The truth lies in Middlebury’s actions, not its words: staff cannot pay the bills with poetry

One of the earliest lessons I learned about relationships is that if you want to know someone’s true intentions, you should pay attention to their actions, not just their words. In 2026, the truth can feel as slippery as an eel, obscured beneath a perfectly polished exterior or lost in the confusion of manufactured chaos. In times like these, that early lesson seems more important to heed than ever. While its wisdom is often applied to family, friendship and romance, it is particularly relevant to the relationship between employer and employee. 

In an economy defined by ever-growing income inequality and a soaring cost of living, which some have described as a full-on affordability crisis, Middlebury’s employees need fair compensation for our labor, and we need it urgently. In the strategic plan working group reports released last March, staff stated that need while expressing an overwhelming lack of trust in the institution after the budget actions taken in Spring 2025, which left many of us feeling overworked and undervalued, given a symbolic seat at the table but no actual voice. Middlebury’s leaders responded with town halls, discussion sessions and assurances that current employees would be prioritized in the final strategic plan. In May, after students had gone home for the summer and campus was quiet, Middlebury prioritized some employees but, unfortunately, not all.  

In a plenary meeting, members of the Senior Leadership Group (SLG) proudly informed faculty that thanks to a secret, months-long fundraising campaign conducted on their behalf, they would be receiving across-the-board raises of 6% in Fiscal Year 2027, with the possibility of up to 9% increases through additional merit raises funded by the college. What was not mentioned was that staff had been deliberately excluded from this effort. In an email sent several weeks later, we were quietly informed that most staff would receive a 3% “market adjustment” in the next fiscal year. This is the lowest percentage increase in years, and was 2% less than the annual rate of inflation for the Northeastern Region of the United States, which was 5% as of May 2026. In other words, when adjusted for inflation, staff will have less purchasing power in FY 2027 than we did last year. 

To put this in context, a 3% raise for someone making $50,000 a year is only $1,500 (before taxes). A 6% raise for someone making $130,000 is $7,800, and a 9% raise for that same person is $11,700. Over just a few years, the impact of that raise differs dramatically, at $4,500 for the hypothetical staff member, and $35,100 for the hypothetical faculty member (which is more than some staff take home in a year). This is not to say that faculty didn’t deserve a raise; they work hard, and they deserve fair compensation. However, to date, the glaring inequity of the lopsided decision and the problematic rationale behind it has not been addressed by the SLG. It begs the question: do decision makers with the privilege of financial security (many of whose salaries are double or even triple that of a faculty member) understand just how much of a slap in the face their latest budget action was to staff? Do they realize that it hit doubly hard after the events of the past year, when staff have been asked to do more with less, operating in what can feel like a permanent triage mode after losing numerous colleagues and decades of institutional knowledge in one fell swoop?

As we proceed with the implementation of the Strategic Plan, I have a few more questions:  

Is it excellent to state without shame that you will not commit to paying all of your employees a  living wage?  

Is it purposeful to fundraise for one of the highest earning segments of your employee base, but not even attempt to do so for the rest — explaining afterward that your target donors are simply not interested in staff wages? 

Do these decisions contribute to the joy of the entire Middlebury community, or just those deemed worthy?  

And if not for all of us, then whom is Middlebury truly for?  

While I’m dredging up old relationship lessons, here is one more for my fellow staff members to consider. Through our own actions and reactions, we teach others how to treat us. In recent years, Middlebury’s actions have increasingly fallen short of its promises to staff, and after the initial waves of protest, the college moves on and we are expected to simply accept it. But together, we have the power to hold the institution accountable in putting its money where its mouth is when it comes to how our vital labor is valued. If we miss this chance, we risk being left further and further behind as other people and projects are prioritized over us.