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!
Friday, October 30, 2009
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...
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...
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
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!
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!
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
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.
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.
Monday, October 26, 2009
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.
"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.
Friday, October 23, 2009
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:
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?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.
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?
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
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.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
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.
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.
Monday, October 19, 2009
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!
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!
Friday, October 16, 2009
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.
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.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
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!
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!
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
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.
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.
Monday, October 12, 2009
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.
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.
Friday, October 9, 2009
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.
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.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
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.
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.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
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.
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.
Monday, October 5, 2009
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.
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.
Friday, October 2, 2009
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.
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.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
