UC Riverside Faculty Association

June 21, 2018
by admin
0 comments

UC’s Contract with General Dynamics Information Technology

The Council of UC Faculty Associations, of which the Riverside Faculty Association is the UC Riverside chapter, sent the following letter to President Napolitano, urging her to cut ties between UC and General Dynamics Information Technology, a contractor for the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement.

—————————————————–

June 21, 2018

President Janet Napolitano
University of California
1111 Franklin St., 12th Floor
Oakland, CA 94607
Email: president@ucop.edu

Dear President Napolitano,

The Board of the Council of UC Faculty Associations applauds you for your forthright support for UC’s undocumented students, your lawsuit against the Trump administration’s rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), and your strong public statement regarding the Trump Administration’s policy of separating immigrant families at the border.

In this spirit, we urge you to act positively on the June 18, 2018 UC-AFT call to sever ties between the University of California and General Dynamics Information Technology, a contractor for the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement. In addition, UC faculty are concerned with outsourcing of the Analytical Writing Placement exam to this contractor who is helping run the child separation program.

On behalf of the CUCFA Board,
Stanton Glantz,
President, Council of UC Faculty Associations,
Professor of Medicine, UCSF

March 27, 2018
by admin
0 comments

The $66 Fix: Restore quality and access while eliminating tuition PLUS Prop 98 K-12 funding

Below is the link to the updated version of the “$48. fix: Reclaiming California’s MASTER PLAN for Higher Education“ that was produced by the Reclaim California Higher Education coalition, which includes the Council of University of California Faculty Associations and other organizations dedicated to affordable, accessible, and excellent public higher education in California. The Council of UC Faculty Associations (CUCFA) is the systemwide organization of which the UC Riverside Faculty Association is a member.  This new version is the same “fix” from last year, but it also includes money for K-14 schools both to satisfy Proposition 98 and because they also need funding. Those two needs together require the $66 Fix.

https://keepcaliforniaspromise.org/3930168/the-66fix

August 25, 2017
by admin
0 comments

Post-Charlottesville Statement

The UC Council of Faculty Associations (CUCFA), of which the Riverside Faculty Association is a member, has issued this statement and set of recommendations in response to the tragic recent events in Charlottesville.

Statement

The events and aftermath of Charlottesville have revealed the disturbing connection between Alt-Right rhetoric of violence and the very real violence perpetrated by white supremacist groups. This situation bears dangerous parallels with the way fascist movements came to power in 20th-century Europe. Historically, fascism takes root in the public demand for a strong government to restore order following the unrest and violence provoked by ultra nationalist organizations precipitating violent confrontations with antifascist forces. President Trump’s irresponsible and incorrect assertion of a “two-sided” violence has set the stage for a likely reaction by anarchy-inspired groups at the next provocation or implementation of violence by the Alt-Right / white supremacist front. This reaction, in turn, would allow the Trump government to present itself as the ‘neither left nor right’ party of order and security.

Knowing that university campuses are the likely sites for violence to erupt, it is tempting to call for suppressing the right to speak of any element connected with the Alt-Right movement. CUCFA disagrees. We reaffirm our unfettered commitment to free speech, and the proposition that universities cannot discriminate among speakers on the basis of the content of their speech. At the same time, we support denying permission to speak on campus if the speaker or those organizing the speech incite explicitly and/or pose a clear threat of violence.[1]

Recommendations

CUCFA endorses the recent AAUP statement, and UC President Napolitano’s letter in the wake of the tragic events in Charlottesville.  We invite them — and the entire higher education community  — to also denounce more explicitly the connection among the Alt-Right appropriation of ‘free speech’ rhetoric to provoke violent confrontation, white supremacist violence, and the proto-fascist narrative of equivalence between left and right being spun by the Trump administration.

To counter this worrisome state of affairs, CUCFA further recommends that UCOP make public its criteria for determining and countering a clear threat of violence on the part of outside speakers, and institute an “Outside Speakers’ Commission”—with representatives of the UC faculty Senate, students, campus police, UC lawyers, and other possible stakeholders—in charge of reviewing and publicly discussing these criteria, and, if necessary, of updating them, or developing new ones which would pay particular attention and respond to the following concerns:

  1. What constitutes evidence of a clear threat of violence brought by a speaker or the organizers of a speaking event?
  2. If necessary, should the cost of extra police protection be borne by the University or the association asking for a certain speaker to be allowed to speak on campus?
  3. Should restrictions be passed to what protesters can hold in their hands (i.e. clubs, batons, etc…) entering any UC campus?

Lastly, recognizing the appealing status of all UC campuses as targets for Alt-Right provocations, CUCFA invites UCOP to publicize as soon and as widely as possible among students and faculty the “Ten Ways to Fight Hate Guide” released by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).


[1] The decision by Michigan State and Louisiana State on August 18 to deny white supremacist leader Richard Spencer permission to speak there is an example of an appropriate response.

June 20, 2017
by admin
0 comments

State Senate should reject Governor’s unconstitutionally nominated Regents

You have probably seen the recent barrage of news stories critical of the way UC has been managed – including articles about the state legislature withholding funding from UC in the recently passed state budget because of problems at UCOP revealed in a recent state audit such as a hidden reserve fund, interference with the auditor’s survey, and excessive executive compensation. The budget also redirects nearly $350 million from UC’s core mission as the legislature tries to gain direct control of UCOPs budget. Earlier articles decried the Regents’ spending over $250 a head on dinner parties for themselves.

These articles demonstrate an eroded level of trust between UC and the state legislature and the people of California. We believe a large part of that erosion is due to the closed and insular method by which Regents are appointed — a method that is in direct contradiction to what is specified in California’s Constitution.

The Council of UC Faculty Associations (CUCFA) has written letters to Governor Brown asking him to obey the Constitution when nominating Regents, letters to the UC Regents asking them to follow their own bylaws and not accept improperly nominated Regents and letters to the California Senate asking them to use their authority of approval of Regents to enforce the Constitution.

Three weeks ago, Governor Brown again nominated Regents without following the consultation process mandated by the Constitution. Several newspaper articles have noted this Constitutional violation.
http://www.sfchronicle.com/education/article/For-decades-UC-has-selected-board-of-regents-11209660.php
http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Follow-the-law-Gov-Brown-11214645.php
http://www.modbee.com/news/article155956179.html

Yesterday CUCFA sent a letter to the State Senate, calling on the Senate Rules Committee to enforce the California Constitution by immediately rejecting (without prejudice) the Governor’s nominees. Regent terms begin as soon as the Governor nominates them, so these improperly nominated Regents can vote on issues at the upcoming Regent’s meeting unless the Senate Rules Committee acts quickly to reject them. We also requested that the Constitutionally-required advisory committee have a more than pro forma role and that the Senate declare that it will only consider Regent nominees that have been vetted through an open public process, in a series of meetings conducted in accordance with the Bagley-Keene Act and with opportunities for public comment.

Many of the Regents are wealthy and powerful individuals, including some Regents who are employed by or invest in the for-profit education sector, a clear conflict of interest. One of the nominees is Maria Anguiano, a former Vice Chancellor at UCR, who is now employed at the for-profit education company, Minerva Project. Californians deserve a more representative, diverse board of UC Regents, nominated by a transparent public process, who will advocate for high quality, accessible, and tuition-free higher education.

You can read the full letter to the Senate Rules Committee HERE.

January 24, 2017
by admin
0 comments

The $48 fix: Reclaiming California’s Master Plan for Higher Education

On Thursday, January 26, the UC Regents will consider and likely approve their budget for the University for 2017-2018. It and the Governor’s budget, to which it is closely tied, perpetuate decades of failed privatization and persistent under funding of the University and of public higher education more generally. At UC and as compared to both 1990-1991 and 2000-2001, total per student expenditures for instruction and the State general fund contribution to per student instruction are sharply down while the inflation-adjusted contributions from students through tuition and fees are 70% higher than they were in 2000-2001 and 135% higher than they were in 1990-1991. Students and their families are paying more and getting less.

It has become conventional “wisdom” that this continuing decline is inevitable and that viable alternatives do not exist.

The report The $48 fix: Reclaiming California’s MASTER PLAN for Higher Education demonstrates that there is an affordable alternative that restores public higher education in California.

“It turns out that keeping the full promise of the Master Plan-returning the state’s investment per CSU and UC student to 2000 levels (inflation-adjusted); eliminating tuition and fees for all in-state UC, CSU and CCC students; and funding seats for qualified California high-school graduates now refused access to the system-is affordable.”

“California’s two-decade experiment in privatizing higher education has failed, as it has failed in the rest of the country. Top-quality, accessible and appropriate higher education that affords opportunity to all California students has been replaced with a system that restricts access, costs students more and compromises educational quality. Exploding student debt constricts students’ futures and harms the economy as a whole. It is entirely feasible to reinstate California’s proven success in public higher education. Several reasonable funding options can be mixed and matched to make the costs remarkably low for almost all California families. Our state has the means and the opportunity. Will we recover our political will and vision?”

This report was produced by the Reclaim California Higher Education coalition, which includes the Council of University of California Faculty Associations and other organizations dedicated to affordable, accessible, and excellent public higher education in California.

November 23, 2016
by admin
0 comments

Defense of Undocumented and other Vulnerable Categories of Students

Dear President Napolitano,

We applaud your timely declaration in the immediate aftermath of the election that the UC administration “remain[s] absolutely committed to supporting all members of our community and adhering to UC’s Principles Against Intolerance.”[1]

Like you, we are gravely concerned by the statements made by President-elect Donald Trump during the campaign, and in the aftermath of his victory, targeting particularly vulnerable communities such as undocumented Latinos and Muslim immigrants.

We support your subsequent statement to the UC Regents that “it is more important than ever that we preserve our core values, expand opportunity, and create and share knowledge in the public interest.”[2] We also support your decision to meet with representatives of undocumented students, and to institute a task force to help UC students who are in the country without legal permission and who may be at greater risk of deportation under a Trump administration.

We endorse the joint letter you wrote with CSU Chancellor Timothy White and CC Interim President Erik Skinner to the California congressional delegation asking for the restoration of year-long Pell grants.[3] CUCFA has long believed in the inextricable connection between affordable higher education and the benefits of all forms of diversity to knowledge-production, society, and democracy. We greatly appreciate the advocacy of our leaders on behalf of our students.

In short, we stand united with our administrators against any threats directed at our students and fellow employees, or any words or acts of hate that threaten our mission as a public research university committed to the betterment of our global society through teaching, learning, and the dissemination of new knowledge. We pledge to stand up for, support, and defend the most vulnerable among us, those deliberately targeted in the lead up to the election, and those who are now victims of hate in its wake – members of our community who are undocumented, people of color, LGBTQ people, Muslims (and other religious minorities), immigrants, people with disabilities, and women.

To implement these policy principles, we urge that, in collaboration with the chancellors and other appropriate authorities, you:

  • Explore all legal venues to refuse to act on behalf of federal agents, and to withhold information on the immigration status, religion, and national origin of our students, faculty, or staff;
  • Not enter into agreements with state or local law enforcement agencies, Homeland Security or any other federal department for the enforcement of federal immigration law;
  • Instruct university police not to honor immigration hold requests, and not to contact, detain, question or arrest individuals solely on the basis of being, or suspected of being, a person that lacks documentation;
  • Standardize a UC systemwide administrative office with responsibility for counseling DACA students on their educational situation;
  • Publicize that DACA student counseling services are available on a strictly confidential basis;
  • Continue to allow DACA-eligible students to pay in-state resident tuition;
  • Ensure student’s access to health care and financial aid within California law;
  • Invest in faculty and staff training for UndocuAlly modules developed by UC Davis;[4]
  • Commit to allow undocumented students to work on UC campuses in the event that the DACA provisions were repealed;
  • Take these measures before Inauguration Day so that DACA students can be assured of institutional support.

We are aware of the many calls to consider declaring all UCs “sanctuary campuses” before the inauguration of President-elect Trump.[5] While we support the spirit of this call, believing that Universities have an ethical obligation to assist undocumented students against threats of deportation, we are concerned that the idea of sanctuary campuses does not have any legal status, and agree with Cal State Chancellor White that declaring any public university a “sanctuary” may give a false sense of security “to the very people we support and serve.”[6] We urge you to study all legal and symbolic ramifications of declaring UC campuses “sanctuaries,” and to involve students, staff, and faculty in making that decision. Accordingly, we ask you to charge the announced task force on undocumented students with discussing explicitly the issue of sanctuary status and to make their findings public before January 20.

It is estimated that one third of the over 740,000 undocumented students in the US reside in California, and our state already has multiple progressive policies designed to support undocumented immigrants, including measures that help them access healthcare, driver’s licenses and student loans. We have a responsibility not only to reassure our students that we will stand by them in the face of deportation if laws were passed in that direction, but to lead the nation in rejecting policies opposed to the core values of our university.

For this reason we support your actions to date and reiterate our desire to work with you and other university leaders to advance these important goals.

On behalf of the Council of UC Faculty Associations Board,
Stanton Glantz,
President, Council of UC Faculty Associations
Professor of Medicine, UCSF


[1] http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/education/article113780763.html

[2] http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-ln-uc-regents-20161116-story.html

[3] https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/uc-president-joins-california-higher-education-and-uc-student-leaders-support-pell-grants

[4] http://undocumented.ucdavis.edu/education/ally.html

[5] http://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2016/11/proposal-turn-californias-massive-public-higher-ed-system-into-sanctuary-campuses-to-stop-trump-107463

[6] http://mynewsla.com/education/2016/11/17/no-sanctuary-at-cal-state-university-but-no-cooperation-with-trump-immigration/

 

November 15, 2016
by admin
0 comments

RFA’s Statement following 2016 Election

To the UCR Community,

The UC Riverside Faculty Association calls on UCR faculty, students and employees to stand united against acts of hate and bigotry directed at our students and fellow employees following the Presidential election. Words and acts of hate are forms of violence that threaten our mission as a public university committed to the betterment of our global society through teaching, learning, and the dissemination of new knowledge.

We pledge to stand up for, support, and defend the most vulnerable among us, those deliberately targeted as the election approached, and those who are now victims of hate – members of our community who are undocumented, people of color, LGBTQ people, Muslims and other religious minorities, immigrants, the differently abled, and women. We have seen firsthand the anxiety and fear generated in the months leading up to this election.

As educators, we affirm UCR’s commitment to fostering an environment that is inclusive and respectful of diversity in all forms — in our classrooms, our offices, on campus, and beyond. We are prepared to defend and support our campus community as we protect our democracy.

Sincerely,

The Board of the Riverside Faculty Association:
Chris Chase-Dunn, Sociology
Norman Ellstrand, Botany and Plant Sciences
Farah Godrej, Political Science
Michel Lapidus, Mathematics
Patricia Morton, Art History
Jennifer Ramos, Comparative Literature and Languages

Home

October 1, 2016
by admin
0 comments

A Statement of Principles for Choosing New University of California Chancellors

This year, the UC Davis and UC Berkeley campuses are searching for new Chancellors, a process that is not open, public and transparent. The Council of UC Faculty Associations, of which the Riverside Faculty Association is a member, calls on changes to the process to include shared governance more fully and to create a public dialogue with candidates.

***********************************************

A Statement of Principles for Choosing New University of California
Chancellors

A University of California Chancellor must be committed both to broad
access to university education and to scholarly excellence, and have a
proven record of support for the value of public education. A Chancellor
must recognize that, despite increases in fundraising for specific
projects, efforts at privatization have failed to sustain the
University’s central mission of education, research, and service for the
people of California. In addition to providing intellectual vision and
integrity, the Chancellor should demonstrate accountability to the
principles and the public mission of the university.

To be forthright and transparent in dealings with the UC community and
the public, the Chancellor must show by example the values held by the
UC system:

•    By focusing on education, research, and public service, not on
peripheral capital projects not directly related to the university’s
primary teaching and research missions that saddle the university with
high levels of debt.

•    By respecting shared governance between administration and faculty
as vital to insulating academic freedom from external political and
financial influence.

•    By limiting the number of out-of-state undergraduate students to
maximize opportunity for Californians.

•    By reducing the number of senior managers; senior management has
grown by a factor of three or four over the last 20 years while the
number of faculty has remained stagnant and the number of students
increased by 60%.

•    By making the administrative leadership transparent and by opening
the budget to meaningful faculty review and input.

•    By implementing a cap on the salary of the Chancellor and other
senior administrators, limited to a given multiplier of the lowest paid
workers on campus on the grounds that a corporate salary leads to
corporate attitudes, whereas a more modest salary corresponds to public
service and respects the financial needs of students, faculty, and the
institution.

•    By pledging not to accept any paid external board service or paid
consulting with for-profit entities.

•    By developing new community outreach programs, involving the
teaching and research role of campus faculty and students and, more
generally, elevating the contributions of UC to the people of California.

Accordingly, the process of choosing the Chancellor should be open to
the university community:

•    The short list of candidates selected by the search committee and
forwarded to the President should be publicly discussed. The candidates
should be invited to campus for public presentations and comments from
the university community should be debated by the search committee.

•    The President and Regents should make their decision after
consultation with the Academic Senate to ensure a candidate the whole
campus supports.

Council of University of California Faculty Associations (September 29,
2016) info@cucfa.org

September 8, 2016
by admin
0 comments

Faculty Associations’ Letter to the President of Long Island University

As you may already know, three days ago, President of Long Island University Kimberly R. Cline and the Board of Trustees locked out the faculty of the Long Island University (LIU) Brooklyn Campus. After contract negotiations on a new contract failed, the administration ended negotiations unilaterally. Such a lockout has never happened before in higher education in the United States. The administration not only locked out the faculty, but they also cut off their pay, their benefits, their health care, their university email, and access to their students. (For information see https://academeblog.org/2016/09/08/lockout-of-faculty-at-liu-looking-down-into-the-abyss/).

RFA believes this sets a dangerous precedent that could threaten academic freedom and shared governance elsewhere. We are convinced that this gross violation of labor relations and shared governance practices must be met with swift and resolute denunciation. CUCFA has sent a letter to President Cline http://cucfa.org/2016/09/letter-to-the-president-of-liu/ urging her to desist from this course of action and return to the negotiating table. We urge you to read the article at the link above (and pasted below) and take action against this outrageous lockout.

********************************************************

September 7, 2016

Dear Dr. Cline:

The Council of University of California Faculty Associations is extremely alarmed by the “lock out” action taken by your administration against the faculty of LIU-Brooklyn.

The action has no precedent in higher education in this country and constitutes a grave assault on unions, labor negotiations, and faculty themselves.

We urge you to reconsider this tactic and return to the negotiating table to bargain in good faith.

To do otherwise is to antagonize hardworking and dedicated faculty for years to come, devastate the educational aspirations and expectations of your students, many of whom have overcome tremendous obstacles to arrive at your college gates, and produce pariah status for LIU-Brooklyn in American higher education.

This path has no future for your institution and we urge you to reconsider.

Sincerely,

The Board of the Council of UC Faculty Associations

July 21, 2016
by admin
0 comments

Alarming Changes to UC Regent’s Governance Structure

The RFA is deeply concerned that the Regents have voted to make changes to shared governance that erode UC faculty’s legal and practical standing in shared governance. As Robert Meister points out, this could be the end of shared governance as a constitutional principle in the UC system. Please follow these links for more analysis.

Regents Propose Centralization Without Real Justification, Tuesday, July 19, 2016, by Michael Meranze, Remaking the University

Alarming Changes to UC Regent’s Governance Structure,  July 19, 2016, Robert Meister as posted on the Council of U.C. Faculty Associations’ (CUCFA) website.