The Chancellor stressed that all options were on the table. Among those options is a higher than the projected 7 percent tuition increase.
Another option is no enrollment growth. He said they were projecting 5000 new students given the enrollment numbers in high schools across the state. The problem with that approach is that for forty years the UC system has taken in the top 12.5 percent of graduating seniors and if they did not do that this year that would be a marked shift in their philosophy and he indicated not a shift they would be comfortable with.
He also put on the table cuts in services to students and cuts in health care coverage to employees. The latter would force employees to dig into their own resources in order to maintain their health coverage.
It is interesting that one item not mentioned as being on the table even though it would not generate a lot of savings would be a roll back of upper administrative salaries. Some may recall the near riots that took place when the UC Board of Regents announced huge tuition hikes while at the same time increased some of their top administrative salaries by $50,000 per year. Symbolic to be sure, but it would be similar to a CEO of a major corporation taking a huge salary increase while at the same they were laying off $10,000 rank and file employees.
Dominating the question and answer period were concerns about worker contracts including Sodexho workers but also university employees who are seeking new contracts amid talks of huge budget cuts.
Don Gibson, a UC Davis student who is VP of the Davis College Democrats and an elected member of the Yolo County Democratic Central Committee. He read from the resolution passed on January 7, 2008 that called for a university contract for food service employees.
The Chancellor asked Janet Gong to speak to this issue.
“In October, the end of the month, we signed what’s called a memorandum of understanding between the university and Sodexho. Sodexho is the vendor that supplies contracted out food service for both our vendor halls as well as our retail operations such as you see in this building downstairs.
That MOU provides for increases in wages at classification levels for campus food service workers that are equal between what Sodexho is paying and what campus workers would be making on campus. The wages are identical in terms of the classification wages.
It also spoke to health insurance and we did find that there were disparities in health insurance between what benefits the university would provide employees and what the vendor was providing. So we arranged with Sodexho to go from a 60-40 employer-employee pay plan to an 80-20 plan. And we supplemented that with $100.10 per month as a stipend that could also go to employees for insurance.
Wages were increased in September, insurance increases were effective in January, since that time there has been a 47 percent increase in the number of Sodexho employees who are now receiving health insurance.”
Ms. Gong further suggested that:
“We’ve agreed to undertake a process to look at all options… certainly the option of bringing food service employees in house is one of the options that we’re looking at. To do that we are mining all kinds of operational and financial data.”
The goal according to Janet Gong was to have preliminary recommendations by April as to whether they should bring food service employees in house. It seems obvious on two levels first that conditions for employees have improved since October both on the wages front and the health care front. However, it also seems obvious that the university would not continue its relationship with Sodexho unless there remained strong financial incentive to do so, which necessarily means that the workers are receiving less in terms of wages and benefits than they would under a university contract. And while the budget crunch is a concern, UC Davis has less excuse on this issue than on others since it is really the only UC outsourcing labor.
Max Alper of AFSCME 3299 disagreed with Janet Gong on some of the points that she raised.
“I just wanted to make sure that everybody saw that there was a report put out by a progressive faculty group for UC Davis that found many interesting things including that Sodexho wages are still even with these changes 5 to 9 percent below UC Davis wages that are paid at the UC Davis medical center. And more disturbing is that health care for families is still 41 percent more expensive including the 100 dollar stipend. And when you ask people to wait until April for preliminary results there are some workers right here who can tell you why they can’t wait.”
Janet Gong responded that food service workers at the UC Davis medical center are not comparable to the food service workers on campus.
“There are very distinct differences between those two which include things like at the medical center food service workers are dealing directly with patients, there is delivery of food to patients, there is compliance with charting restrictions, with regulations, there are different regulatory agencies, it is a 365, 7 day a week, 24 hour a day operation. Those kind of responsibilities in the job descriptions and classifications are very different than working in a campus food-based operation.”
Tarone Bittner unit chair for UAW 2865 at Davis spoke passionately on the issue of outsourced workers and disputed notions by university staff and administration that they were working to bring UC pay inline with market wages.
“I have been here for three years, I have seen no movement on this. Yet we have you sitting here saying that you want to pay market wages. Well do it, what else needs to be done. The Sodexho issue is a sad issue in and of itself because we’re talking about out-sourcing which is intolerable… It should be intolerable for every worker on this campus. Because what you’re saying is that we’re going to take the opportunity to exploit not only the workers that are unionized but the workers in our midst that work for Sodexho. So we’re going to pay them even less.
And we all know where this concept comes from, right, outsourcing, downsizing, etc., that happens when a corporation wants to make more money by paying less in labor costs. It makes sense to a certain degree to do that nationally, but to do it in your community is particularly offense because what you’re talking about is bringing down your standard of living for everyone in your own community. That doesn’t make any sense to me.
There’s a social cost here that seems to be missed. So let me reiterate, all of the workers at UC are paid a substandard wage. So let’s start right there. Let’s fix the thing with Sodexho, we’re the last campus in the system that’s outsourcing, so we’re like the backwater of the UC system.
But we need to fix this so that we can get to the issue of bringing up the wages to market which you said your for. We could deal with that right now. I’m sure all the unions would be happy to meet tomorrow to bring up all the wages to market.”
In the end, Sodexho workers Joe Moreno and Esther Juarez tried to talk with the Chancellor about their health situations and the impact of the university’s policy on their lives. However, the Chancellor was quickly ushered out the back door and the workers were left frustrated at their lack of ability to express to the Chancellor the impact of the university’s policies.
People will look at the improvements and perhaps ask why the workers are continuing their struggle, but it is clear that the university has been forced since October to make concessions they did not want to make and they also are considering more changes. It is difficult to know what will happen in April and it therefore makes sense to continue to press their demands to become UC employees with better wages, better health insurance, and better working conditions.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Could you please document the ‘near riot’ caused by the Regents’ actions? I suspect it was more like concern and disappointment, and that ‘near riot’ is hyperbole.
Could you please document the ‘near riot’ caused by the Regents’ actions? I suspect it was more like concern and disappointment, and that ‘near riot’ is hyperbole.
Could you please document the ‘near riot’ caused by the Regents’ actions? I suspect it was more like concern and disappointment, and that ‘near riot’ is hyperbole.
Could you please document the ‘near riot’ caused by the Regents’ actions? I suspect it was more like concern and disappointment, and that ‘near riot’ is hyperbole.
Of it was hyperbole. Although it has led to the first student based efforts to put a measure on the ballot that would regulate student fees.
Of it was hyperbole. Although it has led to the first student based efforts to put a measure on the ballot that would regulate student fees.
Of it was hyperbole. Although it has led to the first student based efforts to put a measure on the ballot that would regulate student fees.
Of it was hyperbole. Although it has led to the first student based efforts to put a measure on the ballot that would regulate student fees.
so much blather about a non-issue… After the cuts that will be coming to university employee pay the Sodexho workers will be happy that they didn’t take a cut!
so much blather about a non-issue… After the cuts that will be coming to university employee pay the Sodexho workers will be happy that they didn’t take a cut!
so much blather about a non-issue… After the cuts that will be coming to university employee pay the Sodexho workers will be happy that they didn’t take a cut!
so much blather about a non-issue… After the cuts that will be coming to university employee pay the Sodexho workers will be happy that they didn’t take a cut!
The UC system is a business. During lean times businesses do not solve all of their problems by raising prices.
An effort must be made to streamline the administrative staffs throughout the UC System’ – a 10% reduction on of the 2180 FTE’s in the category “Fiscal,Management,Staff” at UCD would seem quite reasonable. On top of that every employee could be asked to take one week of unpaid time off. That would cover the $50-$60 million shortfall UCD is facing. I assumed the student fees are rising 7% and I already factored that in – in other words the shortfall was bigger than $50-$60 million but was reduced by the fee increases.
The UC system is a business. During lean times businesses do not solve all of their problems by raising prices.
An effort must be made to streamline the administrative staffs throughout the UC System’ – a 10% reduction on of the 2180 FTE’s in the category “Fiscal,Management,Staff” at UCD would seem quite reasonable. On top of that every employee could be asked to take one week of unpaid time off. That would cover the $50-$60 million shortfall UCD is facing. I assumed the student fees are rising 7% and I already factored that in – in other words the shortfall was bigger than $50-$60 million but was reduced by the fee increases.
The UC system is a business. During lean times businesses do not solve all of their problems by raising prices.
An effort must be made to streamline the administrative staffs throughout the UC System’ – a 10% reduction on of the 2180 FTE’s in the category “Fiscal,Management,Staff” at UCD would seem quite reasonable. On top of that every employee could be asked to take one week of unpaid time off. That would cover the $50-$60 million shortfall UCD is facing. I assumed the student fees are rising 7% and I already factored that in – in other words the shortfall was bigger than $50-$60 million but was reduced by the fee increases.
The UC system is a business. During lean times businesses do not solve all of their problems by raising prices.
An effort must be made to streamline the administrative staffs throughout the UC System’ – a 10% reduction on of the 2180 FTE’s in the category “Fiscal,Management,Staff” at UCD would seem quite reasonable. On top of that every employee could be asked to take one week of unpaid time off. That would cover the $50-$60 million shortfall UCD is facing. I assumed the student fees are rising 7% and I already factored that in – in other words the shortfall was bigger than $50-$60 million but was reduced by the fee increases.
A non-issue for you Mike, but I’m guessing you have your health, your pay, and your health insurance taken care of.
In terms of budget cuts, it is interesting to note that most of the budget for UC workers does not come from state funds, in fact only 8.6% does. So the budget cuts are largely not going to effect these workers.
A non-issue for you Mike, but I’m guessing you have your health, your pay, and your health insurance taken care of.
In terms of budget cuts, it is interesting to note that most of the budget for UC workers does not come from state funds, in fact only 8.6% does. So the budget cuts are largely not going to effect these workers.
A non-issue for you Mike, but I’m guessing you have your health, your pay, and your health insurance taken care of.
In terms of budget cuts, it is interesting to note that most of the budget for UC workers does not come from state funds, in fact only 8.6% does. So the budget cuts are largely not going to effect these workers.
A non-issue for you Mike, but I’m guessing you have your health, your pay, and your health insurance taken care of.
In terms of budget cuts, it is interesting to note that most of the budget for UC workers does not come from state funds, in fact only 8.6% does. So the budget cuts are largely not going to effect these workers.
….all this “sky is falling” about the Governator’s 10% cut.. IT WON’T HAPPEN! The Democratic-controlled Legislature will NEVER sanction such cuts. The Governator can then turn and say to his CA Republican base,”See, I tried but those pesky liberal Democrats refused”.. adding to his political narrative for a possible US Senate primary bid.
….all this “sky is falling” about the Governator’s 10% cut.. IT WON’T HAPPEN! The Democratic-controlled Legislature will NEVER sanction such cuts. The Governator can then turn and say to his CA Republican base,”See, I tried but those pesky liberal Democrats refused”.. adding to his political narrative for a possible US Senate primary bid.
….all this “sky is falling” about the Governator’s 10% cut.. IT WON’T HAPPEN! The Democratic-controlled Legislature will NEVER sanction such cuts. The Governator can then turn and say to his CA Republican base,”See, I tried but those pesky liberal Democrats refused”.. adding to his political narrative for a possible US Senate primary bid.
….all this “sky is falling” about the Governator’s 10% cut.. IT WON’T HAPPEN! The Democratic-controlled Legislature will NEVER sanction such cuts. The Governator can then turn and say to his CA Republican base,”See, I tried but those pesky liberal Democrats refused”.. adding to his political narrative for a possible US Senate primary bid.
I agree with you that it won’t happen. The chancellor acknowledged as much yesterday. But some cut is likely to occur. And until they know the true extent of the numbers they have to plan as though it were going to be worst case scenario.
The problem and this is the same problem that DJUSD faces is that they have to make decisions for next year long before the final budget is approved. That puts UC and DJUSD in a very bad position. So even if the cuts don’t happen, they may have to cut budget.
I agree with you that it won’t happen. The chancellor acknowledged as much yesterday. But some cut is likely to occur. And until they know the true extent of the numbers they have to plan as though it were going to be worst case scenario.
The problem and this is the same problem that DJUSD faces is that they have to make decisions for next year long before the final budget is approved. That puts UC and DJUSD in a very bad position. So even if the cuts don’t happen, they may have to cut budget.
I agree with you that it won’t happen. The chancellor acknowledged as much yesterday. But some cut is likely to occur. And until they know the true extent of the numbers they have to plan as though it were going to be worst case scenario.
The problem and this is the same problem that DJUSD faces is that they have to make decisions for next year long before the final budget is approved. That puts UC and DJUSD in a very bad position. So even if the cuts don’t happen, they may have to cut budget.
I agree with you that it won’t happen. The chancellor acknowledged as much yesterday. But some cut is likely to occur. And until they know the true extent of the numbers they have to plan as though it were going to be worst case scenario.
The problem and this is the same problem that DJUSD faces is that they have to make decisions for next year long before the final budget is approved. That puts UC and DJUSD in a very bad position. So even if the cuts don’t happen, they may have to cut budget.
Taylor tried to dance around this at the last School Board meeting. Everyone expects that the DJUSD budget won’t suffer these draconian cuts so he suggested that we try and avoid terrorizing the staff and parents about program/staffing cuts… Ultimately,I think that Hammond will find a way to “soften” the budget rhetoric. Of course, the Board was quite willing to use the Governator’s 10% proposal as a scare-tactic to try and kill the VO Charter School.
Taylor tried to dance around this at the last School Board meeting. Everyone expects that the DJUSD budget won’t suffer these draconian cuts so he suggested that we try and avoid terrorizing the staff and parents about program/staffing cuts… Ultimately,I think that Hammond will find a way to “soften” the budget rhetoric. Of course, the Board was quite willing to use the Governator’s 10% proposal as a scare-tactic to try and kill the VO Charter School.
Taylor tried to dance around this at the last School Board meeting. Everyone expects that the DJUSD budget won’t suffer these draconian cuts so he suggested that we try and avoid terrorizing the staff and parents about program/staffing cuts… Ultimately,I think that Hammond will find a way to “soften” the budget rhetoric. Of course, the Board was quite willing to use the Governator’s 10% proposal as a scare-tactic to try and kill the VO Charter School.
Taylor tried to dance around this at the last School Board meeting. Everyone expects that the DJUSD budget won’t suffer these draconian cuts so he suggested that we try and avoid terrorizing the staff and parents about program/staffing cuts… Ultimately,I think that Hammond will find a way to “soften” the budget rhetoric. Of course, the Board was quite willing to use the Governator’s 10% proposal as a scare-tactic to try and kill the VO Charter School.
It feels like they are always saying, “We want the workers to be on par with the market wages.” But they are pushing the issue back with a new committee or waiting for a new study. It’s not exactly like this issue is new. The real question is are they serious about having living wages?
It feels like they are always saying, “We want the workers to be on par with the market wages.” But they are pushing the issue back with a new committee or waiting for a new study. It’s not exactly like this issue is new. The real question is are they serious about having living wages?
It feels like they are always saying, “We want the workers to be on par with the market wages.” But they are pushing the issue back with a new committee or waiting for a new study. It’s not exactly like this issue is new. The real question is are they serious about having living wages?
It feels like they are always saying, “We want the workers to be on par with the market wages.” But they are pushing the issue back with a new committee or waiting for a new study. It’s not exactly like this issue is new. The real question is are they serious about having living wages?
One of the professors I used to TA for in American Government always talked about the fact that when politicians do not want to make tough decisions they shift it off to a commission to study the issue. Now he used the issue of smoking and tobacco back in the Kennedy administration as an example, but really you can think of a multitude of them.
The advantage of a study is that they stall for time, they wear out the fervor of a movement and they can always use cost as an excuse to kill it.
What’s a study going to tell us that we don’t already know:
1. UC Davis is the only UC that outsources its food service employment
2. That it will cost more money to bring them in house because they are asking for higher wages and benefits
3. That that cost will have to be transferred somewhere
One of the professors I used to TA for in American Government always talked about the fact that when politicians do not want to make tough decisions they shift it off to a commission to study the issue. Now he used the issue of smoking and tobacco back in the Kennedy administration as an example, but really you can think of a multitude of them.
The advantage of a study is that they stall for time, they wear out the fervor of a movement and they can always use cost as an excuse to kill it.
What’s a study going to tell us that we don’t already know:
1. UC Davis is the only UC that outsources its food service employment
2. That it will cost more money to bring them in house because they are asking for higher wages and benefits
3. That that cost will have to be transferred somewhere
One of the professors I used to TA for in American Government always talked about the fact that when politicians do not want to make tough decisions they shift it off to a commission to study the issue. Now he used the issue of smoking and tobacco back in the Kennedy administration as an example, but really you can think of a multitude of them.
The advantage of a study is that they stall for time, they wear out the fervor of a movement and they can always use cost as an excuse to kill it.
What’s a study going to tell us that we don’t already know:
1. UC Davis is the only UC that outsources its food service employment
2. That it will cost more money to bring them in house because they are asking for higher wages and benefits
3. That that cost will have to be transferred somewhere
One of the professors I used to TA for in American Government always talked about the fact that when politicians do not want to make tough decisions they shift it off to a commission to study the issue. Now he used the issue of smoking and tobacco back in the Kennedy administration as an example, but really you can think of a multitude of them.
The advantage of a study is that they stall for time, they wear out the fervor of a movement and they can always use cost as an excuse to kill it.
What’s a study going to tell us that we don’t already know:
1. UC Davis is the only UC that outsources its food service employment
2. That it will cost more money to bring them in house because they are asking for higher wages and benefits
3. That that cost will have to be transferred somewhere
I think DPD touched on this, but it is worth repeating and elaborating on
They’ll cut costs somewhere else.
raise the price of tuition, food, lay off workers, whatever. The costs will be transferred from one set of students to the other.
I think if I were to support a movement for change, it would be to make tuition/fee increases inversely proportional to administrative salary increases.
Therefore, we won’t see headlines that say “25% increase to administrators, 10% increase in student fees.”
I think that is a root problem.
I think DPD touched on this, but it is worth repeating and elaborating on
They’ll cut costs somewhere else.
raise the price of tuition, food, lay off workers, whatever. The costs will be transferred from one set of students to the other.
I think if I were to support a movement for change, it would be to make tuition/fee increases inversely proportional to administrative salary increases.
Therefore, we won’t see headlines that say “25% increase to administrators, 10% increase in student fees.”
I think that is a root problem.
I think DPD touched on this, but it is worth repeating and elaborating on
They’ll cut costs somewhere else.
raise the price of tuition, food, lay off workers, whatever. The costs will be transferred from one set of students to the other.
I think if I were to support a movement for change, it would be to make tuition/fee increases inversely proportional to administrative salary increases.
Therefore, we won’t see headlines that say “25% increase to administrators, 10% increase in student fees.”
I think that is a root problem.
I think DPD touched on this, but it is worth repeating and elaborating on
They’ll cut costs somewhere else.
raise the price of tuition, food, lay off workers, whatever. The costs will be transferred from one set of students to the other.
I think if I were to support a movement for change, it would be to make tuition/fee increases inversely proportional to administrative salary increases.
Therefore, we won’t see headlines that say “25% increase to administrators, 10% increase in student fees.”
I think that is a root problem.
I totally agree. From the start they’ve tried to turn the students against the workers here. And they do that in order to avoid the question of administrative salaries.
I totally agree. From the start they’ve tried to turn the students against the workers here. And they do that in order to avoid the question of administrative salaries.
I totally agree. From the start they’ve tried to turn the students against the workers here. And they do that in order to avoid the question of administrative salaries.
I totally agree. From the start they’ve tried to turn the students against the workers here. And they do that in order to avoid the question of administrative salaries.
“1. UC Davis is the only UC that outsources its food service employment”
David, are you sure of that?
I was recently at an event at UC Irvine and the food service was done by a corporation called Aramark. I was told when I was there that Aramark also provides all of the dining hall meals and runs all of the on-campus restaurants. This might not contradict what you said about Sodexho. However, from where I was served, UCI seemed much the same as the situation at UCD.
“1. UC Davis is the only UC that outsources its food service employment”
David, are you sure of that?
I was recently at an event at UC Irvine and the food service was done by a corporation called Aramark. I was told when I was there that Aramark also provides all of the dining hall meals and runs all of the on-campus restaurants. This might not contradict what you said about Sodexho. However, from where I was served, UCI seemed much the same as the situation at UCD.
“1. UC Davis is the only UC that outsources its food service employment”
David, are you sure of that?
I was recently at an event at UC Irvine and the food service was done by a corporation called Aramark. I was told when I was there that Aramark also provides all of the dining hall meals and runs all of the on-campus restaurants. This might not contradict what you said about Sodexho. However, from where I was served, UCI seemed much the same as the situation at UCD.
“1. UC Davis is the only UC that outsources its food service employment”
David, are you sure of that?
I was recently at an event at UC Irvine and the food service was done by a corporation called Aramark. I was told when I was there that Aramark also provides all of the dining hall meals and runs all of the on-campus restaurants. This might not contradict what you said about Sodexho. However, from where I was served, UCI seemed much the same as the situation at UCD.
I’m not sure, but that’s what I was told, if you have evidence to the contrary that would be interesting to see. The who spoke yesterday cited one other example of outsourcing but it was not for food service.
I’m not sure, but that’s what I was told, if you have evidence to the contrary that would be interesting to see. The who spoke yesterday cited one other example of outsourcing but it was not for food service.
I’m not sure, but that’s what I was told, if you have evidence to the contrary that would be interesting to see. The who spoke yesterday cited one other example of outsourcing but it was not for food service.
I’m not sure, but that’s what I was told, if you have evidence to the contrary that would be interesting to see. The who spoke yesterday cited one other example of outsourcing but it was not for food service.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_Irvine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_Irvine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_Irvine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_Irvine
From the Wikipedia link:
“Aramark
UC Irvine is the last UC campus that subcontracts its food services. In summer of 2004, UCI signed a contract with Aramark, a food services corporation, granting it control of nearly all residential dining facilities and restaurants on university property. This includes UCI’s three dining halls (Brandywine, Pippin Commons, and Mesa Commons) and three on-campus restaurants (Phoenix Grille, B.C.’s Cavern on the Green, and Bistro by the Bridge). ASUCI, which is partially responsible for negotiating UCI’s food services contract, has justified the decision to offer Aramark its business with the argument that Aramark has pledged to invest millions of dollars into the university’s food service infrastructure.[52]
Critics argue that offering one corporation the university’s food services contract is a de facto monopoly. It is also argued that the management of food services by Aramark leads to low-quality food and poor customer service, and that support of Aramark condones its poor employee relations record. Many full time Aramark employees qualify for public assistance and rely on Medi-Cal, low-income housing, and other social programs. Though these workers prepare and serve food on the UC Irvine campus in residential dining halls, they are not afforded the same rights as UC service employees. Aramark Corporation prohibits its workers from unionizing to fight for higher wages.[52]
Proponents argue that maintaining one entity for food service lowers costs for the University, which in turn lowers costs for students. Also, the fact that food service workers are not UC employees further lowers costs for the university. Furthermore, UCI notes the large investment Aramark is making is in dining infrastructure, which will outlast its current contract and support UCI’s long-range development plan.[52]”
I wonder how many others are the “last UC campus that subcontracts its food service.”
From the Wikipedia link:
“Aramark
UC Irvine is the last UC campus that subcontracts its food services. In summer of 2004, UCI signed a contract with Aramark, a food services corporation, granting it control of nearly all residential dining facilities and restaurants on university property. This includes UCI’s three dining halls (Brandywine, Pippin Commons, and Mesa Commons) and three on-campus restaurants (Phoenix Grille, B.C.’s Cavern on the Green, and Bistro by the Bridge). ASUCI, which is partially responsible for negotiating UCI’s food services contract, has justified the decision to offer Aramark its business with the argument that Aramark has pledged to invest millions of dollars into the university’s food service infrastructure.[52]
Critics argue that offering one corporation the university’s food services contract is a de facto monopoly. It is also argued that the management of food services by Aramark leads to low-quality food and poor customer service, and that support of Aramark condones its poor employee relations record. Many full time Aramark employees qualify for public assistance and rely on Medi-Cal, low-income housing, and other social programs. Though these workers prepare and serve food on the UC Irvine campus in residential dining halls, they are not afforded the same rights as UC service employees. Aramark Corporation prohibits its workers from unionizing to fight for higher wages.[52]
Proponents argue that maintaining one entity for food service lowers costs for the University, which in turn lowers costs for students. Also, the fact that food service workers are not UC employees further lowers costs for the university. Furthermore, UCI notes the large investment Aramark is making is in dining infrastructure, which will outlast its current contract and support UCI’s long-range development plan.[52]”
I wonder how many others are the “last UC campus that subcontracts its food service.”
From the Wikipedia link:
“Aramark
UC Irvine is the last UC campus that subcontracts its food services. In summer of 2004, UCI signed a contract with Aramark, a food services corporation, granting it control of nearly all residential dining facilities and restaurants on university property. This includes UCI’s three dining halls (Brandywine, Pippin Commons, and Mesa Commons) and three on-campus restaurants (Phoenix Grille, B.C.’s Cavern on the Green, and Bistro by the Bridge). ASUCI, which is partially responsible for negotiating UCI’s food services contract, has justified the decision to offer Aramark its business with the argument that Aramark has pledged to invest millions of dollars into the university’s food service infrastructure.[52]
Critics argue that offering one corporation the university’s food services contract is a de facto monopoly. It is also argued that the management of food services by Aramark leads to low-quality food and poor customer service, and that support of Aramark condones its poor employee relations record. Many full time Aramark employees qualify for public assistance and rely on Medi-Cal, low-income housing, and other social programs. Though these workers prepare and serve food on the UC Irvine campus in residential dining halls, they are not afforded the same rights as UC service employees. Aramark Corporation prohibits its workers from unionizing to fight for higher wages.[52]
Proponents argue that maintaining one entity for food service lowers costs for the University, which in turn lowers costs for students. Also, the fact that food service workers are not UC employees further lowers costs for the university. Furthermore, UCI notes the large investment Aramark is making is in dining infrastructure, which will outlast its current contract and support UCI’s long-range development plan.[52]”
I wonder how many others are the “last UC campus that subcontracts its food service.”
From the Wikipedia link:
“Aramark
UC Irvine is the last UC campus that subcontracts its food services. In summer of 2004, UCI signed a contract with Aramark, a food services corporation, granting it control of nearly all residential dining facilities and restaurants on university property. This includes UCI’s three dining halls (Brandywine, Pippin Commons, and Mesa Commons) and three on-campus restaurants (Phoenix Grille, B.C.’s Cavern on the Green, and Bistro by the Bridge). ASUCI, which is partially responsible for negotiating UCI’s food services contract, has justified the decision to offer Aramark its business with the argument that Aramark has pledged to invest millions of dollars into the university’s food service infrastructure.[52]
Critics argue that offering one corporation the university’s food services contract is a de facto monopoly. It is also argued that the management of food services by Aramark leads to low-quality food and poor customer service, and that support of Aramark condones its poor employee relations record. Many full time Aramark employees qualify for public assistance and rely on Medi-Cal, low-income housing, and other social programs. Though these workers prepare and serve food on the UC Irvine campus in residential dining halls, they are not afforded the same rights as UC service employees. Aramark Corporation prohibits its workers from unionizing to fight for higher wages.[52]
Proponents argue that maintaining one entity for food service lowers costs for the University, which in turn lowers costs for students. Also, the fact that food service workers are not UC employees further lowers costs for the university. Furthermore, UCI notes the large investment Aramark is making is in dining infrastructure, which will outlast its current contract and support UCI’s long-range development plan.[52]”
I wonder how many others are the “last UC campus that subcontracts its food service.”
In response to “I wonder how many others are the ‘last UC campus that subcontracts its food service.”…
That wikipedia posting is out of date.
In January of 2006, UCI administration decided to directly hire all formerly contracted out food service workers.
Check out the story in their campus paper “Negotiations Underway for Direct Hiring of Aramark Workers “http://www.newuniversity.org/plain_article.php?id=4652
In response to “I wonder how many others are the ‘last UC campus that subcontracts its food service.”…
That wikipedia posting is out of date.
In January of 2006, UCI administration decided to directly hire all formerly contracted out food service workers.
Check out the story in their campus paper “Negotiations Underway for Direct Hiring of Aramark Workers “http://www.newuniversity.org/plain_article.php?id=4652
In response to “I wonder how many others are the ‘last UC campus that subcontracts its food service.”…
That wikipedia posting is out of date.
In January of 2006, UCI administration decided to directly hire all formerly contracted out food service workers.
Check out the story in their campus paper “Negotiations Underway for Direct Hiring of Aramark Workers “http://www.newuniversity.org/plain_article.php?id=4652
In response to “I wonder how many others are the ‘last UC campus that subcontracts its food service.”…
That wikipedia posting is out of date.
In January of 2006, UCI administration decided to directly hire all formerly contracted out food service workers.
Check out the story in their campus paper “Negotiations Underway for Direct Hiring of Aramark Workers “http://www.newuniversity.org/plain_article.php?id=4652
At UCI, Aramark has a management contract, but all of the workers are direct UCI employees.
The same thing could be done here in Davis with Sodexho managment staying, but all of the workers being direct UCD employees and therefore receiving all of the benefits that they deserve.
At UCI, Aramark has a management contract, but all of the workers are direct UCI employees.
The same thing could be done here in Davis with Sodexho managment staying, but all of the workers being direct UCD employees and therefore receiving all of the benefits that they deserve.
At UCI, Aramark has a management contract, but all of the workers are direct UCI employees.
The same thing could be done here in Davis with Sodexho managment staying, but all of the workers being direct UCD employees and therefore receiving all of the benefits that they deserve.
At UCI, Aramark has a management contract, but all of the workers are direct UCI employees.
The same thing could be done here in Davis with Sodexho managment staying, but all of the workers being direct UCD employees and therefore receiving all of the benefits that they deserve.
So, according to that article, it is/was going to cost UCI $1.7 million to bring the 170 workers in as UC employees, and they would be required to join the AFSCME.
Do you know what the actual results were? Are they now UCI employees? I couldn’t find any followup articles.
So, according to that article, it is/was going to cost UCI $1.7 million to bring the 170 workers in as UC employees, and they would be required to join the AFSCME.
Do you know what the actual results were? Are they now UCI employees? I couldn’t find any followup articles.
So, according to that article, it is/was going to cost UCI $1.7 million to bring the 170 workers in as UC employees, and they would be required to join the AFSCME.
Do you know what the actual results were? Are they now UCI employees? I couldn’t find any followup articles.
So, according to that article, it is/was going to cost UCI $1.7 million to bring the 170 workers in as UC employees, and they would be required to join the AFSCME.
Do you know what the actual results were? Are they now UCI employees? I couldn’t find any followup articles.
“Are they now UCI employees?”
At the UCI luncheon I was at — in January — the food service workers had “Aramark” insignia on their clothes. I mentioned to a friend what was going on with Sodexho at UCD and was told by him that Aramark managed all the UCI food service. I just assumed that the Aramark food service workers were Aramark employees, but perhaps that was wrong. If they are instead UCI employees, I wonder why they wore Aramark clothes?
“Are they now UCI employees?”
At the UCI luncheon I was at — in January — the food service workers had “Aramark” insignia on their clothes. I mentioned to a friend what was going on with Sodexho at UCD and was told by him that Aramark managed all the UCI food service. I just assumed that the Aramark food service workers were Aramark employees, but perhaps that was wrong. If they are instead UCI employees, I wonder why they wore Aramark clothes?
“Are they now UCI employees?”
At the UCI luncheon I was at — in January — the food service workers had “Aramark” insignia on their clothes. I mentioned to a friend what was going on with Sodexho at UCD and was told by him that Aramark managed all the UCI food service. I just assumed that the Aramark food service workers were Aramark employees, but perhaps that was wrong. If they are instead UCI employees, I wonder why they wore Aramark clothes?
“Are they now UCI employees?”
At the UCI luncheon I was at — in January — the food service workers had “Aramark” insignia on their clothes. I mentioned to a friend what was going on with Sodexho at UCD and was told by him that Aramark managed all the UCI food service. I just assumed that the Aramark food service workers were Aramark employees, but perhaps that was wrong. If they are instead UCI employees, I wonder why they wore Aramark clothes?
The UCI food workers are UC workers. Those workers and also some groundskeepers ran a big campaign down there to get these better jobs.
Even in the bastion of right wing Orange county, the Chancellor there decided it was the right thing to do. Here in Davis, apparently maintaining business relationships with a billion dollar a year multinational corporate giant is at the top of High Chancellor Vanderhoef’s agenda. Does he think he lives in Irvine where this is normal?
It’s also interesting to note that UC wanted to contract-out food service at both UC Merced and at UCSF Mission Bay, however didn’t after pressure.
I guess the Chancellor wants to go down in history as the biggest stick in the mud rather than a champion of the community, responsible to people’s real needs. He keeps saying he is a man of his word and doesn’t want to break a contract. What about a social contract? He doesn’t even need to break the contract as he likes to distract the issue by saying- all he needs to do is lightly alter or amend the agreement with Sodexho, something he has done about every two years for the last decade.
Come on Larry, it’s time to quit marring our campus and community reputation with your stubbornness and ego. You know they aren’t stopping, especially the ones that have almost died in the last few months because of their lack of healthcare…
The UCI food workers are UC workers. Those workers and also some groundskeepers ran a big campaign down there to get these better jobs.
Even in the bastion of right wing Orange county, the Chancellor there decided it was the right thing to do. Here in Davis, apparently maintaining business relationships with a billion dollar a year multinational corporate giant is at the top of High Chancellor Vanderhoef’s agenda. Does he think he lives in Irvine where this is normal?
It’s also interesting to note that UC wanted to contract-out food service at both UC Merced and at UCSF Mission Bay, however didn’t after pressure.
I guess the Chancellor wants to go down in history as the biggest stick in the mud rather than a champion of the community, responsible to people’s real needs. He keeps saying he is a man of his word and doesn’t want to break a contract. What about a social contract? He doesn’t even need to break the contract as he likes to distract the issue by saying- all he needs to do is lightly alter or amend the agreement with Sodexho, something he has done about every two years for the last decade.
Come on Larry, it’s time to quit marring our campus and community reputation with your stubbornness and ego. You know they aren’t stopping, especially the ones that have almost died in the last few months because of their lack of healthcare…
The UCI food workers are UC workers. Those workers and also some groundskeepers ran a big campaign down there to get these better jobs.
Even in the bastion of right wing Orange county, the Chancellor there decided it was the right thing to do. Here in Davis, apparently maintaining business relationships with a billion dollar a year multinational corporate giant is at the top of High Chancellor Vanderhoef’s agenda. Does he think he lives in Irvine where this is normal?
It’s also interesting to note that UC wanted to contract-out food service at both UC Merced and at UCSF Mission Bay, however didn’t after pressure.
I guess the Chancellor wants to go down in history as the biggest stick in the mud rather than a champion of the community, responsible to people’s real needs. He keeps saying he is a man of his word and doesn’t want to break a contract. What about a social contract? He doesn’t even need to break the contract as he likes to distract the issue by saying- all he needs to do is lightly alter or amend the agreement with Sodexho, something he has done about every two years for the last decade.
Come on Larry, it’s time to quit marring our campus and community reputation with your stubbornness and ego. You know they aren’t stopping, especially the ones that have almost died in the last few months because of their lack of healthcare…
The UCI food workers are UC workers. Those workers and also some groundskeepers ran a big campaign down there to get these better jobs.
Even in the bastion of right wing Orange county, the Chancellor there decided it was the right thing to do. Here in Davis, apparently maintaining business relationships with a billion dollar a year multinational corporate giant is at the top of High Chancellor Vanderhoef’s agenda. Does he think he lives in Irvine where this is normal?
It’s also interesting to note that UC wanted to contract-out food service at both UC Merced and at UCSF Mission Bay, however didn’t after pressure.
I guess the Chancellor wants to go down in history as the biggest stick in the mud rather than a champion of the community, responsible to people’s real needs. He keeps saying he is a man of his word and doesn’t want to break a contract. What about a social contract? He doesn’t even need to break the contract as he likes to distract the issue by saying- all he needs to do is lightly alter or amend the agreement with Sodexho, something he has done about every two years for the last decade.
Come on Larry, it’s time to quit marring our campus and community reputation with your stubbornness and ego. You know they aren’t stopping, especially the ones that have almost died in the last few months because of their lack of healthcare…
DpD re: Union tactics
Union reps almost always demonize the employer in order to get sentiment rolling in their favor,(yes alot of stupid people buy their bull).
In the case with public sector unions the taxpayers are the one’s ultimately taking it in the shorts and the union reps get more money.
How about another solution. Terminate sodexho’s food contract. This would certainly be good for the food service establishments in the downtown area,(who pay taxes to support the government and the union leeches). Force everyone to apply for their job thru U.C.
Cut the unions out because they are middle manning the Univ. eployees,(and the rest of the taxpayers), to the tune of tens of millions of dollars in dues and some often imaginery issues.
Does anyone see that the whole thing is going to devour itself due to that old age human trait, GREED. The democrats nor the republicans won’t be able to do anything about it.
Don Shor said that the UC employee’s would be required to join the afscme union. That should have read FORCED to join something they may not want want to join! Some democracy huh, FORCED to JOIN.
Just like that moron, gov. gray davis signing in on a fair share agency because the unions lined his pockets with money and now they are allowed to steal more taxpayers money.
I know dpd won’t agree with any of this because his wife is a rep for afscme.
DpD re: Union tactics
Union reps almost always demonize the employer in order to get sentiment rolling in their favor,(yes alot of stupid people buy their bull).
In the case with public sector unions the taxpayers are the one’s ultimately taking it in the shorts and the union reps get more money.
How about another solution. Terminate sodexho’s food contract. This would certainly be good for the food service establishments in the downtown area,(who pay taxes to support the government and the union leeches). Force everyone to apply for their job thru U.C.
Cut the unions out because they are middle manning the Univ. eployees,(and the rest of the taxpayers), to the tune of tens of millions of dollars in dues and some often imaginery issues.
Does anyone see that the whole thing is going to devour itself due to that old age human trait, GREED. The democrats nor the republicans won’t be able to do anything about it.
Don Shor said that the UC employee’s would be required to join the afscme union. That should have read FORCED to join something they may not want want to join! Some democracy huh, FORCED to JOIN.
Just like that moron, gov. gray davis signing in on a fair share agency because the unions lined his pockets with money and now they are allowed to steal more taxpayers money.
I know dpd won’t agree with any of this because his wife is a rep for afscme.
DpD re: Union tactics
Union reps almost always demonize the employer in order to get sentiment rolling in their favor,(yes alot of stupid people buy their bull).
In the case with public sector unions the taxpayers are the one’s ultimately taking it in the shorts and the union reps get more money.
How about another solution. Terminate sodexho’s food contract. This would certainly be good for the food service establishments in the downtown area,(who pay taxes to support the government and the union leeches). Force everyone to apply for their job thru U.C.
Cut the unions out because they are middle manning the Univ. eployees,(and the rest of the taxpayers), to the tune of tens of millions of dollars in dues and some often imaginery issues.
Does anyone see that the whole thing is going to devour itself due to that old age human trait, GREED. The democrats nor the republicans won’t be able to do anything about it.
Don Shor said that the UC employee’s would be required to join the afscme union. That should have read FORCED to join something they may not want want to join! Some democracy huh, FORCED to JOIN.
Just like that moron, gov. gray davis signing in on a fair share agency because the unions lined his pockets with money and now they are allowed to steal more taxpayers money.
I know dpd won’t agree with any of this because his wife is a rep for afscme.
DpD re: Union tactics
Union reps almost always demonize the employer in order to get sentiment rolling in their favor,(yes alot of stupid people buy their bull).
In the case with public sector unions the taxpayers are the one’s ultimately taking it in the shorts and the union reps get more money.
How about another solution. Terminate sodexho’s food contract. This would certainly be good for the food service establishments in the downtown area,(who pay taxes to support the government and the union leeches). Force everyone to apply for their job thru U.C.
Cut the unions out because they are middle manning the Univ. eployees,(and the rest of the taxpayers), to the tune of tens of millions of dollars in dues and some often imaginery issues.
Does anyone see that the whole thing is going to devour itself due to that old age human trait, GREED. The democrats nor the republicans won’t be able to do anything about it.
Don Shor said that the UC employee’s would be required to join the afscme union. That should have read FORCED to join something they may not want want to join! Some democracy huh, FORCED to JOIN.
Just like that moron, gov. gray davis signing in on a fair share agency because the unions lined his pockets with money and now they are allowed to steal more taxpayers money.
I know dpd won’t agree with any of this because his wife is a rep for afscme.