When the San Francisco Chronicle reported Sunday that the
University of California gave its employees $871 million in
bonuses, relocation packages, administrative stipends and other
forms of cash compensation last fiscal year, the response was
quick.
UC officials defended the payments ““ about $599 million of
which went to 8,500 employees, who each got at least $20,000 more
than their regular salaries, according to the Chronicle ““ as
one-time compensations that were necessary to recruit the best
administrators and maintain the university’s quality.
But student and staff groups were sharply critical of what they
see as deceiving behavior by the UC Office of the President. The
figures released by the Chronicle were not included in a September
report by Mercer Human Resources Consulting, which said UC
executives’ salaries are 15 percent lower than their
equivalents at major universities, and added kindling to an already
smouldering debate over the necessity of increasing compensation
for new administrators while student fees continue to rise.
By Monday evening, the Office of the President had created a Web
site titled “Salaries and Compensation at the University of
California” to deal with questions raised in the article. In
a letter posted on the Web site, UC President Robert Dynes said the
Chronicle “omitted or mischaracterized some important
facts.”
The Web site states the office’s position that increasing
compensation packages are necessary to recruit the best faculty and
administrators and the UC does not under-report salaries, since
many of the items listed in the Chronicle report were for one-time
payments like relocation allowances.
But some student and staff groups do not accept these
arguments.
Jeannie Biniek, the external vice president for the UCLA
Undergraduate Students Association Council, said the Chronicle
article highlighted a lack of transparency in the Office of the
President’s financial dealings.
“It’s frustrating because we always run up against
the argument that the university doesn’t have the money, but
we are asking for such a small amount compared to what they are
spending on bonuses and compensation,” she said, referring to
USAC’s campaign to return financial aid to its traditional
level, 33 percent of university fees, which she said would cost
about $6 million.
And Anu Joshi, president of the UC Students Association, said it
was inappropriate for the university to dole out so much money to
officials and still ask for an increase in student fees.
“It’s ridiculous that students are going to be
paying more and more … and executive salaries are not only
increasing, but the public doesn’t know about it,”
Joshi said.
Cliff Fried, executive vice president of the University
Professional and Technical Employes Union, which represents 12,000
UC employees, said he was outraged.
“They just increased our fees, they just increased our
co-pay on insurance, they are telling us they can’t pay
cost-of-living and longevity increases, and yet they can pay out
almost $800 million in perks and benefits to the higher
echelons,” Fried said, adding that university officials had
admitted staff were underpaid, but hadn’t come up with any
solutions.
University officials said the article brought up legitimate
points, but they felt parts of it were problematic.
Eric Juline, an alumni representative to the Board of Regents,
said the Chronicle raised important questions, but he agreed with a
statement by Dynes that the compensation packages were necessary
and said the article is misleading at times.
“There are questions that I now have that I am looking to
resolve,” Juline said. “I am supportive of the process
of constructive criticism and constructive inquiry, but let’s
give due consideration to the bigger picture.”
Juline said contrary to what the Chronicle’s article
“intimated,” the regents were involved in approving
compensation packages to the extent that university policy
required.
And while information about complete compensation may not have
been released by the UCOP, deliberations about compensation
policies were public when they were instituted, and complete
information may have been released earlier if people had simply
asked more specific questions, he said.
Adrienne Lavine, chairwoman of the UCLA Academic Senate, said
while she saw flaws with some comparisons made in the
Chronicle’s article, transparency in the process is
important.
“One thing that could be a positive outcome out of all
this is more openness about compensation,” she said.
The UC’s compensation Web site is located at
www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/compensation.