Connecticut House Bill HB06491

Connecticut 2013 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/25/13
• Refer: 2/25/13
• Report Pass: 3/26/13
• Refer: 4/8/13
• Report Pass: 4/15/13
• Engrossed: 5/1/13
• Report Pass: 5/3/13
• Chaptered: 6/6/13
• Enrolled: 6/10/13
• Passed: 6/25/13

Caption

An Act Requiring A Report From The Board Of Regents For Higher Education And The Board Of Trustees For The University Of Connecticut Regarding Administrators.

Impact

HB 6491 is expected to have significant implications on state laws governing higher education administration. By requiring these biennial reports, the bill seeks to provide data that can be used for better decision-making regarding compensation and resource allocation within the state's higher education system. The comparisons would not only inform lawmakers about salary structures and ratios but may also influence future budget decisions and educational funding policies, pushing for fair compensation practices.

Summary

House Bill 6491 mandates the Board of Regents for Higher Education and the Board of Trustees for the University of Connecticut to conduct regular salary comparisons between administrative positions at public institutions of higher education in Connecticut and their peers across the United States. This bill aims to ensure that administrative salaries and ratios of administrators to faculty and students are competitive and reflective of similar institutions, thus promoting transparency and accountability in higher education management.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding HB 6491 appears to be supportive among educational stakeholders who value accountability and equitable salary structures in higher education. However, there may be concerns raised about the administrative burden such reporting requirements could impose on state institutions. Overall, the bill is seen as a move towards greater oversight and strategic planning in managing educational resources, reflecting positive sentiment among proponents of administrative transparency.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding HB 6491 include potential pushback from university administrators regarding the implications of the mandated comparisons. Critics may argue that such reports could oversimplify complex salary structures and lead to undervaluation of administrative roles that are not easily comparable. Additionally, there could be debates about the effectiveness of the bill in truly addressing salary disparities or if it simply serves as a regulatory measure without substantial impact on actual compensation frameworks.