Think Twice

Did you get an email like the one above? Think twice before responding to it, or any other similar invitation. Note the fine print; this is not an official UCLA operation. When you put personal info on a website, it may not be used in ways that benefit you. In the case above, if you sign up, you will be asked to give the website access to your gmail account. Caution advised!

Just money

From Patch: A former UCLA hematologist who won $13 million after claiming she was forced out of her job as director of the medical school's lymphoma program because a male-dominated administration ignored her complaints of age and gender discrimination was awarded another $1.8 million in attorneys' fees Friday.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Linfield said the amount was reasonable, despite protests to the contrary by attorneys for the Regents of the University of California...

In her argument opposing the Shegerian firm's fees request, defense attorney Kathryn McGuigan argued that the hourly rate charged by Shegerian is normally only seen by those who practice patent or antitrust law. She said Shegerian's fees on previous cases he won were for about $700 an hour.

Lawyer Barbara Fitzgerald, also on behalf of the UCLA regents, told the judge that (the) lawsuit was a "run-of-the-mill case" that also happened to be tried in the midst of the #MeToo movement, likely benefiting the plaintiff.

But Anthony Nguyen, who works for the plaintiff's firm, said Shegerian received $1,000 an hour in fees in a previous case. He also said the Pinter- Brown case was not an easy one to try because the plaintiff resigned due to the conditions at UCLA and was able to get new employment at UC Irvine...

Full story at https://patch.com/california/santamonica/s/ghfsl/ucla-to-pay-nearly-15-million-in-gender-discrimination-case

LLNL and Retiree Health Care

From Inside Higher Ed:

A California appeals court said this week that the University of California owes retirees who worked at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory the university-sponsored group health insurance they were promised during their employment, reversing an earlier court decision saying otherwise. Several Livermore retirees sued the California system in 2010, saying that it effectively disowned them in terms of retiree health care when a private partnership started running the federal defense lab, in 2007. The retirees argued that their new plan, administered by the private partnership, had “significant disadvantages and no comparable new advantages when compared with the university-provided retiree medical benefit plan,” such as higher premium and higher monthly out-of-pocket costs. Thousands of people were affected by the change...

A spokesperson for the California system said it was “disappointed” in the decision and “considering our options as we review the court’s reasoning.”

Full story at:
https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2018/08/03/appeals-court-says-livermore-lab-retirees-are-entitled-u-california-health

Note that this decision, if it isn't appealed or if it survives an appeal, tends to undermine the UC position that retiree health care is just a nice thing UC provides, but that it has no legal obligation to do so.

Paths can lead to problems

UCLA will deploy UCPath in September, 2018. UCLA will partner with UC Santa Barbara as part of the UCLA/UCSB Pilot implementation, joining the Office of the President, which launched UCPath in 2015, and our sister campuses — Merced, Riverside, and ASUCLA — all of which are now live on UCPath as of January 2, 2018. 

Source and more info at: https://ucpath.ucla.edu/

For those who don't know, UCPath is the much-delayed and much-over-budget computer system to handle payroll and employee records.

OK, But Not Too Close

From the LA Times:

University of California President Janet Napolitano took the helm of the nation’s top public research university five years ago as a tough and seasoned politician and former Cabinet member in the Obama administration. Her take-charge style and ambitions to make a mark startled some campus leaders accustomed to more low-key academics. But their sentiments were not always communicated to the top — and when the state auditor tried to assess campus views in a review of Napolitano’s office published last year, two of the president’s aides tampered with the surveys. The interference sparked a political uproar and prompted Napolitano to apologize publicly.

Now campus leaders have spoken up — and say they want more autonomy from Napolitano’s office even as they value many of the systemwide services it provides. Their opinions are expressed in a new study obtained by The Times that was commissioned by the UC Board of Regents after the audit interference fiasco. Consultants with Sjoberg Evashenk Consulting Inc. interviewed 74 senior campus leaders, including all 10 chancellors, to gauge their views of the services and programs provided by the UC Office of the President, often referred to as UCOP.

The study found widespread support for the vast majority of systemwide services, such as legal counsel, government relations, employee benefits and the retirement system. One longtime chancellor said the breadth of support for the president’s office is greater today than a decade ago, when a poll of campus leaders showed more dissatisfaction.

Senior administrators expressed the greatest concerns about the flurry of Napolitano’s systemwide presidential initiatives. Since 2013, Napolitano has launched several signature ventures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, expand access to food, promote free speech, increase collaboration with Mexico, aid UC students living in the U.S. illegally, and encourage students to pursue public service careers...

Full story at http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-edu-uc-campuses-president-20180801-story.html

They just want to be left alone:

Implication Unclear

From Inside Higher Ed:

A $717 billion defense spending bill sent by the Senate to President Trump for his signature Wednesday prohibits the use of appropriated funds for Chinese language instruction provided by a Confucius Institute or by a Chinese language program at a college or university that hosts a Confucius Institute. The bill states that the prohibition can be waived if a defense official certifies that Confucius Institute employees and instructors will have no involvement with the Chinese language program or authority or influence over its curriculum.

Confucius Institutes -- Chinese government-funded centers for language and cultural education that can be found at about 100 U.S. universities -- have come under increasing scrutiny in recent months from Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, and other lawmakers. Critics say the institutes spread Chinese Communist Party propaganda and allow an entity of the Chinese government undue control over instruction and curriculum in U.S. universities, while supporters say the institutes are vehicles for cultural and educational exchange and provide much-needed funds for Chinese language instruction.

Trump is expected to sign the defense spending bill into law.

Source: https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2018/08/02/defense-bill-restricts-funds-colleges-confucius-institutes

A Slow Day

It's another slow day for university-related news. So, as we have done before, here are some recent photos of the new building going up as part of the Anderson School complex.