Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
del.icio.us.
Digg!
furl
google
newsvine
reddit
technorati
Facebook
Yahoo!Since University of California President Mark G. Yudof was hired at over $900,000 per year twice as much as the last president UC workers, students, and teachers were more than slightly angered by his plan to cut funds.
Dozens of teachers, service workers, and students gathered in the noonday sun on Wednesday, July, 29 at the UCSB Visitors Center courtyard, in passionate protest against what they clearly regarded as the UC Regents' and President Yudof's fiscal flop.
"These cuts will affect the quality of life long-term," said UCSB Art Professor Robert Williams of Yudof's alleged missteps.
The UC Community Coalition for Option 4 (UCCC404), rejects three options offered by Yudof at the meeting of the Regents on July 16: salary cuts, furloughs, or both with the addition of student fee increases.
UCCC404 seeks other alternatives what coalition members call the fourth option. For example, an oil extraction tax will maintain CalWorks In-Home Support Services and Healthy Families, with about $300 million left over for public education, according to UCCC404. Coalition members said UC should go after some of that money. Regents ought to "defend, not de-fund" their universities, said faculty member Lisa Hajjar. "The state faces an unprecedented education crisis as a result of the incompetent stewardship of the Schwarzenegger administration and a minority of legislators and, in the UC system, the regents and president whose only response to the fiscal crisis is to cut and gut schools," said Hajjar.
Hajjar said the coalition disagrees with the regents' decision to grant Yudof "emergency powers," and demands that the Commission on the Future of the UC include more varied viewpoints. She and others called for "transparency."
Service Workers Still Struggling: Edward Woolfolk of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) said that the UC system does not necessarily depend on state funding, and has enough money to not make such dramatic cuts.
"The Vice Chancellor revealed last Wednesday that there is an emergency fund," said Woolfolk. "Only 8.6 percent of [the University of California] funds come from the state budget."
Woolfolk said it has taken two years for the UC and AFSCME to agree upon a contract which would raise service workers' pay by 60 percent over five years but the new plan would demolish that settlement.
"We only receive the last two years if funds are available," said Woolfolk. "Within the first year, they're already claiming they have no funds."
The UC's bond rating was recently affirmed "stable," according to literature generated by UCCC404, due to a "sizeable balance sheet that remains highly liquid, with $5.4 billion of unrestricted financial resources." Nonetheless, teaching personnel will have their pay cut by four to 10 percent. Furloughs are also anticipated, though they have not been entirely clarified.
Students Seek Support: Due to a decreasing number of classes and an increasing number of undergraduates, student protestors said Yudof and the Regents decisions are taking a toll on them as well.
Fourth-year UCSB student Lindsey Quock said increased costs to students-tuition is to increase this year coming by over nine percent-are causing immeasurable mental and familial damage. Quock added that it was likely that there will be a mid-year spike in tuition and fees as well. "The 9 percent increase is only the beginning," she said.
According to the UCCC404, many parts of the UC system have already surrendered the fight against costly fees. Berkeley Law, for instance, is now $36,000 per year.
"The state is systematically divesting from our generation," said Quock.
Related Links
Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.
Previous Month
Comments
Discussion Guidelines
Conventional wisdom is that the Republican governor does not value public higher education, and that many Repubs think higher education is not a proper role for government. But this UC coalition might ask themselves why the Democrats in the legislature are so silent about UC budget cuts. Where's Pedro? Demos Gray Davis and especially Jerry Brown (who may be the next gov.) were equally stingy with UC. Recall that Jerry Brown favored "psychic pay" for professors.
revisionist (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2009 at 7:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It might be a hard stone to throw when the UC system found $ 900,000 annually for the person in charge.
sbpaddy (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2009 at 3:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No one complains when they get a cost of living raise. We are now in a recession and gnp has contracted at an adjusted yearly rate of 6%.
Housing cost are down. Automobile cost are down.
Private sector salaries are down. Why shouldn't university salaries be down?
Do not do a furlough -- work the same hours for lower wages.
loneranger (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2009 at 3:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
UC professional staff earn big salaries. They could afford a salary cut. Students, however, are bearing the brunt of Sacramento's unreasonable treatment of education, kindergarten through college. The priorities set by our incompetnet governor are all wrong. Our state sinks further and further behind and our administration and legislature don't care. Throw all of the bums out.
lmeoriole (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2009 at 5:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
A 60% increase over five years? Outrageous! We're in a belt-tightening low-inflation environment. 60%???? My heart is stopping as I write. Get real, people. I should observe that when it comes to student-supported issues, the general concensus among developmental professionals is that the human brain is not really "complete" until age 25. Perhaps that explains the student support for every hare-brained idea that comes along. 60%? I may puke.
RCMeltzer (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2009 at 7:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
One lesson that should be clear all around is that multi-year labor contracts are a fallacy.
FirewindII (anonymous profile)
August 1, 2009 at 5:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
In response to Imeoriole's comment about professional staff
earn big salaries; not true. Upper management does - outrageous amounts. Some professional staff, i.e. managers and heads of technology groups earn big salaries. The vast majority of professional staff make 78% of the going rate. UCSB is the second lowest paid UC
campus in one of the most expensive areas to live.
sbpaddy (anonymous profile)
August 3, 2009 at 10:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is one of the most biased pieces I have read in the Independent, and that's saying something. Is it an opinion piece or a news article? The author does not say that she is a UCSB student, indicating a possible conflict of interest, nor does she mention any attempt to contact any member of the UCSB administration for comment. The piece is nothing but a reiteration of the points made by the people who organized the event. How is that good journalism?
totheeditor (anonymous profile)
August 4, 2009 at 2:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)