Previous poll Next poll

New Kansas University Chancellor Bernadette Gray-Little will be paid a maximum of $425,000, about 25 percent more per year than Chancellor Robert Hemenway. Do you consider Gray-Little’s salary to be fair compensation for the job?

Response Percent Votes
No
 
61% 548
Yes
 
38% 344
Total 892

Comments

RiverCityConservative 5 years, 10 months ago

The chancellor's pay should be on a par with or above the pay of the athletic director. This should not even be a matter of contention in a serious institution that aspires to be a world-class university.

Chris Ogle 5 years, 10 months ago

With that kind of salary.... I would only have to work about 3 months.... then take off for three years.... not lazy,,, just not greedy.... that would be my way sharing the wealth

Bob Reinsch 5 years, 10 months ago

Let's not confuse greed with achievement. Academics that reach the pinnacle that Dr. Gray-Little and others have achieved do so because of hard work. In any career, those that make the best decisions and work the hardest succeed and a compensated appropriately.

RiverCityConservative 5 years, 10 months ago

Guess that explains the success of George Bush II. :)

jumpin_catfish 5 years, 10 months ago

Achievement, hmmm. I always wondered about what goes on up there.

Boeing 5 years, 10 months ago

Can't we have a "lets wait and see how good she is" option?

jumpin_catfish 5 years, 10 months ago

Lot O' Money! I hope her performance justifies the investment.

50YearResident 5 years, 10 months ago

It is excessive, why should a new hire receive 25% more than the one leaving when the one leaving was doing a good job and had been successful for many years?

purplesage 5 years, 10 months ago

Well said, 50 year. The new coaches cost more than the old ones and now, the new chancellor. How do we think somone who has invested so many years of hard work feel when they find out the new replacement makes 25% more. I know that isn't the point, but it is a good question: why do they pay someone new to a job more money?

And something is upside down when athletics make more money than academics. A classic case of the tail wagging the dog.

50YearResident 5 years, 10 months ago

This poll is skewed! The answer (NO) has a double meaning and therefore the poll is meaningless. No responders can mean 1) No, the salary is way to high, or 2) No the salary is too low. So, how is the question supposed to be answered?

mom_of_three 5 years, 10 months ago

tennesseerader, the amount each gave to charity doesn't prove anything.

bankboy119 5 years, 10 months ago

Mo3,

I believe it shows that Bush/Cheney believed in giving back to others while the Dems just wanted to keep what they had for themselves and spend some more of yours. At least the conservatives believed in giving back while still spending yours haha.

Liberty275 5 years, 10 months ago

The extra 25% is for the hyphen in her name. That makes her smarter than us garden variety dimwits.

melg 5 years, 10 months ago

I think it's about twice as much as she is worth.

KansasVoter 5 years, 10 months ago

tennesseerader (Anonymous) says… "In 2007, the Bushes donated 23% of their income to charity. In 2008, the Obamas donated a mere 6 1/2%. Vice President Dick Cheney gave 75% to charity — $6 million — in a single year. Joe Biden only gave $369 a year average for 10 years (typical for a democrat)."

First of all, I don't believe any of that without a link from a reliable source. Second, even if it is true, the Bushes and Cheneys are MILLIONAIRES! They donate more to charity because they have A LOT more money and they need to get tax deductions because they hate to pay their fair share of taxes.

Conservatives.....they never miss a chance to prove how ignorant they really are.

bankboy119 5 years, 10 months ago

KV,

Here's the tax schedule from 2007:

http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=164272,00.html

Anything over about $358k is in the same bracket. Assuming GWB made $1 million he'd have to give away about $643k (or 64.3% of his income) to receive a 2% tax deduction. Or he could pay $350k in taxes (35%) and have more than had he given it away in charity. I don't believe the tax deduction is a viable argument. Generosity seems more likely.

Granted, the Obamas don't make as much as GWB. The argument still holds that GWB does more with his money rather than tell you how yours is going to be spent.

JHOK32 5 years, 10 months ago

She makes more than the President of the United States?! No wonder college is so expensive!

Commenting has been disabled for this item.