The survey has 133 entries. Show details of all entries

DSI Survey

Which category do you belong to?
63 (47%) Full time, Academic
49 (37%) Full time, Professional
13 (10%) Part time, Academic
6 ( 5%) Part time, Professional
2 ( 2%) no answer


Do you know what Discretionary Salary Increases are
122 (92%) Yes
9 ( 7%) No
2 ( 2%) no answer


If so, who told you about DSI?
53 (40%) Dean/Chair/Unit Director
35 (26%) Supervisor
23 (17%) Colleague
22 (17%) other:
other: chair personnel committee
other: college bulletin
other: From being here for many years
other: I asked when I received one
other: I knew about it from another SUNY
other: knew from other campus job
other: longevity of not receiving DSI
other: memo received in my mailbox
other: Never told about DSI
other: no one until last week
other: Personnel Committee chair
other: provost letter
other: Sentinel
other: the e-mail about this survey
other: UUP
other: UUP
other: UUP contract negotiations
other: UUP Delegate
other: UUP newsletter
other: Written material


Did you apply for DSI this last round
52 (39%) Yes
78 (59%) No
3 ( 2%) no answer


If you applied, which category did you apply for?
7 ( 5%) Equity
40 (30%) Merit
18 (14%) other:
68 (51%) no answer
other: Both
other: both
other: both
other: both
other: Both as a part of my evaluation
other: Can professional apply for DSI?
other: did not apply
other: did not know i had to apply i thought it was a recommendation by my supervisor
other: I have been put up by colleagues for merit awards in the past.
other: My supervisor nominated me for a DSI based on merit
other: recommended for it; not certain which it was
other: see comments below
other: supervisor submitted
other: Unsure - the department did it as a unit; and I am not sure I was told the entire truth
other: was not told I could apply
other: We do not apply; my director put me in for it.
other: We do not get to apply for DSI in.......department
other: we don't "apply" in ...it just miraculously appears or doesn't appear. Not quite sure how it's awarded.



Who gave you instructions/ guidelines for application?
40 (30%) Dean/ Chair/ Unit director
21 (16%) Found it in my inbox
52 (39%) Never received instructions/guidelines


If you applied for DSI, did you get what you asked for?
16 (12%) Yes
16 (12%) No
27 (20%) other:
74 (56%) no answer

Do you think the current method of dispersing DSI is fair?
41 (31%) Yes
68 (51%) No
24 (18%) no answer


Do you think that there should be a better system for dispersal of DSI?
84 (63%) Yes
28 (21%) No
21 (16%) no answer


Any other thoughts?

I think by number of years with SUNY (not just Oneonta) - I do not think an across the board would be fair to employees that have been with SUNY for many; many; years.

I work in REMOVED and I didn't even know there was an application form for DSI.  Our supervisors submit our names for consideration and the management team makes the decisions on how to divide up the money.

In some departments; this deteriorates into a popularity contest. Obviously; the raises are NOT based on performance in some cases. OBVIOUSLY.

I do not think you should publish the DSI data in the Sentinel.  It is one thing to make it available; it is another to push it in front of people.  I think that no good can come from publishing the data the way you did only ill will toward colleagues and toward the institution. It also paints the union with a "trouble maker" light making it appear that things are done only to stir things up.  This makes it difficult to come to the union with a real problem because you are viewed as a trouble maker.  The first letter of DSI stands for discretionary; it is never going to appear fair to all.  It is money given for exceptional work and it is not an entitlement.  Employees who work hard and go the extra mile should be rewarded; employees who show up and do their job should get their paycheck.

I am not really sure what the procedure is and how to get the funds. I think I am missing a piece of the puzzle because I was under the impression that the chairman submitted a recommendation. I did not know there was an application.

I don't think DSI should even exist. The whole system of salaries and equity of salaries is a joke.  The system needs to be overhauled with regard to min and max salaries per level.  DSI has in many cases been used to fill a disparity in someone's salary because they were hired at a salary too low in the first place. This issue concerns the teaching faculty more than admin levels; it seems.

question who gave you instructions ignores departments where personnel committees assist in the process so you need another choice in the question

I didn't need to apply-it's just based on whether or not my boss feels I deserve any money.

I believe that DSI should be given across the board (equally) to all who are eligible.  I hear many complaints and all pull their weight.  I don't think it should be a reward system based on taking on new responsibilities or how much you published; or who you know and have coffee with.  Some of us are already loaded with work and can not possible add more without bring a cot in and staying all night.  Let's compensate all who work on this campus.  Without any or all of us; we could not run smoothly or get the job done.

"Fair" is certainly a loaded word; but hard work and merit should be rewarded; otherwise it's easy to feel like a chump for doing a disproportional amount of departmental "grunt" work.

Similar to a "secret society" on the professional

Frankly; I'm not that well versed on the matter.

We don't actually "apply" for discretionary increases.  Our VP decides who will get them.  PS:  You spelled "category" incorrectly!

Eliminate DSI and negotiate step increases.

I can't answer the last two questions because I don't know how the decisions are ultimately made.

There is no equity in how the teaching loads are distributed. Because of vastly different class sizes; the loads could be different among different instructors teaching the same number of semester hours.

I can't comment on the method for dispersing as I believe units do it differently.  In my case; it's more of a "spread the wealth" department as opposed to me justifying why I should receive a specific amount.

The chairs should have been told sooner and not just through the grape-vine that part-time employees are now eligible for DSI increases.

Some years ago I felt I was undervalued relative to a same level colleague; and considered an Equity issue.  As it turned out I later received a Merit award (submitted by my Chair) so now I do not feel underpaid relative to my colleague.  Given my own department; the dispersing of DSI is probably fair; but this may not be the case in other areas.  As long as workers have the ability to request for an Equity pay; I am not opposed to Merit pay increases at the discretion of the supervisor.  Merit does need to be discretionary (only some are awarded); with higher awards for excellence.  If Merit pay cannot be attributed to excellent performance; or if 2 equally excellent workers get different treatment; then the allocation of Merit increases should be looked into.  This may be an issue with some academic areas; and deserves examination by UUP.

More information need. Not aware of what DSI is.

Re the second to last question; it is fair within my department; but I don't have enough information to judge campus-wide fairness.  Re the last question; I would need to know the methods used by all academic departments; Deans and Program Directors; and the Provost in deciding how DSI are awarded to make an informed answer.

More clarity in equity decisions.  We do not ever hear how and/or why decisions were made; just results.

While I am not a chair, I think some chairs are at a disadvantage. They can't ask for it themselves; and we faculty are busy and doing our own applications so they don't think about recommending their chair. I say this because some years in the future I want to be chair (and get a pay increase). PS- I feel solicitation by the chair to their faculty is just tacky and wrong. How do chairs get recognized?

The process seems secretive and subjective.

What are the criteria for different increase amounts?  Maybe if I knew this I would know what to do extra during the academic semesters to receive more than $500. 

The word "fair" and the word "better" as used in this survey are both meaningless and loaded terms tending to bias replies. If this is what was intended; why even bother with a survey?

Perhaps we would be better served by a dual process involving both departments and individual faculty members reporting to the Dean. A system of balances may be a way to correct for some of the perceived arbitrariness and bias in the current system.

I would be interested in more public discussion about the existing system for salary increases. Some schools have a Merit Pay system in which my job performance was evaluated openly and pay increases hinged on that evaluation.  Oneonta's discretionary system seems less transparent and more arbitrary; mostly; perhaps; because I don't really understand how it works. I may be misinterpreting things; but it seems like the longer you have been here and the more attuned you are to the flow of money; the more likely you are to receive funding.  Frankly; I have the same problem with the dispersal of faculty development funds...Does this system reward political acumen; staying power; or faculty performance?

As I understand it; departments are limited in the % of people who can be recommended by the chair for DSI.  I work in a department with a small number of faculty .  This means that SOME receive a DSI .

I have never applied for DSI; but have received it in the past.  I wasn't aware of the application process until this year.  I have concerns about how it is distributed.  Last year was without a doubt my best performance year ever and I was told I would not receive DSI.

the administration needs to do a better job of clarifying DSI procedures

I received notice of deadline to apply for DSI in an email from supervisor the day of the deadline for my department.  I am unsure how to apply and what the instructions and guidelines are - It would be helpful if this information (including deadline for submission) was available directly to the employee to access - on the Internet to download.  It may be already but I am not aware of it.

In terms of fairness; I can only assess my department. I believe we do a reasonably good job. I know that other departments have problems and that many professionals feel like they have not been well treated.

DSI should be determined based on publicly available criteria.

In light of the issue of adjuncts suffering from inadequate wages that has been made highly visible in recent issues of the UUP newsletter as well as nation wide; it was particularly painful to see people who are already making more than twice what I am making receive a raise. It is not that I feel those who deserve raises should not receive them - they should. I am not sure what the criteria is for receiving this raise; whether it is merit based or simply who is next on the list; but I wonder why there is no such system in place for adjuncts. If the money is allocated to each department that then gets to decide how the money is spent; is there simply a lack of concern or appreciation for adjuncts? Or is there some rule that adjuncts are not eligible? Is there no way to review the work of adjuncts and compensate them based on how long they have worked in one institution; extra; unpaid duties performed (advisors to organizations...); new classes created; or student evaluations? It becomes increasingly disheartening to devote creative energy; dedication; time; and concern for the quality of instruction when one feels invisible and nearly worthless. While the new raise in pay for teaching each class is a bit of relief from the sense of hopelessness I try to keep at bay; I am still starting to look for employment in non-academic fields. I love teaching students and cannot bear to think of doing something other than teaching; but when I cannot afford car repairs (let alone new car payments); a raise in my rent (let alone a down payment for my own home);conferences to further my development (grants require you to pre-pay and submit receipts - who can advance the money to pay in the first place?); or even regular haircuts; I have to consider some other form of employment.   I feel blessed with fantastic insurance; a beautiful campus; wonderful colleagues; and great kids to work with. I know that UUP officials work hard on behalf of adjuncts and many voice concerns. I also understand the difficulty of balancing the budget that administration has to contend with. But I still feel disposable; as if just anyone could come in and replace me no matter how much devotion and energy I dedicate to Oneonta. I am sure you are tired of hearing adjuncts whine; and perhaps as long as adjuncts can be found who are willing to teach for less than minimum wage; no one is going to really take them seriously. But I do wonder at what point the quality of instruction will suffer; if it has not already. Oneonta prides itself on not using graduate students; which is a bit misleading because it implies that all instruction is of the highest quality. But when people have to teach at 2 or more campuses just to make ends meet; how much time do you think they can devote to what goes into their classes? 

I do think DSI based on merit is a good idea: in my department; everyone is *not* equal in either effort or performance. (Capitalism has shown to work better than communism in motivating people). In my department; we all vote on who should get DSI; the department head then makes the final recommendation. Yes; there is a lot of politics and favoritism involved sometimes; but we are unable to come up with a better method of dispersal. A blind review panel is one idea; but that seems impractical on such a large scale.

Concerning how it's done; there should be a committee of personnel who distributes; or if there is; then we should be told who's on this committee...

I would very much like to receive one.  My Director is fair and equitable;  There is a level of dishonesty that directly affects me.

I strongly support the idea of DSI based on merit. While years of service should count for normal salary increases; DSI based on merit recognizes that some faculty do make extraordinary efforts. I think that research should feature more prominently in making DSI awards. Research achievements especially can take a large amount of effort outside of the usual academic year and any achievements in this area deserve recognition. At a teaching intensive college should as Oneonta State in which many junior faculty have a 4:4 load research needs to be encouraged. DSI based on merit with an emphasis on research would be a means to this end.

Didn't know there is a process to request DSI.

My term for DSI is 'Discriminatory Salary Increase' (and not 'Discretionary Salary Increase').  It is often secretive; divisive and given to favorites.  I would like to see across the board distribution so it is fair and on a reverse sliding scale; so those who make the most get the least and those who make the least and need it more; get the most.  Thank you.

I think it is fairly handled in our department; but have heard from other faculty and professionals that it is not handled as fairly in their units.

It is difficult; as an adjunct; to discern what I am eligible for/entitled to.  It's a bit like being a ghost.  I'm here as a faculty member; but not REALLY a faculty member.  And yet I understand we comprise 46% of SUCO faculty?

I have no idea what the process is for DSI's in my area . No one EVER speaks of it - as if its some great secret.  There is obviously a reason why some get such large increases and others get none.  Who decides that and what are the criteria??????

DSI should be spread across the board to everyone!

Where I work in; there is no "application" for a DSI.  In fact; many here may not be aware of the award or when it is granted.  If there is a campus-wide application; it should be distributed to ALL departments on campus. 

My Dean/chair/unit director missed the deadline so those of us who were eligible did not receive any merit increases.  Given that this is the only way to raise our base salary; it seems there should; perhaps; be some mechanism to catch such glitches?  Just a thought.

I know of some people in the past who were told that if they performed certain duties above their normal duties, they would recommend that they get a discretionary salary increase that coming fall. They got it. It seems that this money is used as make-up pay, promising away discretionary funds to adjust salaries that should have been addressed by other means- a stipend perhaps. How is that fair to those that apply for equity pay?

I was not aware of the fact that DSI is something to be applied for.  I was under the impression that each department decided what to do with any monies available for discretionary salaries; and it seems to always goes to full time faculty.

Some in this office did not receive the discretionary increase and I think that we have worked as hard or harder than anyone else who did receive the DSI.

The money should be distributed across the board to all members.  There is no sense in the current system that I can see.

There should be CLEAR criteria to employees as to how the DSI will be allocated in each department.  The word 'discretionary' maybe should NOT be included; as it allows each department chair to do whatever they want.

I'm not sure of how the current process is done?

try dispersing to people that work and don't get recognized; maybe someone can't get one within two years of already receiving one

Although there was not anyone in my department who did not deserve an increase; there should be an explanation to the people (like me) who did NOT get an increase.  Wouldn't such a response be part of assessment/quality control?

On the academic side there is a lot of variability in terms of Departments.  Some follow practices that are fairer than others.  However; institution-wide we need a system that is fair to all.

I would like to see across-the-board awards as an option.

I am grateful for the opportunity to be financially compensated for exemplary work.  I have never been recognized for working extra hard before; and getting DSI recognition makes me feel appreciated at SUNY Oneonta

I think the union should oppose them as a matter of principle.   If administrators really believe that they function as incentives then they should endeavor to make the process and the CRITERIA for making awards public. After having done so then the need to abide by these criteria in giving awards. I suspect that the awarding of DSI's here is like the granting of tenure and promotion - open to too many exceptions. When this occurs criteria are selectively used as post hoc explanations by decision makers to justify the decision that the decision maker wants to make.

I have given up on getting DSI. Two rounds ago; I submitted my paperwork to my dean/department chair/ supervisor only to be told that the applications had already been submitted and mine had missed the boat. Meanwhile I was never told anything about deadlines; I was just using the generally announced one for the campus. So I just gave up. Until there is some kind of equalization formula applied to rectify the inequities on this campus; I have resigned myself to watching others (who; in my opinion; may or may not deserve extra raises) receive some good sized increases while my salary loses ground to inflation every year. I have lowered my expectations of advancement. -- This DSI situation is just one of many ways that this college does not treat all employees fairly. *Let’s see if the new Administrator for Equity and Diversity will be able to address the situation.*

  I think we should have an opportunity to apply for the DSI.  I also feel we should have an opportunity to verbally present our case for DSI; I also feel there should be a committee of people to make the recommendation; it should not be just one person the way it is now.

I am fine with the system...I just wish there was information on how to apply.

For some departments where the members are part-timers; it might be fairer for DSI to be distributed equally. At the very least; all members of the department should be instructed on how and when to apply.

Peers make recommendations to the chair/dean regarding DSI; but then the chair submits his or her own recommendations; and these seem to be the ones that are applied. All it takes is a personality conflict or a tense situation to find oneself dumped from the list; even though one's peers made a considered recommendation. Why is a supervisor's opinion considered more powerful (and accurate; apparently) than one's peers? Some feel DSI should be across the board; but this discriminates against faculty who really shine. It takes a bite out of incentive to do something extraordinary. As much as I appreciate acknowledgement in other ways; I LIKE knowing my extra hard work might be rewarded and recognized in some monetary sense.

I like the current system. Don't penalize the people who know how to use the system to their advantage.. Everywhere you go, people who work well with the people who make the decisions get what they deserve. The people who use their discretion when it comes to awarding DSI are doing just fine. I can tell by the use of the word "fair" and "better way" that you are trying to manipulate the system. How fair is that?

I don't know how the amounts of DSI are determined.  However; there is quite a range of the amounts.  Couldn't something be done so that everyone receives some amount yearly; with higher DSI amounts dispersed to those who have a workload greater than the average employee?

I do not think you should publish the names and amounts of DSI.  Since it is often based on Equity; I think it is only relevant along with annual salary amounts.  Since you think publication of personal information like this is acceptable; please publish the annual salaries of all UUP members so we can see whether or not we are being treated equitably.  I look forward to your next publication.  Thanks.

I would like to see a certain pool reserved for Part Timers that excel in their positions.  Also; I'd like to see mgt. award the merit pay through a committee system based on merit.

Must ensure each person has equal opportunity to learn about the availability of DSI as well as directions/guidelines for application process. Some administrative offices are very forthcoming; some are not. I do not know how the process is completed.

Chairs should be required to inform faculty as to what they recommend to the Deans concerning DSI allocation. Some Chairs claim this is confidential and refuse to disclose what they recommend to the Deans.

I did not know I could directly apply- I have been under the impression that merit and equity decisions were made by my divisional leaders- I know I can recommend my employees pending equity and or performance issues.

I have no objection with managers having some discretion; but I feel that I certainly deserved one; based on merit and work load; but apparently my manager did not agree...I have met and exceeded all of my performance goals.  So; it feels unfair.

I want to know why someone who gets to the office no earlier then noon on regular basis and is sick at least once every couple of weeks for two or three days receives a (removed) dollar increase and I work (length of days worked and hours removed); (myriad of duties and other info removed) get none. Who makes those decisions?  It seems incredibly unfair.

The process should be transparent; everyone should be aware of criteria and how they were applied 

I think it might be best to do away with the DSI!

Am I really eligible for DSI as an adjunct?  I am teaching only one course.