| | |

Pension Rejection Hits the Press

In an earlier post, the press release from UCOP rejecting the lifting of the pension cap for high-paid execs was reproduced. So now the story is in, where else?, the press:

UC’s top leaders reject bigger pensions for top earners: Thirty-six highly paid employees have threatened to sue if benefits were not based on full salaries. The UC president and the regents board chairman support the $245,000 limit. (excerpt)

Larry Gordon, LA Times, Jan. 5, 2011

The University of California system’s two top leaders on Tuesday rejected a politically controversial demand by some of the university’s most highly paid employees that they should receive larger pensions, based on a percentage of their total salaries, not on just the first $245,000. The dispute comes weeks after UC bolstered its long underfunded retirement plans by cutting benefits for all employees and raising the minimum retirement age from 50 to 55 for those hired after 2013.

…On Tuesday, UC President Mark G. Yudof and regents board chairman Russell Gould responded publicly to the demand, saying that the university was not obligated to provide the pension boost. They said the university had retained attorneys in case of a lawsuit.

…Those who signed the letter, details of which were first published by the San Francisco Chronicle, included Christopher Edley, UC Berkeley law school dean; David Feinberg, UCLA hospitals chief executive; Judy Olian, UCLA Anderson School of Management dean; Franklin Gilliam Jr., dean of the UCLA School of Public Affairs; Jack Stobo, UC system senior vice president for health services; and John Plotts, UC San Francisco senior vice chancellor.

…Gilliam said he would not benefit personally by any increase because UC policy grandfathered in employees who were hired before 1994 at a somewhat higher pension cap and because his salary, in any case, is $245,000. But he said he signed the letter, despite the bad economic timing, because he worried that without the pension boost, the university would lose out to schools like Harvard and the University of Texas in recruiting battles and would no longer be “a world-class university system.” …

Full story at http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-uc-pensions-20110105,0,6880072.story

Inside Higher Ed has a long story – lots of quotes from various folks – at http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/01/05/california_pension_fight_politically_tough_for_yudof

The Sacramento Bee notes that the Berkeley Faculty Assn. has a petition going among faculty opposed to the pension increase. Story at http://www.sacbee.com/2011/01/05/3299622/top-uc-officials-reject-execs.html

The San Francisco Chronicle has some juicy quotes from an anonymous angry exec:

Exec speaks out

But on Tuesday, one would-be beneficiary of the higher pension lashed out anonymously against the critics and at Yudof in particular. She said she feared retribution if she spoke on the record. “The university is revoking benefits that have been ‘earned but denied,’ ” she said, invoking the phrase used by the regents in 1999 to describe retirement pay that executives would have received if the IRS hadn’t imposed a cap on benefits a few years earlier.

“It should scare every state employee that this can be done,” the caller said.

She labeled Yudof a hypocrite for the sweet retirement deal he worked out for himself when he arrived at UC in 2008 from the University of Texas. “The hypocrisy is that Mark Yudof is standing on a soapbox and positioning himself as the guy against high benefits for executives,” she said. “But guess what? He’s got the highest benefits paid in the history of the University of California.”

Full story at: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/01/04/BAF71H3L67.DTL#ixzz1AAxeefs4

It’s easy to reject:

Similar Posts

  • |

    Spotlight on Speech Codes, 2022

    Fire (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) has just released its yearly summary of the state of free speech at 481 public and private colleges and universities in the United States. FIRE defines free speech as “the overwhelming majority of speech protected by the First Amendment.” Few exceptions exist. The survey addresses a wide variety of issues with relevance to free speech, including: Free Speech Zone PoliciesPrior RestraintsSecurity Fee PoliciesPolicies Governing Speakers, Demonstrations, and RalliesPolicies on Bias and Hate SpeechInternet Usage PoliciesPolicies on Tolerance, Respect, and CivilityBullying PoliciesThreats and IntimidationHarassmentPolicies on Bias and Hate SpeechObscenityIncitement The report is both disappointing…

  • | |

    Academic Senate Rejects New Pension Tier

    Representatives of UC faculty on all campuses delivered a strongly worded rejection of the proposed 2016 pension tier. Reports from the campuses were extensive and overwhelmingly negative (link to PDF). Berkeley faculty called the proposal “imprudent and potentially fiscally irresponsible.” Davis faculty said, “It is a myth that UCRP is too generous,” and went on to detail a long list of likely negative outcomes from the new tier. Irvine faculty noted “the level of disappointment and depth of passion expressed from all quarters about the negative impact that the imposition of the PEPRA cap has on the future of the…

  • |

    Faculty Voice Opposition to Pension Proposal

    On Friday, the UCLA Academic Senate hosted an informational meeting that explained in clear terms that this is a bad, bad plan for faculty. What to do about it was less clear cut. Shane White gave a deeply detailed account of financial aspects of the plan (Slides here: Pension Presentation by Shane White). Among the things we learned: Last year’s budget deal introduced the “PEPRA cap” to UC retirement benefits. This is not a limit on retirement pay-outs, but a cap on the earnings that are used to calculate retirement pay-outs. So any new hire after July 1, 2016 who…

  • | | |

    Pension Changes Proposed: lower benefits, little savings, weaker UCRS

    The University of California will soon have a third pension tier if the Regents approve a plan put forth by the Retirement Options Task Force on Friday. UC President Janet Napolitano charged the Task Force, which included management and Academic Senate representatives, with finding a way to implement her agreement with Gov. Brown to set a cap on pension benefits in exchange for state funds to support the pension system. Over the weekend, as faculty activists read the task force report and a second report produced by Senate leaders (Guide to reviewing the recommendations of the Retirement Options Task Force)…

  • | | |

    The Degradation of Faculty Welfare and Compensation

    Colleen Lye and James Vernon (UC Berkeley Faculty Association) UC faculty need to wake up to the systematic degradation of their pay and benefits.  In 2009, when the salary furlough temporarily cut faculty salaries between 6 and 10%, faculty were outraged.  Yet since then our compensation has been hit by a more serious, and seemingly permanent, double blow. First, despite modest salary rises of 3% and 2% in October 2011 and July 2013, faculty take-home pay has been effectively cut as employee contributions to pension and healthcare have escalated.  Faculty now pay more for retirement and healthcare programs that offer less.  Secondly, faculty are…

  • | | | | | | |

    Listen to Part of the Regents Afternoon Session of 1-22-2014

    As we have noted in numerous prior posts, the Regents refuse to archive their meetings beyond one year.  So we dutifully record the sessions in real time.  Below is a link to part of the afternoon session of Jan. 22.  This segment is mainly the Committee on Educational Policy.  Gov. Brown was in attendance.  We will separately (later) provide links just to certain Brown segments.  But for now, we provide a continuous recording. There was discussion of designating certain areas of UC-Merced as nature reserves, followed by discussion of a new telescope.  The discussion then turned to online ed and…