If the Univ of California is representative, this is not good

As I previously noted the University of California system has some financial problems. The multi-campus system is such a big player in NIH funded biomedical research that it is difficult not to see it as...important. At the very least many of those not at UC have friends, colleagues and competitors working for the system's institutions.
So it is with some interest that I received a link to a union-backed effort to vote no-confidence in the President, Mark Yudof and a link to another lettter defending him.
Looks nasty. I'd hate to delve into the specifics but it sure does seem a no-win all around, doesn't it?

13 responses so far

  • I liked Mark when he was My president. In fact, U of M improved in many ways while he was here. After he left, the improvement has been spotty, which may not be entirely the fault of our current president. But it probably is.

  • whimple says:

    This part of the complaint:
    Roughly 3600 UC employees earn aver $200,000 in yearly salary.
    ...is going to be comprised almost entirely of MDs. If you want to close the hospitals and medical schools at UC, you can try cutting their salaries, but these people are net bringing in cash, i.e. not the problem.

  • lylebot says:

    They did a little analysis on those $200,000+ earners on their blog:
    link 1
    link 2
    I have the sense that there are some class resentment issues behind that statement.

  • BP says:

    Not necessarily whimple. The salaries for Berkeley were made public not too long ago and all of the full profs I looked up -- all PhDs -- in the department I was in there made >$200K. There is a huge spread in salaries there.

  • DrugMonkey says:

    Ahhh, you folks are starting to pique my interest. NIH cap is $190K more or less.
    one wonders if the free-n-easy NIH grant getting through the doubling period encouraged a ramp up in the salary scale for people who were otherwise in a hard money category. easy for a Uni to go high if the first $190 is on the Federal dime.
    I guess this is a point made by someone before, whimple maybe?

  • Anonymous says:

    I guess this is a point made by someone before, whimple maybe?
    Not me, but I like it. Still, the NIH scale is based on % effort. If you're making $190k at 100%, there's nothing left for anything else.
    My guess is the med faculty will solidly populate the $200k-$400k range. Above that, you're generally talking administrators.

  • Neuro-conservative says:

    Lylebot's links point us towards the actual goldmine of UC salary data: http://ucpay.globl.org
    How much time can you spend looking up the salaries of everyone you know in the UC system?
    Incidentally, can anyone explain how UC salaries are structured between base pay and "extra pay"? It appears that many PIs are making as much in "extra pay" as in base salary.

  • DrugMonkey says:

    Still, the NIH scale is based on % effort. If you're making $190k at 100%, there's nothing left for anything else.
    right but you can be making, say $250K of which only $190 can be charged to the Federal grants. The local institution has to come up with the remaining cash.

  • JohnV says:

    I'll preface this list of "things that don't surprise me" by adding that some/all of the sports programs in question probably return money to the university:
    1. 2008 BERKELEY TEDFORD , JEFF HEAD COACH-INTERCOLG ATHLETICS $225,000.02 $0.00 $2,117,314.50 $2,342,314.52
    2. 2008 LOS ANGELES HOWLAND , BENJAMIN CLARK COACH, INTERCOL ATHLETICS,HEAD $279,166.71 $0.00 $1,779,308.47 $2,058,475.18
    3. 2008 LOS ANGELES NEUHEISEL , RICHARD GERALD COACH, INTERCOL ATHLETICS,HEAD $250,000.08 $0.00 $1,040,135.53 $1,290,135.61
    4. 2008 BERKELEY MONTGOMERY , MICHAEL J. HEAD COACH-INTERCOLG ATHLETICS $183,712.47 $0.00 $734,849.97 $918,562.44
    5. 2008 LOS ANGELES DORRELL , KARL JAMES COACH, INTERCOL ATHLETICS,HEAD $150,000.00 $0.00 $504,314.38 $654,314.38
    6. 2008 BERKELEY BOYLE , JOANNE HEAD COACH-INTERCOLG ATHLETICS $239,048.34 $0.00 $396,033.02 $635,081.36
    7. 2008 BERKELEY BARBOUR , ANNE SAUNDERS HEAD COACH-INTERCOLG ATHLETICS $265,575.00 $0.00 $187,435.28 $453,010.28

  • JSinger says:

    When I was at UCLA a decade ago, the union was carrying on in exactly the same way about "fat cats" making more than $100K. If anything, I was surprised by how little a lot of them were making. You're talking about the premier state college system in the country, the most prestigious (rightly or not) public university in the country, a couple of the top college athletic programs in the country...
    I remember looking at the salary of the head legal counsel at Berkeley and wondering how they possibly filled that job with someone appropriate with what they were paying.

  • JSinger says:

    The complaint someone raised, BTW, that seemed to have merit, was that UCLA was paying Terry Donahue something like five times as much as Stanford was paying Bill freaking Walsh. On the other hand, the Montana/Young/Rice-deprived Walsh never did much at Stanford, so even that went out the window.

  • msphd says:

    re: JSinger's question about people being underpaid, my understanding is that at most places PIs are allowed to supplement their income with consulting, etc. on the side. Correct? Someone sent me a copy of a memo that went out around one of the UC schools encouraging the disgruntled faculty to pursue "other forms" of "research activity" to supplement their meager salaries during the furloughs. Of course, certain other job titles do not allow "other activities" of any kind, according to UC policy, so there are plenty of other disgruntled types I'm sure!
    FWIW, I think the UC's problems probably long predated Mark Yudof. He hasn't been there that long, right?

  • DrugMonkey says:

    MsPhD, my reading of the woeful state of the CA economy sez that I don't care who the President is s/he has a tough set of no-win options. Sounds to me as though there has been a whole pile of NIMBY behavior- not that I'm not sympathetic to the lower paid over the higher paid but the situation looks bad all over. I was amused by a prior letter from the faculty charis at the larger UCs which tried to throw the lesser UCs under the bus en bloc, I can tell you.
    I don't know about UC specifically but I think that outside consulting is generally permitted one way or another. Most places have $10K as the reporting limit* but clearly, from the news reports and Grassley investigations some people go way above this value.
    *above this triggers some sort of requirement to notify NIH I think, perhaps why it is so universal?

Leave a Reply