not
        cover my son's tuition expenses.
 167    none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:05 AM
 168    Some of these questions were not clear. It would have helped to have what the             Feb 24, 2011 10:14 AM
        university's current benefit is to compare it to proposed changes as not everyone
        is currently using these benefits. I don't think it would be wise for the university to
        reduce benefits for current employees. Changes that result in reduction of
        benefits should only be applied to employees hired after implementation of those
        changes.
 169    none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 10:16 AM
 170    No questions at this time.                                                                Feb 24, 2011 10:18 AM
 171    The proposed strategies to fund salary increases disproportionately redistribute          Feb 24, 2011 11:13 AM
        the funds gained from these strategies to the upper income employees and may
        not benefit the lower income employees who are most likely the ones using the
        benefits that are reduced (tuition remission) and will be paying more out of pocket.

        Some universities in the past have given salary increases to only employees with
        lower salaries(under $70, 000). This is something the university should consider,
        so, not to create a bigger gap with the haves and have nots as this recessionary
        economy has created. Salary adjustments(bringing everyone up to market value)
        for our lowest paid employees should be the first priority with any salary increase.

        However to give UofL credit, it does have an excellent benefit program which
        benefits many and their president has forgone salary increases during this freeze
        in employee salaries.
 172    The University should also make sure that parking fees are not increased. They            Feb 24, 2011 11:20 AM
        were increased for 2 years when we did not get a raise.

        Cutting our existing benefits doesn't make any sense. Our salaries are already
        below market because of these "perks" that we receive (i.e., tuition remission, free
        TARC service, etc.) How can you expect people to use TARC and be more
        "green" minded if you cut the benefit?

        The University steps over a dollar to pick up a dime. One example, by forcing us
        to use remanufactured toner cartridges we wind up spending more money in
        service calls. You should never put Volkswagen parts in a Cadillac so why are we
        putting inferior toner cartridges in top of the line printers?

        The asthetic changes on campus are very attractive; however, I don't understand
        how we can justify spending so much money in this area (given the state of the
        economyh) rather than investing it in holding the line on tuition increases and
        increased fees to students. When are we going to start emphasizing education
        rather than all of the "fluff"?
 173    none                                                                                      Feb 24, 2011 11:37 AM




                                                      161 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                    Response Text
 174    Merit should not be used because not all supervisor's do merit the same way.             Feb 24, 2011 11:48 AM
        Some are very generous and give 30's. Others are more conservative and give
        lower scores, but that does not mean that their performance is not as good as if
        not better than the employees getting 30's.
 175    none                                                                                     Feb 24, 2011 11:51 AM
 176    How come the Deans, chairs has bonus in the past years while we don't have a             Feb 24, 2011 12:55 PM
        penny raise?
        At school of medicine, how come the chairs has bonus if they passed
        performance review while we don't? this practice should stop now.
 177    I truly think that the University does everything within its means to show that          Feb 24, 2011 1:30 PM
        employees are valued and rewarded in the workplace. I think Louisville has the
        opportunity to cause a major positive trend and influence the "mass" employees in
        a positive way here, and we should do so without seeming presumptuous. The
        President, Provost, VP's, Deans, Directors all do a fantastic job carrying the
        weight of the University, but I think many of the faculty/staff need a morale
        boosting initiative.

        I don't know what that could be, but let's think VIRAL about it---get hip, excited,
        and resourceful in our offerings. Salary increases are important, paid time off is
        important, but making the workplace a magnetic environment for positivity,
        creativity, and kindness would require a collaborative institutional effort---it's one
        I'm willing to work towards, and its one I think the University has on its horizon. I
        hope you'll balance policy with quality of programs when you're considering these
        many options.

        Thanks for your hard, hard work and the opportunity to share feedback here.
 178    UofL tuition coverage is the main perk that keeps me here. I love my job but the         Feb 24, 2011 2:31 PM
        reality is many of us could be making more money elsewhere. This perk makes it
        worth staying put and sharing our UofL pride with our families. This is a critical
        benefit to employees and their families!
 179    if merit plays into raise then it should include performance last severval years         Feb 24, 2011 3:17 PM
        since last raise!
        also less for those that have not been here as long and more for others that have
        missed past raises due to freeze!
        cost of living analysis for each job category should be done - feel some are
        underpaid
 180    I think if the university messes anymore with employee benefits then the best            Feb 24, 2011 3:45 PM
        employees are going to leave. Myself included.
 181    Those who already get bonuses and incentives and increases to their higher than          Feb 24, 2011 3:52 PM
        120,000 salaries should not be part of those eligible for more money from the
        salary pool.
 182    Security officers that have been at Uof L since security section was added to            Feb 24, 2011 5:25 PM
        public safety need and should be treated better and and have a voice and be
        represented better.




                                                      162 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                    Response Text
 183    Thanks for letting us take the survey so that you get a feel for how the majority        Feb 24, 2011 9:37 PM
        would like for things to be done. But, I myself, as well as others in my office, truly
        did not understand how the distributions would "really" work. It might seem self
        explanatory to you, but for many of us, we don't really know how pay increases
        were done in the past, so we don't know, when it is all said and done, if we really
        made the best choice when we answered, or what to compare it with..
        I know this might seem like a LOT of trouble, but this is my suggestion...
        Send out another survey, with just the last 2 questions dealing with the salaries.
        Explain in more detail, showing an example of amounts that would be next to
        each question, especially showing what might be possible with, and without, merit
        increases. Also what would be straight across the board. I am just thinking a
        majority of us might answer differently if we understood more facts than just
        guessing what we thought you were actually asking.
        I would like to know if anyone else was confused about understanding and
        answering the questions.
        I hope you have a GREAT day.
        Thanks,
        Chuck Stewart
        U of L's
        Kidney Disease Program
 184    need to change asap                                                                      Feb 25, 2011 10:41 AM
 185    In my department, there are many of us that work long and hard hours to meet the         Feb 25, 2011 10:55 AM
        university's initiatives. These employees deserve more recognition!!
 186    just give the merit raise in a separate check like last year                             Feb 26, 2011 9:06 AM
 187    It appears that the no-smoking policy is a complete joke among students and              Feb 26, 2011 3:00 PM
        staff. I frequently have to walk through smokers when outside of buildings and
        they have only disdain when reminded that we are a no smoking campus. The
        policy needs to have some teeth to be effective.
 188    All staff and faculty are due a raise at the University since its been about 3 years     Feb 27, 2011 2:02 PM
        since a raise has been received. Inflation is on a continued rise and our incomes
        have been at a standstill.
 189    It's been a few years since anyone has received an increase. Eveyone is                  Feb 28, 2011 3:24 PM
        deserving of an increase at this point so it's not the best time to introduce merit
        increses.
 190    Consider a system when HSC employees have to go to the Belknap Campus for                Feb 28, 2011 3:57 PM
        events and vice versa. We usually have to find a parking spot, which is usually
        completely filled by the students. This wouldn't cost any money. Maybe there
        could be a temporary parking hanger given to the UBMs for their employees to
        use who come to campus.
 191    The stated goal of "100% of labor market media values" is disingenuous at best.          Mar 1, 2011 12:09 PM
        University administratin has no intention of applying this standard to individual
        salaries, only to broad general classifications. No provision exists at present for
        lateral adjustment of salaries of individuals who can demonstrate that they are
        underpaid by current market standards. Just who is kidding whom?
 192    Staff Senate seems to have a lot of turnover. It would be interesting to do a             Mar 1, 2011 1:00 PM
        survey to see what problems there are that cause Senators to need to quit.
        Maybe the issues uncovered could then be addressed as a campus climate issue.
 193    We go out everyday performing at our very best in hopes that we would someday             Mar 1, 2011 2:31 PM
        be rewarded for how the quality we have added to this campus would be
        recongnized.




                                                      163 of 168
50. Feedback/Questions/Issues:

                                                    Response Text
 194    The University of Louisville is a great place to work. The administration of the         Mar 1, 2011 6:06 PM
        university should do everything within its power to reward and retain faithful
        employees. Reducing benefits, even with the possibility of a salary increase, does
        nothing to improve the moral. It has always been a mystery to me that highly
        educated people (administrators) don't understand that happy people work harder
        than unhappy ones and that more money doesn't always translate into more work.
 195    Listening sessions are stupid.                                                           Mar 1, 2011 11:01 PM

        Isn't that what Senators are for or is everyone just to lazy for one on ones?
 196    My main concern is the tuition remission issue. The employees of UofL already            Mar 2, 2011 9:47 AM
        have lower salaries compared to other companies. The tuition remission was a
        part of the recruiting tool that was attractive enough to settle for the lower salary.
        By implementing this proposed change will be reason for many to look for
        employment elsewhere, including myself. To remain competitive in this trying
        economy, UofL really needs to reconsider this change. I know I would not
        recommend this company if benefits are slashed along with the lack of deserved
        annual raises.
 197    I find the tone of this survey disturbing. During the last three years chairs and        Mar 2, 2011 10:34 AM
        many faculty members have been receiving $25,000 annual performance
        bonuses but the university wants to balance the budget on the backs of it's
        woefully underpaid staff? Our spouse tuition benefit was removed without the
        university even disclosing what that program cost. Why are benefits not
        grandfathered in based on a hire date?
 198    Not receiving a raise the last few years doesn't make me want to work as hard for        Mar 2, 2011 11:37 AM
        the University. Did I mention I put up with angry patients ALL day EVERY day and
        I do not get paid enough for that! I want to like my job, who doesn't. It's hard to
        feel appreciated when you're not compensated. The free credits are great for
        those that are able to use them but for those who don't it lessons the appeal.
 199    Morale! Morale! Morale!                                                                  Mar 3, 2011 10:20 AM
        'Nuff said.
 200    I have worked in many offices at U of L. So called "merit increases" are the same        Mar 3, 2011 1:18 PM
        everywhere and are not based on merit in a fair way. They are given to the office
        pets regardless of the quality or quantity of work performed. It is always those
        pets who want the merit option. This may sound bitter but it is not; it is just the
        way bosses do things. BTW, I have received merit increases but still know how it
        is.
 201    i like the $1200 lump sum                                                                Mar 3, 2011 3:04 PM
 202    i like the $1200 lump sum                                                                Mar 3, 2011 3:04 PM
 203    Some things need changes for sure, if our students cost of education keeps going         Mar 3, 2011 5:49 PM
        up and our salaries are paralized ;where do we draw the line and make a
        difference in our lives.
 204    This survey was an efficient way to reach staff. I hope you receive a good               Mar 4, 2011 9:14 AM
        response. The improvements in HR since Mr. Connally has come on-board have
        been excellent and welcomed. Thanks for everyone's efforts.




                                                      164 of 168

				
DOCUMENT INFO