If presidents in the California State University system need to be tutored in fiscal prudence, we demand better-prepared presidents who don’t need last-minute, on-the-job training.
Sure, even a president of a four-year institution needs a tip or two (maybe an entire book) on how to handle a position with so much power. But do we seriously need to pay former presidents nearly $280,000 a year to teach the new leaders?
That’s the nasty situation recently revealed by the California Bureau of State Audits in a 115-page comprehensive analysis that detailed the CSU’s compensation practices and polices.
The report indicated that a hefty portion of the CSU’s $225.8 million payroll increase went to executive salary boosts. What was their justification?
For the CSU system to compete with other institutions of higher learning, it must literally bribe its top dogs, or “compete with other wages,” to keep them on the leash so they won’t be pooper-scooped by other employers.
Campus presidents are yanking in nearly $300,000 per year. It soars above that when tabulating perks such as housing and car allowances. CSU Chancellor Charles Reed pulls in $421,500 a year plus royalties. That’s astronomical when considering President George W. Bush gets paid $400,000 a year for running an entire country.
Of course Bush gets extra goodies, too, but he’s the most visible leader of the known world, not a CSU.
If those are the kinds of executives we have in the CSU (the types who follow the money trail rather than the students’ paths to success), they should be replaced. There are candidates at our own university who could do a better job, while keeping the best interests of students in their hearts.
We are, after all, an institution that is suppose to serve students, not pimps in flashy suits.
The CSU Chancellor’s Office was quick to whip up a grammatically correct press release indicating the audit didn’t find any violations other than a “limited number of cases where exceptions were made.”
One such case was when someone from management received $102,000 in compensation, allegedly to gain some experience that would benefit the university, during his seven-year hiatus. The individual never came back.
That’s money that could go toward something the university community could actually benefit from, like increased security or lighting to protect students after the sun goes down.
Compared with the meager faculty pay raise of less than six percent this year, a 25 percent increase in executive compensation during the past five years shows the lack of interest our administrators have for the well-being of students and faculty.
Like every business (face it folks, universities are in the business of selling education), there has to be someone in charge of the collective wallet.
The audit makes it apparent that Chancellor “Chuckie Greed” and his avaricious mobsters are abusing their powers. Those in charge are taking advantage of a flawed system by siphoning our garden hoses to make green their own pastures.
The prudent thing to do would be to have Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger call a moratorium on executive salary increases. The only other solution to check soaring university costs – namely our tuition and textbook costs – would be to pass it on to taxpayers. The “Educ-Hater” clearly nixes that idea, unless it can be disguised as “fee increases.”
Each time the CSU vampires attempt to suck out another pint of student blood they proclaim, “The CSU remains one of the best deals of four-year universities in the nation.”
Instead of constantly trying to sell us the tired used-car spiel, “CSULB is still the most affordable of all the CSU campuses,” our high-priced executive should reject his pay raise when the trustees force it on him. Yeah, right. That’ll happen.
It’s hard to tell when these problems will be rectified. In the meantime, we can go back to our mold-scented, overcrowded classrooms, while executives plan Thanksgiving dinner on their yachts.
