pension

Academic Senate Rejects New Pension Tier
| |

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)…

| |

PBS’ Hot Potato May Not Be on California Stations

As far as yours truly can tell, the major PBS affiliates in California have so far taken a pass on the hot potato program described below.  That decision could have been because the threatened pension initiative that would have swept in UC was originally aimed at the November 2014 ballot.  With it apparently off the ballot for now (see earlier posts), some stations might air the program.  On verra. The Wolf of Sesame Street: Revealing the secret corruption inside PBS’s news division On December 18th, the Public Broadcasting Service’s flagship station WNET issued a press release announcing the launch of…

| | | | | | | | |

Tradition!

The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) has issued a report on UC and CSU funding.  LAO is usually viewed as a neutral agency.  But it is a component of the legislature.  So it tends to favor approaches that add to legislative control as opposed to, say, gubernatorial control.  This report is no exception. LAO seems to want to return to what it terms the “traditional” approach to funding, but with bells and whistles added to monitor legislative goals.  The traditional approach seems to be one focused on undergraduate enrollment.  But in fact the tradition – such as it is – has…

| |

Anti-Pension Group Opens the Door to ID Fraud

That’s a harsh headline.  But it applies to any group that publishes info on the web – because it is technically legal  to obtain and publish it  – that identifies incomes of individuals.  And the same harsh headline applies to govt. salary data, not just pensions.  It applies whether there is a political objective, as in the pension case, or just a way to get eyeballs to a commercial website.  While there may be a case for such disclosures for top executives and elected officials, wholesale publication deserves harsh headlines.  For details on the latest such development, see: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/02/04/6125543/government-reform-group-launches.html And,…

| | |

Pension Initiative Seems to Be Out of Gas (for Now)

Earlier posts noted a pension initiative drive – fronted by San Jose Mayor Chris Reed – that would have swept in UC.  For now, the effort seems to have stalled.  The proponents have decided to litigate the title and summary by the attorney general of the initiative.  Effectively, that will take enough time so that they will not be able to gather the signatures needed to get the initiative on the November 2014 ballot.  The decision to litigate may just be a polite way to bow out for now.  See:http://www.sacbee.com/2014/01/30/6116016/public-pension-measure-likely.html Of course, if your car stalls for whatever reason, you…

| | | | | |

Issue Heating Up

We noted in yesterday’s posting (in the update portion) on the Regents public comment session that there were spokespeople complaining about anti-Israel activities on UC campuses including course credit on one campus, pushes for divestment, etc.  Earlier postings noted statements by the UC prez and several chancellors (including Block) opposing an academic boycott of Israel by several academic societies.  Today, the LA Times reports: A group of lawmakers has formed the California Legislative Jewish Caucus to weigh in on issues of priority to members, including immigration, civil rights and Israel, according to its chairman, state Sen. Marty Block (D-San Diego)… …

| | | | | | |

Is there a Changing State Attitude Regarding the UC Pension? Reading Between the Lines

As blog readers will know, UC has had difficulties in getting the state to recognize that its pension liabilities were ultimately those of the state, just as CalPERS and CalSTRS liabilities are liabilities of the state.  Thanks to the two-decade hiatus of contributions, the state seemed to forget about UC’s pension.  However, there is beginning to be recognition that although you can say the pension is a liability of the Regents, in the end the Regents have no sources other than the state and tuition to deal with it. We noted recently that in his budget document describing his proposal…

| | | | |

Neutral

Proponents of the  proposed pension/retiree health care initiative (that would cover UC) were afraid the attorney general would come up with a nasty title and summary.  It doesn’t seem to have happened, however.  Other than the references to teachers, nurses, and peace officers (the public’s favorite public employees), it is pretty neutral.  To the extent there is mention of costs, the references come from the earlier Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) report.  Below is the title and summary: January 6, 2014 Initiative 13-0043 The Attorney General of California has prepared the following title and summary of the chief purpose and points…