The following appeared in a report of the Committee on Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University.

“During her 17 years as a professor of botany, Professor Thomas has proved herself to be well worth her annual salary of $50,000. Her classes are among the largest at the university, demonstrating her popularity among students. Moreover, the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years. Therefore, in consideration of Professor Thomas’ demonstrated teaching and research abilities, we recommend that she receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson; without such a raise and promotion, we fear that Professor Thomas will leave Elm City University for another college.”

A report of the committee on Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University is of the view that Professor Thomas should be promoted to Department Chairperson and be granted a raise of $10,000, keeping in view her demonstrated teaching and research abilities. The report also justifies her $50,000 annual salary to be well deserved as her popularity among students can be seen by the size of classes at the university. It also mentions that the money she has brought to the university in research grants, exceed her salary in the last two years.

Though, the merits of Professor Thomas are commendable, a lot of other factors should be considered before giving her a $10,000 raise along with the proposed promotion. Firstly, the usually followed rules and criteria for promoting someone to the post of Department Chairperson should be carefully considered. It is likely that in spite of her demonstrated teaching skills, the professor does not fulfill the standard criteria yet, say maybe based on work done in the administrative department. Besides, maybe this post calls for more experience in terms of years. Moreover, the achievements of other eligible candidates for the same post are not mentioned. A fair decision of selecting the Department Chairperson can be taken only after going through these details.

Secondly, the grants brought in to the university by the Professor can be held in high esteem only after a comparison with similar grants in other departments and fields. It is also possible that these grants would have anyway been granted for the upgradation of the department according to the latest standards and requirements. In such a case, the professor can not be credited entirely for the task.

Thirdly, the large classes taken by Professor Thomas may be due to her expertise in the subject, but it may be possible because of the growing demand of the subject in the outside world or the shortage of faculty in Botany. Therefore, the correct estimate of her efficiency and popularity can be made only after comparing the class sizes of other botany professors along with the demand of the subject when compared to other subjects.

Fourthly, proper analysis should be done to know if it would be actually possible to give her a $10,000 raise. Again, accomplishments of others should be reviewed as they may later object to the rising discrepancy. This can bring a drift between less paid professors and can create a reverse effect. They may quit their liaison with Elm City University to avoid direct comparison and any sort of complex. Whatever may be the worth of Professor Thomas, all subjects and faculties of the university have their own significance.

Last, but not the least, its only an apprehension that Professor Thomas who has been efficiently serving Elm City University for the last seventeen years and has also been paid deservingly, may leave the university for want of more salary and a promotion. There have been no substantial grounds for these fears as no such record of the past has been mentioned.

Thus, all the above stated arguments should be considered before arriving at any decision.