Search News


Browse Archives

News

'60s Tactics, New Cause

September 24, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Few think the clock will be turned back to the Berkeley of the 1960s, but the protests planned across the University of California today mark a return to the tactics of another era. This time, however, the cause isn’t free speech or an end to war, but instead a response to the university administration’s budget-cutting proposals.

Today will be the first day of classes for 8 of the 10 campuses in the California system, and protest organizers plan to send an early message that the budget cuts besetting the university have been inappropriately addressed by system leaders. The centerpiece of the planned action is a walkout, which has been supported by systemwide student and technical employee organizations, as well as more than

1,100 faculty who’ve signed an online petition supporting the walkout.

Some campuses have also planned teach-ins, which will center on discussions about California's budget shortfall. The protests come in response to a number of actions taken in recent months by California’s regents, who approved a combination of furloughs and tuition increases to help fill an $813 million budget hole. Today’s demonstration has three stated goals:

  • No furloughs or pay cuts for those making less than $40,000 a year.
  • Implementation of a furlough plan endorsed by the Academic Senate, which suggested a portion of the furlough days be taken on instructional days. Many faculty say disallowing furloughs on teaching days – as the university’s systemwide leadership has mandated – disguises the true impact of the furloughs, and amounts to a pay cut for faculty whose responsibilities won’t be reduced.
  • Full disclosure of the system’s budget, which some argue has been insufficiently transparent throughout the budget-cutting process.

“I think there are real goals here,” said Joshua Clover, an associate professor of English at the Davis campus and one of the organizers of the walkout. “I think the three demands made in the letter are real and achievable goals, and I hope we get there, although I don’t think we’re going to get there with a one day action.”

The prospect of both faculty and students walking out of classes or not even showing up today has administrators scrambling. Patricia Turner, vice provost of undergraduate studies at Davis, said efforts are underway to keep the walkouts to a minimum.

“We’re taking advantage of every opportunity to encourage our faculty to meet their obligations and attend their classes, and to use other mechanisms for making their dissatisfactions with the fiscal situation known,” she said.

At the same time, there’s a fair amount of ambivalence detectable at Davis and elsewhere. Memos sent to faculty suggest a delicate balancing act, where administrators accept the prospect of a walkout without actually endorsing it. In a letter to Berkeley faculty, Provost George Breslauer and Chancellor Robert Birgeneau said faculty participation in the walkout was “a matter of personal prerogative.’ They urged, however, that faculty who planned to walk out make their intentions known to department chairs so arrangements could be made for unspecified “alternative arrangements.”

Turner, a professor of African and African American studies at Davis, said “no ultimatums have been issued” to faculty who plan to walk out. Asked if she personally thought faculty were misguided to shirk their teaching duties, Turner said “I respect the academic freedom of my colleagues.”

Turner added that efforts will be made to send administrators to classes that are empty, so they can at least meet with students. Leslie Sepuka, a spokeswoman for Yudof’s office, also declined to condemn the walkout.

“I can say we respect and support the staff’s right to participate in these types of demonstrations,” she wrote in an e-mail. “We also expect that those participating will appropriately account for their time away from their jobs and/or classrooms in accordance with our policies.”

Critics Seek Broad Coalition

While campuses are prepared for the possibility of faculty simply not showing up for class, many say it would undermine their own aims to not at least make an appearance. Mike Davis, a professor of creative writing at the Riverside campus, said he does not believe students will walk into any empty classrooms today. Professors will meet with their classes, hand out syllabuses and discuss their concerns about the budget situation before leaving, he said. One of the objectives of the demonstration is to illustrate the budget problem to students, and communicating with them in class is part of that effort, he said.

The walkout planning process has been largely decentralized, and individual campuses have embraced some of their own stated goals or demands. At Riverside, participants are calling on university regents to cease future tuition increases – dubbed “fees” in California – and roll back the 9.3 percent increase they approved in May. In addition to the previously approved increase, regents will vote in November on whether to phase in another two hikes, bringing in-state tuition to $10,302 by next fall – 44 percent higher than it was in fall of 2008.

By including opposition to tuition hikes in their demands, Riverside faculty aim to win the support of students in a growing coalition.

“We’re hoping that when the students see this isn’t primarily about our own selfish interest, but we’re fighting on their behalf, that there will be a big response from students,” Davis said.

Today’s effort aims to bring together disparate groups that haven’t always rallied around the same causes. The walkout was scheduled to coincide with a one-day strike by the University Professional and Technical Employees-Communication Workers of America union (UPTE). UPTE represents the university’s research support professional employees and technical employees, who have charged the university with unfair labor practices in connection with layoffs.

One of the key endorsements for the walkout has come from the University of California Student Association (UCSA), which approved a resolution expressing solidarity with the demonstrators.

“There has been a real effort to spin this as faculty against students,” Clover said. “[That argument] doesn’t hold water at all. The UCSA resolution supporting the walkout makes it clear that no one is buying it.”

Some students have spent recent days promoting the walkout. On Tuesday morning, Jorge Serrato was handing out fliers about the demonstration on the Riverside campus. The Riverside senior said the tuition hikes have raised serious concerns among his classmates about whether they can continue at the university, and some have already opted to attend community colleges instead – although space is scarce on those campuses.

Serrato said Tuesday that he had already mapped out a plan for the demonstration.

“I am showing up to class and I’m going to announce to the whole class that we’re walking out,” he said. “I already e-mailed my professors and they said it was OK for me to do that.”

The walkout, however, is not universally embraced. Joel Michaelson, chair of the Academic Senate on the Santa Barbara campus, said he was sure there were some faculty who supported the action and others who viewed it as a disservice to tuition-paying students who showed up for class.

“We rarely agree on anything,” said Michaelson, a professor of geography. “There’s a range of opinion on it, clearly.”

Henry Powell, chair of the systemwide Academic Senate, showed no interest in even touching the subject of the walkout.

“I have nothing to say about that,” said Powell, a professor of pathology at San Diego’s School of Medicine.

State of Shared Governance Questioned

Underlying the discontent at the University of California is a concern expressed by some that a time-honored tradition of shared governance has been dispensed with amid a period of economic difficulty. That concern was exacerbated when Yudof rejected the Academic Senate’s recommendation that a portion of furlough days be taken on instructional days.

The furlough plan differs for employees based on their salaries. Those on the lowest end of the pay scale – making up to $40,000 – will take 11 furlough days or the equivalent of a 4 percent salary reduction. For those making more than $240,000, 26 furlough days or the equivalent of a 10 percent salary reduction will be required.

While staff are expected to actually take their furlough days off, few faculty see how they can take true furloughs. None of their responsibilities in teaching, service and research are being curtailed to accommodate furloughs.

“From a faculty perspective, it absolutely is a salary cut, and it was never portrayed as anything other than that,” said Croughan, a professor of obstetrics, gynecology, epidemiology and biostatics at the San Francisco campus.

Medical center employees were exempted from furloughs to protect patient safety, but the centers had to develop alternative plans to reach equivalent savings. Given their appointments in medicine, some have questioned whether Croughan and Powell -- the immediate past chair and chair of the Academic Senate – are subject to the furlough plan. Both say they are subject to the furloughs – most faculty aren’t considered medical center “employees” – and will work through their furlough days like other faculty.

Supporters of taking furloughs on instructional days hope to reinforce the impact of the budget cuts to the public, but that sort of symbolic action is exactly what systemwide leaders decided against. Provost Lawrence Potts, who suggested Yudof not approve instructional day furloughs, wrote in a September 10 letter to faculty that he worried it “would be perceived as further burdening our students in order to make a political point with Sacramento.”

Yudof’s decision prompted a rebuke from the American Association of University Professors, which called it “at best unwise and at worst dismissive of a cornerstone of the UC system’s strength, its faculty.” That is not the way the chair of the Academic Senate sees it, however.

“Shared governance is a system whereby the faculty give advice, and by and large President Yudof has taken that advice on virtually all of the major issues,” said Powell, who wrote a letter disagreeing with the AAUP’s premise.“On this one [matter] he chose a different way, and we recognize the administration can make a decision even if it’s a decision that doesn’t agree with us. I think the Senate was disappointed in the decision he made, but on the other hand is respectful that on many different issues he has agreed with Senate.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on '60s Tactics, New Cause

  • Unknown story: UC professors salaries are backfilled
  • Posted by Robert , Staff at University of California on September 24, 2009 at 7:45am EDT
  • Why aren't reporters including an important detail in the coverage about faculty furloughs? UC faculty are allowed and encouraged by administrators to backfill their 4 to 10 percent salary reduction with money from their grants. Staff, who have no such recourse to backfill their salary reductions, are the ones helping facilitate this money shuffle for the profs. In addition, some campuses with deep pockets are using other funds (public?) to help back-fill profs' salary reductions. Someone should look into the number of professors whose salaries are actually reduced to shed some perspective on those profs who are crying foul while being treated with kid gloves, once again, to the detriment of student and staff morale.

  • The 60's
  • Posted by Richard Cole on September 24, 2009 at 7:45am EDT
  • "Few think the clock will be turned back to the Berkeley of the 1960s" - You obviously don't have an older brother or sister who lived through this period but I have. The children of 60's have never left us, they are teaching in our academic institutions. The signs of the 60's are all around us, you just need to review your history. They have never forgotten their cause and weep and see shrinks when they recall their failure to make the changes they wanted. But the clock being turned back is not what's happened here. The clock, for them, has never moved forward.

  • Posted by CSU Prof on September 24, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • The other California university system, the CSU (California State University) is experiencing drastic cuts as well, with greater dependence on state funding because it has historically been deemed a "teaching" system instead of the research system. No walkouts, but just as much distress for both faculty and students. At the CSU we are hearing about other revivals from the 60s -- we are seriously being asked to pipe video of our classes into secondary classrooms in which students sit with no real-life professor, just a video screen. This "creative use of instructional technology" is being presented as an exciting opportunity to explore new ways of adjusting to our budget realities, which our administrators say are permanent, not temporary fluctuations in state support. The point of this article should not be the throwback methods used to combat budget cuts at the UC, but the huge and disabling impact of those cuts on our ability to educate young people in our state. What is wrong with our media when the point of a story is the format of protest, not the damage to education that is being protested?

  • What does this mean?
  • Posted by Rod Bell , Adjunct Professor - Political Science at College of DuPage on September 24, 2009 at 11:00am EDT
  • I'm not sure what this protest is about, if the first goal is "No furloughs or pay cuts for those making less than $40,000 a year." What's the rationale for this? Does it mean that there is no job in (California) academia that could be done by someone making, say, $35,000? Is it an implicit acceptance of and metric for the "living wage" concept? Does it mean that someone earning $50,000 is disproportionately advantaged, regardless of how his/her salary compares to private-sector incomes in the same field, etc. etc.? --Where does this particular demand come from? Or is it just another example of the mind-numbing naivete and intellectual incompetence that, for reasons I have never been able to fathom, seems to characterize the efforts of academia in its collective action mode.

  • Can we please can the "Oh, it's the Sixties again" rhetoric?
  • Posted by Rob on September 24, 2009 at 12:15pm EDT
  • There are undergraduate students, graduate students and employees (often coordinating via their unions), and yes, faculty and staff involved in this walk-out who weren't even born in the 1960s. I know it's a tempting "hook" for a story partly about a campus as celebrated and reviled in the national imagination for 1960s radicalism as Berkeley, but really -- at this point it's just lazy to make the comparison. And it can only lead people like Richard Cole above to make equally lazy dismissals of all the contemporary issues, to reduce the walk-out to some caricature of baby-boomer nostalgia. The hook encourages people to ignore the distinctly contemporary issues of declining public funding and the eradication of faculty governance.

    If it's not clear from the above, by the way, I'm a supporter of the walk-out. California is right now simply the most egregious example of a nation-wide attack on public higher education, and it's heartening to see people fighting back. Every one who cares about public higher education should take note: California is perhaps the most dramatic instance of what happens when states end their commitment to funding higher education, but this is happening everywhere. Pay attention: it's happening to you, or will soon.

  • few can "backfill"
  • Posted by Kirsten , Professor at UCSC on September 24, 2009 at 2:15pm EDT
  • Robert, you are right to say that staff are unfairly shouldering the burden of the Furlough Exchange Program, but very few faculty are even eligible for this--only those with access to certain kinds of grants (mostly, it's the med school faculty). Not a soul in my own division is taking part in it. The great majority of UC faculty are sucking up the pay cuts with no workload mitigation. CSU prof, the "Keep California's Promise" website sponsored by the Council of UC Faculty Associations (http://keepcaliforniaspromise.org) makes it clear that we support the restoration of the *entire* Master Plan, including restoring funding for CSU and the community colleges. While CSU faculty are encouraged to make the cuts visible, we are being explicitly prohibited from doing so by the systemwide administration.

  • Interesting question, Rod.
  • Posted by DFS on September 24, 2009 at 2:30pm EDT
  • You quote: "No furloughs or pay cuts for those making less than $40,000 a year."

    Then you ask: "Does it mean that there is no job in (California) academia that could be done by someone making, say, $35,000?"

    The original quote has the equivalence: 'If you make less than $40K/year, then you suffer neither furlough nor pay cut." (False, in general.) Its contrapositive is then: "If you suffer either furlough or pay cut, then you make less than $40K/year." (Therefore False, in general.)

    Equivalent to your question: "If you make less than $40K/year, then there is no job in (CA) academia?" Its contrapositive is thus: "If there is a job in (CA adademia, then you don't make less than $40K/year."

    Duh.

  • Oops
  • Posted by DFS on September 24, 2009 at 3:15pm EDT
  • My third paragraph, the consequent in the contrapositive, should read: "then you make at least $40K/year"

  • Forced to use vacation days for furlough
  • Posted by P , Staff at UC Berkeley on September 24, 2009 at 4:00pm EDT
  • This article fails to point out that at least at Berkeley, the campus has given specific dates for 11 furlough days. If you happen to have less than those days of furlough due to your salary band, or because you are fortunate that some of your salary is paid for by outside grants, you are required to USE YOUR OWN VACATION DAYS for those days even if you have work to do and do not want to take those days off because you want vacation say during the summer, and even if you do not have enough vacation days! The university is "kind enough" to advance 6 vacation days to use for the purpose, but of course these have to be paid back.

  • Economic/Academic fallout
  • Posted by David on September 24, 2009 at 5:15pm EDT
  • My first thought was how anyone can live on less than 40k a year doing anything in California--but what can one expect working for institutions that depend so heavily on state largesse from a state going broke?
    The reality though, is that the gravy train of California State expenditures is over and so are the silly, inane departments that so many schools have padded themselves with; specious departments, ridiculous courses, underqualified students, and never a thought to how it would continue to be paid for. No budget expenditure was too big, no request too ridiculous for any politician when it was asked for under the guise of "education". Get rid of the bureaucrats and academic hacks and there would be little worry over furloughs and pay cuts, but we'll all ice skate in hell before that heppens.

  • 40K cutoff
  • Posted by PMH at ucla on September 24, 2009 at 5:15pm EDT
  • Rod-

    Part of the rationale is that unemployment benefits are the same for everyone earning over about 40K. Below that, your benefits are proportional to salary. So if you have a pay cut and then are laid off, you will receive lower compensation.

    The other part, of course, is simply that those earning less to begin with will be hit harder. That's not universally true, but it's not a bad generalization.

  • Hit harder? By what math?
  • Posted by ACF on September 24, 2009 at 8:30pm EDT
  • "The other part, of course, is simply that those earning less to begin with will be hit harder."

    How do you figure? A 5% cut on a salary of $100,000 means a cut of $5,000. A cut of 5% on a salary of $40,000 means a cut of $2,000.

    Note that $5,000 is larger than $2,000, so the person with the higher salary gets "hit" harder.

    Percentage reductions always result in those earning less being hit SOFTER.

    It's pure math.

  • First day of class
  • Posted by UC Assistant Professor , Assistant Professor at UCI on September 24, 2009 at 8:30pm EDT
  • To echo the above, it is the rare faculty member funded partially through grants, and the even rare exception who can "backfill" lost wages. As the article states, we have all taken a pay cut, but are expected to produce not less but more for our salaries: research expectations continue to rise, and larger classes, along with the the devastating loss of staff and adjunct faculty support, means that most of us are doing far more teaching and administrative work than before, with far fewer resources (and it never ends; ever two weeks it seems we are asked to cut more, making it impossible to plan even a quarter or two into the future). I did not participate in the walkout but I applaud the efforts to educate students and the greater public. I sense a lot of anger at the manner in which Yudof communicated his rejection of the Senate furlough plan; it was leaked to a few individuals weeks before it was made public to the larger University community. The irony is that the entering class are the brightest and most engaged I've seen in some time; we have a huge waiting list in our department for entrance into the major (necessarily curtailed by 70% because of faculty cuts).

  • ACF cant be serious
  • Posted by chris , BMF at HKU on September 25, 2009 at 6:00am EDT
  • ACF, is 2k more valuable to someone making 40k or is 5k more valuable for someone making 100k? I hope this is an easy answer. Once you make a certain amount of money to pay for basic needs and some luxuries every additional dollar is not as valuable. But you know that and are being intentionally obtuse. And I don't know about the UC but in the CSU system there are secretaries making in the low 20's. I would much rather see a full prof making 120k get a pay reduction than a secretary making 30k.