On the same July day that the UC Board of Regents cut $813 million from UC budgets - setting in motion pay cuts, layoffs and campus cutbacks - the board quietly approved pay raises, stipends and other benefits for more than two dozen executives.University officials were quick to characterize the increased pay in a positive light.
"It's really a story about cost savings," said Barbara French, a UCSF spokeswoman, adding that three people on her campus who won hefty pay increases took on new duties and deserved to be compensated.
It's the same ethos as the bankster bonuses and pay raises. None of them do anything for the essential functions of their institutions that couldn't be done better and cheaper by employees who have hit one of the institutional social glass ceilings. The only exceptional things these minor league compradors have to offer are their connections to each other, driven by the conviction that entrenchment is a socially beneficial entitlement. In good times, when the institutions are flush with paper wealth, there's some grumbling over that, easily dismissed as ressentiment by the anteroom clowns. In harder times, for everyone else, the elaborately fussified ad hominem dismissals get a little nastier, and the vulgar realities of chicken plucking gain immediacy.
Comments (2)
Having long ago agreed to get on its knees for business, the higher ed system is following the business order to its logical end. Tuition hikes, service cuts, salary give-aways to the overseers -- all without the slightest consideration of democratic reform.
The only thing saving these fuckers is the mad desperation of the middle-class to escape the system themselves via the progressive destruction of childhood/the great race for the perfect entrance app.
http://books.google.com/books?id=3rmmj3lKATAC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Posted by Michael Dawson | August 23, 2009 2:48 PM
Posted on August 23, 2009 14:48
On July 16, the regents also approved requests from other campuses to pay new deans and vice chancellors higher salaries than their predecessors had earned, on grounds that this was needed to attract the brightest leaders.
Would those "brightest leaders" be from the same pool that nearly destroyed the world economy with their stupidity?
Posted by fish | August 24, 2009 1:25 PM
Posted on August 24, 2009 13:25