One reason it is difficult to attact high school teachers who can teach computer programming well is that teachers' union contracts say that you have to pay gym teachers and CS teachers the same amount.
In the US this is already common. But salaries in AI (and to a lesser extent CS in general) have recently gotten high enough that you'd need much bigger differentials, plus you start getting to absolute salary numbers that become unaffordable to all but a handful of places. An early-career academic at a top university might make, say, $60-80k in the humanities versus $100-130k in CS, but companies will pay $150k+. A prominent tenured professor in CS can make $200k+ in some cases in recent years, but if you believe recent reports , senior AI researchers are being paid $1m+ outside of academia, which seems really unlikely to be matched.
I'm not sure it's necessarily a problem per se, though. Depends on what your goals are. As a fairly junior CS academic, it's good for me personally. CS faculty jobs are now much easier to come by than is usually the case in academia (look at the nightmare stories of physicists and biologists doing 10-year postdocs trying to land a tenure-track position). And pay has risen enough that it's now pretty good, even if still not as good as industry.
I've worked at a couple of universities, and as far as I understood it there were special provisions for professors of law and medicine, meaning that they got paid more, and that they could work outside of the University to a greater degree than senior academics in other departments.
Absolutely. The baseline salary for a given rank varies across divisions (salaries in STEM fields start higher than in the social sciences, which in turn pay better than humanities) and varies across schools (law and medical schools pay better than arts and sciences, since the former compete directly with the private sector). More importantly, faculty compensation is negotiated on an individual basis, and deans have tremendous leeway in how much they can offer to retain talent in the face of competing offers. At a first- or second-tier research university it's typical for star faculty to have a salary that's 2x or 3x the department baseline (or more).
This has happened in many markets in recent years. Don't you recall big data hype around 2007? You would be considered as God if you can barely install Hadoop back then.
I agree, robots are hit and miss
Those elite American universities have been sucking talent away from all over the world, and working with an amount of resources that provide them with a considerable advantage.
Now they receive some taste of their own medicine.
Note: I'm aware that there is nothing bad in what those universities have done (probably every university would do the same if they could or knew how) and I shouldn't feel like that! But I'm just human, and unfortunately far from being a perfect human... and being beaten to results by people that have 3x as many PhD students and 10x as much GPU power ends up creating bitter feelings.
Note: I am not saying it’s better or worse, just (much) more competitive.
I just can’t tell whether you’re referring to universities or to tech.