Furlough Issue Comes To Head This Week at UC Davis
At the same time, last week, UC Davis told its more than 4400 union employees that if they do not accept the furlough they will face layoffs or other reductions.
At the same time, last week, UC Davis told its more than 4400 union employees that if they do not accept the furlough they will face layoffs or other reductions.
He reports that UC regents will meet next week to discuss the phased increases which would include a more modest 7.5 percent hike for Spring 2010 followed by a much sharper increase in the fall.
The University of California Board of Regents this summer approved exorbitant pay raises for more than two dozen executives. The hikes, which included a 25 percent increase for UC San Francisco’s chief financial officer and pay in excess $500,000 for UCSF’s chief operating officer, came at the same time that Regents approved pay cuts, layoffs, and furloughs for lower wage workers.
In some ways, this might seem to a no-brainer as it mitigates the impact of what should be the university’s primary duty–the education of students. However, not surprisingly this has trigger criticism from faculty leaders and representation.
Realtors around Davis have expressed concern about the overall viability of the project describing it as small housing with limited equity that is unlikely to attract existing homeowners. They pose the question as to whether the project will fail before it even gets underway.
Wrote the Chronicle on August 7, 2009:
Everyone joked as to how long the process took, but the planning began back in the 1990s as a means to provide affordable housing for faculty and staff while supplying additional housing for some 3000 UC Davis students.
Excessive executive compensation has been in the news a lot lately from AIG to the Auto Industry, but when it happens in a public institution like the University California it gets nowhere near the public outcry.
However, as bad as the report is, that is not our concern in Davis. Our concern is with the status and implications of incoming Chancellor Linda Katehi. And from our perspective it appears that Chancellor Katehi comes out unscathed. The report directly names nine people who either knew or should have known of the admission of substandard clouted applicants at the time of those decisions, Katehi is not only not mentioned on that list but her name does not appear at all in the report.
Right up until the end, Mr. Garamendi was looking for another way. He called on the Regents instead of acceding to the demands of the economic downturn to join a coordinated effort with CSU and the Community Colleges to Abolish the two-thirds majority requirement and pass an oil severance tax.
If this is the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression one of the biggest victims will be the California Dream of an accessible and affordable college education.
The Vanguard had the opportunity to do a brief phone interview with AFSCME Local 3229 President Lakesha Harrison. The Vanguard asked Ms. Harrison two questions revolving around this ordeal: Is this fair? And who does this effect the most?
The bottom line I think for myself is that at first the chancellor did not answer questions about what happened during her tenure at the University of Illinois. When she did, her answers seemed in contradiction to the facts that emerged. In short, she has not been forthcoming with information that explains her exact role. While I agree that nothing has come forward is a smoking gun in terms of her involvement, at the same time the answers and statements that she has given have failed to put this issue to rest.
Here is her full statement, you can decide yourself based on the evidence if it is believable:
The revelations link a politically connected Greek Orthodox priest trying to get help for the daughter of a family friend so that she could attending the University of Illinois. In the course of doing so he reached out to a campaign adviser to State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias. A few months later, that priest aided Giannoulias with a large fundraiser that needed him at least $120,000, according to the Tribune article.
For weeks now, the Chicago Tribune has detailed the well established and entrenched practice of circumventing the normal admissions process for the sons and daughters of the wealthy and powerful.
This week, the Vanguard ran a story asking for the incoming UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi to come clean in terms of her involvement in a University of Illinois scandal. Last week, the Sacramento Bee had run a story where Ms. Katehi had apparently refused to answer questions. In response, UC Davis released a statement to the media that claimed she had no knowledge of the scandal.
She wrote in an email:
“I want to be clear to you and others at UC Davis that I was not involved in the admissions decisions that were the subject of the Tribune’s “Clout Goes to College” investigation.”
Vice Chacellor Lavernia writes: