CFA & LT. GOVERNOR CALL ON CSU TO POSTPONE VOTE EXECUTIVE PAY RAISES
Sept. 18, 2007
On Sept. 18 Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi, who is also an Ex Officio Member of the CSU Board of Trustees, and California Faculty Association President Lillian Taiz called on the Board of Trustees not to vote on proposed executive pay increases totaling more than 40% over the next four years until the Governor decides whether or not to sign two pieces of legislation that would reform CSU executive pay practices.
On a conference call with the media Tuesday morning Taiz said, “I call on the Trustees to cancel the votes on executive pay increases until the Governor decides whether to sign important reform legislation that will directly impact executive pay discussions.”
“One gets the feeling that the Administration is attempting to sneak in this executive pay vote before the two bills – SB 190 and AB 1413 – are signed by the Governor,” said Taiz.
Tuesday’s announcement came on the heels of a letter sent by Garamendi to CSU Chancellor Charles Reed and Board of Trustees Chair Roberta Achtenberg opposing any executive pay raises. The letter outlined seven substantial reasons for the CSU not to proceed with a pay increase.
To view the full letter, click here
On Wednesday Sept. 19, the CSU Board of Trustees will vote on an administrative pay increase of nearly 12 percent. Garamendi is encouraging his fellow board members to vote no on this issue.
SEPT. BOARD OF TRUSTEES’ MEETING PREVIEW
Sept. 18, 2007
“Twenty-eight of California State University systems highest paid executives are in line for another pay raise – just as students learn they could face another 10% student fee increase in the fall.”
This was the headline from a San Francisco Chronicle story on January 23 of 2007. Now less than a year later this exact scenario is set to repeat itself.
When the CSU Board of Trustees convenes next week the Trustees will vote on a compensation hike for top executives and hear the preliminary budget plans for 2008.
Based upon documentation provided to attendees at the August 2007 CSU System Budget Advisory Committee, it seems all but assured that next year budget plan will include yet another 10% student fee increase that can be avoided only through a legislative “buyout”– an action that seems unlikely due the state’s current fiscal state.
“With all the urgent issues currently confronting the CSU it is disappointing that awarding a pay increase to top executives is the Administration’s first order of business at the start of this new academic year,” said CFA President and CSU Los Angeles History Professor Lillian Taiz.
“This is just the latest example of the Trustees failing to do the right thing,” said Taiz. “Our classrooms are overcrowded, our facilities get worse by the day and the working conditions for faculty continue to deteriorate. Yet, the foremost thought on the minds of the administration as we begin a new term is how to fatten up the wallets of already-wealthy administrators.”
JLAC TO AUDIT CSU
Apr. 17, 2007
California’s Joint Legislative Audit Committee (JLAC) announced Tuesday that it will audit the hiring and compensation practices of the CSU.
The audit comes after Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, Portantino and
Assemblymember Lori Saldana requested a full audit of the CSU in a February letter to the committee. Núñez and the other authors of the letter specified that the audit examine compensation program for CSU executives, post-employment compensation, disclosure of special assignments, hiring practices and employment lawsuit settlements over the past five years.
The letter also calls for total accounting of money taken in by the CSU system and its distribution by campus and academic departments.
LEGISLATORS GRILL REED ON EXECUTIVE COMP
March 27, 2007
Chancellor Charles Reed was admonished by state lawmakers Wednesday at a hearing to examine the CSU executive compensation and transition programs.
During the hearing headed by Sen. Jack Scott, chairman of the Senate Education Committee, the senators chided Reed for offering generous executive perks when students were being asked almost annually to pay higher tuition and faculty members were living with one small pay raise since 2003.
"It is just a little difficult to hear some of the practices and some of the dollar figures in the context of rising student fees and, as far as the CSU system goes, what seems to be a looming strike among the faculty where fiscal matters are on the table," said Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Pacoima (Los Angeles County).
Also on last Wednesday, the Assembly subcommittee on education finance urged CSU administrators to come back to the bargaining table and settle a fair contract with faculty.
"We do not want our history of CSU and our history in California to have the black eye of a strike," Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, D-Santa Monica, chair of the committee told CSU officials. "It has never happened before and we do not want it to happen now. Our interest here is to make a public plea to ask you to come back to the table."
PETER SMITH TO RETURN TO CSU?
March 27, 2007
Former CSU Monterey Bay President Peter Smith, who left the CSU with a pocketful of “transition” money, may be returning to the California State University after resigning from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organizations, or UNESCO.
In his resignation letter, Smith said he has "a firm offer of employment as well as other opportunities that I am considering," but offered no specifics. He resigned just before release of an audit of practices implemented by Smith for awarding UNESCO contracts to outside firms. Under CSU rules, Smith is entitled to return to the university within five years of his departure to a faculty position.
See California Faculty magazine, Winter 2006/07 edition for more background on Smith.
CSU DOUBLE-DIPPER PETER SMITH QUITS UNESCO AFTER CRITICAL AUDIT
March 20, 2007
One of the 22 “double-dippers” of the chancellor’s Executive Transition
Program—the subject of a current lawsuit by CFA—is Peter Smith, the former president at CSU Monterey Bay.
Smith not only received a salary of more than $157,000—plus retirement
benefits—under the Executive Transition Program. He also collected another sixfigure paycheck in his new job as assistant director-general of UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization).
But now Smith’s post-retirement cruise has hit rocky shoals: he abruptly resigned from UNESCO on March 16, following the release of a highly critical audit report.
The report blasted Smith for awarding more than $2 million in UNESCO contracts in a six-month period to a single Chicago-based consulting firm. Auditors also raised questions as to whether payments to the contractor had been deliberately structured so as to attempt to fly under the radar of investigators.
$103,000 RETIREMENT GIFT FOR DOMINGUEZ HILLS’ LYONS
March 13, 2007
In a familiar pattern, new fee punishment is coupled with a new executive handout. The latter takes the form of Chancellor Reed’s $103,460 “settlement” with James Lyons, the retiring president at CSU Dominguez Hills.
Lyons is “settling” for a lump-sum payment in lieu of a paid year’s leave under the “executive transition program.” In response to widespread legislative, media and public criticism, that program is being modified to the extent that such payments are brought out into the open. However, the moral difference a one-year paid leave and a six-figure retirement bonus isn’t readily apparent.
LEGISLATORS TO AUDIT CSU EXECUTIVE PAY & PERKS
March 13, 2007 –
State legislators renewed their request for “an audit of the CSU administration’s executive compensation policies and agreements” by sending a letter last Friday, February 9, to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee.
The letter from Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez and Assembly members Lori Saldaña and Anthony Portantino, who chairs the Assembly Committee on Higher
Education, to JLAC chair Nell Soto asks for “an investigation into employment hiring practices and settlements regarding accusations of discrimination.”
The letter goes on to state that the request was made “in light of recent media coverage surrounding the California State University’s compensation for top executives, and representations by some that the CSU campuses may be engaging in employment discrimination when departments are hiring faculty.
TRUSTEES GIVE EXECS A RAISE (AGAIN), GARAMENDI DISSENTS
January 30, 2007
The CSU Administration again showed short-sightedness last week when they awarded themselves a 4% raise while contract talks remain stalled and student fees are slated to be increased an additional 10%.
The raise will be retroactive to July 2006 and will bring salaries for the 23 campus presidents and five top executives to between $239,000 and $377,000 a year. CSU execs got an average 19% hike in compensation in October 2005. The faculty got 3.5% a short time later.
Lt. Gov. John Garamendi, who is an ex-officio Trustee, cast the only vote against the executive pay raise. Garamendi said he “talked to many key legislators who were not happy, not happy at all.”
The Chancellor, the highest paid CSU executive, also receives an additional $30,000 a year from the CSU foundation.
CFA TO APPEAL MUNITZ RULING; “A CLOSED-DOOR
RECRUITMENT,” NEWSPAPER EDITORIALIZES
January 30, 2007
Superior Court Judge Dzintra Janavs issued a preliminary ruling against CFA
Jan. 11 in our lawsuit alleging that the CSU administration’s secret appointment of former chancellor Barry Munitz to the CSU Los Angeles faculty, along with a lucrative fundraising position, violated the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.
In his deposition in the case, Chancellor Reed admitted that the March 14 Trustees meeting, in which the Munitz hire was made, was a closed-door executive session because they expected a negative public relations fallout.
“We will continue to fight for transparency in the CSU system,” CFA Vice President Lillian Taiz said. “As soon as the judge’s decision is finalized, we will be filing an appeal.”
CFA’s initiative in shedding light on the Munitz scandal drew praise in an editorial in the Long Beach Press-Telegram headlined “A closed-door recruitment,” with the subhead “Munitz hiring may be legal, but it wasn’t open enough.”
|
