“What Will You Do to Save Cal Poly?” asked the green and gold signs waving at the Save Cal Poly Rally yesterday morning. Put on by the Cal Poly branch of the California Faculty Association (CFA), the rally was in response to fiscal problems in the California State University (CSU) system, furloughs and the College Based Fee (CBF) delays at Cal Poly.
The event, designed to educate and initiate action by students and faculty, attracted a majority of faculty and staff members but only about 40 students.
The looming threat of large-scale layoffs, or “non-renewal” of contracts for faculty and staff, at Cal Poly continue to grow as professors have taken furloughs and further CBF decisions continue to be delayed. On the other hand, students are worried how this is going to affect their education.
The speakers spoke of the need to communicate with legislators, CSU administrators and parents to initiate greater involvement from all parties.
“If we want to change this we have to ban together and let our voices be heard in Sacramento,” Joan Kennedy, President of the local CSU Employees’ Union, said. “If we don’t fix what’s happening in Sacramento right now we’re facing massive layoffs come June.”
The state and Cal Poly have not been seeing things from the same point of view recently. For instance, CSU Chancellor Charles Reed denied Cal Poly’s increase in CBFs, which students voted in favor of last spring.
Cal Poly’s Associated Student Inc. (ASI) President Kelly Griggs briefly addressed the audience and expressed her frustration at Cal Poly’s situation in the CSU by saying that the term “state-supported” in regards to Cal Poly should now be placed in quotations. We’ve been denied our desire to keep our education at the same level, Griggs said.
“I feel the need to protect the status of our education at Cal Poly.”
Keeping Cal Poly at its currently esteemed status (voted No. 1 by US News and World Report as best public-masters university for the seventeenth year in a row) was a main focus.
Speakers noted that Cal Poly is in better shape than the majority of the other CSU schools but will begin to hurt as time goes on if actions aren’t taken.
One of the options the CFA was pushing is the passage of Assembly Bill 656, which would put a tax on oil and gas extracted from California. This tax, which the majority of other oil-producing states have some version of, would bring $1 billion to the school system California. Tentatively, $600 million would be allotted to the CSU system and would then be divided by Chancellor Reed from there. The speakers urged students to sign cards supporting AB 656.
Many of the speakers expressed disappointment at the student turnout.
“The only regret I have is that this lawn is not filled,” Cal Poly President Warren Baker said. “This is such an important issue.”
Baker said that he was impressed with the faculty’s ability to adapt in the difficult situation. He stressed the importance of not reducing the intellectual capacity of the Cal Poly institution. In the face of non-renewal of faculty and staff contracts, furloughs and CBF delays this could prove to be quite the challenge.
The Academic Senate is responsible for keeping the Cal Poly curriculum up to its standards and has no plans to eliminate any programs, Rachel Fernflores, Academic Senate chair and professor of philosophy, said. “What we’re trying to do is preserve the integrity of the curriculum,” she said. Fernflores warned the audience not to be downtrodden by the odds against them and to be resourceful in the face of adversity.
Although the speakers were addressing the issue, there was a lack of clear ideas or solutions on how to attack the budget shortfall.
Some students saw this as a problem. “To me it seemed like a lot of scapegoating,” Aristotle Ou, an environmental engineering senior, said. “I didn’t really hear any real solutions,” he said. It seemed their solutions to the problem were not tangible but just to think of further solutions, Ou said.
“I don’t have any good ideas either,” he said.
Students, faculty and staff can get involved by logging on to csualliance.com and signing petitions for AB 656.
It’s ironic that the California Faculty Association is rallying to preserve Cal Poly when in fact they and their members are a major part of the problem.
The reality is that civil servants at all levels, including Cal Poly faculty and support staff are breaking the bank because they refuse to admit that their compensation plans, specifically their retirement packages are breaking the bank and causing monies that would otherwise go to education and social services to be redirected to their retirement programs.
Here’s how it works versus the private sector and what the CFA doesn’t want students to know.
Private sector workers – Pay 100% of their retirements and receive roughly $1,500 per month from social security at 67 years of age. Additionally, on the amounts they’ve been able to set aside for retirement, they receive no cost of living adjustments for inflation.
Public sector workers (including Cal Poly faculty and staff) – Pay approximately 8% of salary into Calpers program for retirement. Work 30 years (to approximate age 54), retire at between 65% and 90% of working salary (e.g. a Cal Poly professor will be paid $6,000/month in retirement while a Cal Poly fireman will be paid $8,000/month). Receive yearly cost of living adjustments to accommodate inflation and enjoy comprehensive medical and dental etc. for life.
The NET – civil servants at ALL levels refuse to give ground on their pension programs despite the fact that the private sector does not get such programs. This is what’s breaking the bank and why student fees will continue to rise.
The solution – place civil servants at all levels on the same retirement programs as the private sector meaning they must pay the majority of their pensions via 401K matching programs. Eliminate retirement at 30 years and require working until age 65. Enforce cost of living adjustments consistent with that of social security.
The private sector simply wants a level playing field. Civil servants who have become very comfortable feeding at the trough don’t. That has to change.
Relying to Robert, your recommendation would require a wide-ranging change throughout US secondary education. I’m not denying the drain on the budget by retirement plans, but think through on the results. If CSU (and UC, presumably) made the change unilaterally, I’d expect there would be wide spread jumping of ship by faculty, as the retirement plan is one factor that lures people into teaching at a public University in the first place; there has to be some perk. Do you want to retain the best faculty (I’m assuming Poly has some of these, based on national rankings), or have just anybody that needs a job (and meets the requirements), teach the classes?
There is no simple solution here, but a unilateral one like this would not be wise.
Many of the speakers expressed disappointment at the student turnout.
“The only regret I have is that this lawn is not filled,” Cal Poly President Warren Baker said. “This is such an important issue.”
It outraged me to see President Baker saying this considering the rally itself was not well advertised. If I had known that this rally was going on at a time that wasn’t during classes(or that it was even going on) I would have surely attended. The CBF’s are a huge part of Cal Poly’s financial situation. How can the CSU Chancellor deny a university the chance to add more sections, keep more professors, and most of all – enhance the education the STUDENTS are paying for. We, being the students, agreed to increase our own fees, why should we be denied our choice to pay more money? Seriously?