After the initial decision to approve adjustments in pay ranges for University of Wisconsin System leaders, Board of Regent President Toby E. Marcovich and UW System President Katherine Lyall have opted to confer with numerous search consultants before moving forward with official changes to the current salaries.

Such a move comes after heated public and political outcries, which have not only questioned the need for raises in such economically unstable times, but also criticized the manner in which meetings were held to make the original approvals.

Under Marcovich’s and Lyall’s decision, recommendations from university search consultants will determine whether the wages are appropriate in relation to other university salaries in today’s market conditions.

The board has maintained that salary adjustments of current wages are necessary to maintain the administrative caliber of the UW System. As they noted, the loss of two chancellors, from UW-Milwaukee and UW-Stevens Point, to higher-paying out-of-state positions reflects the possibility of losing even more administrators.

Comparative studies have shown that pay within the UW System is relatively low compared to that of other university systems, something they attribute to the high increases in the market wages.

No raises in salary will be made until after the recommendations have been made and evaluated, which will take place in early October.

Erik Christianson, spokesman for the UW System, is confident that these outside analyses will help to lead the board and the system to the best decisions.

Board member Beth Richlen feels the decision to bring in other voices is an attempt by the board to make up for its previous mistakes, a move she considers to be “in their best interest.”

Richlen believes that the meetings regarding the initial approvals were poorly conducted and feels that not all board members were informed on the manner at hand.

“I didn’t understand the decision from the beginning. I definitely would’ve voted against the pay ranges,” Richlen said, adding that the large number of absentees should’ve warranted some sort of apprehension about how informed the voters actually were. “That really doesn’t make for informed decisions.”

Christianson, however, feels that confusion has surrounded the matter because many people are not completely aware of the actual decisions that were made. He said it is important to realize that no official decisions regarding pay raises have been made; instead, the board merely adjusted pay ranges.

Richlen is not assured that the decision to employ consultant opinion really represents a change in the overall attitude of budget concerns.

As she puts it, the board generally concerns itself with the quality of education and the numbers that are backing it up. In this instance, she feels the board is putting quality before financial matters.

“No matter where money is coming from, it still is from the same big pot. For them, I don’t think it makes a difference because the decision is already made,” she said. “I’m curious to see if anything can be done about it now.”