Since the economic recession began, companies of all types, from Fortune 500 corporations to nonprofit organizations, have suffered revenue losses and financial cutbacks. One would expect the chief executives and presidents, especially of the nonprofit organizations, to start reducing their large salaries and hunkering down to weather the storm and preserve the quality of their firm.

Surprisingly, this has not been the case. In particular, president's have been earning incredibly high salaries while their schools' budgets have suffered.

Data from the Chronicle of Higher Education shows that presidential salaries have grown at a shocking rate since the 2007-2008 academic year. At doctoral-granting private universities, such as Brandeis, the average president's salary has increased by an appalling 20.3 percent to $582,661. At Brandeis specifically, former President Jehuda Reinharz earned a base salary of $487,352, "other reportable compensation" of $101,457 and deferred compensation of $825,790 in the 2009 calendar year, according to Brandeis' Federal tax filings.

A variety of schools, including Brandeis, have made substantial cutbacks to their programs in order to make ends meet during the financial recession. The fact that few to no reductions were made to presidents' salaries is shocking. Take Arizona State University at Tempe, for instance. During the 2008-2009 academic year, the school had to make significant cuts to its staff and academic programs. According to an article from the March 16, 2009 issue of The New York Times, the school eliminated 500 jobs, 48 programs and hundreds of teaching assistants.

The president, Michael Crow, received $709,196 in total compensation for the 2008-2009 year. For the 2010-2011 year, his total cost of employment was $728,350. It's unfortunate and, in my opinion, a rather poor reflection on his character that he did not decide to give any part of his large compensation back to the university to preserve some of those lost jobs.

Similar trends can be found at other public universities. The president of the University of Central Florida received a total compensation of $800,703 in the 2009-2010 year. A March 22 article from MSNBC article indicates that, in Pennsylvania, the governor is proposing cuts totaling $625 million to institutes of higher education. Schools that would be affected, including Temple University and Pennsylvania State University, paid their presidents $707,947 and $800,592, respectively, in the 2009-2010 year.

At Brandeis, substantial cutbacks were made during the recession in an attempt to stabilize its debt. Besides originally planning to close the Rose Art Museum, the University stopped contributing to the retirement accounts of faculty and staff for a year, saving $7.4 million out of an $8.9-million deficit, according to a May 21, 2009 article in

The New York Times. The University also laid off 76 employees in 2009, as reported in January 2010 by BrandeisNOW. Reinharz's base pay for that one year was enough to have preserved several jobs. One would have expected former President Reinharz's salary to be lowered in accordance with the funding cuts made throughout the University. I do understand that it is difficult to make compensation changes once contracts are signed. However, in the case of Brandeis, former President Reinharz received a new contract in June 2008, right at the beginning of the recession.

During the midst of the crisis, Reinharz did say that he donated to a charitable gift fund started by a group of professors to prevent staff layoffs. Furthermore, he indicated that he and other senior administrators made regular donations to the University, according to a Jan. 13, 2009 article in the Justice. In addition, Reinharz also willingly reduced his salary in order to maintain the Rose Museum. These acts are admirable, but I don't believe they fully justify Reinharz's high salary. During financial difficulties, it is the chief executive who should first make sacrifices as an example of effective leadership. I'm not completely convinced that Reinharz did this. The standard donation to the charitable fund was one percent of the faculty's salary, which, assuming that Reinharz respected this standard, is rather small taken out of $487,352.

I consider it most appropriate for the individual with the highest salary to financially sacrifice first, and I'm sure it couldn't hurt professional morale for university staff and faculty to see salaries cuts made at the highest administrative levels in addition to the lowest. In the future, senior administrators and college trustees ought to consider cuts from the president's salary as an option to reduce debt in an economic crisis. It may not cure all of a university's financial woes, but it will certainly help. Since the economic recession began, companies of all types, from Fortune 500 corporations to nonprofit organizations, have suffered revenue losses and financial cutbacks. One would expect the chief executives and presidents, especially of the nonprofit organizations, to start reducing their large salaries and hunkering down to weather the storm and preserve the quality of their firm.

Surprisingly, this has not been the case. In particular, president's have been earning incredibly high salaries while their schools' budgets have suffered.

Data from the Chronicle of Higher Education shows that presidential salaries have grown at a shocking rate since the 2007-2008 academic year. At doctoral-granting private universities, such as Brandeis, the average president's salary has increased by an appalling 20.3 percent to $582,661. At Brandeis specifically, former President Jehuda Reinharz earned a base salary of $487,352, "other reportable compensation" of $101,457 and deferred compensation of $825,790 in the 2009 calendar year, according to Brandeis' Federal tax filings.

A variety of schools, including Brandeis, have made substantial cutbacks to their programs in order to make ends meet during the financial recession. The fact that few to no reductions were made to presidents' salaries is shocking. Take Arizona State University at Tempe, for instance. During the 2008-2009 academic year, the school had to make significant cuts to its staff and academic programs. According to an article from the March 16, 2009 issue of The New York Times, the school eliminated 500 jobs, 48 programs and hundreds of teaching assistants.

The president, Michael Crow, received $709,196 in total compensation for the 2008-2009 year. For the 2010-2011 year, his total cost of employment was $728,350. It's unfortunate and, in my opinion, a rather poor reflection on his character that he did not decide to give any part of his large compensation back to the university to preserve some of those lost jobs.

Similar trends can be found at other public universities. The president of the University of Central Florida received a total compensation of $800,703 in the 2009-2010 year. A March 22 article from MSNBC article indicates that, in Pennsylvania, the governor is proposing cuts totaling $625 million to institutes of higher education. Schools that would be affected, including Temple University and Pennsylvania State University, paid their presidents $707,947 and $800,592, respectively, in the 2009-2010 year.

At Brandeis, substantial cutbacks were made during the recession in an attempt to stabilize its debt. Besides originally planning to close the Rose Art Museum, the University stopped contributing to the retirement accounts of faculty and staff for a year, saving $7.4 million out of an $8.9-million deficit, according to a May 21, 2009 article in

The New York Times. The University also laid off 76 employees in 2009, as reported in January 2010 by a publication by BrandeisNOW. Reinharz's base pay for that one year was enough to have preserved several jobs. One would have expected former President Reinharz's salary to be lowered in accordance with the funding cuts made throughout the University. I do understand that it is difficult to make compensation changes once contracts are signed.

However, in the case of Brandeis, former President Reinharz received a new contract in June 2008, right at the beginning of the recession.

During the midst of the crisis, Reinharz did say that he donated to a charitable gift fund started by a group of professors to prevent staff layoffs. Furthermore, he indicated that he and other senior administrators made regular donations to the University, according to a Jan. 13, 2009 article in the Justice. In addition, Reinharz also willingly reduced his salary in order to maintain the Rose Museum. These acts are admirable, but I don't believe they fully justify Reinharz's high salary. During financial difficulties, it is the chief executive who should first make sacrifices as an example of effective leadership. I'm not completely convinced that Reinharz did this. The standard donation to the charitable fund was one percent of the faculty's salary, which, assuming that Reinharz respected this standard, is rather small taken out of $487,352.

I consider it most appropriate for the individual with the highest salary to financially sacrifice first, and I'm sure it couldn't hurt professional morale for university staff and faculty to see salaries cuts made at the highest administrative levels in addition to the lowest. In the future, senior administrators and college trustees ought to consider cuts from the president's salary as an option to reduce debt in an economic crisis. It may not cure all of a university's financial woes, but it will certainly help.