• Printer friendly
• E-mail to a friend
• 9 comment(s)
• Recommend

  ( 0 )

• 

Subject:

Body:

Poster:

Enter text seen above:

-8% for everyone with 46K+: a really bad joke given cost of living at the coast : 6/23/2009

The so-called options are a joke anyway: one just gets a choice how exactly one is screwed, the financial consequences - i.e., -8% - are the same. Basically, the plan is completely unfair since it puts younger faculty and staff at an extreme disadvantage. Obviously here at UCSB were already underpaid compared to what faculty in other states make: An assistant professor at some state college in ID or TX makes the same as an assistant professor here at UCSB, but housing costs up to 5 times more here than in many other places. Younger faculty are those that make less money to begin with and had to find housing at a time where the housing bubble was largest. If someone is Full 6 or 8 or even above scale (I am not even mentioning the people making the real money, like the Chancellor etc.) , then (i) they most likely have already been here for a while and hence bought a place when housing was still affordable to us mortals, and (ii) they just won’t feel a pay cut: it doesn’t really matter whether you make 160K or 147K a year. If on the other hand someone is a low-ranking Associate Professor (like me) or staff, then (i) they most likely have only arrived here when paying for housing was already on the brink of not being affordable, and (ii) a pay cut of 8% means changing from saving a few hundred $ each month to running a deficit, especially when pension plan contributions and health plan increases are considered at the same time. Now, since we’re already paid salaries whose ratio to our costs of living (because of housing alone) is a joke compared to what happens in the rest of the country, then UCOP could at least have the decency to make the salary reduction proportional to the income. For example reduction = -1 + ( 0.0001 * income ) which means, for example, people making 160000 and more get a 15% cut, people making 120-130K get an 11% cut, people making 80000 and more get a 7% cut, etc. Yes, that may mean annoying some of our Nobel Prize winners and UCOP and Chancellors and the like, but it would socially fairer than this oh-we-are-so-impartial-and-cut-everybody’s-salary-the-same reduction, which completely disregards the *real-life* consequences of a reduction of this magnitude and will drive younger faculty away from UC. UCOP would be well advised to not just protect Full Prof 7 and higher salaries but to consider the future of the system, which lies to at least some degree in attracting and retaining top faculty from the more junior ranks. What does UCOP think, that $800-1000 less a month does not matter for staff and junior faculty? That we can live working full time and making a deficit each month?

RZ

After a few years in Santa Barbara it dawns on them : 6/23/2009

I find it interesting that people who decry the wages and living costs in Santa Barbara do not leave and move to those places that pay more and cost less. Don't you get it? Everyone is thinking the same way as you - they won't budge - so Santa Barbara is overcrowded and as a result extravagantly expensive. If it is not worth living here then leave! The population will go down and prices will fall. It is everyone who insists on staying here and working for the wages offered that has made the problem. You have met the enemy and it is you!

Beenherealongtime

Cuts should be proportional and should start from the top : 6/23/2009

I agree with RZ that the cust should inded be proportional and that the cuts come at the worst time. The UC has of late underpaid many of its staff, in particular those at the middle or lower rungs. The sad thing is that everyone is feeling the pinch, the County has already gone through a furlough with the added hur of having no cost of living increase. Nevertheless, those at the top are least likely to feel the hurt than those at the bottom of the pay scale in a place that is suppose to be paradise, but is more like a gilded cage.

Not Here

cut beneifits and retirement : 6/23/2009

I would first look at the benefit and retirement packages. Can those be cut or changed before cutting salaries?

local

income : 6/24/2009

researchers (lab technicians and postdocs) typically make on the order of $40k. The 4% cut would put them at $36k. This type of work, and also most jobs such as maintenance and administrative staff, have a specific set of tasks that must be completed. So they will need to do the same work despite a furlough. They aren't going to accept payroll, grants, grades, etc never being filed, certain buildings not being fixed or cleaned, or the library closed a few extra days of the week. As mentioned above, it is a mystery where many staff manage to live in this county, as someone having $2700 takehome pay can afford $950 rent with traditional 3X income criteria. I think you need to have a spouse with investment income?

Julie

Staff and Faculty Salary Cuts??? : 6/25/2009

I work at UCSB in an academic department as a staff member. I have a family (wife and two kids) and I live in subsidized housing. I have lived in SB my whole life. I have worked on campus 8 years and have slowly moved up the scale to where I now make barely enough to support my family. A 4% pay cut or more (if furloughs are included which would happen to be during my busiest time of year and you think the work is going to get done on time) would devastate my family financially. You have to ask yourself though....why in the world is the UC system proceeding with capital building projects while cutting salaries. Is a new road, parking structure or building more important than being able to keep food on the table, I think not. You also have to realize that if the UC system hadn't been poring a couple of billion dollars into a new campus over the last few years the UC systems would be in a better place financially.

MP

Regents should take pay cuts : 7/6/2009

The UC Regents are paid a salary of a million dollars each annually. If they were paid normal salaries like everyone else then the university could save millions of dollars.

JN

Lots of wild figures... : 7/7/2009

The Regents are unpaid. The UC Retirement System is only 50% funded, and taxpayers of the state of California haven't contribute one red cent to it since 1990. Most likely it will go bankrupt and UC employees will be put on 401(k) type systems. Lots of portions of UC make a lot of money... the med centers, dorms, food services, summer programs etc. The big money loser, in the eyes of the admin, is teaching. Teachers cost you money, but health administrators make you money.

Cheadle

California Dreaming Becomes a California Nightmare : 7/8/2009

All of California, in so many ways, is not worth living in any more. California politics have stunk as long as I can remember–30 years solid. The Golden State is being dismantled, bit by bit. The Terminator, our Governor, has lived up to his name.