THE UNIVERSITY OFCHICAGO WECOEOMay 16, 1980 ISSN 0362-4706 An Official Publication Volume XIV, Number 3CONTENTS85 THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMTHE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGOFOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER© Copyright 1980 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO RECORDTHE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGOAFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMMarch 1980The University of Chicago has a policy of providing opportunity in employment for all qualifiedpersons and prohibiting discrimination in employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex,national origin, handicapped status, or veteranstatus. This is the report of the current program ofequal employment opportunity and affirmativeaction.Dissemination of Policy. Statements of the University's policy are carried in University personnel policy booklets distributed to all entering employees and available to all employees at anytime. Periodic reports are published in the Record. Posters of policy and the law are displayed onpersonnel bulletin boards at various points aroundthe campus. Meetings have been held with department heads and supervisors to discuss theaffirmative action program. The policy has beendiscussed with unions and is stated in collectivebargaining agreements to accurately reflect theUniversity's policy. The existence of the affirmative action program and the obligations to follow itare widely known throughout the University.The policy is also made known outside the University. Advertisements for openings carry thenotice that the University is an equal employmentopportunity-affirmative action employer. Theequal employment opportunity clause is containedin contracts, purchase orders, and other pertinentcontractual arrangements with outside organizations. Announcements of searches for employeessent to various institutions and organizations, employment agencies, and the like mention the University's equal employment opportunity policy.Through all these activities, as well as by directcommunications, prospective employees aremade aware of the University's adherence to thisprogram.Responsibilities for Implementation. The responsibility for implementing the affirmative action program is recognized at the highest levels ofthe University's administration. The actual per formance of affirmative action is a daily activitythat takes place within each department and otherunits of the University. Members of the facultyand staff have been made aware of the University's strong commitment to affirmative action. Inthe academic departments, it is the responsibilityof each departmental faculty and its chairman toassure proper compliance with the policy. In theacademic divisions, the deans have the responsibility to review the activities of the departments in appointments, reappointments, promotions, and other personnel actions relating tofaculty to assure that the affirmative action program is followed. The deans of the professionalschools and the College assure compliance bytheir units. The provost, in reviewing and approving actions such as recommendations for appointments sent forward from the deans, considers whether the appointments are consistent withall University policies, including its affirmativeaction policy. Should he perceive a problem toexist, he exercises his authority to take necessaryaction. In addition, at any level of the process, thefaculty appointment committees, chairmen,deans, and provost may consult with the assistantvice-president for affirmative action, who is theaffirmative action officer, about the interpretationof the program and its application to particularsituations. This is often done.In nonacademic areas, the primary responsibility rests initially with the departmentheads and supervisors. The Personnel Office playsa large role in advising department heads aboutemployment actions and the affirmative actioneffects of such actions. The director of personnelreports to the vice-president for business andfinance about the University's affirmative actionefforts and has general responsibility for the administration of the affirmative action program innonacademic employment. Again, regularly andwhen particular situations arise, the affirmativeaction officer is consulted about the interpretationof the program and its application to particularsituations.All supervisors are made aware that they areresponsible for the implementation of the affirma-85tive action program as a part of their duties andwill be evaluated on their performance under theprogram. The University's nondiscriminationpolicy applies to all employment decisionswhether or not a particular unit is above utilization or underutilized.The affirmative action officer has a broad spectrum of duties in connection with equal opportunity and affirmative action. Under the generalsupervision of the president, and in regular consultation with the provost and vice-president forbusiness and finance, the affirmative action officeris concerned with the ongoing process of developing and supplementing the affirmative actionpolicy and program and disseminating informationabout the program within and outside the University. The affirmative action officer consults withchairmen, deans, officers, the Personnel Office,and supervisors at all levels regarding implementation of the program, the handling ofproblems that arise, and the review of the affirmative action aspects of particular personnel actionsincluding hiring, compensation, promotion, corrective actions, and termination. With the assistance of the Legal Counsel's Office, the affirmativeaction officer keeps the University administrationinformed of changes in laws and regulations aboutequal employment opportunity. Employees, students, applicants, or other interested parties contact the affirmative action officer (as well as otherpertinent authorities within the University) to discuss affirmative action or equal employment suggestions or complaints. In oral and written reports, the affirmative action officer keeps University administration abreast of current developments in affirmative action within the University. In the development of the affirmative actionprogram, the affirmative action officer participatesin identifying problems and their solution and inoverseeing the collection of data, the determiningof availability, and the making of realistic projections. The affirmative action officer generallysees that there is adequate review of the variety ofactions involved in affirmative action, includingrecruitment, hiring, compensation administration,reappointment and promotion, training programsfor upgrading and apprenticeship, posting of nondiscriminatory notices, providing of facilities on anondiscriminatory basis, providing guidance tosupervisors, investigating and resolving informalcomplaints, and supervising responses to actionstaken to enforcement agencies.Records. The provost and the affirmative actionofficer have made it the responsibility of eachacademic department to keep records of all fac ulty searches for two years after the completion ofeach search. The University recently improvedthe recordkeeping for searches related to new faculty appointments. The provost and the affirmative action officer have designed and discussedwith department chairmen procedures to insureaffirmative action and to record a better summarydescription of faculty searches. At the time that arecommendation for appointment is made, thedean and the provost review departmentalaffirmative action activities.Audit of performance in affirmative action is theresponsibility of each person having line responsibility for employment and of the affirmativeaction officer. Thus, the department chairmen anddeans for academic areas and the departmentheads and the Personnel Office for nonacademicemployees have the responsibility to audit performances of those making recommendations foremployment actions. Records, normally maintained in the academic departments at the departmental level and, for nonacademic staff, in thePersonnel Office, are fully available to those approving actions and to the affirmative actionofficer. When an enforcement agency desires aresponse to a charge of discrimination, theaffirmative action officer is responsible for seeingthat the pertinent facts are made available for review by such agencies.Promotions, Reappointments, and Transfers. Fornonacademic employees, when positions becomevacant, the Personnel Office is notified. The Personnel Office is responsible for implementingequal opportunity and affirmative action procedures of posting openings within the Universityand recruiting outside the University.For faculty, promotion from assistant professorto associate professor normally occurs in the sixthyear of appointment as assistant professor, thoughearlier promotion occurs when unusual productivity has been apparent. There are differencesamong disciplines in the length of time required todisplay outstanding productivity; early evidenceof high productivity as a scholar is more likely tooccur in a theoretical field than in an experimentalfield, for example. Differential rates of promotionto a higher rank can be due to differences in lengthof time in the current rank.Promotion from associate professor to professor does not occur within any particular timeperiod. However, the academic areas have beenasked to review all individuals who have been associate professors for more than six or sevenyears. The University intends to continue thispractice.86TABLE A: REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN AT THE UNIVERSITY OFCHICAGO COMPARED TO CITY OF CHICAGO AND CHICAGO SMSAWORKFORCE (NONFACULTY)The Universityof Chicago City of ChicagoJob Category 10/1/79 Chicago* SMSA*Officials and Managers 44.2% 20.9% 14.6%Professionals and Technicians 59.6 41.6 38.0Sales 51.6 38.2 37.4Office and Clerical 86.3 68.9 73.9Skilled Craftsmen 2.1 6.1 5.0Semiskilled Operatives 18.3 32.6 30.0Laborers 0 10.9 11.0Service Workers 56.0 40.5 47.2^Source: Table 3 of Labor Force Information for Affirmative Action Programs, Illinois State Employment Service, September 1979.Considerations of faculty reappointments andpromotions are initiated in the academic department. Recommendations are made to the deanand then to the provost. All decisions to renew ornot to renew faculty appointments and to promoteor not to promote faculty are carefully reviewedby the Office of the Provost to determine if theappropriate procedures have been followed. Thisreview practice will continue. The review dutiesof the affirmative action officer are stated above inthe section on implementation.Complaints and Terminations. Faculty memberswho have complaints related to affirmative actiontake the matters to their department chairmen ordeans. Questions not resolved with chairmen ordeans may be referred to the provost who mayconsult the Committee on Appointment Inequities, comprised of faculty members appointedby the president of the University. Faculty members may also discuss complaints with anothercommittee appointed by the president, known asthe Committee on University Women, which reports to the Council of the University, a facultybody elected by the University Senate. Innonacademic employment, individuals may register complaints or grievances with their supervisors, department heads, and the PersonnelOffice. Members of employee groups representedby unions normally follow grievance proceduresin their collective bargaining agreements. Involuntary termination of nonacademic employeesmust first be reviewed with the Personnel Office toassure fair treatment and compliance with nondiscrimination policy and related laws and regulations. Records of termination of nonfaculty employees are maintained by the Personnel Officeincluding job, race and sex, date of termination,and length of time in last position at the Universityof Chicago. These are periodically reviewed bythe affirmative action officer to determine whetherthey reflect any deviation from the University'snondiscrimination policy. Involuntary terminationof a faculty member with tenure, or one on a termcontract within the term, can be made only byfollowing procedures specified in the UniversityStatutes.In addition, before or after using the proceduresnoted above, any employee, applicant, or otherperson having a specific concern about employment matters at the University may contact theaffirmative action officer.Nonfaculty StaffThe University has compared its nonfaculty staffprofile with the profile of the Chicago StandardMetropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) with respect to utilization of women and minorities. Twocomparisons have been made and are reproducedhere. The first compares the University workforcewith figures for the Chicago SMSA and also withthe narrower figures for the workforce within theChicago city limits by major EEO-1 categories1(Tables A and B). The second compares the Uni-1. In order to compare like data, the University's workforcestatistics have been adjusted to the format of EEO-1 instead ofEEO-6 as they are reported because the only available areastatistics are in EEO-1 format. That there are significant differences between the EEO-1 and EEO-6 formats can be illustrated by the classification of a supervisor of technicians underOfficials and Managers in EEO-1, but as T (Technical) under theEEO-6 primary occupational groups.87TABLE B: REPRESENTATION OF MINORITIES AT THE UNIVERSITYOF CHICAGO COMPARED TO CITY OF CHICAGO AND CHICAGOSMSA WORKFORCE (NONFACULTY)The Universityof Chicago City of ChicagoJob Category 10/1/79 Chicago* SMSA*Officials and Managers 25.0% 16.5% 6.4%Professionals and Technicians 44.6 24.5 12.2Sales 32.3 19.0 3.7Office and Clerical 50.2 29.3 17.4Skilled Craftsmen 14.2 27.6 14.6Semiskilled Operatives 34.1 48.9 31.3Laborers 61.1 47.6 32.0Service Workers 86.2 43.2 29.1*Source: Table 3 of Labor Force Information for Affirmative Action Programs, Illinois State Employment Service, September 1979.versity's workforce, divided into logical jobgroupings, with the availability of employees ofthose job groupings in the Chicago SMSA as calculated from EEO-1 statistics (Table C).Both comparisons show that the University'sutilization of women and minorities generally exceeds that of the area. Only with respect to a fewspecific job groups does the University have anindication of possible underutilization of womenor minorities. The comparison disclosed somegeneral underutilization of a specific minority,Hispanic. A special recruiting program wasundertaken in 1977-78 which is described below.The program was continued in 1978-79 and will becontinued in 1979-80.Chicago SMSA statistics have been chosen asthe most reliable overall index of the availabilityof staff for the University. A review of the residence patterns of the University employees hasshown that the employees are dispersed throughout the metropolitan area. The University advertises extensively in metropolitan newspapers. It isconveniently located near public transportation,and, thus, easily accessible to many communities,particularly those along the lake and in the southern suburbs. With all these factors considered,there is no better general indication of theavailability of employees in the area than theSMSA and City of Chicago statistics. It shouldalso be noted, of course, that for certainclassifications of jobs, particularly officials andmanagers and professionals, the University drawsfrom a national labor market. Availability by Major EEO-1 CategoryTables A and B compare the University's nonfaculty workforce as it is classified by major EEO-1category with that of the City of Chicago aloneand with the Chicago SMSA.As indicated in Table A, the employment ofwomen at the University exceeds employment ofwomen in the City of Chicago and SMSA with theexception of the categories of skilled craftsmenand semiskilled operatives and laborers. Theseare three of the four groups with the smallest totalpopulation at the University: skilled craftsmen,233; semiskilled operatives, 82; and laborers, 18.Table B shows that the employment ofminorities and blacks at the University exceedsChicago SMSA in all categories except skilledcraftsmen and also exceeds the City of Chicagoemployment in every category except skilledcraftsmen and semiskilled operatives.Availability by Job GroupingsAs part of the affirmative action program, the entire nonfaculty workforce was divided intothirty-three job groups. These groups wereidentified by considering such factors as skilllevels, educational requirements, wage and salaryrates, content, functional lines, and other considerations. A description of each group follows.Following the listing of job groupings is TableC, Employment Profile, showing employment atthe University by total numbers and percentagesof females and minorities and blacks besideavailability.88Job Groupings — Nonfaculty1. Officers and Department Directors. Officersand directors of principal nonacademic departments of the University.2. Departmental Administrators /Managers. Assistant and associate directors of principalnonacademic departments of the University.3. Academic-N onfacuity . Professionals who participate in the instructional and research activitiesof the University but are not defined as ''faculty." 4. Professional Librarians. Professional librarians employed in the University library.5. Laboratory School Teachers. Teachers andadministrators of the precollegiate LaboratorySchool of the University.6. Nurses. All professional nursing staff (RNs) ofthe hospitals and clinics and their supervisorsthrough the level of assistant directors of theNursing Department.7. Accountants. Professional accountants, thelarge majority of whom are in the Comptroller'sTABLE C: THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO— EMPLOYMENT PROFILE(Nonfaculty, Full-time)Total Female Minority Black10-1-79 Total Percent Availability Total Percent Availability Total Percent AvailabilityOfficers and Department Directors 50 5 10.0% 14.6% 1 2.0% 6.6% 1 2.0% 4.5%Departmental Administrators 101 45 44.6 14.6 14 13.9 6.6 11 10.9 4.5Academic Nonfaculty 87 26 29.9 15.0a 19 21.8 11. 9a 7 8.0 6.0aProfessional Librarians 55 36 65.5 27.9 8 14.5 11.0 1 1.8 7.4Laboratory School Teachers 143 99 69.2 69.2 13 9.1 13.4 11 7.7 11.8Nurses 676 647 95.7 61.2 266 39.3 19.7 215 31.8 10.6Accountants 111 50 45.0 23.8 36 32.4 9.7 23 20.7 6.5Scientists and Engineers 71 11 15.5 3.6 7 9.9 6.1 1 1.4 2.4Research Specialists 374 117 31.3 18.2" 91 24.3 5.2" 6 1.6 1.9"Supervisors of Technicians 37 15 40.5 31.1 10 27.0 11.0 6 16.2 7.4Research Technicians — Professional 417 265 63.5 64.3 148 35.5 20.5 42 10.1 10.8Computer Clericals 65 58 89.2 65.2 53 81.5 20.0 49 75.4 16.1Computer Field Professionals 148 44 29.7 25.6 36 24.3 10.2 26 17.6 6.9Publishing and Media Professionals 129 90 69.8 27.0 10 7.8 10.7 8 6.2 7.2Fund Raising and Public Information 36 19 52.8 23.6 2 5.6 9.6 0 0.0 6.5Student Program Administration 59 34 57.6 22.9 8 13.6 9.4 6 10.2 6.3Health Field Professionals 164 119 72.6 47.2 46 28.0 16.1 35 21.3 9.0Independent Professionals 85 41 48.2 27.3 12 14.1 10.7 10 11.8 7.2Biological and PhysicalSciences Technicians 525 349 66.5 58.6 372 70.9 19.2 320 60.9 10.1Other Technicians 34 4 11.8 27.5 10 29.4 10.9 3 8.8 7.3Secretaries and Typists 941 905 96.2 97.5 517 54.9 11.0 477 50.7 8.1Other Clericals 768 599 78.0 65.2 466 60.7 20.0 391 50.9 16.1Exempt Clericals 338 302 89.3 72.6 85 25.1 17.9 77 22.8 14.3Sales 28 15 53.6 57.4 10 35.7 10.2 9 32.1 7.5Plant and Real EstateSkilled Workers 197 3 1.5 4.1 37 18.8 14.9 31 15.7 8.8Semiskilled Workers 44 0 0.0 23.1 30 68.2 32.5 29 65.9 25.0Printing Trades 83 19 22.9 0.5 11 13.3 15.6 9 10.8 11.2Machinists 49 0 0.0 0.0 8 16.3 14.0 3 6.1 8.7Research Laboratory Mechanics 16 1 6.2 0.0 4 25.0 17.1 3 18.7 11.7Supervisors of Service Workers 75 36 47.9 14.6 53 70.7 6.6 51 68.0 4.5Service Workers — Health 189 166 87.8 68.6 179 94.7 34.4 172 91.0 30.5Service Workers — General 787 430 54.6 44.2 705 89.6 29.1 679 86.3 22.6Security 94 7 7.4 8.4 32 34.0 16.7 32 34.0 15.2a. These availability percentages based on earned degree data are more accurate than the SMSA data which include primary and secondary teachers.b. The primary qualifications for the great majority of positions in this job category is an advanced graduate degree. Hence the best availability figures are based onthe estimate of the percentage expected to earn such degrees in the academic fields represented in the category rather than on the SMSA data.89TABLE D: REPRINTED FROM "LABOR FORCE INFORMATIONFOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMS"Table III: Occupation of Employed Persons by Sex and Minority Status — 1970 and 1975"Occupational Group Both SexesTotal White Black OtherRaces SpanishAmerican MinorityGroup(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) •(f) (g)All OccupationsNumber 1975 2,920,000 2,471,000 420,000 29,000 118,000 567,000Number 1970 2,852,000 2,413,000 410,000 29,000 115,000 554,000Percent 1970 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Professional, technical and related 15.0 15.9 8.4 32.7 7.2 9.4Engineers 1.7 2.0 0.2 3.9 0.6 0.5Medical and health workers 2.1 2.1 1.6 13.9 1.8 2.3Teachers 2.9 3.0 2.4 1.4 0.8 2.0Other professional workers 8.1 8.7 4.1 13.5 3.9 4.6Managers and administrators,nonfarm 7.9 8.9 2.5 4.3 2.6 2.7Sales 7.6 8.5 3.2 3.5 3.4 3.3Retail stores 3.9 4.2 2.1 1.9 2.1 2.1Other sales workers 3.8 4.2 1.1 1.6 1.3 1.1Clerical 22.3 22.5 21.4 19.4 15.1 20.0Secretaries, stenos, and typists 6.2 6.7 3.5 4.4 3.4 3.5Other clerical workers 16.0 15.7 17.9 14.9 11.6 16.5Craftsmen, foremen and related 13.9 14.6 9.8 7.8 13.3 10.4Construction/craftsmen 2.9 3.1 1.5 1.0 2.0 1.6Mechanics and repairmen 2.7 2.8 2.2 2.4 3.0 2.4Machinists and other metalcraftsmen 1.8 2.0 1.0 0.8 2.2 1.2Other craftsmen 6.3 6.5 5.0 3.7 6.1 5.2Operatives except transportation 13.9 12.6 21.5 15.1 37.0 24.4Durable goods manufacturing 7.8 7.3 10.6 7.6 23.4 13.1Nondurable goods manufacturing 3.4 2.9 6.3 3.9 9.7 6.9Nonmanufacturing 2.7 2.3 4.5 3.6 3.9 4.4Transport equipment operatives 3.9 3.5 6.0 1.4 3.5 5.3Laborers, nonfarm 4.2 3.7 7.1 2.9 7.3 7.0Service, except private household 10.2 9.1 17.0 11.5 9.6 15.2Cleaning and food service 5.4 4.8 8.5 8.5 6.5 8.1Protective service 1.4 1.4 1.5 0.2 0.5 1.2Personal, health and other services 3.3 2.7 7.0 2.9 2.5 5.8Private household workers 0.7 0.3 2.6 1.0 0.4 2.0Farm workers 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.3a. Source: Detailed Manpower Indicators, Tables 25A, 25B, 26A and 26B; Labor Market Indicators for Affirmative Action Programs,Census of Population in Labor Force Information for Affirmative Action Programs, 1978.b. Area: Chicago SMSA (Cook, DuPage, Kane, McHenry, and Will Counties).IN A = Information not available.Office and the hospitals and clinics' Finance Section, including supervisors through the level of assistant comptroller.8. Scientists and Engineers. Nonacademic scientists and engineers in the biological, physical, andsocial sciences divisions engaged in research.9. Research Specialists. Research associates andresearch project specialists. Employees in thesegroups are engaged to assist faculty or staff inresearch. 10. Supervisors of Technicians. Supervisors ofresearch technicians who manage research laboratories in the biological and physical sciences divisions; generally they report to faculty researchdirectors.11. Research Technicians — Professional. Technicians and technologists in the biological andphysical sciences divisions who are engaged in research or clinical activities and have attained thebachelor of science degree or equivalent, forexample, A.S.C.P. certificate.90TABLE D — ContinuedOccupational Group FemaleTotal White Black OtherRaces SpanishAmerican MinorityGroup"(a) (h) (i) (J) (k) (D (m)All OccupationsNumber 1975 1,124,000 928,000 183,000 13,000 39,000 235,000Number 1970 1,097,000 907,000 178,000 12,000 38,000 229,000Percent 1970 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Professional, technical and related 14.7 15.2 11.0 35.2 7.4 11.7Engineers INA INA INA INA INA INAMedical and health workers 3.6 3.4 2.8 23.5 2.6 3.9Teachers 5.3 5.6 4.0 2.7 1.6 3.5Other professional workers 5.8 6.1 4.2 9.0 3.0 4.3Managers and administrators,nonfarm 3.0 3.2 1.6 1.8 1.2 1.6Sales 7.4 8.2 3.4 2.7 4.2 3.5Retail stores 6.1 6.7 2.8 2.4 3.5 2.9Other sales workers 1.3 1.4 0.6 0.3 0.7 0.6Clerical 42.8 44.6 34.6 30.0 28.9 33.4Secretaries, stenos, and typists 15.7 17.3 7.7 9.7 9.9 8.1Other clerical workers 27.1 27.3 26.9 20.3 19.0 25.3Craftsmen, foremen and related 1.8 1.8 2.1 1.4 2.8 2.2Construction/craftsmen INA INA INA INA INA INAMechanics and repairmen INA INA INA INA INA INAMachinists and other metalcraftsmen INA INA INA INA INA INAOther craftsmen INA INA INA INA INA INAOperatives except transportation 14.5 13.4 19.7 16.3 42.1 23.3Durable goods manufacturing 7.6 7.6 7.9 7.0 24.9 10.7Nondurable goods manufacturing 4.7 4.1 7.3 5.8 13.8 8.3Nonmanufacturing 2.1 1.7 4.5 3.5 3.3 4.2Transport equipment operatives 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.3Laborers, nonfarm 1.2 0.9 2.3 0.9 2.1 2.2Service, except private household 12.5 11.2 18.9 9.2 10.0 16.9Cleaning and food service 6.2 5.9 7.9 5.0 5.1 7.3Protective service 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.3Personal, health and other services 5.9 5.0 10.6 4.0 4.6 9.2Private household workers 1.6 0.9 5.5 2.1 1.1 4.6Farm workers 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.312. Computer Clericals. Clericals in the computerfield, comprising keypunch operators, data processing clerks, and coders.13. Computer Field Professionals. Professionalsin the computer field, including programmers,analysts, computer operators, supervisors, andproduction expediters.14. Publishing and Media Professionals. Professional writers, editorial assistants, and otherprofessionals in publishing and related fields.15. Fund-Raising and Public Information Staff.Staff of the development and public affairs officesengaged in fund raising and public information activities. 16. Student Program Administrators. Advisors tostudents and administrators of student programs,including deans of students in professionalschools and assistant deans of divisions and theCollege.17. Health Field Professionals. Professionals,other than medical doctors and nurses, in thehealth field, including dieticians, therapists, andcaseworkers. Included in this group are supervisors through the level of assistant hospital administrators.18. Independent Professionals. Various professionals scattered throughout the Universitysuch as architects, attorneys, artists, planners,program coordinators, and security analysts.9119. Biological Sciences and Physical SciencesTechnicians — Nonprofessionals . Research technicians in the biological and physical sciences divisions and clinical technicians in the hospitalsand clinics, whose skills are based primarily onexperience, normally do not require a bachelor'sdegree, but often require specialized educationalor training programs beyond high school. Examples are: licensed practical nurses, X-ray,hematology, operating room, radiation safety, andelectronics technicians.20. Other Technicians. Other skilled technicalworkers including draftsmen, photographers, audiovisual workers, and barbers.21. Secretaries and Typists. Clericals whoseduties require primarily typing and other secretarial skills, exclusive of such persons who areconsidered exempt under F.L.S.A. white collarregulations.22. Other Clericals. Other clericals includingbusiness machine operators, bookkeepers, records and other clerks except those grouped withcomputer field staff (12 above).23. Exempt Clericals. Administrative secretariesand administrative assistants, library assistants,housing managers, and office managers who areexempt as administrators under F.L.S.A. whitecollar regulations.24. Sales. Sales personnel primarily in thebookstore and hospitals and clinics gift shops.25. Plant and Real Estate — Skilled Workers.Skilled tradesmen and their apprentices workingin building maintenance operations.26. Plant and Real Estate — Semiskilled Workers.Semiskilled operatives in building maintenanceand groundskeeping operations.27. Printing Trades. Skilled tradesmen and theirapprentices and operatives in the University Pressand Printing Department.28. Machinists. Highly skilled instrumentmakers/machinists developing tools and instruments and experimental apparatus for research.29. Research and Laboratory Mechanics. Mechanics and technical assistants engaged in settingup experiments and repairing and maintainingequipment in teaching and research laboratories.30. Supervisors of Service Workers. Supervisorsof service workers primarily engaged in housekeeping and food service operations. 31. Service Workers — Health. Nursing assistantsand mental health workers.32. Service Workers — General. Service workersengaged primarily in housekeeping and food service operations.33. Security. Security Department patrol officers,sergeants, and lieutenants.Explanation of Statistical MethodAvailability data were generated from "Table III,Occupation of Employed Persons by Sex andMinority Status," which is included in the document "Labor Force Information for AffirmativeAction Programs, 1979," issued by the State ofIllinois and reproduced in Table D.In the cited table the data are presented for theChicago SMSA showing the percentage of eachethnic group in a series of occupational groups.Utilizing the number in each ethnic group, it ispossible to calculate the numbers of persons ineach ethnic group in each occupational group. Forexample, of the total of 420,000 blacks, Column Dof the table shows 2.2 percent are mechanics andrepairmen; thus, the number of black mechanicsand repairmen is 9,240. Similarly, Column B indicates that 2.7 percent of the total workforce of2,920,000 are mechanics and repairmen, or78,840. Thus, blacks comprise 9,240 divided by78,840, for example, 11.7 percent. There are several cells in the SMSA data which are marked"INA" (information not available). In preparingthe percentages, the agency analysts counted INAas zero availability. In order to maintain the integrity of the data, our calculations also equate INAwith zero availability. The results of these computations for females, all minorities, and blacks,for nineteen occupational groups, are presented inTable E.Using the job groupings developed in the University and the Chicago SMSA availability datacomputed as described above, it was possible tocompute predictions of the numbers of females,minorities, and blacks which might be expected tobe found in each job grouping. These computations took into account the mix of occupationalgroups in each job grouping and the numbers ofpersons in each occupational group. The predicted numbers were then compared with actualemployment statistics.It should be borne in mind that these data aregenerated from what appear to be the best publicly accessible comparable statistics for jobclassifications more refined than the six EEO-1categories. Several points of caution should be92TABLE E: AVAILABILITY DATA(Computed from data for Chicago SMSA provided in1975 Labor ForceInformation for Affirmative Action Programs)3University Availabilityof Chicago OccupationalIdentifying Group TotalCode Female Minority Black1 Managers and OfficialsTechnical and Professional 14.6% 6.6% 4.5%2A Engineers INA 5.4 1.72B Medical and Health 66.0 21.0 11.02C Teachers 70.4 13.5 11.92D Other ProfessionalsSales 27.9 11.0 7.43A Retail 60.2 10.4 7.73B OtherClerical 13.2 6.0 4.24A Secretary/Stenographer/Typist 97.5 11.0 8.14B Other ClericalCraftsmen 65.2 20.0 16.15A Construction INA 10.6 7.45B Mechanics and Repairmen INA 17.1 11.75C Machinists INA 13.4 8.05D OtherOperatives INA 15.9 11.46A Nonmanufacturing 29.9 31.1 24.06B Transportation Equipment 22.1 26.1 3.07 LaborersService 12.0 34.9 26.58A Cleaning and Food 44.2 29.1 22.68B Protective 8.2 17.0 15.48C Personal, Health, Other 68.8 34.4 30.5INA = Information not available.a. Latest information available.noted about these data. First, in some categoriesthe University of Chicago recruitment area is atleast national and the use of data from the ChicagoSMSA may overstate or understate availability.Second, the mix of individuals within jobcategories for a research university probably doesnot reflect the mix within a standard metropolitanarea in some cases. Each year there is reconsideration of the sources of information aboutemployment availability.In preparing nonfaculty availability figures forthe 1980 report, consideration was given to theeight factors which appear in 41CFR 60-2.11 (b).This consideration made clear that the most reasonable way to conceive of appropriateavailability pools is to take into account the actualdynamics of filling jobs. Elsewhere in this report93are described the methods used for hiring fromoutside the University: sometimes there is advertising for a particular opening, other times there isadvertising for a general class of jobs (for example, secretaries). At other times, individuals present themselves at the Personnel Office to inquireabout possible openings. Whether applicantscome in response to advertising or on their owninitiative, all the avenues focus on the specific jobopenings. Therefore, by definition, the availabilitypools for the University of Chicago jobs and formaking single-year projections consist of thosepeople who can take up immediately the jobs thatare open during that year. Because of that, laborstatistics that describe the minority and femalecomposition of occupational groups are by far themost appropriate and pertinent numbers that canTABLE F: PROGRESS TOWARD PROJECTIONSOCTOBER 1978-OCTOBER 1979Groups and Categories byNumber for Which Projections Projections for Actual HiresWere Required, October 1978 1978-79 1978-79(Projections over 0.5)5. Laboratory School TeachersMinority 0Black 014. Publishing and MediaMinority 0Black 015. Fund RaisingMinority 0TABLE G: PROJECTIONS FOR OCTOBER 1979-OCTOBER 1980AND PROJECTIONS TO REACH ULTIMATE PROJECTIONSJob Categoryand Number TotalProjectedNew Hires10/79 to 10/80 ApparentlyUnderutilizedGroup Availability ProjectedNew Hires10/79 to 10/80UnderutilizedGroup UltimateProjectionsforUnderutilizedGroup1. Officers andDirectors 5 FemaleMinorityBlack 14.6%6.64.5 10a0a 2214. ProfessionalLibrarians 12 Black 7.4 1 35. Laboratory SchoolTeachers 8 MinorityBlack 13.411.8 11 6614. PublishingProfessionals 6 Minority 10.7 1 415. Fund Raising Staff 14 Minority 9.6 1 120. Other Technicians 4 Female 27.5 1 525. Skilled Workers 10 Female 4.1 oa 526. Semiskilled Workers 1 Female 23.1 oa 1028. Machinists 1 Black 8.7 oa 1a. Based on the projected total number of appointments during the year in this job category, the projection comes to less than 0.5persons, hence there is no projected appointment of the underutilized class for this period.94TABLE H: HISPANIC EMPLOYEES, 1975-793-31-75 10-1-77 10-1-79Officers and Managers 1 4 4Professional and Technical 24 33 33Sales o 0 0Office and Clerical 41 46 48Skilled and Semiskilled 7 7 9Laborers 1 0 0Service 12 22 27be used to describe the University's availabilitypools. The Labor Department statistics were usedbecause they appear to be the most comprehensive publicly available statistics.As has been described elsewhere, nonfacultyjobs are posted at the University and anyonequalified may bid for posted jobs unless otherwisedetermined by labor union contracts. The University is in the process of improving its methods formonitoring internal personnel transactions. It isclear that there are many areas in which the internal sources of hiring for particular jobs are scattered so that the description of these availabilitypools may be elusive.Projections for 1978-79. Last year the analysis ofthe nonfaculty workforce in its thirty-three jobgroups showed that the University appeared to beunderutilizing women, minorities, or blacks byfive people in nine groups. For these groups, theUniversity charged supervisors with the responsibility for extra monitoring of recruitmentand hiring. Projections were made about hiring.As Table F shows, in the three groups requiring aprojection of at least one person, the projectionswere not able to be met in spite of extra effort.Effort will be renewed this year.Projections for 1979-80. An analysis of the workforce for this year shows a few groups, accordingto the above-explained method of calculation, tobe underutilizing women, minorities, or blacks.(As required by the regulations, a group is considered underutilized if women or minorities comprise fewer than four-fifths of the availability figures.) Projections for 1979-80 are shown inTable G.Hispanic s. Table H shows the count of Hispanicsat the University in EEO-1 categories. The University concluded in 1977-78, based on the October 1977 figures, that Hispanics were underutilized in its workforce in comparison with theiravailability in the Chicago SMSA. In 1977-78, theUniversity undertook to make special efforts inrecruiting Hispanics with a special program of advertising including radio and television ads to inform the Hispanic community about opportunitiesat the University. Special recruiting efforts continued in 1978-79 and will continue in 1979-80.FacultyIntroductionThere are several attributes of the University ofChicago that influence the selection of faculty.The University of Chicago is a research university. That means that the quality and commitmentof faculty to productive research is as importantas is the quality and commitment of faculty toteaching. The Shils Report identifies these standards in more detail.Academic units at the University of Chicago donot have a fixed number of " slots." Offers fornew appointments are authorized by the provostupon the recommendation of appropriate deansand department chairmen on the basis ofacademic needs and hiring opportunities.Due to the projected financial situation of theUniversity, it is expected that there will be a decrease in the size of the faculty in the years ahead.95TABLE I: CURRENT EMPLOYMENT OF FACULTY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGOTOTAL FEMALES, MINORITIES, OCTOBER 1, 1979FacultyTotal Females MinoritiesBiological Sciences DivisionClinicalAnesthesiologyBen May LabMedicineNeurologyObstetrics/GynecologyOphthalmologyPathologyPediatricsPsychiatryRadiologySurgeryZoller Dental ClinicDivisional InstructionClinical TotalBasic SciencesAnatomyBiochemistryBiologyBiophysicsMicrobiologyPharmacological/PhysiologicalSciencesBasic Sciences Total 196751122632392836337932310162614101591 42.1% 80.0 04.0 327.3 34.5 116.7 112.5 423.1 93.6 116.7 60.0 00.0 011.1 111.4 370.0 00.0 023.1 67.1 120.0 26.7 111.0 10 68.4% 1316.7 15.3 49.1 136.4 816.7 19.4 312.8 50.0 016.7 66.1 20.0 00.0 013.6 4410.0 112.5 20.0 021.4 30.0 06.7 17.7 7Physical Sciences DivisionAstronomy and AstrophysicsChemistryGeophysical SciencesMathematicsPhysicsStatisticsDivision Total 11262443389151 0.0 00.0 00.0 04.6 22.6 10.0 02.0 3 9.1 13.8 112.5 37.0 35.3 211.1 17.3 11Social Sciences DivisionAnthropologyBehavioral SciencesEconomicsEducationGeographyHistoryPolitical ScienceSocial ThoughtSociologyDivision Total 2126233283824619197 9.5 215.4 40.0 018.8 60.0 07.9 38.3 20.0 015.8 310.2 20 0.0 00.0 00.0 03.1 10.0 010.5 44.2 10.0 05.3 13.6 796TABLE I— ContinuedFacultyTotal Females MinoritiesHumanities DivisionArt 18 16.7% 3 5.6% 1Classics 9 33.3 3 0.0 0English 35 17.1 6 2.8 1Far Eastern Languages andCivilizations 11 18.2 2 27.3 3German 8 0.0 0 12.5 1Linguistics 8 12.5 1 12.5 1Music 12 16.7 2 0.0 0Near Eastern Languages andCivilizations 11 18.2 2 9.1 1Philosophy 14 0.0 0 0.0 0Romance Languages and Literature 17 29.4 5 0.0 0Slavic Languages and Literatures 10 10.0 1 0.0 0South Asian Languages andCivilizations 9 0.0 0 33.3 3Division Total 162 15.4 25 6.8 11Graduate School of Business 79 1.3 1 7.6 6Divinity School 26 7.7 2 7.7 2Law School 26 3.8 1 0.0 0Graduate Library School 9 22.2 2 0.0 0Social Service Administration 33 33.3 11 9.1 3Committee on Public Policy Studies 1 0.0 0 0.0 0College 35 17.1 6 0.0 0Oriental Institute 14 14.3 2 7.1 1Physical Education 16 43.8 7 12.5 2University Total 1,163 10.9 127 8.1 94That does not mean that there will be no new appointments because, of course, there will be turnover due to resignations, terminations, anddeaths. But it should be clear that the compositionof the faculty will change slowly because the rateof new appointments will be modest.CompositionThe composition of the current faculty and recentand projected appointments are displayed in several tables in this section of the report. Affirmativeaction analysis requires an annual description of the current workforce of the University includingfaculty. In Table I such a description for faculty isset out. The total number of faculty at the University of Chicago as of October 1, 1979, as shown inTable I, was 1,163.Projections, Availability, and UtilizationThe regulations and accompanying interpretationdefining formats appropriate to institutions ofhigher education require projections to be madeevery three years for our divisions and schools. Inthe 1978 affirmative action program (based on the97TABLE J: PROJECTIONS AND TIMETABLES FOR FACULTY— FEMALESArea 1977-80 Availability Availability 1977-80 Actual New ProjectedProjected Pool for Pool for Projected Hires, AdditionalNew Ap- Females, Females, New Hires, Females Femalepointmentsa New Hires1' Current Females FacultyEmployment 1977-78 1978-79 in 1984cBiological SciencesClinical 100 10.8% 7.8% 10.8 4 6 5Basic Sciences 20 16.0 9.0 3.2 1 0 2Humanities 24 24.5 15.2 5.9 1 2 0Physical Sciences 33 6.3 3.1 2.1 0 2 3Social Sciences 30 15.9 7.9 4.8 4 1 1Graduate School ofBusiness 25 3.4 2.9 0.8 0 1 1Divinity School 5 7.1 6.5 0.4 1 0 0Law School 5 11.1 3.8 0.6 0 1 1Graduate Library School 2 22.5 22.5 0.4 0 0 0Social ServiceAdministration 5 35.7 29.7 1.8 2 0 0College 3 14.0 6.7 0.4 0 5 0Oriental Institute 2 32.1 13.0 0.6 0 0 0Physical Education 2 47.0 47.0 0.9 1 0 0a. The actual number of new faculty appointments in the three years 1977-78 through 1979-80 will depend on student enrollment, research funding, and other sources of income for the University and for each of the academic areas. The projected new appointments do notrepresent commitments, either in total or for any academic areas. It is highly probable that the total number of faculty will continue todecline. Thus, the projections are based primarily on an estimate of faculty turnover over a three-year period.b. Assumes new hires will be 80 percent at junior level and 20 percent at senior level. Availability percentages for junior and seniorfaculty are weighted by these percentages.c. This column indicates the expected number of additional faculty appointments for females for a six-year period ending in 1983-84.This projection assumes that some of the turnover will occur among female faculty members.Projections of additional female faculty in 1984 were generally based on the following assumptions:1. There would be an attrition rate of 40 percent for individuals now members of the faculty.2. The number of new female appointments in 1981-83 would be the same as in 1977-80.3. The attrition rate for new appointments made between 1977 and 1983 would be 10 percent.Where units contained small current numbers of faculty or units had special characteristics, other factors were considered in projecting theincrease in the number of women on the faculty.In no case does the projected additional faculty members, for the indicated academic areas, result in less than full utilization of femalefaculty, as defined in Chapter 60 of Title 41 of the Code of Federal Regulations (41CFR60), Sec. 60-2.12 and amplified in the GerryMemorandum, by the academic year 1983-84. However, it is not implied that full utilization of females is likely to be achieved at thedepartmental level in every department or other separate academic unit by 1984 due to the small number of faculty in separate departmentsand the size of the availability pool. As stated in41CFR60, "The purpose of a contractor's establishment and use of goals is to insure that hemeet his affirmative action obligation. It is not intended and should not be used to discriminate against any applicant or employee because ofrace, color, religion, or national origin."Full utilization, of course, requires a longer period than six years due to the slow turnover of tenured faculty. A more reasonable length oftime to achieve full utilization for some academic departments would be twenty to twenty-five years.October 1, 1977 count) estimates were made of thenumber of faculty appointments expected to bemade in the three-year period 1977-1980. Usingavailability estimates, projected appointments offemales and minorities were stated. The methodsused in determining the availability estimates usedin those projections were printed in the 1979 report but they are reprinted below.Set out in Tables J and K are the projections oftotal new appointments and projected appointments of females and minorities for the period.The regulations require two types of projections. One is for the number of new appointments of women and minorities that might be ex pected for a three-year period (1977-80), and theother is for a time period more distant when itcould be expected that employment would equalfull availability in the academic areas determinedto have underutilization.The last column in each of the two projectiontables (Tables J and K) provides a "bestestimate" of the increases in the number ofwomen and of minorities on the faculty by 1984.These projections of changes in the compositionof the faculty assume that there will be turnoveramong women and minorities as well as amongwhite male faculty members.Also included in Tables J and K is a report of98TABLE K: PROJECTIONS AND TIMETABLES FOR FACULTY— MINORITIESArea 1977-80 Availability 1977-80 Actual New ProjectedProjected Pool for Projected Hires, AdditionalNew Appointments3 MinoritiesNew Hires New Hires,Minorities Minorities MinorityFaculty1977-78 1978-79 in 1984"Biological Sciences DivisionClinical 100 6.7% 6.7 6 13 0Basic Sciences 20 4.9 1.0 0 0 0Humanities 24 3.6 0.9 0 0 0Physical Sciences Division 33 3.0 1.0 3 0 0Social Sciences Division 30 4.6 1.4 0 0 0Graduate School of Business 25 2.4 0.6 0 0 0Divinity School 5 3.6 0.2 0 0 0Law School 5 3.1 0.2 0 0 0Graduate Library School 2 3.7 0.1 0 0 0Social Service Administration 5 13.0 0.6 0 0 0College 3 4.0 1.2 0 0 2Oriental Institute 2 3.6 0.1 0 1 0Physical Education 2 12.1 0.2 0 0 0a. See footnote a in Table J.b. See footnote c in Table J. Read "minority" where "female" appears.the number of appointments of women andminorities which have been made in the first twoyears of the three-year period.Tables J and K of this section about faculty include projections of new appointments of womenand minorities. The footnotes to those tables explain the methods used to arrive at those projections. The second appendix of the 1978 reportis an aid to interpreting the projections for newappointments.Availability DataTable L displays the current size of faculty in ourdivisions and schools. Also given in that table arethe female and minority availability estimates forthose units as well as the current numbers ofwomen and minorities in these units.The availabilities in these tables may be revisedas more accurate and more complete data can bedeveloped. The specific procedures and sourcesused in estimating availability have been indicatedin the relevant footnotes and in the following section entitled ''Methods and Sources of Data forAvailability Pools." However, important limitations inherent in the methods of determiningavailability were discussed in an appendix to the1978 report. Interpretations of availability percentages should be made in the context of issuesdiscussed in that appendix. Methods and Sources of Data for AvailabilityPoolsFemalesThe availability pools for each department andschool, except as noted below, were calculated asfollows:a. Earned Ph.D. degrees from all United Statesuniversities for 1973 and 1974 were used to determine the percentage awarded to females. Thispercentage was used to measure the availabilitypool for junior faculty (instructors and assistantprofessors).b. The availability pools for senior faculty (professors and associate professors) were determinedby utilizing data on the percentages of females ateach faculty rank in the American Association ofUniversity Professors (AAUP) Category I, privateindependent universities. The separate percentages for professor and associate professor wereeach multiplied by the number of faculty at theUniversity in each of these ranks and divided bythe total number of faculty at the University in thetwo ranks to determine the percentage of femalesin the senior faculty ranks. A similar calculationwas made to determine the percentage of femalesin the instructor plus assistant professor ranks ifthe AAUP Category I, private universities, had99TABLE L: CURRENT FACULTY EMPLOYMENT AND AVAILABILITY ANALYSISFEMALES AND MINORITIESFacultyTotal10/79 Females Minorities10/79 10/79 AvailabilityPool Underutilization 10/79 10/79 AvailabilityPool UnderutilizationBiological SciencesClinical 323 37 11.4% 7.8% 0 44 13.6% 6.7% 0Basic 91 10 11.0 9.0 0 7 7.7 4.9 0Humanities 162 25 15.4 15.2 0 11 6.8 3.6 0Physical SciencesSocial Sciences 151197 320 2.010.2 3.17.9 20 117 7.33.6 3.04.6 02Graduate School ofBusiness 79 1 1.3 2.9 1 6 7.6 2.4 0Divinity SchoolLaw School 2626 21 7.73.8 6.53.8 00 20 7.70.0 3.63.1 01Graduate LibrarySchool 9 2 22.2 22.5 0 0 0.0 3.7 0Social ServiceAdministration 33 11 33.3 29.7 0 3 9.1 13.0 1College 35 6 17.1 6.7 0 0 0.0 4.0 1Oriental Institute 14 2 14.3 13.0 0 1 7.1 3.6 0Physical EducationCommittee on Public 16 7 43.8 47.0 1 2 12.5 12.1 0Policy 1 0 0.0 2.0 0 0 0.0 3.2 0the same distribution of faculty in the two ranks asthe University. The percentage of females at thesenior ranks was divided by the percentage offemales at the junior ranks. This ratio was thenmultiplied by the percentage of females in thejunior availability pool to determine the femaleavailability pool for senior faculty at the University.The exceptions to the above procedures were asfollows:1. Availability pool for females for junior facultyin the clinical departments was based on the percentage of females in the relevant residency programs in the United States on September 1, 1973,except Zoller Dental Clinic which was based ongraduates of dental schools for 1970-71.2. Female availability for senior faculty positionsin the clinical departments was based on the percentage of females holding the rank of professorand associate professor in all United States medical schools in 1970-71, weighted by University distribution of faculty for these two ranks in theclinical departments.3. Availability pool for the Graduate School ofBusiness for junior faculty was the percentage ofearned Ph.D. degrees in business administrationand management in 1975 awarded to females; forsenior faculty, the percentage for 1970-72 wasused.4. In the School of Social Service Administration,junior faculty availability was based on the percent of Ph.D. degrees in social work awarded in1973-76; senior faculty was based on percent ofindividuals holding the doctorate on faculties ofschools of social work in 1976. (Data was suppliedby the School of Social Service Administration.)5. Senior faculty availability in the DivinitySchool was based on earned degrees in religionand theology, 1920-1972.6. The availability pool for the Law School wasbased on the percentage of females on United100States law school faculties in the ranks of fullprofessor (tenured), associate professor (tenured),and assistant professor.MinoritiesWhat was true when the Gerry Memorandum waswritten in 1975 remains true today, namely thatthe amount and quality of data on minorityavailability is much more limited than the amountand quality of data on female availability for faculty positions. Data on earned degrees forminorities are not available for certain fields andfew or no data are available for differentcategories of minorities. Thus, the data used arefor all minorities.The availability pools for minorities for eachdepartment and school, except as noted below,were calculated as follows:Earned Ph.D. degrees from American Association of Universities (AAU) members; averagesof 1969^1972 and 1972-1975 which were used forall faculty positions (junior and senior).The exceptions were:1. For Social Service Administration, minoritiesholding doctorate degrees on faculties of schoolsof social work in 1976. (Data was supplied by Social Service Administration.)2. For the Law School, 1975-76 American Association of Law Schools data on tenure track, non-librarian teachers on law faculties.3. Availability pools for the Oriental Institute andthe Divinity School were set equal to weightedaverage minority availability for the humanities.4. Availability pool for the Graduate LibrarySchool was set equal to a simple average of the minority availabilities for the humanities, socialsciences, and physical sciences.5. No reasonable data were found for minorityavailability for physical education; the percentageused was the percent of recreation workers in theUnited States in 1975 who were minorities.6. No reasonable data were found for minorityavailability for the clinical departments. Blackswho were graduates of United States and Canadian medical schools were 1.7 percent of themembers of residency programs in the UnitedStates in September 1973. It was assumed thatblacks represented 25 percent of all minorities inresidency programs giving an availability percentage for minorities for junior faculty positions in allclinical departments of 6.8 percent. This is ahighly unreliable estimate but no better figurecould be found.Sources: Except as indicated in the notes, thesources of data for availabilities were:AAUP, Nearly Keeping Up: Report of the Economic Status of the Profession, 1975-76.Curtis O. Baker and Agnes Q. Wells, Earned Degrees Conferred 1973-74: Institutional Data.Washington: United States Government PrintingOffice, 1976.Scientific Manpower Commission, ProfessionalWomen and Minorities: A Manpower Data Resource Service. Washington: Scientific ManpowerCommission, various dates.This report has been based on the October 1979employment data at the University as they are required to be collected. A new report will be prepared based on the October 1980 data.THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO RECORDVICE-PRESIDENT FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRSRoom 200, Administration Building_ o .¦T I om £ c 33D £? Tl2 > -n w 3POST/*AIDiO,ILLTNO. oa32z o 1-*. O rn¦* r- O0) 3