Desperate times call for desperate measures. We have seen one million layoffs in the United States this year, many concentrated in specific industries such as automobiles and computer technology. And, although Harvard faces its largest budget shortfall in history, FAS has announced it will avoid having to fire employees in order to cut costs. Instead, department chairs were notified earlier this week that non-union salaries will be frozen and most searches for tenure-track and tenured faculty will be put on hold. While the salary freeze may be unfortunate, it is a fair and logical step given the dire economic situation and the need to cut about $100 million from the FAS operating budget. [CORRECTION APPENDED]

Harvard is facing unprecedented losses to its endowment right now, which has fallen off 22 percent since June and may see further capital deterioration. In the face of such sobering performance, cutbacks are not ideal but are certainly necessary. In this trying time, reductions must be evenly and fairly distributed across all of FAS. The policy of freezing salaries and curtailing new hires is appropriate because it does not necessitate any drastic shifts in policy or practice within a department or campus body. Although this policy affects many people, it does so to a manageable degree in order to distribute the burden of the ongoing financial crisis.

The decision announced Monday to suspend all searches for new faculty goes against FAS dean Michael D. Smith’s statement in November that departments will continue searches they have already begun. Terminating searches will mean the school might miss out on hiring opportunities, especially chances to woo promising young professors. Fortunately, however, FAS has recognized that there may have to be exceptions to their no-search policy if, for instance, a window opens for a distinguished luminary to join the faculty or if a new position is desperately needed. Although only 15 ongoing searches remain, departments will likely still keep tabs on key academics moving into the Boston area, and informal discussion among professors at other universities concerning future available positions here will keep promising future faculty on Harvard’s radar.

Asking departments to limit their searches for new faculty also helps send a message that budget issues are serious and likely to persist. This will hopefully help departments internalize the need to collectively tighten the belt and not expect to adhere to prior spending levels.

FAS deans have also mentioned plans to create new teaching positions akin to teaching post-docs. This signifies the positive development of an admirable initiative, as these recent Ph.D. recipients face stiff competition in the dwindling job market and are less likely than ever to find employment elsewhere. It is also important that the university continues to prioritize teaching even amid dire economic straits, and access to these new positions early in their careers might encourage post-docs to continue teaching rather than leave academia altogether.

As a non-profit institution with a long-term horizon, Harvard can afford to take relatively low-impact steps to address its budget shortfall. So far, Harvard has not had to follow the lead of the market in issuing a shower of pink slips. However, Harvard is far from immune to the market downturn, and, while we would ideally want to avoid cutbacks altogether, restricting salary increases and new hires is a reasonable decision that will minimize impact to our community, while hopefully helping to ease a significant portion of the $100 million shortfall.




CORRECTION:
Due to a typographical error, this paragraph cited the need to cut $100 billion from the FAS operating budget, when in fact the amount is $100 million.  The figure has since been corrected within the text.  The Crimson regrets the error.