Berkeley Employees Making a Comeback June & July

From the Daily Cal: Most UC Berkeley employees will be expected to return to on-site operations beginning July 12.

Additionally, starting June 16, employees currently working remotely will have the option to return to in-person work earlier on a voluntary basis, according to an email sent Thursday by campus administrators. Specific guidelines for returning to campus will be announced in May and will depend on the availability of vaccines and low community transmission of COVID-19, according to campus spokesperson Janet Gilmore...

Full story at https://www.dailycal.org/2021/04/29/uc-berkeley-employees-expected-to-return-to-campus-starting-july-12/

Time to Think Again About a Faculty Regent? Voting in the Room Where It Happens

Back in the day (1970s) when the student regent position was created, the Academic Senate decided against having a faculty regent even though that was a possibility. So we now have a voting student regent, alumni regent, but only a faculty representative (nonvoting).

We also have a recent history of the Regents not paying a lot of attention to faculty views.*

Students may be on the verge of getting a second vote at the Regents. If that were to happen, the time would be ripe for reconsideration of that 1970s decision that nixed a voting faculty regent.**

From the Bruin:

A proposed constitutional amendment would allow a second student member on the University of California Board of Regents to vote in board decisions, strengthening the presence of students’ voices and advocacy efforts, UC students said.

The UC Board of Regents currently has two positions for students – the student regent and student regent-designate. A student must serve as the regent-designate for a year before they earn voting power as the student regent. Under California Senate Constitutional Amendment 5, voting power would be extended to the student regent-designate.

State Sen. Steve Glazer worked with the UC Student Association, Student Regent Jamaal Muwwakkil and Student Regent-designate Alexis Atsilvsgi Zaragoza to draft SCA 5, said Joshua Lewis, government relations chair of UCSA and a third-year political science and public policy student at UC Berkeley. Glazer introduced the amendment April 16.

Many regent committee meetings happen simultaneously, but the student regent can only vote in one meeting at a time, said Muwwakkil, a linguistics doctoral student at UC Santa Barbara. He added that although the regent-designate can be present and vocal in the other meetings, their inability to vote is an unnecessary restriction that limits the scope of student influence.

Zaragoza, a fifth-year geography and political science transfer student at UC Berkeley, said the designate position is essentially the same role as the regent position without the voting power.

“Why not have more representation?” Zaragoza said. “That person’s already here. They’re already doing the work. They’re already speaking up. You might as well just let them say ‘aye’ and go on about it.”

Muwwakkil added that the student voice becomes more powerful on the Board of Regents because of the ability to affect structural change.

“We get to be in the room where it happens,” Muwwakkil said...

Full story at https://dailybruin.com/2021/04/28/proposed-amendment-would-expand-student-influence-on-uc-board-of-regents

or direct to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WySzEXKUSZw

===

*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2020/08/severe-and-deep-disappointment-in.html

**This issue has arisen before. See: http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2015/10/a-faculty-regent-part-2.html and http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2015/10/a-faculty-regent.html

The UC Prez on the Accellion Data Breach

As noted in a prior posting, UC President Michael Drake spoke to a virtual meeting of emeriti and retirees groups (CUCEA and CUCRA) on April 28. One of the topics he touched on was the Accellion data breach. Mainly, he talked about it in general terms referencing other such breaches in other organizations and recommended using "consumer protections" (which seemed to refer to the one year of Experian monitoring UC is offering). He made a reference to a forthcoming communication from UC. (In another session of the meeting - not with the prez - there was reference to some kind of notice that would be coming to those affected in 45-60 days.)

You can hear his comments at:

https://archive.org/details/drake-cucea-cucra-4-28-21-full/drake+CUCEA-CUCRA+4-28-21+Data+Breach.wma

Don't Say We Didn't Warn You

As the campus pursues its conversion from old-fashioned copper wire phone service, above is a note from a service provider. When the Big One hits, don't expect your campus VoiP phone, or your personal cellphone, to work. And don't say we didn't warn you. (Just type in "VoiP" in the search engine for this blog for our numerous warnings.) 

Flat Again

 

Each week, we have tracked new claims for unemployment insurance in California as an index of the direction of the state's labor market and economy. Things have been flat in recent works with new claims basically unchanged. It remains flat for the week ending April 24. So, we have the seeming paradox of a good budget situation - see our prior post today - but a labor market that still needs improvement. 

As always, the latest new claims data are at https://www.dol.gov/ui/data.pdf.

Time for UC to Ask for More - Part 3

 

With the upcoming May Revise budget proposal by the governor (some time in mid-May), we have noted that the improved state budget situation and the recall make this an optimum time for UC to ask for "more" from the state.* At a joint meeting of organizations representing emeriti and retirees at UC (CUCEA and CUCRA, respectively), the UC prez indicated that indeed UC is asking for more. Its request to the governor is to be made whole for cuts this year, to receive some adjustment for inflation, and for "one-time" funding for deferred maintenance including seismic upgrades and specialized programs such as returning Native American artifacts. You can hear an audio of what President Drake said about the UC budget request at:

https://archive.org/details/drake-cucea-cucra-4-28-21-full/drake+CUCEA-CUCRA+4-28-21+budget+excerpt.wma

====

*https://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2021/04/time-for-uc-to-ask-for-more-part-2.html

Radio Silence on Accellion Breach - Part 8 (Students & Alumni, Too)

The Daily Cal notes that those affected by the UC/Accellion data breach are not limited to employees, retirees, dependents, and beneficiaries. (Maybe "limited" is not the right word here.) Those affected also include students and alumni. Apparently, the latter have not been notified by UC:

On March 31, the UC system announced that it was one of 300 organizations affected by a nationwide cyberattack on Accellion’s File Transfer Appliance, a vendor service used for “transferring sensitive information.” Following the announcement, many students have reported their personal information being found on the dark web. The stolen information included Social Security numbers, email addresses, phone numbers and home addresses. 

“We are working with federal law enforcement and external cybersecurity experts to investigate this incident,” said Stett Holbrook, spokesperson for the UC Office of the President. “In the meantime, we have notified the UC community and offered one year of complimentary credit monitoring and identity theft protection.”

Campus alumna Lauren Miller, who has formerly worked at The Daily Californian, alleged that her Social Security number, phone number, email address and home address were found on the dark web. Miller also claimed that her parents’ personal information was also accessed.

Miller said she learned about the breach through her bank and her sister, who is currently studying law at UCLA, rather than through the university. Other alumni have not received any official communication from the university, according to Miller...

Full story at https://www.dailycal.org/2021/04/27/uc-data-breach-leaks-students-personal-information-to-dark-web/

UCPD: Maybe 40% Cut; Maybe Not

From CalMatters: The chair of the University of California board of regents said Wednesday he’s open to considering dramatic cuts in the number of armed, sworn police officers across the university system.  The comments by Regent John Pérez came during a panel on the future of campus policing co-hosted by CalMatters and KQED, in which the UC Student Association proposed decreasing armed officers on UC campuses by 40%. “There’s room to have discussion about a significant reduction in policing on campuses,” Pérez said, adding, “I don’t think the 40% number is wildly out of the range of possibility.” ...

The chair of the UC Student Association’s racial justice campaign, outlined the organization’s proposals to freeze hiring of new officers, give independent oversight boards authority over police department budgets and create a pilot program in restorative justice, an approach that emphasizes repairing harm rather than punishment. The UC spent $138 million on policing in the 2018-2019 year. (He) said that budget should instead be spent addressing mental health and funding housing for homeless and at-risk students. 

While Pérez agreed that the association’s proposals are a framework for progress, he and UC Davis Police Chief Joseph Farrow argued during the panel that it is necessary for UCs to retain their police departments. Officers hired to work at a UC campus are better equipped to work with students, they said, compared to police officers from outside the campus coming in to answer calls. 

“I’m going to say something unpopular: One of the reasons we need police on campuses is because campuses aren’t free from violent crime, and they’re not free from other expressions of crime that are appropriately responded to by police,” Pérez said...

Full story with video at https://calmatters.org/education/higher-education/college-beat-higher-education/2021/04/future-of-campus-policing/

Radio Silence on Accellion Breach - Part 7

UC-Irvine breaks radio silence on the Accellion data breach to tell us that there is continued radio silence. The Irvine official newspaper reminds us of litigation of an earlier UC data breach in 2015 that resulted in litigation. And it tells us that no one knows whether UC plans any litigation this time:

UCLA Health was victim to a network breach compromising 4.5 million patients in 2015. UCLA began investigating suspicious activity in conjunction with the FBI in October 2014, and officially determined that the network containing personal information of UCLA Health affiliates was compromised on May 5, 2015. Social security numbers, health care information and other personal information were also compromised at the time.

Similar to UC’s offer with Experian IdentityWorks, UCLA also offered affected individuals a financed year long subscription to an identity protection service, MyIDCare.

Class action complaints were filed against the Regents of the University of California on July 24, 2015. The legal suit resulted in a settlement agreement in which UCLA agreed to pay $7.5 million in claims, purposing $5.5 million to new network security improvements and $2 million to class action claims.

According to a FAQ posted on the UCnet website, UC is working with local and federal law enforcement and third-party vendors to investigate the data breach. As of April 26, no litigation plans have been officially announced.

Source: https://www.newuniversity.org/2021/04/26/uc-system-information-compromised-in-accellion-data-breach-after-nation-wide-cybersecurity-attack/

Maybe radio silence will be broken at the next regents meeting. Blog readers will know the regents had a secret briefing about this issue.* Stay tuned:

or direct to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikaes-rBO4Y

===

*https://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2021/04/radio-silence-on-accellion-breach-part-5.html

===

PS: Too bad Accellion never hired Kaminsky. Now it's too late. See:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/27/technology/daniel-kaminsky-dead.html

Time for UC to Ask for More - Part 2

We've said it before, but the headlines are reinforcing the message.* Now is the time for UC/UC Regents to be asking the state for more. The governor is now facing a recall - and would like to keep folks happy. Moreover, the budget situation is such that there is more to give. Redistricting is now set in motion by the release of 2020 Census figures. That means district lines in the state assembly and senate will be redrawn. Incumbents will be running in districts in the future that will be different from what they have now, again an incentive to keep everyone happy. UC needs to go for it.

MORE!

or direct to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw-EDPuPNR8.

====

*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2021/04/time-for-uc-to-ask-for-more.html

UCLA History: Ex-Chancellor Returns to Dedicate Public Health Building (1968)

The caption for this photo reads, "Chancellor Murphy at School of Public Health building dedication, October 4, 1968." However, by that date, Franklin Murphy was the former chancellor. Charles Young became chancellor on September 1, 1968. Murphy left the chancellorship to become Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Times Mirror Company.

Source of photo: https://dl.library.ucla.edu/islandora/object/universityarchives%3A31396

Closed Door Regents Meeting Tomorrow (April 26)

Here (below) is the agenda. Presumably, all nominees will be revealed at the full board meeting in mid-May. How those nominees were selected will not be known.

Source: https://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/regmeet/april21/nominationsx-4.26.pdf

UCLA Grad/Astronaut Sent to International Space Station

From MyNewsLA: Hawthorne-based SpaceX successfully launched another group of astronauts into orbit early Friday morning en route to the International Space Station — becoming the first launch involving a previously used spacecraft and rocket.

...Flying on the mission launched Friday are NASA astronauts Shane Kimbrough and Megan McArthur, Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) astronaut Akihiko Hoshide and European Space Agency astronaut Thomas Pesquet. McArthur, who grew up in Northern California, is a UCLA graduate in aerospace engineering, and she earned a doctorate in oceanography at UC San Diego, where she was a researcher at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography...

Full story at:

https://mynewsla.com/education/2021/04/23/spacex-launches-4-astronauts-to-space-station-on-used-rocket-one-astronaut-a-ucla-grad/

There's a Fly in the Fall Vaccination Ointment for UC/UCLA

From the LA Times: ...The vaccines to protect against the coronavirus are available under emergency use authorization from the Food and Drug Administration, not full approval yet. And because of strange wording in the law governing emergency authorization, the government cannot require people to get the vaccine. Only private entities can, at least according to recent legal interpretations.

As public institutions, UC and CSU are stuck. Both announced Thursday their intention of requiring vaccination for students, faculty and staff starting in the fall, as soon as the vaccines receive formal approval. And that is expected to happen for the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, which have shown themselves to be remarkably safe and effective — well, maybe by fall. Then the universities have to allow time for everyone to become fully vaccinated.

With many of the schools starting in August, this means it’s highly unlikely students will start out their fall quarters and semesters fully vaccinated, unless they do so voluntarily. Yet this is the most important time in the academic year for ensuring everyone is vaccinated. Students are coming from all over, places where infection rates might be higher or lower. Then they’re placed in the tight living quarters of dormitories where they’ll be ready to mingle and party after more than a year of remote learning and social distancing. Fortunately, California’s infection rate is very low overall, and most of the UC and Cal State students come from within the state. But at this point, it’s hard to know what the situation will be in the fall...

Full story at https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-04-22/opinion-why-a-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-for-uc-and-cal-state-is-more-complicated

=========

Note: Yours truly poked around the websites of the FCA and CDC and found no time schedule - or even anything about a schedule - for a non-emergency approval of the vaccines. Note that UC-Berkeley starts its semester in August as does the UCLA Law School.

UCLA's Version of Fall Vaccination Policy

Yesterday we posted UC's announcement about requiring vaccinations in the fall (along with information on the policy of CSU and the community colleges).* UCLA also circulated an email yesterday in the late afternoon on its version of the new policy. The text is below:

COVID-19 Response and Recovery Task Force

Dear Bruin Community,   Today, the University of California announced a proposed policy for review that would require all UC faculty, staff, academic appointees and students to be vaccinated against COVID-19, subject to limited medical and religious exemptions. The requirement would go into effect by the beginning of the fall term, provided at least one of the vaccines has full approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and is readily available. The details of this proposed policy can be found in the UC Office of the President’s announcement, the text of which is below.   UCLA is committed to supporting the vaccination effort, which will help protect the safety and vitality of our community and facilitate our return to greater in-person campus operations in the fall. Everyone 16 years of age and older is now eligible to receive the vaccine in the United States. The Arthur Ashe Student Health and Wellness Center is coordinating with UCLA Health to provide vaccine appointment information to students. UCLA Health patients can schedule their free COVID-19 vaccine appointment through My UCLA Health. Because UCLA has not received sufficient vaccine doses for all of our faculty, staff and students, we encourage members of the community to book an appointment through California’s My Turn or through a vaccine provider if able. Those outside of California should check with their local health departments about appointments, and we encourage international students to get vaccinated through the systems in place in their countries.   For questions about this proposed policy, please review UC’s FAQ for students and FAQ for faculty and staff, or send an email to covid19@ucla.edu. Thank you for doing your part to support the greater good and helping our institution put community health and safety first.   Sincerely,   Michael J. Beck Administrative Vice Chancellor Co-chair, Response and Recovery Task Force   Michael Meranze Immediate Past Chair, UCLA Academic Senate Professor of History Co-chair, COVID-19 Response and Recovery Task Force       UC encourages COVID-19 vaccinations for university communities while reviewing policy requirements   The University of California today shared the details of a proposed policy on COVID-19 vaccination (PDF) as part of its engagement with its community as it joins the California State University in supporting immunizations as part of an expected return of students, faculty, academic appointees and staff to in-person instruction across the state this fall.   “Receiving a vaccine for the virus that causes COVID-19 is a key step people can take to protect themselves, their friends and family, and our campus communities while helping bring the pandemic to an end,” said UC President Michael V. Drake, M.D.   “Together, the CSU and UC enroll and employ more than one million students and employees across 33 major university campuses, so this is the most comprehensive and consequential university plan for COVID-19 vaccines in the country,” said CSU Chancellor Joseph I. Castro. “Consistent with previous CSU announcements related to the university’s response to the pandemic, we are sharing this information now to give students, their families and our employees ample time to make plans to be vaccinated prior to the start of the fall term.”   Given the importance of vaccination, UC is engaging its community in a discussion of the details of the proposed policy now so that students, faculty, academic appointees and staff will have ample time to obtain the vaccine ahead of the fall term.   Under the proposed policy, the University would require students, faculty, academic appointees and staff who are accessing campus facilities at any UC location beginning this fall to be immunized against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. UC already strongly encourages students, faculty, academic appointees and staff to voluntarily obtain a vaccination as soon as they are eligible and able to schedule an appointment. The requirement would go into effect once a vaccine has full approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).   Students planning to access UC campuses for the fall will need to update their immunization documentation on file to indicate vaccination or an approved exception or medical exemption prior to coming on campus. For those who are unable to receive a vaccine prior to campus arrival, student health centers may be able to help find a local resource for vaccination but special protections may be required. Faculty, academic appointees and staff will be advised on the process for providing vaccination information after a policy is finalized.   With an increasing number of people expected to return to UC locations, vaccination is essential for the safety and well-being of the community. Additionally, physical distancing, mask wearing and frequent hand-washing and cleaning will continue to be crucial for daily campus life. ==== *http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2021/04/uc-proposes-to-require-coronavirus.html

 

UC Proposes to Require Coronavirus Vaccination in Fall IF...

From EdSource: The University of California and California State University systems will require students, faculty and staff to get Covid-19 vaccinations so they can access campus facilities this fall, they jointly announced Thursday.

The requirements are conditional on the Food and Drug Administration giving full approval to a vaccine. The vaccines are currently authorized for emergency use.

In a statement, Cal State Chancellor Joseph Castro said the university systems were making the announcement now so students, faculty and staff have “ample time to make plans to be vaccinated” before the fall terms begin.

“Together, the CSU and UC enroll and employ more than one million students and employees across 33 major university campuses, so this is the most comprehensive and consequential university plan for COVID-19 vaccines in the country,” he added.

UC President Michael Drake said in the statement that receiving the vaccine is a “key step people can take to protect themselves, their friends and family, and our campus communities while helping bring the pandemic to an end.”

Meanwhile, the chancellor overseeing California’s 116 community colleges, Eloy Ortiz Oakley, said in a statement Thursday that it will be up to the state’s 73 local community college districts, which run the system’s 115 colleges to decide whether to require vaccinations.  An additional college, Calbright, the system’s only online college, is operated by the system’s central office.

“I fully expect districts will do whatever they can to ensure the safety of everyone returning to our campuses, and everyone should make a plan now to get vaccinated if they haven’t already,” Oakley said.

Source: https://edsource.org/news-updates#university-of-california-california-state-university-plan-to-require-covid-19-vaccines-this-fall

UC's announcement:

UC encourages COVID-19 vaccinations for university communities while reviewing policy requirements

UC Office of the President

Thursday, April 22, 2021

The University of California today (April 22) shared the details of a proposed policy on COVID-19 vaccination as part of its engagement with its community as it joins the California State University in supporting immunizations as part of an expected return of students, faculty, academic appointees and staff to in-person instruction across the state this fall. 

“Receiving a vaccine for the virus that causes COVID-19 is a key step people can take to protect themselves, their friends and family, and our campus communities while helping bring the pandemic to an end,” said UC President Michael V. Drake, M.D. 

“Together, the CSU and UC enroll and employ more than one million students and employees across 33 major university campuses, so this is the most comprehensive and consequential university plan for COVID-19 vaccines in the country,” said CSU Chancellor Joseph I. Castro. “Consistent with previous CSU announcements related to the university’s response to the pandemic, we are sharing this information now to give students, their families and our employees ample time to make plans to be vaccinated prior to the start of the fall term.”

Given the importance of vaccination, UC is engaging its community in a discussion of the details of the proposed policy now so that students, faculty, academic appointees and staff will have ample time to obtain the vaccine ahead of the fall term.

Under the proposed policy, the University would require students, faculty, academic appointees and staff who are accessing campus facilities at any UC location beginning this fall to be immunized against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. UC already strongly encourages students, faculty, academic appointees and staff to voluntarily obtain a vaccination as soon as they are eligible and able to schedule an appointment. The requirement would go into effect once a vaccine has full approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Students planning to access UC campuses for the fall will need to update their immunization documentation on file to indicate vaccination or an approved exception or medical exemption prior to coming on campus. For those who are unable to receive a vaccine prior to campus arrival, student health centers may be able to help find a local resource for vaccination but special protections may be required. Faculty, academic appointees and staff will be advised on the process for providing vaccination information after a policy is finalized.  

With an increasing number of people expected to return to UC locations, vaccination is essential for the safety and well-being of the community. Additionally, physical distancing, mask-wearing and frequent hand-washing and cleaning will continue to be crucial for daily campus life.

Source: https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/press-room/uc-encourages-covid-19-vaccinations-university-communities-while-reviewing-policy

Flat this time

We have been tracking new weekly claims for unemployment insurance in California as an indicator of the state's labor market. For the week ending April 17, new claims were basically flat (little changed from the prior week). That result is disappointing after the big drop in the prior week. For the U.S. as a whole, new claims are dropping, whether on a seasonally-adjusted or unadjusted basis. 

In terms of absolute values, new claims were over 72,000 in California. In the boom times just prior to the coronavirus downturn, they were in the vicinity of 40,000. So we have a way to go.

The latest data are at https://www.dol.gov/ui/data.pdf.

The Prop 4 Limit and the UC Budget

Back in 1978, voters enacted Proposition 13 which drastically cut local property taxes and limited the ability of state and local governments in California to raise taxes. The taxpayer revolt of that era led to a second proposition a year later, Prop 4, which effectively put a ceiling on revenues state and local governments could retain, The limit was essentially based on per capita income and population growth. Under Prop 4, excess revenues had to be refunded to taxpayers.

As it turned out, shortly after Prop 4 was enacted, the state (and nation) had two back-to-back recessions which cut tax receipts so the impact of Prop 4 was not immediately felt. But in the late 1980s, the Prop 4 ceiling (known as the Gann Limit or State Appropriations Limit) was hit and the state rebated some revenue. 

Thanks to Prop 13, the K-14 system - which had been traditionally heavily dependent on local property taxes - had subsequently become heavily dependent on the state. The K-14 establishment preferred not to see its state revenue base eroded and effectively modified school finance and the Gann Limit through Prop 98 (1988) and Prop 111 (1990). The net effect was protection of K-14 revenue and spending and a loosening of the Gann Limit in ways favorable to K-14. Given the change, the Gann Limit was not a potential factor until the peak of the dot-com boom. But that boom turned into the dot-com bust, cutting revenues. We didn't start hearing about the Gann Limit until the boom shortly before the coronavirus crisis. 

As it turned out, the recent virus-related downturn didn't have the expected downward shift in revenue that was projected when the current state budget was enacted. And now the economy and revenues are in an upward trend.

All of this history is a prelude to the fact that current projections indicate that the Gann Limit will become a factor in state budgetary decisions going forward. The Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) has just published an alert to that fact.* The chart in this post comes from that publication.

In theory, something might be put on the ballot adjusting the Limit in some way. LAO points out that there are also some legislative maneuvers that can relax the limit at the margin. However, UC depends on the state for its "core" educational funding. And unlike K-14, UC doesn't have preferential status in the budget.

If you didn't know about Gann before, now you do. You are likely to hear more about it when the governor releases his May Revise budget proposal next month.

===

*https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2021/4416/SAL-042121.pdf

Drake and Pérez on Chauvin Verdict

Tuesday, April 20, 2021

University of California President Michael V. Drake, M.D., and UC Board of Regents Chair John A. Pérez released the following statement today (April 20) regarding the Chauvin trial verdict:

As the prosecution made abundantly clear, Derek Chauvin grossly and maliciously overstepped his duties as a police officer when he killed George Floyd. The jury confirmed what many of us who watched that horrible video know to be true: Floyd was murdered.

This verdict will not ameliorate the incredible pain and grief the Floyd family are experiencing, or the pain and suffering endured by so many more. It does, at least, reaffirm the principle that no one is above the law, especially not a peace officer trusted with protecting a community’s safety and security. Although it cannot bring back Floyd, may today’s jury decision give his family and loved ones a measure of peace, and encourage our country to reimagine and work toward a safer and more equitable future for us all.

Source: https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/press-room/uc-commends-chauvin-murder-trial-verdict

Unsettling News About the Heaps Settlement

Back in November, we noted that a class-action settlement had been reached in the Heaps case for $73 million.* Apparently, however, that may not have been the end of the matter. From MyNewsLA:

Attorneys representing former UCLA students who allege they were sexually abused by disgraced ex-campus gynecologist/oncologist James Heaps urged other former patients to opt out of a $73 million federal class-action settlement before the May 6 deadline.

A federal judge in January gave preliminary approval of the settlement in which the University of California system agreed to pay $73 million to more than 5,500 women who were patients of Heaps, who has been charged with 20 felony counts of sexual assault.

The agreement — which requires the judge’s final approval in July — is part of a class-action suit against the university and Heaps brought by women who allege they were sexually abused and assaulted by the doctor at UCLA medical facilities. The settlement also requires UCLA to ensure stronger oversight procedures for identification, prevention and reporting of sexual misconduct..

Full story at:

https://mynewsla.com/crime/2021/04/20/sexually-abused-by-disgraced-ucla-gynecologist-attorneys-urge-ex-patients-to-opt-out-of-73-million-settlement/

===

*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2020/11/heaps-settlement.html

Berkeley Accellion Data Breach Webinar

UC-Berkeley presented a webinar related to the Accellion data breach. It focuses on personal data fraud monitoring. You won't find information on what UC is doing about the breach. You won't find any information about potential UC liability regarding the breach. You can find the link below:

or direct to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOg6gN7vi9Q.

From the YouTube site:

On Thursday, April 15 at 11 a.m. we hosted a town hall for the campus community on how to protect yourself against identity theft. This was in response to the recent cyberattack(link is external) impacting the University of California and hundreds of other organizations. Moderated by Jenn Stringer, Associate Vice Chancellor for IT and CIO, expert panelists included Allison Henry, Chief Information Security Officer; Anthony D. Joseph, Campus Cyber-Risk Responsible Executive and Chancellor's Professor in EECS; plus Scott Seaborn, Campus Privacy Officer. We provided information about signing up for credit monitoring and identity theft protection, offered a primer on the credit monitoring environment, and the basics of protecting yourself from identity theft and fraud.

The Rank Smell of the Wrong Scandal

 

RANT: Yours truly has long disliked the overemphasis placed on university rankings in popular news sources with their arbitrary weightings of particular indexes. Inside Higher Ed today reports that a former dean at Temple U and other officials have been indicted by the feds for giving phony data to US News, a magazine which apparently admits it doesn't verify the info it receives. Yours truly could certainly understand that Temple might want to take action in this case. But resources spent on a federal indictment? 

Isn't the bigger scandal the publishing of info without verifying it, particularly when it is known that there are big incentives to provide phony data to inflate rankings? Yours truly is less interested in the legal technicalities at issue here than in the misplaced priority. Let US News deal with the problem of relying on unverified data; it is profiting from offering supposedly meaningful rankings. And let the feds go after, say, some Big Time drug dealers. 

Inside Higher Ed's story is at: 

https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2021/04/19/ex-dean-temple-indicted-charges-manipulating-rankings

Watch the Regents Health Services Committee Meeting of 4-6-2021

We are a bit slow in catching up with the Regents Health Services Committee meeting of April 6. However, it turned out to be revealing. The meeting went on for over 4 hours but one hour was noteworthy.

As usual, the meeting started with public comments. The comments this time were limited; perhaps potential speakers are waiting for the May meeting of the full board. In any case, comments referred to a bill in the legislature that would limit UC partnerships with Dignity. (Dignity, because of its Catholic connection, doesn't provide certain services such as abortion.) Speakers noted that the partnership at Riverside was essential for its medical program and that other partners were not available.*

The public comment period was followed by the usual presentations of UC president Drake and Carrie Byington who heads UC health on such matters as the coronavirus situation. One issue it would be nice to have a simple answer to is what the net effect of the coronavirus situation has had on UC Health. It was said that there was a revenue loss of $1.6 billion but that 53% was made up by various government grants. However, there was a confusing switching between 12-month periods and 6-month periods. Mental health services for students were also discussed.

In past meetings, there was little attention in the Health Services Committee to the various health insurance plans that UC provides to its own employees. Presumably, this lack of focus on those plans reflected the fact that in the past administration of the programs was in the hands of HR folks at UCOP. 

Almost an hour was devoted to "self funded" UC health plans, i.e., essentially everything except Kaiser.** It is apparent from that meeting that UC Health is calling the shots now, although it was said to be in partnership with the HR people. Carrie Byington was in charge of that session of the meeting. However, a PowerPoint presentation was made by Laura Tauber who is in charge of UC self funded health plans. There was a lot of talk about why we let UC's health dollars go to Kaiser, about how keeping those dollars at home (in UC Health facilities) would help the university (including non-medical departments that get indirect cross-subsidization). On the other hand, it was said that the UC Health centers give a "discount" to UC plans - which presumably would lower the indirect and direct benefits. No specifics were provided.

Regent Park in particular grumbled about the dollars going to Kaiser. UC Health reps talked about Kaiser not doing its fair share in California of handling low-reimbursement Medi-Cal patients. Other California providers have to take up the slack and are then forced to charge more for commercially-insured patients. There was some taking account of campuses without UC Health centers and the fact that Kaiser may be a good option for them, but the focus was on capturing the Kaiser dollars, perhaps by rejiggering rates charged to employees to make the self funded plans that offer UC Health more attractive. 

At one point, Robert Horwitz - Academic Senate vice chair - was called on and fretted that UC Health was taking over the university; he was quickly squelched. It was said that UC Health is about half of UC revenue and growing and that to be competitive, UC Health had to be big and growing. The Regents along the way have approved the growth and that's the way it is. Of course, the Academic Senate vice chair will soon become the chair. How Horwitz will get along in that role now that he has been seen as a potential enemy of UC Health remains to be seen. 

There was no specific discussion of retiree health plans or Medicare Advantage.

The session on UC's health insurance plans was followed by discussion of strategic planning at UC Health. In that segment, there was a brief return to the theme of capturing UC health insurance dollars by UC Health.

You can see the meeting at the link below. The segment about self funded plans and capturing the Kaiser dollars for UC Health starts at around hour 2, minute 50:

https://archive.org/details/health-services-committee-regents-4-6-21

It's worth a watch.

===

*Yours truly was unable to find the bill on the web.

**Many large employers including UC self-fund their health plans. What this means is that the employer acts as an insurance company, but hires an actual insurance company to process claims. From the employee's perspective, an entity such as Blue Cross is providing the insurance. However, the collection of premiums and the reimbursement of providers, etc., is from a pool of funds maintained by the employer who takes on the risk.

UC's Pell Ad

UC is running paid Facebook ads campaigning for an increase in Pell grants:

or direct to: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1639793216208174

Harvard Admissions

Blog readers will remember our coverage of the 2018 Harvard admissions case in which the allegation of the plaintiffs was that the screening methodology discriminated against Asian Americans. The plaintiffs lost at the lower court level, but the case is under appeal and might be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court. (You can find our coverage by typing "Harvard admissions" into the search option on this blog.)

The Court does not have to take the Harvard matter up, however, and it could decide not to do so - even if it wants to take up the issue of affirmative action - due to the fact that the plaintiffs at Harvard did not include an Asian American who claimed discrimination. That is, the Court might choose some "better" case for review.

Nonetheless, Harvard is obviously a high profile university, so the Court could choose the case for review on that basis. In any event, the NY Times had an article yesterday whose main theme was that the dropping of the SAT by some universities (including UC) and other factors related to the protests last year produced a rise in applications and admissions by underrepresented groups.

Buried in that article we find this information on Harvard admissions:

At Harvard, the proportion of admitted students who are Black jumped to 18 percent from 14.8 percent  last year.  If all of them enrolled, there would be about 63 more Black students in this year’s freshman class than if they were admitted at last year’s rate. Asian-Americans saw the second biggest increase, to 27.2 percent from 24.5 percent, which could be meaningful if a lawsuit accusing Harvard of systematically discriminating against Asian-Americans is taken up by the Supreme Court.

One interpretation is that Harvard is preparing for the possibility of a (conservative) Supreme Court review. If the Supreme Court does take up the Harvard case, and if it were to curtail or eliminate affirmative action-type programs - two big "ifs" - the impact on UC's admission practices might still turn out to be slight since California voters rejected repeal of Prop 209 last November. So, in principle, California doesn't have affirmative action admissions and thus would not be within the purview of some hypothetical Supreme Court decision. We will see.

The NY Times article is at:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/17/us/minority-acceptance-ivy-league-cornell.html

Who gets what?

From the Bruin: ...Some transfer students from the class of 2022 are asking to receive priority housing after they found out UCLA was not prioritizing returning transfers for on-campus housing. UCLA announced in a campuswide email that it plans to offer some in-person housing in the fall. UCLA said it plans to offer priority housing to incoming freshmen, returning sophomores and incoming first-year transfer students. However, transfers from the class of 2022 were not offered priority housing.

Transfer students submitted a petition, which has gathered more than 1,200 signatures, to UCLA on Monday asking administrators to include current first-year transfer students. Students also attended a town hall meeting... with a group of housing administrators, where some expressed their frustration and implored administrators to offer housing priority to returning transfer students...

Zuleika Bravo, a fourth-year political science transfer student and the Undergraduate Students Association Council transfer student representative who sat on a priority housing committee, which gave UCLA recommendations on which groups of students to prioritize, said she advocated for UCLA Housing to prioritize returning transfer students because many of them have not set foot on campus...

Sarah Dundish, director of housing and planning, said at the town hall the school cannot accommodate all transfer students because UCLA will not be offering triple-occupancy housing in the fall...

Full story at https://dailybruin.com/2021/04/15/class-of-2022-transfer-students-call-on-ucla-to-guarantee-housing-for-fall