On the bad side, the deal was negotiated by two leaders
without any real effort at shared governance.
In fact, the university will still have to negotiate with unions and
faculty over pension reform measures.
Like the fast-tracking of free trade agreements, this method of
negotiation values secrecy over democracy.
As is often the case in the UC system, consultation occurs after a
decision has been made, and this represents a fake form of democracy and shared
governance.
The most threatening aspect of the plan is that it requires
a new pension tier, but the details of the plan are not spelled out. A big
concern is the talk of a defined contribution plan, which we have told the
university is not only bad for the employees but also bad for the entire shared
defined benefit plan. History shows that
once you allow employees to opt into a reduced benefit, the main benefit plan
becomes destabilized.
Attention now turns to the legislature where there are many competing plans for UC. Just as UC employees are concerned about the lack of democracy in the Committee of Two, legislators are surely feeling squeezed out of the democratic process.
Attention now turns to the legislature where there are many competing plans for UC. Just as UC employees are concerned about the lack of democracy in the Committee of Two, legislators are surely feeling squeezed out of the democratic process.