But that would need to be a careful, individual-oriented evaluation, not a blanket high allocation to a unit on the basis of dubious criteria. It is my opinion that unit merit, or differential raise pools for different departments based on supposed differential merit between departments, is a most pernicious doctrine. What that means, in turn, is that a very good person in a supposedly inferior unit will not be rewarded on an equal basis with someone of equal merit in a supposedly superior unit. This is a major policy change that is being instituted without faculty discussion. As professor and chair in a relatively small humanities unit, with only one MA program and otherwise no graduate mission to date, I am concerned that unit merit, versus merit to and for individuals only, will seriously hurt us and our corner of the humanities.
Individual merit is the way to go, as a matter of fairness.
To my knowledge we have no criteria for judging unit merit, though we may well pretend to have such criteria. I'm not in favor of differential salary allocations by unit because this will penalize the arts and humanities departments, most of which are in the process of rebuilding after years of neglect. In one department of 20 faculty, there may be 15 faculty performing at levels above the average in the university, while in another unit with the same total number there may be only 5 performing above average. It is obvious that it would be grossly unfair if both units were allocated the same raise pool. 3.Most of the salary increase should take into account differences in average faculty asccomplisments from department to department.