[SSC] Membership types and contributions

[Joss Winn]

On 01/03/11 12:25, Terry Wassall wrote:
> Hi Joss. Thanks for the clarification.
> 
> In one of my management jobs at Leeds Uni I had access to the the
> list of employees' salaries in my dept. In the spreadsheet all the
> professors were listed as $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ (appropriately) as there
> salaries are negotiated with the Uni and they are not employees of
> the dept. as such. Some of the salaries are way over the scale 10
> £56k! At least at Leeds they are.
> 
> I think, if fees are going to be stratified in some way then a
> notional 1 hours net pay per month sounds reasonable. I think there
> would still have to be some flexibility though as part-timers would
> be paying disproportionately if they just divide they net monthly
> income by the hours they work. 

Agreed. I'm proposing a self-assessment based on trusting members to
contribute as close to the suggested amount as possible in their given
situation. The scale I set out earlier today would be available as a
quick reference guide as to what they should first consider. More or
fewer contributions would be at the discretion of the individual.

Sound OK? Anyone else got any ideas around this subject?

As I see it, as much as talking about money at this stage might be
uncomfortable, it will be even more uncomfortable if we have take on
students without a five year 'business plan'. Having a framework for
funding at an early stage, gives us as much assurance as we might hope for.

Of course, the other question remains: What do we need the money for?

Joss

> Their fee would be the same as a
> full-timer on the same hourly rate. There could be some adjustment
> based on the proportion of, say, 36 they work. I assume that state
> pensioners and people in reciept of benefits would be free. I think
> the general point is that not all individuals on the same net income
> have the same discretionary disposable income. Quite often when a low
> income is already fully committed to basic and living expenses there
> isn't anything left over. Some of my junior academic colleagues are
> in this postion even though their salaries look quite reasonable,
> especially now their low rate fixed term mortages have had to be
> renegotiated, spiralling costs and a rise of only 10% of the increase
> in CPI. Small extra expense can be a tipping point. As someone said,
> if you are standing on tip toes to keep your head above water a very
> small additional rise in level can drown you. I guess each case would
> have to be assessed on merit in some way. Have any other funding
> models been discussed? I find it hard to think of any within the
> spirit of the project.
> 
> Best wishes
> 
> Terry
> 
> Dr. Terry Wassall Principal Teaching Fellow School of Sociology and
> Social Policy University of Leeds 
> ________________________________________ From:
> ssc-bounces at lists.aktivix.org [ssc-bounces at lists.aktivix.org] On
> Behalf Of Joss Winn [joss at josswinn.org] Sent: 28 February 2011 23:56 
> To: ssc at lists.aktivix.org Subject: Re: [SSC] Membership types and
> contributions
> 
> On 27/02/11 19:57, Terry Wassall wrote:
>> Dear All
>> 
>> Thanks Joss for sending round the notes etc. so quickly. As I said 
>> before, I am very sorry I was not able to come to the meeting.
>> Sounds like you had a really interesting discussion. I have just
>> got back from a weekend in an internet free part of Scotland,
>> practically mobile phone network free as well. I will try to
>> respond to the emails in reverse order over the next day or so
>> startng with the first about membershipd fees/contributions.
>> 
>> There is quite a broad band of professorial salaries, starting not 
>> much above the senior lecture salary. Some profs. also have 
>> additional incomes related to their professorial work. If the prof 
>> rate is used as a benchmark then presumably lecturers A, B, Senior 
>> etc. will be proportionate, say £80, £160, £240 and £300+.  Some
>> more junior academic staff may be on part-time of fixed term
>> contracts, and so the a varity of circumstances will need to be
>> considerd and allowed for. Then at any one time there will be
>> different numbers of students with varying numbers of them able to
>> pay anything. A general quesion is whether the 'fee's model is
>> likely to be adeqate and equitable.
>> 
>> Many academics might be willing to contribute, their subject 
>> expertises, their materials, their experience of being learners
>> and researchers, their ability to be facilitators of discussion
>> etc., maybe even their travel expenses to attend face-to-face
>> sessions. They may not be willing to pay a fee to do so. One answer
>> to this would be, of course, if they are not commited enough to the
>> idea and the ethos, then the Centre doesn't want them.  There could
>> be differeing views on this.
> 
> Hi Terry,
> 
> I would agree with your latter point. As a non-hierarchical 
> organisation, we're all contributing time/effort *and* money relative
> to what we earn elsewhere according to what is likely to be equitable
> and affordable.
> 
> Let's think of it this way:
> 
> An academic on grade 10, at the top of the pay scale is earning
> about £56K (I guess a lot of Profs. negotiate their own salaries off
> of the formal pay scale??)
> 
> So someone on £56K, might be expected to pay a membership fee of 
> £300/year. That person is *taking home* a net pay of around £142/day
> or £712/week or £19/hr. We're suggesting that they work just over one
> hour a month in order to earn the suggested £25/month membership
> fee.
> 
> The bottom of Grade 9 is £46K and a take home wage of £120/day or 
> £603/week or £16/hr. So a suggested membership fee at this level
> might be £18/month, again, just over one hour's net salary.
> 
> If I take my own salary of about £32K, I take home about £428/month
> or £12/hour, so my contribution might be £15. My own salary happens
> to also be our total household income at the moment, but I know I can
> afford this kind of contribution.
> 
> These are rough calculations, but you get my point. We can aim to
> ask people to contribute at least one hour of their monthly take home
> salary to the SSC. Shift the focus away from the £££ and to the
> actual time they work elsewhere in order to keep the SSC running. I'd
> work for an hour a month and give that income to the SSC. I think
> others would, too.
> 
> I'll come up with a more accurate suggested scale of salary vs. 
> contribution based on this idea in the next day or so.
> 
> Joss
> 
> 
>> 
>> I agree with Richard's comments about the need to have some sort
>> of costing and projections. I guess you could call this, between
>> gritted teeth, a business plan. This would need some sort of
>> consideration about sustainability, in terms of finances and
>> objectives, and any obvious risk factors (for instance, under
>> recruitment of paying students). Have a realistic idea of what the
>> costs would actually be is another way of estimating contributions
>> as these could be divided, suitably weighted by income, across the
>> membership.
>> 
>> As far as 'profit' or a surplus is concerned, I think there may be
>> 2 main reasons for needing this - the financial sustainability of
>> the Centre for at least 3 to 5 years (to do right by the students
>> who enrol and to give the project the time to develop and solve
>> the problems and issues that will arise) and to fund the further 
>> development of the Centre. This may not only be in terms of social 
>> science activity. I understand there has been some discussion of 
>> embarking upon other sorts of activities and services in the
>> Centre that may raise money.
>> 
>> Best wishes
>> 
>> Terry
>> 
>> 
>> Dr. Terry Wassall Principal Teaching Fellow School of Sociology
>> and Social Policy University of Leeds 
>> ________________________________________ From: 
>> ssc-bounces at lists.aktivix.org [ssc-bounces at lists.aktivix.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Joss Winn [joss at josswinn.org] Sent: 27 February 2011
>> 12:19 To: ssc at lists.aktivix.org Subject: [SSC] Membership types
>> and contributions
>> 
>> One of the things we discussed for some time in the pub after the 
>> meeting on Thursday is the need to decide what types of membership 
>> there will be at the SSC and how much we hope/expect people to 
>> contribute.
>> 
>> Let's use this discussion thread to work that out. One question
>> that I think Mike raised was that we might first ask what do we
>> need the money for?
>> 
>> As for membership types, these might be academic, student, general 
>> supporter, etc. or we might not distinguish between these at all.
>> 
>> As for the amount of contribution, Mike (a Professor), thought it 
>> reasonable to ask that other Profs. contribute between
>> £300-£500/year or roughly £30+ /month.
>> 
>> I think the general agreement at the pub (outside of the formal 
>> meeting when some people were no longer present) was that people 
>> should self-assess their income and pay a fee that was matched to
>> an income category roughly in line with what Profs. Snr. Lecturers
>> and Lecturers (and possibly one more level) are earning. Low wage
>> and unemployed would pay nothing.
>> 
>> So, what do you think about all of this? Please send your ideas to 
>> this thread so we can come to a decision on this.
>> 
>> Thanks very much Joss
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ SSC mailing list 
>> SSC at lists.aktivix.org
>> https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/ssc
> 
> _______________________________________________ SSC mailing list 
> SSC at lists.aktivix.org https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/ssc 
> _______________________________________________ SSC mailing list 
> SSC at lists.aktivix.org https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/ssc