Good morning. 
Friday in Whitewater will be cloudy with a high of 48. Sunrise is 7:23 AM and sunset 4:26 PM for 9h 02m 12s of daytime. The moon is a waning gibbous with 75% of its visible disk illuminated.
On this day in 1814, representatives of the United Kingdom and the United States sign the Treaty of Ghent, ending the War of 1812.
Rich Kremer reports UWM Chancellor Gets 32% Pay Hike (‘Regents also hike UW-Madison chancellor pay 21.7%. Faculty leader protests decision’):
The University of Wisconsin Board of Regents has approved increasing salary ranges for top university positions in order to match ranges at peer institutions. The vote Monday came after UW System interim President Tommy Thompson said he favors smaller, successive increases for top executive pay ranges.
Regents voted unanimously to raise the salary ranges for chancellors, provosts and UW System leaders. The range for the UW-Madison chancellor increased 21.67 percent, which sets a minimum of $600,126 and a maximum pay of $900,190. The range for the UW-Milwaukee chancellor position increased by 32 percent, setting a minimum pay of $451,440 and a maximum of $677,160.
Before the vote, Regent President Edmund Manydeeds said changing the salary ranges “doesn’t address or guarantee salary rates for any of the senior executives.” Instead, he said the intent was to align salary ranges with market data provided during a Dec. 9 board meeting.
….
At the start of Monday’s meeting, Manydeeds told members he received a phone call from Thompson reiterating his opposition to matching market rates for top executive positions all at once.
“He thinks that we should not go to the high end of these ranges, as you know,” Manydeeds said. “He had a recommendation. He thinks it’s prudent to do that in successive increases, not do it all at once.”
Thompson is right, in almost any circumstances, but notably in these times of stress for frontline workers inside and outside of the UW System. Weak leaders (in this case, the Regents) often favor the level close to their own (in this case, specific chancellors). They want to placate those with whom they deal, or with whom they more closely identify, while ignoring ordinary employees.
Indeed, this is an easy marker of a weak board (whether public or private): it foremost confers raises and benefits to those who are closest by hierarchy to the board.