(California State University) poised to OK 12 percent tuition hike

[alp227]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

(07-12) 13:44 PDT LONG BEACH -- California State University's finance committee voted today to raise this fall's annual tuition by 12 percent over the objections of critics who said middle-class and undocumented students - neither of whom qualify for financial aid - will be priced out of a basic college education.

The full board is expected to approve the tuition increase later today at their meeting in Long Beach.

The decision will bring tuition to $5,472, up from $4,440 last September. And with mandatory campus fees averaging $950, the price for a year at CSU will come to $6,422.

(...)

At the same time, over the objections of Gov. Jerry Brown and other critics, the trustees also voted to approve a salary for Elliot Hirshman, incoming president of CSU's San Diego campus, that is about $100,000 higher than his predecessor.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/12/BAA51K9JOE.DTL

[Adsos Letter]

1. A bit more from the article on that salary increase for CSU San Diego's Hirshman

Hirshman will earn $400,000 - including $50,000 paid from the campus foundation - compared with $299,435 paid to former President Stephen Weber.

What, almost $300,000 wasn't enough for the guy? Nice example to set, as Governor Brown pointed out.

[mike_c]

2. in recent months chancellor Reed has been circulating a powerpoint...

...presentation that seeks to demonstrate that faculty salaries in the CSU are one or two percent below the national average for comparable institutions, while those of campus presidents and other top executives are closer to thirty percent below average, constituting an executive compensation "crisis" in the CSU that threatens its ability to retain top talent.

Of course, this analysis is deeply flawed on several fronts, including the assumptions used to calculate the compensation woes of all those poor, suffering campus executives, but its intent is blazingly obvious-- to create and maintain the general impression that CSU faculty are already well paid (we're in tough contract negotiations with the CSU presently) while creating the opposite impression about the university's top executives.

The compensation packages those top executives receive are pretty outrageous, at least on most CSU campuses. They include exorbitant car allowances, housing allowances (or free housing), and lots of other perqs, on top of six-figure base salaries that are way out of proportion to what most campus presidents actually accomplish.

So you can imagine the red flags that went up in faculty and staff union meetings about that Powerpoint presentation. It's clear that the chancellor's office seeks to foster a confrontational relationship with university faculty, staff, and to a certain degree, students, while treating it's top execs like kings. Hmm, sounds like the corporate model, doesn't it?