Day 109

Today is my last day in the office until a few days before the university reopens from the holiday furlough. I will be at home trying not to spend money, and dreaming of the faraway tropical islands that will just have to endure the holidays without me. This has certainly been a tumultuous year for our campus, but what would a year be at Berkeley without a few wild moments, protests, and faculty outcries? I look forward to returning in a new decade when hopefully, after a bit of rest, the UC community will be renewed and refreshed to restart the good fight. But for now, happy holidays, safe travels, and much rest and relaxation!

Day 106

This afternoon, we've been talking about the fee hikes, and wondering how on earth we are going to fund our department's graduate students. Doctoral students typically enjoy what many institutions call a "tuition waiver," which we also provide here at Berkeley. Except the tuition isn't waived; the money is actually paid from a department account to the university. Parents in the UC system are not the only ones who are going to suffer financially from the increase in tuition and fees. The very departments that make up the university will also have to dig deep into the waiting area couch cushions to find extra change. When we can't find the change, we will have to enroll fewer students, which will have a negative impact on the undergraduate classroom, and we will lose many top students to competitor institutions, potentially diminishing the quality of our program and ultimately, the university. And the merry-go-round spins round and round and round...

Day 105

I was shocked to learn this morning that Chancellor Birgeneau's home was violently attacked Friday evening by a group of terrorists who called themselves protesters. They chanted "no justice, no peace" while throwing objects at the house, breaking windows, and trying to set the place on fire while Mr. Birgeneau and his wife were home. Occupying a campus classroom building is one thing. Threatening and endangering the life of the Chancellor is quite another. I truly wonder what good these people believe their actions could do. When similar attacks took place at UC Santa Cruz, the so called protestors were demonstrating against harmful testing on innocent animals. Was the group this past Friday demonstrating against harmful tuition-billing of the innocent middle class? I fail to see how tuition hikes and violent attacks go together. Although something about this sounds a little like the beginnings of the American Revolutionary War.

The unions have finally come to an agreement with the university on the temporary layoffs. CUE members will have the 4-6% pay reduction as outlined originally by the university through temporary layoff days timed with scheduled university closures, which are the scheduled furlough days for those of us not in the union. These employees will be temporarily laid off for those days. They have the option to spread their pay cuts over a twelve month period, and if they do that, their benefits will accrue as normal. Yes, you are correct: this is almost exactly the same as the furlough plan already in place, but with different vocabulary. Our department's unionized staff member basically rolled her eyes and shook her head that it took this long for those "bunch of idiots over there in the union" to come to the same conclusion the university worked out in August.

I've heard the word from the chairman's mouth: university administration has all but officially committed to ending the furlough on time, and practically promised that the furlough will not be extended into next year. While promises are of course light and easy compared to actual action, the chairman believes that it would be extremely damaging for the university to make such a claim only to go back on in 260 days from now, and he therefore believes them. Perhaps he is right. But federal stimulus money will disappear next fall, and the state shows no signs of giving back our funding, so the fact that 70% of the university's budget is in payroll indicates to me that while we may not see furloughs, we will likely continue to be in a hiring freeze and maybe see more layoffs.

A member of our staff has resigned to move on to bigger and better things away from UC and California. We are of course very sad to see her go. But our collective held-breath has let out just a little bit knowing that she will not be replaced, and her exit will therefore help to better secure all of our jobs, even if just ever so slightly. What a state of affairs when we are thankful that a hard-working, appreciated colleague is leaving her full-time workload on our shoulders so that we might all wake up to work another day.

Day 102

A graduate student just came into my office looking a little frazzled and frantic. He had a hard time spitting it out, but basically he was telling me that he needed a conference room or classroom right away for a review session he is holding for a final that will be held tomorrow. Apparently, his normal classroom is in Wheeler Hall, where students have once again decided to camp out. Well, they aren't camping there anymore since police calmly and politely went into the building, woke up the napping protesters, arrested them one by one, and removed them from the building. The place was still a zoo, and our student teacher couldn't get into the building to help his own desperate undergraduates prepare for their final. This protest, I'm afraid, has seemed to just fall flat compared to the chaos of the last one. Maybe the students are just too exhausted from studying to give it a real go.

In about an hour or so, the staff is going to caravan over to a nice restaurant for our annual staff Christmas lunch. Economy, budget, fiscal crisis all be damned. It's the holidays for crying out loud and we're going to have dessert and wine and everything.

Day 100

This morning, a co-worker and I were chatting about what is particularly un-fun about working for UC at the moment. Our state is a disaster, our higher education system is on the verge of collapse, and we feel trapped. She will soon reach her twenty year mark with the university and is looking forward to the benefits that come along with that, but she admits to being far less enthusiastic about them than she was twenty years ago. "The benefits were good when I started working here," she said. "But it's pathetic how little I am making now for how long I've been at this place." She has career ambitions to move onward and upward in the university, but has practically no opportunities to do so since the university isn't really hiring now, and probably won't be for a long time. She prophesied that as soon as the economy improves, everyone will leave to find better jobs elsewhere, which you know is exactly what I think, too. The strange thing about this whole conversation is that we weren't speaking with particular melancholy or ire, but more just as statements of fact for the sake of confirming our mutual feelings and understandings of the situation in front of us. We all know how lucky we are right now to have a job so no one really says that aloud anymore. Like I've said, no full time staff in my department have been laid off, but since we don't have many other options, we accept that we're just hanging around with our fingers crossed that layoffs won't happen in the future. Our occasional party atmosphere has picked up again in the office with potlucks instead of catering, and it's been just great. We trudge along and smile and laugh and get along exceptionally well with the bond of our common experience. It's almost like we are all stuffed down into a rickety bomb shelter while a small nuclear war is waging outside, and we've decided to keep going with our daily activities as if nothing has changed because what the hell else are we going to do? I hope other staff around campus and UC are as lucky as I am to have colleagues who keep smiling.

Day 98

So very many interesting things have come up in the past week including posters around campus that say "Quality Staff Deserve Quality Benefits," a headline investigation into unnecessary police force used on student protesters, a video released by Chancellor Birgeneau on the recent protests and budget issues, an agreement between the university and the union on the temporary layoff measures, and news of hearing that is being held today in Sacramento on the California Master Plan. However, last week I was working through lunch and staying late every day in preparation for our two week hiatus over the winter break furlough, so I barely had time to powder my nose, let alone ponder the daily trials of the California system of higher education or my colleagues' opinions on those issues. I certainly pondered, but only within my own mind rather than through my fingertips at the keyboard.

Speaking of my fingertips, I can barely feel them at the moment since Murphy's Law has taken over Berkeley campus, and on the coldest day of the year so far, half of campus is without heat and hot water. I am wearing a knee-length wool winter coat, winter boots, and a bulky scarf with a space heater at my feet that isn't even able to keep my ankles warm. My office mate went to a discount clothing store across the street and bought a pair of fingerless gloves to add to her arctic getup. Faculty are fleeing for their home-computers while the staff here in the office are blowing warm air into our fists like the pitchers at a frigid MLB playoff game in the northeast. At this moment, Bob Cratchit and I are kindred spirits.

Day 92

We received a fair-warning email this afternoon that in commemoration of the 1964 UC Berkeley Free Speech Movement, there will likely be campus-wide protests, which may include building occupations or sit-ins including in our own building. We are advised that if students march through our building, that we should "let them" and "try to carry on business as usual." Yeah, OK. Tomorrow is my biggest deadline of the year, so this should be exciting. I can't wait for the flood of students who will come to me and use the protests as an excuse as to why they didn't submit materials on time. I'll get extra compensation for the overtime it will take to deal with these issues, right?

The paycheck I received today is $14.17 less than last month due to the increase in California tax withholdings instituted in November. Anybody else want to take a piece of my paycheck? I'm taking numbers so get in line, my loyal readers!

Day 91

As you can well imagine, things can be a bit busy in the office on a Monday after a long holiday weekend...

On my way into the office this morning, I noticed a logo spray painted on the pavement a few times along the way: "hypocritiCal." The "Cal" part was in UC Berkeley traditional font based on our nickname here. I assume the artists mean that the institution espouses one set of values, priorities, and mission while completely undermining these high ideals through major budget cuts and funding priorities? I'm just guessing.

Day 86

Along the highway I commute on every day are several billboards as with most highways (or "freeways" as I should be calling them now that I'm a Californian). They are usually advertising a phone service, a newly released film, or some other consumer good. This week, one of them depicts a small portion of the torso of a stout man in a suit with a wad of cash sticking out of the handkerchief pocket of his suit jacket. The text reads, "Whose University, Yours...or Yudoff's." I did a real life double-take when I noticed it the first time (then, just like last Friday, had to remind myself to pay attention to my driving). The UPTE appears to be the primary sponsor.

According to an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, UC student protest groups are in a bit of a disagreement about whether to continue their activities focusing on UC administration, or to shift attention to Sacramento. They don't agree about whether the administration is the real problem and/or potential solution, or the legislature. I would find the Sacramento shift more promising if we were seeing evidence that Yudoff and his Chancellors were kicking and screaming about the state's cuts, but they just aren't. Yudoff seems to be just trying to divert the river from flowing full force into his office with a few bags of sand rather than a full blast-and-dam project. He practically ignores student, faculty, and staff outcries (though he obviously can't ignore this recent bout since it made national headlines and completely disrupted the whole system for an entire day), and doesn't seem to be doing anything outside of occasionally rolling his eyes at the legislature and whining to students and faculty, "don't look at me, blame the state!" How are we to believe in his sincerity when he's just socking it to campus constituents without taking up his own bullhorn and leading the parade to Sacramento? This could all be going much better for him and maybe even for the university, but he seems to be just screwing it all up. 


We're being let go a few hours early today to get a head start on the long weekend. Happy Thanksgiving all!

Day 85

Yesterday, we received an email from the Chancellor in reflection of Friday's events. The all-day protests were covered nationally, and expanded on into yesterday when protesters staged a sit-in at the president's office in Oakland (where they later had a lengthy discussion with administrators...Yudoff was out of the office reportedly on one of his furlough days). Below, I've pasted in its entirety, the email sent to everyone on campus:

Monday, November 23, 2009

Dear Campus Community:

Last week was a very difficult week for everyone across the University of California as the Regents voted to increase fees by 32% in response to the extreme funding cuts imposed on the University by the State of California.  Protests occurred on many campuses, including our own, as students, faculty, and staff are justifiably angered by the fee increases, by lay-offs, and by other difficult decisions necessitated by the state budget reductions.

On Friday, 40 individuals, the majority of them students, took over the second floor of Wheeler Hall, refusing to come out unless the administration agreed to reinstate 38 laid-off custodians.  Supporters and on-lookers gathered at Wheeler Hall, urged on by fast-spreading electronic communications.  We urged the police to be as respectful as possible of our students.  As the size of the crowd grew and false fire alarms were repeatedly set off in many campus buildings, our police chief recommended bringing in additional officers from outside the UC Berkeley police department to help maintain order and ensure safety.  As safety barriers were brought in, confrontations began to occur between the police and the quickly growing crowd.

118 classes were scheduled in Wheeler Hall that day. We have a responsibility to provide instruction to students who rightfully expect to attend their classes and decided that we needed to remove the protestors swiftly and safely in order that classes could proceed.
 
Many of you have written to us expressing concerns that police action at Friday's demonstration in front of Wheeler Hall showed brutality toward individuals who did not appear to be presenting any imminent threat.  Concerns have been raised about the calling in of outside police and the excessive use of force that may have caused injury to those who had come to support the protestors inside Wheeler Hall.

The images that have appeared on YouTube and videos do not reflect our values and those of our entire campus community and may not accurately reflect the whole sequence of events.  As are many of you who have written to us, we are distressed at the portrayal in the media of our campus.  Our priority in dealing with the demonstration was to provide for the safety and wellbeing of the entire campus community.
 
We truly regret the incidents that brought physical and emotional injury to members of our community. UCPD has already begun conducting an operational review that entails collection of all the available information including reports, videos and pictures taken by UCPD, students, the public, and media, to ensure that actions were reasonable given the situation presented and the information known at the time.  This includes a review of uses of force.  Additionally, we will ask that there be an independent investigation by the Campus Police Review Board.  The Board includes representatives of students, faculty, and staff.  It will receive the report of the UCPD.
 
Any tactics to exercise crowd control on campus must provide a safe platform for expression of free speech and freedom of assembly and we expect that, as a result of this review, modifications will be made.  We must strive to ensure that there is no possibility in the future of the alleged actions of police brutality and that our actions are guided by non-violence.

We are facing extraordinarily challenging times as we work to find solutions to one of the most difficult financial situations in the history of the university.  While last week's protests were difficult for everyone, we have been encouraged by the outpouring of concern, support, and offers of assistance from almost every area of our community to work together.  Many key members of our student and faculty leadership are very engaged with us to help address issues concerning the future of the university and the experience we offer our students.
  
We must sustain our two paramount goals:  access and excellence.  State budget cuts are extremely damaging to UC. We continue to encourage everyone to express your outrage to your elected representatives at the state's disinvestment in UC; we share your passion and commitment to this effort.  As we stated on Friday, we must work together to advance our cause.   We hope that last week's events will mark the critical moment which mobilized all of us to focus our collective energies together.
 
As many of us leave campus this week to reunite with family and friends for Thanksgiving, we urge everyone to reflect upon the week with the benefit of distance from the events that we have experienced.  However difficult the challenges we face, we should all remember to give thanks that we are part of this great university and reaffirm our commitment to work together to ensure its future. 

Robert J. Birgeneau
Chancellor

George Breslauer
Executive Vice-Chancellor & Provost

Harry Le Grande
Vice-Chancellor for Student Affairs

The student paper here on campus reports that the student protesters at the President's office gave the administrators they had been talking with red armbands in solidarity with the student group. Solidarity in what? Blaming Sacramento!

Day 81

I wrote most of this early in the morning yesterday, but the day was cut short for my department, and undoubtedly, many on campus. At about 10:30 or so, with the occupation and protests at Wheeler Hall fully underway, the fire alarm in my building sounded, and we all evacuated the building. A colleague and I joked that "Smith Hall" was officially going on strike and kicking us all out. The fire department came, they checked the building, shut off the alarm and let us back in. About ten minutes later, the same thing happened. Then again. And again. And again. Each time we left the building, we learned more about what was taking place elsewhere on campus, and that protesters were pulling fire alarms in most of the other major buildings on campus and the whole of Berkeley's daily operations were completely disrupted. We could see the alarm lights flashing through the windows of the building next to ours. I answered exactly three emails at work yesterday, and that was pretty much all I accomplished between each evacuation before my boss decided she'd had enough, and told us all to go home sometime around noon. I think the chaos on campus Friday answered my question about what the groups meant by "escalate" on their strike posters. Now, onto my thoughts from yesterday...

On my way into work this morning, I heard on the news that students at UC Berkeley had successfully occupied Wheeler Hall, one of our classroom and office buildings. I started clapping right there in my car (then quickly reminded myself that my hands belonged on the wheel). From what I understand, building occupations are also taking place at the Santa Cruz, Davis, and LA campuses, and maybe others as well. The Berkeley student interviewed on the radio said that students at other colleges and universities around the country and the world are also holding protests in solidarity. The news is on the homepages of the New York Times and CNN (top headline news on all sites seems to be that Oprah has canceled her show. Priorities, America), but strangely enough, not on the LA Times where the Regents meeting is actually taking place. The New York Times headline blurb says, "A Crown Jewel of Education Struggles With Cuts: Students and faculty worry that deep budget cuts are pushing the University of California into decline."

I wandered over to Wheeler with my camera and found police tape and officers surrounding the building, with a group of students and workers in a picket line along one side of the building. A student with a bullhorn and a kerchief hiding his face addressed the crowd from a window on the second floor of the building and called this protest just the beginning. A student handed me a flier of information with subheadings like, "Regents Declare War on Students, Faculty, &Workers," "Police Intimidation & Repression Shuts Down Free Speech," and "The Struggle Continues!" According to the flier, students are planning to rally at noon outside California Hall, home of the Chancellor's Office. A co-worker reported mild irritation this morning when she was walking across campus to our building, but had to backtrack and take a different route because the picketers wouldn't let her through. My boss, a Cal alum and Bay Area native, greeted me this morning wearing a yellow sweater and a blue and gold striped scarf around her neck.

While thinking about the cuts and Yudoff's response to them, I felt dismayed by the fact that in everything he says about the situation, he blames the state. Of course, out of the other side of his mouth, he says he fully supports the Governor and understands that the legislature has no money to give us even if they wanted to (despite the fact that he has just asked them for a $900 million or so increase in state funding next year). The state is an "unreliable partner" I keep hearing. Our hands are tied, we have no choice, blame the state, BLAME THE STATE! Now don't get me wrong. I blame the state, too. But isn't it a little whiny and childish to never take any of the blame or responsibility ourselves? Yes, I understand that our endowment income has dropped, state funds have dropped, and we will likely lose the crutch we have for this year with federal stimulus money. I don't have the answer, but shouldn't our leader?  If he's trying to step in solidarity with the student body and their tuition-paying parents by pointing the finger at Sacramento and taking the heat off himself, it's not working.

My other new favorite financial crisis on campus is the issue of post-retirement benefits. As I've mentioned before, nobody was paying into the UC pension fund for 20 years because it was 100% funded. Now, everyone is panicking because the fund is expected to drop by 60% or so next year, and we suddenly won't be able to afford retirement benefits for anyone. Employees and the university are going to have to start dumping money like mad to keep the program afloat, and the university is scrambling to revamp the program so it won't go under. Way to plan for a rainy day, guys.

Day 80

On NPR this morning, a report of the proposed fee increases and system-wide student protests was reported as national news from Washington DC, right between a report about the safety of the H1N1 vaccine and something related to the war in Afghanistan. When I walked by Sproul Plaza at lunch time, parked on Bancroft Avenue were four TV news vans including the local NBC and CBS affiliates, and another two unmarked. The headline "Regents Raise College Tuition in California by 32%" tops the New York Times homepage.

When I arrived on campus this morning, much like yesterday morning, I could hear chanting from Sproul Plaza, and it's been going steady, interspersed with speeches from the steps of Sproul Hall, all day. Someone in the office said that it was a lousy time of the semester for these protests since everyone's got papers and mid-terms due. I noted that the timing was based on the Regents meeting taking place in LA, and that I really don't blame students for at least trying to do something about the enormous fee hikes. Her response was, "Well you know it's not going to make a damn bit of difference. They're going to raise the fees anyway." The attitude made me a bit sad, not only because she was acting flip about something obviously so hugely important and momentous for the students, the university, the state, and public higher education as a whole. But because, at least for the moment, she turned out to be right.

I attended a lecture yesterday afternoon given by Dr. Hanna Holborn Gray, former provost and interim president of Yale University and former president of the University of Chicago. With a voice like Julia Child and speaking style like the dullest of college professors, Dr. Gray proposed that universities need to pare down their functions and get back to focusing on the specifics of what each institution does best. This solution was aimed at boosting the quality of our universities and dealing with declining financial resources. During these discussions about the UC budget cuts, many have asserted that the issues are not entirely a problem of resources, but of priorities. The UC system as a whole, and certainly Berkeley campus have about a zillion functions (give or take) with a good deal of overlap, inefficiencies, and all of the typical problems of major research universities and state systems. As it seems now, when history reflects on the presidency of Mark Yudoff, it will not look at him as a leader who re-focused the university system on its most important functions and mission during a time of financial crisis, but as one who marked the end of an era of one of the greatest free public services to the students and citizens of the state of California. His and the Regents' claim that the fee increases are the only answer to this budget crisis, but that we shouldn't worry because they will only affect wealthy students is a huge load of crap.

Day 79

Everyone in the office got a kick out of a sign on our building's front door this morning (which, for the sake of this story, we'll call Smith Hall):

Smith Hall is on Strike!

The student-created poster goes on to explain that we are all going to meet at 11, then march over to Sproul Plaza at noon to join the rally.  When I first saw this sign on the front door this morning, I thought to myself, "Well, how is the building going to hold picket signs? Will the building be marching over to Sproul Plaza? I'm not sure that all the buildings on campus would fit on the plaza if other buildings are also on strike!" Another staff member wondered what would happen if some sort of altercation started, and a fight were to break out with the building. I chimed in that I would put my money on the building winning that battle. My boss joked that we are obviously failing as an institution of learning and that we should kick out all the students for making such a ludicrous sign. This conversation started after a staff person received a scathing note from a faculty member about her inappropriate use of the word "impact" as a transitive verb. So through some sort of psychological twist, our collective shame at a member of our ranks having been wrist-slapped by a higher grammatical authority was passed along to the dipstick students beneath us for attributing Smith Hall with principles.

Sproul Plaza was crowded at the noon rally today, but maybe not quite as crowded as I expected. The stairs of Sproul Hall were covered with students holding giant signs and banners, but at the meeting point along Telegraph Avenue, maybe a hundred or so demonstration signs sat idle, leaning upside down against the wall. The crowd looked to be made up primarily of students, several hundred or so, but for a campus that has in the tens of thousands of students, it was a little light. My theory is that students have taken this opportunity to skip class and stay home to work on a paper or watch Oprah.

Day 78

As with the September 24 walkout, the Director of Human Resources issued a letter to campus managers explaining the university's position and policies about the campus UPTE strike scheduled to begin tomorrow. Again, the university finds the strike illegal, and uses the same sentence as last time about expectations: "...All employees are expected to report to work and meet their job obligations." Here is the HR director's statement on the campus' stance on the strike: 

It is the University's position that the UPTE strike is not protected under HEERA as the parties have not yet completed the bargaining process, much less the statutorily mandated impasse process.  While UPTE has filed unfair practice charges, which the University believes are unfounded, the mere filing of a charge does not confer a legal right to strike and therefore there is no legal basis for this activity by UPTE.

Posters are all over my building, and I assume all over campus. Professional posters from UPTE (in conjunction with the CUE and other supportive campus and union groups), as well as separate flyers from student groups. The student groups see the campus-wide strike as a protest against fee hikes, which will be decided upon by the Regents this week. The UPTE posters also include protest against further layoffs and cuts to student services, which they list as other considerations on the table for the Regents. According to the union posters, the schedule is as follows:

• November 18: Walkout
• November 19: Reclaim
• November 20: Escalate

A time and location (Sproul Plaza) for daily rallies is included under each date, as well as a scheduled meeting to discuss what they'll do the next day. They are mysteriously vague about the loaded word "escalate." They say, "If regents increase our fees, lay us off, and cut our pay, we will have no choice but to escalate our actions." Does this mean they will yell louder like when the phone company won't remove an erroneous late fee? Extend the strike into next week? March on the Regents' meeting with pitchforks? I hope to listen in on the rallies/meetings since I will NOT be on vacation this time. If it reaches this point of escalation on Friday, I will certainly let you know the answer about what that actually means.

Day 74

This flu has finally gotten the best of me, so I'm spreading my germs over my own laptop rather than my computer at work. My fellow staff--including me--are a little testy about people coming to work sick, so for most of the week I've been retracing my steps with clorox wipes on the water cooler handle, the buttons on the microwave, and the door handle to the office's main entrance. Today, however, the only other people who could be exposed to my flu are my butler, cook, and housekeeping team. Oh, and my fund manager who came to give me updates on the millions I've earned today, and to tell me how he's found a loophole that will make me exempt from the CA increase in tax withholdings. In my defense, I've had hand sanitizer dispensers installed in all two of the rooms in my apartment so each member of my household staff can be responsible for his or her own health. Priorities, you know.

I heard on the radio this morning that the University of California Small Farmer's Program will be closing its doors at the end of December. This program is an example of the many things the university system does for the state, its businesses, and citizens. Apparently, it is largely responsible for things like California's rich supply of organic salad greens and heirloom tomatoes, and provides scientific agricultural advice and assistance to California's small business farmers. Farmers interviewed for the report have attributed their success to the program, and fear for their businesses upon its demise. A university spokesperson said that while the office/department is closing, it's faculty experts are not losing their jobs, and that the university is still committed to the program. This sounds like a chapter for a future Freakonomics volume that will explain how the Mexican takeover of the former state of California can be attributed to cuts in the University of California system that led to the collapse of the small, organic farmer. Store my number in your rolodex for interviews when that day comes, because I'm calling it now.

Day 73

Great news: California is going to increase the amount of income tax it collects on paychecks issued after November 1! More specifically, the collection rate is going up rather than the actual rate. So I'll receive the extra money back in my refund early after I file next year, but the state is taking more now to build up the state's in-hand cash. Brilliant! Everyone in the state is going to get another pay cut just in time for the holidays. California government never ceases to amaze me.

Day 71

This morning, I had every intention of attending the staff forum on retirement benefits. Once I finally found the building (college campuses can be so confusing), I found myself looking at a crowd of people staring into the narrow doorways of Sibley Auditorium, straining to hear the speaker. The room was packed, and a hundred or so staff spilled out of the doorways on either side, unable to make it into the room. I stood in the crowd for a minute or so before realizing that I couldn't see the screen where they were projecting information, nor could I really hear the speaker, so I left comforted by the fact that the event was supposed to be recorded, and I'd be able to find it online somewhere in a few days. As I walked out the front door, I overheard a woman telling a few of her colleagues that she was surprised and disappointed at how quiet the crowd was being, saying, "I thought 'oh good old Berkeley,' but no one is saying a word!" Perhaps she would have preferred the melee that these meetings sometimes become. Maybe once the speakers were finished, her wish would come true.

Once I'd made it back to my office I felt ready for a nap because my cold is starting to win the war against vitamins and warm tea.

Day 70

Tomorrow is the big day for the first listening tour forum on campus. I received a reminder this morning from the Chancellor, which included a more generous description of the session compared to the one in his message last week. He says that the Q&A session will be a time to "answer your questions and listen to your concerns." Before, it was just to answer our questions. I wonder if this addition to the description was intentional.

We are having another strike on campus to protest the fee increases. The Regents meet on November 18 to decide on tuition hikes, so the entire campus community is being asked to strike for three days. The Daily Californian credits the UC Berkeley Student Worker Action Team, which they describe as consisting of "students, staff, faculty, and community members" with organizing the protest. I haven't heard much talk about this strike compared to the buzz before the walkout on September 24, but I imagine the tension will build over the coming week. Faculty have been divided over whether it is right to leave the classroom empty in protest, and this will undoubtedly be another showing of divided opinions.

I read an article this morning in the Chronicle of Higher Education on whether too many students are going to college. The article consisted of opinions from a handful of professors and other authorities on economics and college access and affordability.  No one could deny that at least some college statistically increases the income for individuals, but the panelists were divided about whether our system is sustainable, whether the government should pay for higher education, and whether students leave college with the actual education to back up the degree and its increased earnings. Some argue that student learning from college is valuable to their careers, others say its a wasteful bunch of elitist bologna, while some say that the earning potential is not a fair way to judge whether a college degree is worthwhile since it could hold other value besides financial. My education has made me a far better speaker, writer, and thinker on all subjects. I am also a better employee because I know how to find information and solve problems better than I believe I would if I hadn't gone to college. However, my education cost FAR too much, and I will literally be paying the price for a very, very long time. Working in the public sector with high college debt already puts me in the category of people who may not see any financial gain from my degrees, and possibly even a loss over the long term. In retrospect, I wouldn't give back the degrees I've earned because I have gained more from them than a raise (though I got that, too) including an invaluable social and professional network, increased confidence and abilities, and increased awareness about the world around me and in my field. However, I would have managed the costs of those degrees better so that I would never have to feel like a slave to them. My education has given me upward mobility, but I was a lower-middle class kid, so I had to take out loans to pay for this mobility. I also believe that not all degrees are created equal and some students with BAs have had a better education than others. This leads me to my final thought on the issue which is that I believe that yes, too many students are going to college. The traditional model of college is not right for many, and calling all four-year degrees the same thing is ridiculous and inaccurate. Sending everyone to college will set many up for disappointment and failure, not to mention wasted time and money (yes, I know that even one year of college is better than none for future earnings). Do a better job of educating kids and teenagers in K-12 so that students and taxpayers no longer have to spend money on college tuition for people to learn "essential workplace skills" like how to read and add.

Day 65

Today, Vice Chancellor Nathan Brostrom sent an email to all campus faculty and staff offering us "FREE!" tickets to a men's or women's Cal basketball game. The men's game is November 24 (the week of Thanksgiving) vs Jacksonville, and the women's is November 15 vs Idaho State. A generous menu of options.  He offers the tickets as a "special 'thank you' for your dedication to our university," and concludes with, "Thank you for all you do to support this great campus."

Oh, Nate, you're welcome!

Day 63

November already?

Next week will be the first forum on Berkeley's campus for the "listening tour" for the President's Commission on the Future of UC. The topic will be "Post-Employment Benefits." The task force has been charged with finding a sustainable way to go forward with retirement benefits, since they do not believe that the current model meets that requirement. According to a posting on the UC Berkeley News Center site, "The university is committed to offering competitive post-employment benefits to attract and retain faculty and staff, but fiscal pressures are making it increasingly harder to so." Unlike at many--maybe even most--other institutions, we haven't had to make contributions to our retirement plan in years. The fund for our retirement has been at or near 100% for quite a while because it was performing so well, so it was decided (forgive the passive voice, but the precise origins of decisions like this seem to vanish into the ether over the years) that the university and employees should stop contributing. This year, the fund lost a good deal of money, so we will all have to start putting money into the pot beginning in April (meaning everyone's take-home pay will decrease AGAIN). Now we are being invited to an event on a listening tour where we will hear a 30 minute talk, then have 90 minutes to ask the panel questions. The language of the invitation doesn't give the impression that there will be a whole lot of actual listening by the task force, but it is easy enough to make an opinion sound like a question, so I'm sure we'll hear plenty. I have been to many administrative meetings over the years, including union meetings, so I am curious about how useful and productive this meeting will be as opposed to--pardon my French--a bitch-fest by frustrated, angry, money-strapped staff who are sick of the university taking things away from them. Even if the meeting turns mildly hostile toward the administration, at least they will know how we are feeling, and how important things like a great retirement plan are to people with mediocre paychecks. Oh, and I don't want to forget to mention that the faculty will have their own separate meeting. While I understand the differences in the university system between the compensation of faculty and staff, and that both meetings will likely be more productive by separating the groups, I resent it just the same. Unionized members of the staff and those of us who are exempt, salaried staff members are compensated in very different ways from each other, too, so the split isn't entirely that simple and straight forward. Maybe separating the groups is part of a secret conspiracy to enhance divisions amongst the members of the masses so we won't organize and rebel. But I'm willing to bet that the conversation at the faculty meeting will be very similar to the one at the staff meeting, just with bigger words.

Day 60, part 2

A delightful member of the buildings and grounds staff here always impresses us with her clever Halloween costumes. One year she came as a two-headed Cal football player complete with eye black and shoulder pads. This afternoon she came to share her Halloween cheer as a UC Berkeley employee for hire who can do anything and everything we might need done on campus. She can do it all. She has a tool belt with implements for jobs like painting, roofing, plumbing, and gardening. She pulled a little red wagon full of tools to deliver the mail, be a locksmith, trash collector, mechanic, accountant, carpenter, and even a classroom instructor. She also carried a "work for hire" sign that reassured potential UC employers that they wouldn't need to worry about the furlough, unions, or benefits, because she's prepared to work totally for free!

Happy Halloween!

Day 60

Yesterday afternoon, I received an email from a student about an upcoming student meeting on campus. She sent her message to staff advisors asking us to "Please forward to grad student lists. Thanks!" Many of us receive emails like this every day about lectures, calls for papers, etc. since staff are responsible for maintaining current student lists, and it's easiest to reach students through us. We all usually just forward them along and go about our days. However, this message was signed "In solidarity, Graduate Student Organizing Committee" after a few paragraphs lambasting Sacramento and the administration for terrible financial management and dramatically increasing tuition. While I might agree with the group's grievances, it seems to me that something is a little ethically askew about forwarding this message along as if it was any other scholarship opportunity or student appreciation luncheon. I am confused and maybe even a bit offended that this group assumes I and my colleagues would all be willing to use official university email lists to help students protest against the institution that provides those email lists. Go put posters up, find student emails on the public directory, even stop me in the hall and ask for a favor, but to use official university channels just seems out of touch.  In an article in the Chronicle titled "Is it My Job to Teach the Revolution?" a student services director at Dartmouth recounts having to tell a student who had come to her for advice about occupying the administration building that the student probably shouldn't tell her about those plans since she herself is part of said administration. Two deans who witness the subsequent dainty (my word) student protest against the administration are quoted at the end of the article as saying, "These kids don't know how to do this...In my day, we knew how to pull off a demonstration."

Furlough paycheck number two arrived in its virtual form in my checking account today. For the sake of dramatic impact, I compared my gross earnings from when I first started to my take-home pay now, just to see how much I am giving up in taxes, benefits, and furlough. The difference made me nearly faint. I do not recommend ever doing this with your own paycheck unless you have handy an EMT with a defibrillator. In honor of Halloween, if I really wanted to go for a good shock, I could also add in the amount of money the university pays for my benefits to make a really big ugly number far larger than double what I take home. But I am, instead, going to step away from the computer...

Day 58

I took a survey this morning related to the new project designed to assess how green my building is. I answered questions about the availability of recycling bins in my office (I have my own under my desk), whether I turn the lights off when I leave the room (um, usually), and if I know where our compost bin is for the building (we have a compost bin?). Turns out that undergraduate students in a service learning oriented course on sustainability are running this project. Students in the course this semester will conduct the assessments and make suggestions, then students in the course next semester will make plans and implement them. I think that's pretty darn cool. Giving students opportunities and the responsibility to take care of their own campus while learning a whole lot along the way seems like a win for everyone involved.

Today was our office Halloween party. We had a potluck lunch, some fun chit-chat, and a bunch of ghoulish decorations in the department lounge. At one point before the festivities began, the receptionist realized we didn't have any paper plates, but wasn't sure that she had any cash in her front desk slush fund. Turns out she had $5, guilt money from yours truly for printing something for myself on the department's color printer. Thanks to my inappropriate use of office supplies and subsequent repentance, we didn't have to hold our chips and dip in our hands. Hooray!

Day 57

I have always held a soft spot in my heart for school athletics. I was an athlete through middle and high school, and many of my friends and classmates were, too. I grew up in a small town where the high school boys basketball team was the center of social activity, and generations of locals came to games to show support for the kids, often when none of their own were even on the team. Members of the community were joined together through a common interest and something to take pride in. I saw the lives of kids who seemed destined for a future in jail guided by coaches and saved by the rigors of practice and game schedules. GPA eligibility requirements kept them focused on schoolwork, and helped them earn diplomas they might otherwise have left high school without. While I was an undergraduate, I encountered a few privileged athletes whose admission to college was at best a total mystery, but I found many more athletes who were motivated by sports, and who were talented students due to their heightened self-discipline and time-management skills. While it is true that some college athletes have a questionable place in the classrooms of top institutions, most athletes are good students. These success stories are often lost in the conversation sometimes because students might play softball, rugby, swimming, or other sports not as popular on their campuses. Plus it is often far more tempting to focus on the negative anecdotes rather than the positive. In my college experience, sporting events were places for students to rally together, build school spirit and pride, and find common ground with classmates who were not long ago total strangers. I am not trying to excuse lax academic standards for popular athletes, nor am I endorsing the highly commercialized (and somewhat corporatized) college sports arena that in many ways just serves as farm teams for professional sports. I certainly appreciate and agree with some of the major complaints about the financial imbalances between athletics and academics. But I do think it is important to remember that college athletics has an important place on campuses--for the athletes, non-athlete students, alumni, and the surrounding community--and that while the system is seriously flawed, college athletics are not the antithesis of an institution's academic mission.

Burying the lead here a little bit, I say all of this because college athletics are under attack once again, and UC Berkeley is at the head of the conversation. We've made headlines because Birgeneau recently loaned millions of dollars to our athletics department, something the university has done several times over the years, many times forgiving the loans rather than requiring repayment. Stadium and athletic facility upgrades are moving forward despite our huge budget problems. Berkeley's faculty senate will be meeting next week to discuss putting forth a resolution to end the university's subsidies to its athletics programs, especially since we are facing pay cuts, increased tuition, and reduced course offerings. Pretty good point. Big athletics hold imbalanced priority on campus, evidenced by the fact that a handful of our coaches are among the top paid employees of UC Berkeley, with our football coach taking the number one spot over the Chancellor and Nobel Prize winning faculty (you have to flip through about a zillion pages of salaries listed from highest to lowest to find your first non-faculty, non-sports related staff person). Anti-trust laws prevent NCAA regulations on coach salary, so in the arena of competitive college sports, university presidents pay coaches top dollar so we can have top teams in response to the demands of alum and donors. According to a study just released by the Knight Commission on College Athletics, most college and university presidents at schools with top football programs feel somewhat powerless to end this out-of-control situation, in large part because of the huge amounts of money that these big programs bring in. (Remember that I said Birgeneau loaned money to the athletics department as a whole, not football specifically, a sport at Cal that brings in a lot of money through merchandise, TV deals, and donations.) Wouldn't it be nice if we could spend a little less on football, and use that income to fill in the gap with our other sports programs? As far as I can tell, that's kind of the idea, though the process is obviously broken. I'm not sure, however, that the students on the woman's water polo team deserve to have their program cut because the football team is spending too much money. I hope that the faculty senate uses the time at their meeting next week to work toward finding a sensible and fair balance on campus between academic and non academic activities (athletics are, of course, not the only "non-academic" activity subsidized by campus funds; think music, dance, theater, visual arts, volunteer projects, health and fitness programs, etc.) and that the faculty avoid merely attacking the campus sports culture that is important to so many by demeaning it and creating yet another "us against them" conversation with the administration and campus' sports enthusiasts.

Day 56

The three headline articles on the front page of today's student newspaper:

"Campus Use of Financial Reserves Questioned"
"UC System to Expand Full Tuition Coverage"
"Conference Held at UC Berkeley to Protest Budget Cuts"

The first is about how campus administration is working on moving money around to fill in gaps, and how union representatives don't buy into all of the priorities of this rearrangement. The second is about President Yudoff's recent proposal to the regents that students whose families make $70K or less (the previous figure was $60K) will have a free ride at UC. The third is about the conference held on campus this past weekend where about 600 people from throughout education met to discuss tactics for working toward "free" public education in the state. The Daily Californian is not an economically oriented publication, nor was this a special issue on the UC budget crisis. This is just the daily world that we live in at the moment.

A colleague had some fairly expensive work done on her car a few months ago (a mere week after I'd had to have the exact same expensive work done on my car), but her car broke down again over the weekend and it seems to be because of a similar problem. She of course hopes that this round won't cost another big chunk especially because, as she states, "I'm making $300 less a month than I was when this first happened." My own car's recent nervous breakdown pretty much wiped out my slowly-but-proudly growing emergency savings account, so she and I joked that if either of us have one more problem with either of our cars in the next year, they might as well just take the poor hunk of metal to the impound, because we won't be able to afford to have them fixed again. This sort of leans more on the side of depressing than funny, but what are you gonna do? I'd rather laugh about it now to help balance the pain I'll feel the next time my car stops running while driving up a hill in downtown San Francisco.

Day 53

I got yelled at yesterday by the boss. Well, maybe not really "yelled" at, but I did get an over-the-glasses glare, along with some particularly terse words that escalated in volume as they poured out. I hadn't done anything wrong myself, I was just trying to share some information, be positive about a crappy situation, and I was pretty much told "don't try to tell me something, because I know what's going on, and I don't need you trying to tell me what I already know!" Um, OK. Just trying to be helpful. Lesson learned. This is just the sort of thing that, once the economy improves and everyone else starts hiring again, will expedite a mass exodus brain-drain of the staff, something few seem to be publicly concerned with. My neighbor talks about the "attaboys" that staff plebes appreciate a lot more than many employers seem to realize. I know I've said this before, but some words of encouragement and appreciation sans demeaning attitude could go a very long way to keeping intact the outstanding group of people I work with during a time of pay cuts and no foreseeable raises.

Speaking of pay cuts, did you know that faculty can compensate themselves with research grants? This means that if a faculty member has a non-state funded grant, and can meet other various criteria, he or she can fill in the pay gap from the furlough with grant money, which then means they have less money for research, but a full paycheck. That seems fair. Why is it that the "haves" always end up making out or breaking even in these situations and the "have-nots" who don't have these options take the brunt? Well, I suppose if I could get myself awarded a federal grant for research on envelope stuffing and data management, I could compensate myself, too, so I have no right to complain. This is America after all, the land of opportunity, where we can shape our own destinies and make our own fortunes, and it's just our own damn fault if we don't.

This morning campus members received an email from the Chancellor Birgeneau "encouraging your participation in the work of the Commission on the Future." He points us to a letter written to "UC Colleagues" from President Yudoff, and Chair of the Board of Regents, Russell Gould. In the letter, Yudoff and Gould tell us that we have "several" ways to participate. We can post a question or suggestion on their website, or we can attend a forum on campus to voice our opinions to the commission's working group leaders while they are on system-wide "listening tours." I realize that by "several," these gentlemen mean to say that these two options will not be the only ones (unless they missed the day in second grade on the difference between "several" and "a few"). But by starting with these two options, they at least give the impression that while our comments are welcome and encouraged, there is no guarantee that they will make any difference whatsoever. In an earlier letter, Regents were invited to participate or nominate other UC members to join the working groups, but so far this appears to be the only opportunity for non-upper administration UC community members to have an official voice in the process. After looking over the selected member list, of the 28 members of the commission, only three are non-upper administration or Regent: two faculty and one alum. According to the "University of California - Commission on the Future" website, here are the goals of the commission:

How can the University of California best serve the state in the years ahead and maintain access, quality and affordability in a time of diminishing resources?

The UC Commission on the Future will address that question and others as it develops a vision for the future of the state’s public research university – one that reaffirms UC's role in sustaining California's economic and cultural vitality, while recognizing that limited state funding will require creativity and new strategies to meet that mission.

The Commission and its five working groups – on the size and shape of UC, its education and curriculum, access and affordability, and funding and research strategies – will meet through March to consider, among other issues:

• What is the right size and shape of the University going forward? Where should it grow, or should it?
• What educational delivery models will both maintain quality and improve efficiency for UC's future?
• How can UC maximize traditional and alternative revenue streams in support of its mission?

I notice that they continue to use the phrase, "delivery models" for the education of students, which I remember one faculty member taking issue with, and saying something to the effect that professors are not FedEx drivers and do not "deliver" educations. Nor do I and my colleagues "deliver" advice to students and faculty. If we could deliver advice and educations, the need for humans on campuses would hardly exist, and students could possibly just stand under the end of a conveyor belt and have their needs met with a good healthy clunk on the head from a package containing all the information we members of the university bloat used to give. Perhaps this concept should be added to the delivery models list of maybes. It would certainly save the institution a good deal of money on delivery costs, especially if the conveyor belt is solar powered.

Day 51

This morning, my boss came in to chat with me about some final touches on our department's new website (which will go live tomorrow after a year of work. Hooray!), and I mentioned to her that I had received by somewhat bizarre means a copy of President Yudoff's white paper, "Exploring a New Role for Federal Government in Higher Education." Well she just went off about how he and Berkeley's Chancellor Birgeneau seem to be on a mission to federalize public education, and how her husband's faculty colleagues are in an uproar, and that she talked to some of our faculty who are also in an uproar, and can I believe what they are trying to do to California's public university?, etc. I responded with my own tirade about how Yudoff is a frighteningly powerful man in education right now, and that with the economy in the tank that he could really have a serious influence in Washington advocating for the federal government to get its hands in on the operations of our country's poor starving public state universities, and what will that mean for the future of UC?, etc. We had a great time just getting fired up about the whole thing. Unfortunately, the priorities of the work that needed to be done on the new website took over, and a few moments later, the fun was over and we were forced to retreat to our offices to get to work, which I have been feverishly doing all day. Quotidian details indeed.

Day 50

President Yudoff was interviewed by some student journalists from various UC campuses about budget issues. When asked where he was during the walkout on September 24, he responds, "I might have been out of town. I don't remember." Really? Yeah, I can see how that helps his level of respect with campus constituents. Pretend like the walkout was so minor and unimportant that he really can't remember whether he was walking his dog or vacationing in Aruba. Since I am sure that he was probably actively working to do something that he believes is good for the university, or that he hopes would at least appear that way to the public, it seems to me that it would be worth a few brain cells to remember enough details to reassure the campus community that he was in fact trying to do his job rather than sitting at home pretending we all don't exist.

Dr. John Thelin of Kentucky University (who earned his PhD in history of education here at Berkeley and is a well known authority on higher education) wrote an op-ed for the Chronicle of Higher Education titled "How to Bail out Public Universities." He makes some great points about big-wig hiring during hiring freezes, and goes on (and on, and on) about how we could better manage finances related to big athletics on campuses so that the income from teams better support the academic mission of the institution (although most college teams cost money rather than earn). But I raised an eyebrow more than once while reading his refutes and suggestions to some of the common public university presidential cries of woe during these tough economic times. Here are my thoughts on just one little bit:

Common Public U presidential complaint: Our state gives us less and less.

• (part of) Dr. Thelin's response: State universities rely on a sleight of hand to justify their complaint that state appropriations have become a shrinking part of their annual operating budgets. They gloss over the fact that the size and complexity of a university is markedly different from years ago. New, federally sponsored research programs, medical centers, auxiliary services, research parks, and foundations are self-initiated ventures that expand the overall base budget. That then makes the state contribution decline as a percentage of the budget—even if appropriations increase in actual dollars.
• My response: Sleight of hand? Are you kidding me? Actual dollar state appropriations for higher education do in fact usually go up every year; it would be totally false to claim that as every year trickles by, we continue to see annual massive blood-letting like at UC this year. But will these funds all be replaced, costs incurred by the university to deal with these cuts be refunded, and a back-dated increase in funding be given once things improve? Of course not, and neither have any other major crisis-based cuts over recent decades. And of course, state increases in funding haven't kept up with the increased costs of running these institutions in ages despite all of the tricks and twists that you could blame like increased student services, more external money, etc. Dr. Thelin is lucky to live in a state that has maintained its funding, which is very rare. Finally, additional research money from the government and foundations contribute toward growth and additional activities on campus, and are not used merely as an accounting trick to make the state look bad.

I have 1 1/2 weeks left until my next shrunken pay check, and it looks like I'm going to make it without any overdraft fees, but man, this year is going to be hard.

Day 49

Since just about the time that the country went into financial meltdown--let's say, summer '08 or so--my boss has been grouchy, unapproachable, terse, and even bordering on verbally hostile at times. During my first year or so here, she would come by at least once a week to chat, check in, and give me pat on the back, which is something she would do with the entire staff. We could all hear her characteristic laugh throughout the office often enough to feel comforted. We had staff parties every once in a while (not to belabor the silly point), and she would bring us lemons from the tree in her yard. Now that we are all stressed, worried about our personal finance, and thinking we might be jobless by this time next year, we need her encouragement more than ever. But now I hardly ever speak with her, and it's likely better that way since those who do seem to be lambasted about something or other. I asked my office mate how many times in the past year our boss has come into our space with something positive to say, or even just to socialize for a moment or two like in the good old days. I miss when she used to come in just to grumble out of empathetic camaraderie about the bumbling faculty (no offense to my lovely professorial readers, who I am sure never bumble with the staff given the fact they are even bothering with this blog). I told my office mate that I would appreciate it if our fearless leader took the time to have a personal conversation with me to acknowledge the difficulties of our salary situations, and thank me for sticking with the department anyway. My office mate said she would appreciate it if we could be let out at three some Friday afternoon just for the hell of it. Amen, sister.

Today, I found language that I like in a press release/call-to-action put out by a faculty (?) group at UCSB (I found the document through Chris Newfield's blog "Remaking the University"). This letter, which is essentially a recommendation to censure Yudoff, includes the assertion that the emergency powers granted to UCOP allow the administration to "circumvent financial obligations to faculty, staff, and students." I hadn't thought of it exactly this way, but what a great perspective. I have an official letter from my department given to me on my day of hire that outlines the terms of my hire, which include my salary. Seems to me like that letter is something of a contract. A financial contract that the university has now violated without my express written consent, outside of the fact that I have now signed my September time sheet effectively agreeing to my pay cut. Why can't they just tell our vendors, creditors, and utility companies that they're going to be put on a 6% furlough, too? Of course I understand the highly-flawed logic there, but at the root of it, what's the real difference between violating my contract and the contract the university has to pay its electric bill--in full--each and every month? I wonder if we will see lawsuits crop up before the end of this.

One of my job responsibilities includes processing a large volume of incoming mail over a short period of time from about November through January. This means that two weeks of mail will pile-up and remain unopened, unprocessed, and unacknowledged for at least two weeks during the mandatory furlough we have at Berkeley over the holidays. I don't really want to think about the heap that will be at my feet after the break. Another concern with this is of course Campus Mail Services, and whether the university will even be receiving or processing mail at all during that time. Imagine the heap of mail at THEIR feet at the end of the break. Well today we received a short survey from Mail Services to help them determine whether the campus needs them open during break, and how many people they should have on the clock during those weeks. Someone will have to be physically present in the offices that want mail delivered over the break, and no one will be in my office, so I guess that means we are out. Unless, of course, the union makes some sort of convoluted agreement with the university that forces union workers to be here during furlough. Yeah, I can see how that could work: I'll just have our receptionist do my job while I'm out, and then I will hardly have any catching up to do when I return. Perfect!

Day 46

No one knows what's going on with the unions. Well, I'm sure someone does, but no one on the staff here does. Yesterday was supposed to be the deadline, but we are guessing that no agreements have been made. One staff member's husband wrote to his HR person to express his concerns and find some answers, but she wrote back and said, Sorry, but I don't know what to tell you. This man might lose his accruals and benefits effective any-day-now, and she has no information for him? I asked our staff member who is in a different union on campus, and she says she hasn't heard a peep from them, or our boss, and she has no idea what's going on either. We can't find anything about it on the union websites, university news site, or the human resources site. Next stop, the twilight zone.

I need some new software for my computer that will cost about $200, but have been afraid to ask my boss for anything that costs more than a dime or so. This afternoon, I chatted for a few minutes with our computer guy--one of the biggest spenders in our department, since he is in charge of our equipment and upgrades--and mentioned my concern. He kind of chuckled and told me that our manager is concerned with figures that have a few more zeros, and that I shouldn't feel badly asking, especially if it will make our office more efficient. Now I realize that the department's bank account, even in tough times, is better padded than my own. But I come from humble beginnings, so I think of $200 as, well, kind of a lot of money for software I could certainly live without. I felt a just weensy bit surprised when she didn't flinch at the cost and handed me a credit card for my purchase. This makes me impressed and very thankful that she fully understands how this $200 will more than likely save thousands of dollars in staff time, and is worth every penny. I think she should hold workshops for campus and state administrators.

I'm planning to stay home for the next two days, cook yummy meals for lunch next week, and play around in my garden. Life could be worse, eh? Hope you all have a wonderful, restful weekend.

Day 45

(I definitely had a day 43 post for Tuesday, but I wrote it from home, and apparently my home computer ate it instead of posting it, hence the missing entry and incorrectly labeled "Day 43" yesterday, which I have now corrected. I had written a short, slightly snotty blurb about a meeting that had been canceled because of the rain Tuesday and how foolish I thought that was. Maybe it's for the best that it was lost to the cyber-gobblins.)

The ladies room at this place seems to be becoming my source of juicy information about protests and the like over this budget thing. According to a flier stuck to the back of my bathroom stall door, The CA Campaign to Save Public Education will be holding a "statewide conference to organize against the cuts" here on Berkeley's campus next Saturday. The goal appears to be to gather all people who work in all levels of education across the state to come up with ways to "save" all levels of CA public education from pre-school all the way through the college and university systems.

Today is supposed to be the deadline for a union agreement about the furlough, but I've heard nary a peep about it from anyone official. I chatted with a few co-workers who will be affected by the decisions (either themselves or through spouses who work on campus), and they are generally fumed with how the union is behaving and handling this, and seem to collectively agree that the union leaders are shooting themselves in the foot in regards to respect and success in future negotiations with campus and their own members.

On my way to work this morning, I got a good healthy eye-roll and head-shaking out of a story reported on local NPR. A new report is showing that the state-worker furlough plan is not saving the state nearly as much money "as the governor might have hoped for." Turns out that the furlough is effectively just leading to delayed costs that will be added to the next fiscal year, in addition to reduced income taxes and other forms of revenue being collected. Upon further investigation, I have discovered that this research and report were done by UC Berkeley, where of course we have our own potentially idiotic furlough. According to a chart in an article on Berkeley's website, cutting the $2 billion in wages and benefits from state employees for three days of furlough will only save the state about $236 million. A one day furlough would actually bring in slightly more cash for the state--$256 million--which should raise a great big bright red flag that, um, maybe the furlough logic is flawed. These figures are barely a drop in the proverbial bucket of the state's empty coffers. And these numbers do not account for the loss to the CA economy because workers are now, of course, spending a lot less, which some experts believe will mean that the furlough will actually cost the state money. Good plan, guys! Were your calculators broken when you came up with this plan in the first place? Seems like my theory that layoffs, brain drain, and attrition would end up costing the university may not have been so far-fetched after all. But seriously, can you believe that this report was commissioned and is being issued now rather than BEFORE the furlough was implemented? If you have a moment and are willing to participate, please raise your right hand and promise your state, fellow citizens, and future generations that when the next round of elections and voting come up, that you will vote these incompetent morons out of office.

My boss surprised me this afternoon when she sent an email asking if anyone would be willing to plan our annual Halloween party. It's potluck of course, but I was still glad to learn that we haven't actually been totally banned from having any sort of fun around here. Hooray for parties!

Day 44

The Governor of California and his legislature are each at all-time low approval ratings; their ratings are in the tank. I wonder if Schwarzenegger again, like with the votes of no confidence against Yudoff, and UC protests at every campus on September 24, will say that these polls are just a bunch of eccentric loud mouths ranting and raving over nothing (I'm paraphrasing), and that he doesn't take it too seriously.

A headline on today's cover of the student newspaper reads: "Middle-Income Students Struggle to Make Ends Meet." The article goes on to give examples of students whose family household incomes are above $60K (the arbitrary line in the sand the university has drawn between people who can afford to send their children to college, and those who cannot), but who are still struggling to afford Berkeley. This situation will most definitely only become worse as fees spike over the next year. I've also heard and read about how this will negatively impact our efforts to recruit, enroll, and fund minority students, something that UC has been miraculously successful at despite Prop 209, which outlaws making hiring/admissions decisions based on race (and a few other demographic factors). Frankly, I think that UC has pretty much ignored that law by finding nuanced ways to work around it, hence the success. For example, we do not make admissions decisions based on race, but we take race into consideration when making final admissions decisions. Hey, you've got to do what you've got to do when the man tries to keep you down, know what I mean? Either way, the university is going to have a very tough time convincing low-income parents (an unfairly defined term, in many ways) that a UC education is worth the money, especially when said family cannot afford it, or if it involves student loans.

Remember a while back, I referred to a Sign of the Apocalypse? Here's another one: An annual volunteer day for Berkeley students had to be cut back due to decreased funding. The economy is so bad, that we can no longer even afford to work for free.

Day 42

This morning, we received yet another email from my supervisor about the trash pickup in our building. Apparently, the plan requiring that people leave their trash cans in the hallway to make quicker work for our custodians has been revoked. The Fire Marshall has alerted us to the fact that leaving these bins in the hallway violates fire code, and would we please put them all back into our offices, and leave them there. University efficiency plan: foiled. Hah! Now we are back to less frequent trash-emptying, and the greater potential for rodents and bugs. Ah well. We've got the efficiency consultants now, so plans like this will surely be worked out better in the future.

A second efficiency project is now underway for my building. The university is rolling out a plan to find ways to reduce our lighting energy usage across campus. A few workstudy students are going to enter every room in the building to record the "type and quantity of lighting fixtures."  The data will presumably be used to figure out where we can use more efficient light bulbs or fixtures. I hope this project includes counting the number of light bulbs per person, or something similar. Three people once worked in the same room as I do, but now I am here by myself because of one layoff and one person who quit a while back. I now have six overhead fluorescent light fixtures--which use a total of 24 fluorescent tube bulbs--all to myself. And because they actually don't light my cubicle all that well, I have four additional small light fixtures attached to my desk. I do try to leave the lights off if it is sunny enough outside, but the Bay Area isn't always terribly cooperative on that front, and having the lights off can sometimes give the false impression that I'm not around. Will they give me one or two new energy efficient floor lamps to use instead? That would be nice.

After my minor meltdown about the state of things last week, I decided that I needed a pick-me-up, and figured I should try to find a little ray of sunshine that I could share with others, too. I bought a bunch of miniature gourds, enjoyed a Sunday afternoon of carving some jack-o-lantern faces into them, and handed them out at work this morning. I had fun doing it, and it brought at least one extra smile to everyone's face today. Mini-mission accomplished.

Day 39

Once upon a time, long long ago, I went to a staff birthday party thrown by my department. The birthday party was during the lunch hour when the office is closed. At the party, there was food and treats, decorations and a game or two. It was totally over the top, completely unnecessary, but a wonderful break from normal office drudgery, and our spirits were lifted for the rest of the afternoon. Later that year, I went to another birthday party in my office, but this time, it was for everyone who had a birthday between Thanksgiving and the New Year. You know, because of the holiday and everything, it was probably best to just put them all together. But the party was fun, and we had wine and snacks, and chit chatted for an hour or so. Then, the clouds began descending upon the fair land of California, and birthday parties became simplified versions with just a few muffins and some orange juice left on the counter for passersby to enjoy and shout a quick "happy birthday" to the special person. From now on, so I've heard proclaimed by the receptionist, we are going to have some bagels and coffee from the kitchen every three months or so, about once a season, to celebrate and honor the birthdays of everyone born during those months. And could everyone pitch in a few dollars?

We really can't spare a few dollars to bring a little sunshine into this place to have some cake and ice cream for the 12 staff birthdays we have in a year? Seriously? Some feel that the birthdays are silly and wasteful, particularly during the furlough. I remember seeing a huge union banner at a staff picnic that read, "we want living wages, not free sandwiches." Realistically, the cost of a few treats to say happy birthday to each other doesn't even come remotely close to the huge budget problems we are facing, so it seems a little silly, to me, to make the comparisons. And maybe we don't need to have actual birthday parties, but some snacks and an hour of goof off time once a month or so hardly seems wasteful, especially when we could all use a little cheer. Maybe I'll just show up to work one day with a little party in a few grocery bags, and start a celebration myself.

Day 38

(Sorry for missing yesterday, I was a bit under the weather.)

As expected, the fervor about the financial crisis has quieted somewhat, at least for the moment. No headlines on Berkeley's website, the SF Chronicle, or the student paper about the budget. No fliers posted in the ladies room about making plans to take Yudoff to the gallows. No new emails about our furlough, the efficiency consulting firm recently hired, the union, or capital projects on campus. No talk of another walkout, protest, or strike. On the surface, things appear quite ordinary today.

But personally, the budget situation is really getting to me. I feel discouraged by my chipped away income and stagnant position. Our graduating seniors and PhDs are going to have a terrible time finding jobs for themselves, and there isn't much we can do to help them. Admissions for our new graduate students will be tougher because of dramatically cut fellowship budgets, and our once elaborate spring open house will be whittled down from Bay Area touristy outings to some chips and dip out on the lawn. Class sizes are increasing, and that can't do anything positive for the quality of the education of our students who will soon be paying far more in tuition than they ever expected when they enrolled. My boss looks bedraggled from her hours and hours pouring over department budgets and account balances, and tells me to not even ask about any budgets that I need for the upcoming year, because she just has no idea what, if anything, will be available. Staff are all on edge, and I must hear or say at least fifty times a week, "well at least we have jobs," a statement that sounds like celebrating something that is just one step above really crappy, which to most of us, it is. This isn't the first budget crisis or economic downturn, nor will it be the last. However, this time, the university is going through serious and permanent change, and many of the changes are not for the better. Perhaps the gloomy gray skies above me today are contributing to my particularly pessimistic view of the University's future, but financial stress and the decay of things we value can get to anyone after a while.

Day 36

The Chronicle of Higher Education, which is the premier publication for college and university news in the US, had a special section last week called, "The Crisis in California." This section included commentary on the lessons we can learn from the crisis, as well as a plea by Yudoff himself for everyone to get on board with tuition increases. Today, the headlining feature article on the Chronicle's website is, "At Transfer Time, California Students Hit a Dead End." California's public higher education system includes a pipeline for two-year community college students to transfer to the state's mid-tier Cal State schools, or the more prestigious and selective UC system to earn their bachelors degrees. This three-tiered transfer system has historically been the envy of many states, and has served the citizens of California exceptionally well for decades. But this year, thousands of community college students have been rushing full force into a brick wall. The Cal States, and the UCs, are dropping enrollment numbers by the thousands, which means those slots normally filled by community college students are disappearing, and those students are being left stranded by the gaping hole left in the system from the state budget cuts. Or slashings, if you will. Taking time off from school before you've earned your degree can often lead to no degree attainment at all. According to the Chronicle, many of those abandoned students will now hang around their community colleges and fill seats in classes the don't need, which will take space from others trying to work toward the transfer process. Some will enroll in CAs private schools and spends tens of thousands more than they had planned, or will drop out all together. A quite significant portion of those transfer-hopefuls are first generation or non-traditional students, a group that California has in the recent past served extremely well. CA society is stratified enough as it is, but this will undoubtedly lead to an even wider margin between the haves and have nots. This will of course lead to a greater need for social services, many of which the state has recently flushed down the toilet. At a time when a high school diploma no longer cuts it in our high-tech workforce, California's education system is headed for the tank, and thousands and thousands of well-intentioned students will be left without a degree, and will lack the skills needed for higher-earning and producing jobs. Terrific. The state system is looking more and more like a private school that admits international and out of state students galore to help fill the tuition coffers, while leaving its local community to suffer.

I received an email today from the president of my alma mater about the university's financial situation. My former university, like most others, suffered financial hardship and worry about the future. Hiring was frozen, capital projects halted, and most other spending stopped in its tracks. For one year. Financial teams worked hard and furious to make the best use of the capital in their hands, and kept the university running. After one year of tight-belted budgeting and assessment of efficiency, the university is once again hiring faculty and staff to replace those who left during the freeze as well as to continue filling other vacant positions. They have boosted financial aid to help the families of students in economic trouble, and have given strong, competitive packages to incoming students. Everyone, except top administrators, received raises. In the past, I have known this institution to be, well, not always so great at managing money. But the crisis along with outstanding (new-ish) leadership has put the school not back where it started, but in even better shape.

So should I start applying for jobs at my alma mater, an institution where everyone held it together during tough times, and which is now actively working toward an improved future? Would I be a traitor if I jumped off this starving, crumbling, nearly derailed UC train onto one that paused for a moment to recalculate, and is now moving forward again? Practically no one sees this furlough year as a time of planning for a better year next year. Things are most likely going to be even worse next year. They won't drop tuition back down after the crisis, they'll just keep raising it. The state isn't going to make up for twenty-plus years of cutting our budgets or refill the gaping holes they've left behind. I won't get three or four years worth of raises when things improve. The university won't be able to go on a faculty and staff hiring spree because the cash needed for a massive wave of hiring just won't exist. There is at least one department on campus where they started with a staff of six, and they've laid off all but ONE person in the office, who can now only manage to keep the office open three hours a day. How can one person who is on her own furlough possibly run an entire department and have any hope of maintaining Berkeley's excellence as Yudoff asserts is a top priority? This poor person probably has a tough enough time just making sure faculty and student workers get paid, never mind scheduling classes, advising and registering students, processing admissions applications, awarding fellowship payments, maintaining classroom space, filing reimbursement requests, or even answering the damn phone. Somehow, it is all just a little more bearable when everyone else is suffering the same way. Hearing about how another gigantic university with its own small-endowment problems and perpetually tight budget has managed to start climbing out of the crisis is, however, a little tough.

Day 35

Happy Earthquake Preparedness Month! Chancellor Birgeneau wrote to us Friday evening to alert us to an earthquake drill that's taking place on campus this Wednesday. We test the emergency alert system here on campus on the first Wednesday of every month, but this week's events will be special. He asked us to participate by dropping to the ground, taking cover under our desks, and holding onto the desk to practice for what we would do in a real earthquake. The Chancellor reminds us that buildings around campus continue to be retrofitted for earthquake safety, but we must still take individual precautions. I don't know the mechanics of retrofitting all that terrifically well, but I think I can get on board with the university spending the necessary money to invest in the future of campus and the safety of its occupants by taking measures to help prevent buildings from collapsing. Although I must admit that these earthquake protection drills seem suspiciously similar to my mother's account of hiding under her desk as a school child during nuclear bomb drills in the fifties and sixties. What on earth do they make desks out of that make them so safe to be under anyway?

A University of California, San Francisco professor has won the Nobel Prize in medicine along with two other professors who also worked on the same project. The findings of their research have led to dramatic improvements and new directions for cancer treatment research, among other things. The kicker is that these researchers weren't trying to cure cancer or solve any other global dilemma. They were just scientists digging into the workings of DNA for scholarship's sake. I bring this up to point out that universities are not just degree mills for undergraduates who need jobs, or producers of specific answers to legislated questions. They are places of making and sharing great discovery. Congratulations, Professor Blackburn. You've brought a much needed boost of pride and inspiration back to your university and state. I hope your achievements inspire California voters, legislatures, and university administrators to remember what an amazing place UC can be and why what we all do is so important.

Oh, and by the way, Mr. American Education Budget Guy? Asian countries are spending money like CRAZY on their universities to compete with the US, while we are slashing and hacking away at our education budgets. Can't wait to see how that works out.

Day 32

One percent. That is what one of my colleagues was in near tears about this morning. Her husband whose pay would put him in the 4% furlough pay reduction category is in the union, and is only a 50% employee, which means that if he has to face the temporary layoff the union may allow the university to impose, he will fall below the mandatory half-time level for benefits. He will not only lose accruals such as vacation and retirement, he will lose his health insurance for as much as four months. The two of them are contemplating the option of him joining the START program (a voluntary pay reduction program we have here at Berkeley started sometime last year), which has a minimum of a 5% pay reduction. In this program, he would still be considered at his normal status for benefits. But is the extra 1% pay reduction worth more or less than the risk of not having health insurance for a short while along with the loss of retirement accrual? Would she be allowed to add him to her health insurance mid-year, and how much would that cost? How much financial benefit is the university really gaining by totally screwing over people who make barely anything, and are reduced to losing sleep over 1% of a drop in the university's bucket?

On Fridays around here--as I'm sure in just about every office in America--we've pretty much had it for the week by mid-afternoon. Sometimes we leave a smidgen early to go to the faculty club for cocktails and gossip. Sometimes we have a five minute "dance party" and I blast some old disco from my computer speakers. And other times we share funny YouTube videos or silly websites that make us cackle with laughter over someone else's foolishness or misfortune. Today, we read aloud to each other a few tidbits of prank emails that someone found on a website that collects these gems. After the whistle blows for the day, we'll be joining some of our graduate students for a late afternoon happy hour in the student lounge complete with cheap beer and Elvis sandwiches. Financial stress be damned! It's the simple things that get us through the day.

Day 31

My first furloughed paycheck. Not quite as big a hit as I expected (it isn't as much as I spend on groceries per month as I previously guesstimated), but not insignificant. It amounts to about what I spend on lunches during the workweek, and occasional Starbucks in the morning. So if I kick those two things out of my life, I should be back to happily living on the edge rather than with my head underwater. Phew! Although, I did go back through my bank statements, and I was taking home more last November than, say, this past March because of the increased parking fees. So my take-home income has been steadily declining in literal dollars since I started working here.

Chancellor Birgeneau dropped a bit of a bomb on us this morning. UC Berkeley has hired an outside consulting firm to spend the next six months with us assessing our efficiency and functionality to find places where we can save money to help deal with the permanent budget cuts we've had to make. For my friends who are fans of Office Space, they've called in the Bobs. The Chancellor mentions the importance of the involvement of faculty, staff, and students three times in the message, presumably to help allay fears that a tornado is going to come through and wipe out all of our jobs and completely change the way we do things. The project has been dubbed "Operational Excellence" or OE. I have nothing but snarky comments to add about all this, so I'll keep them to myself for now. I am curious and nervous about where this will lead us.

The one union represented staff member in my office is practically foaming at the mouth with fury over the behavior and actions of her union allegedly acting on her behalf and with her best interests in mind. Seems that the university is going to collect the amount of the furlough savings from union employees one way or another, so if they don't give it up in the monthly bite out of everyone's paycheck, they are going to lose it some other way.  One option on the table is a temporary two month layoff for everyone, which means all union employees will lose their 4-6% annual pay over a two month period instead of twelve, undoubtedly leaving some hungry bellies empty, and landlords unpaid. Another plan being bantered about involves something with her owing the university money. None of the non-furlough plans she's heard about will allow the accrual of vacation, sick, or retirement time. Those of us on the furlough are accruing all of those things at a regular full-time pace. The union has until October 15 to come to an agreement with the university. If they don't, the layoffs will be implemented. If that happens, she's threatened to storm out of the office holding a box filled with the plant from her desk, pictures of her kids, and that bag of peanuts she keeps stashed in her desk drawer. Well, she might have to do that even if she doesn't want to. Bad times, bad times.

Day 30

I'm back!... Wait, what happened? Did I miss something? Thousands of faculty staff and students protested, marched, and had rallies around the entire UC system, you say? But I read that the Governor shrugged the whole thing off as just a bunch of eccentrics raising a silly little ruckus! I also read that the legislature is not interested in taking responsibility for the impact of the $800 million dollars in cuts to the UC system, saying that UC administrators were allowed to deal with the cuts in their own ways, so if there are any problems in the system as a result, we should blame UCOP.  But wait, I thought Yudoff and his administrators don't want to take the blame either, and are saying that the fault lies in Sacramento? Well if it isn't the fault of anyone in charge, then I guess that all means that it must be my and my colleagues' faults for making too much money and participating in the bloat, and students' faults for not paying enough tuition. I'm relieved that the finger is now pointed in the right direction.

Sorry about the lame post from over my vacation, I didn't realize it hadn't come out right. My supervisor had forwarded an email to us all that was sent to building coordinators around campus with the subject line, "WALK-OUT Precautions." Here is the message I was trying to share with you:

"Building Coordinators

As I am sure you are aware, the walk-out and its associated events scheduled for tomorrow may present some unique challenges for the campus as the majority of our facilities are open to the public. Although we do not expect any malicious activities, its [sic] possible your building may be marched through or even have minor disruptions, so it's best to be a little more vigilant of those who may be roaming our halls. It might be good to review standard operating procedures for this eventuality (see below."

Specific instructions on what to do in case of a variety of potential scenarios follow in the email. As far as I know, no buildings were occupied, but Sproul Plaza was covered with people, and the steps of the Sproul administration building acted as the soap box stage, which has been a tradition here at Berkeley since the movements of the sixties. I remember that when I first started working here, a staff person who works in the Sproul building said that while she thinks its neat that we have a tradition of free speech and protest here, that it gets pretty loud and annoying having to listen to the happenings out on the plaza every day. Ah, the costs of freedom and democracy.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go catch up from vacation and work hard to earn my depleted income so I can pay bills and restock my raman noodles supply. Tomorrow is the big day when we receive our first furlough paychecks. Can't wait.