With the UC Board of Regents slated to vote on a controversial fee hike at their meeting Thursday, UC officials and students are citing different figures for the actual size of the increase.
While UC officials and most media outlets have said tuition will rise 9.6 percent increase, student leaders have said that if approved, the increase will be a 10.5 percent.
So which number is correct? Technically, both. It depends on how the numbers are framed.
The proposal would raise mandatory fees — comprised of tuition and a student services fee, which all students must pay — by a total of 9.6 percent. If the increase is approved, tuition itself would rise from $10,152 to $11,220 while the student services fee of $972 would remain the same.
This would raise mandatory fees from $11,124 to $12,192 — a total increase of 9.6 percent.
However, since only tuition is rising, student leaders have said that the hike should be called a 10.5 percent increase because excluding the student service fee and looking solely at the jump in tuition — from $10,152 to $11,220 — tuition is rising 10.5 percent.
The UC Students Association has said that the difference in the numbers being reported reflects a lack of transparency in the way the UC is presenting the hike.
“The result is that the tuition itself is increasing 10.5% and students are concerned that this is not being framed to public in a transparent manner,” said a statement from the association.
Aaida Samad is an assistant news editor.
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.
No need for fee or tuition increases with wage concessions by University of California Chancellors, UCOP and Faculty.
Californians face foreclosure, unemployment, depressed
wages, loss of retirement, medical, unemployment benefits, higher taxes: UC
Board of Regents Regent Lansing, President Yudof need to demonstrated
leadership by curbing wages, benefits. As a Californian, I don’t care what
others earn at private, public universities. If wages better elsewhere,
chancellors, vice chancellors, tenured, non tenured faculty, UCOP should apply
for the positions. If wages commit employees to UC, leave for better paying position.
The sky above UC will not fall.
Californians suffer from greatest deficit of modern times. UC
wages must reflect California’s
ability to pay, not what others are paid.
Wage concessions for UC President, Faculty,
Chancellors, Vice Chancellors, UCOP:
No furloughs
18 percent reduction in UCOP salaries & $50
million cut.
18 percent prune of campus chancellors’, vice chancellors’ salaries.
15 percent trim of tenured faculty salaries, increased teaching load
10 percent decrease in non-tenured faculty salaries, as well as increase research,
teaching load
100%
elimination of all Academic Senate, Academic Council costs, wages.
(17,000
UC paid employees earn more than $100,000)
Overly
optimistic predictions of future revenues do not solve the deficit. However, rose bushes bloom after pruning.
UC Board of Regents Chair Sherry Lansing can bridge the public
trust gap by offering reassurances that UC salaries reflect depressed wages in California. The sky will
not fall on UC
Once
again, we call upon UC President, Chancellors, Vice Chancellors, Faculty, UCOP
to stand up for UC and ‘pitch in’ for Californians with deeds – wage
concessions.
No tuition and fee increases required with University of California wage concessions.
Californians face foreclosure, unemployment, depressed
wages, loss of retirement, medical, unemployment benefits, higher taxes: UC
Board of Regents Regent Lansing, President Yudof need to demonstrated
leadership by curbing wages, benefits. As a Californian, I don’t care what
others earn at private, public universities. If wages better elsewhere,
chancellors, vice chancellors, tenured, non tenured faculty, UCOP should apply
for the positions. If wages commit employees to UC, leave for better paying position.
The sky above UC will not fall.
Californians suffer from greatest deficit of modern times. UC
wages must reflect California’s
ability to pay, not what others are paid.
Wage concessions for UC President, Faculty,
Chancellors, Vice Chancellors, UCOP:
No furloughs
18 percent reduction in UCOP salaries & $50
million cut.
18 percent prune of campus chancellors’, vice chancellors’ salaries.
15 percent trim of tenured faculty salaries, increased teaching load
10 percent decrease in non-tenured faculty salaries, as well as increase research,
teaching load
100%
elimination of all Academic Senate, Academic Council costs, wages.
(17,000
UC paid employees earn more than $100,000)
Overly
optimistic predictions of future revenues do not solve the deficit. However, rose bushes bloom after pruning.
UC Board of Regents Chair Sherry Lansing can bridge the public
trust gap by offering reassurances that UC salaries reflect depressed wages in California. The sky will
not fall on UC
Once
again, we call upon UC President, Chancellors, Vice Chancellors, Faculty, UCOP
to stand up for UC and ‘pitch in’ for Californians with deeds – wage
concessions.
Students are what make the school. Students are the future.
Especially with the sneaky “trigger” 5.6% proposed increase in tuition(which those lazy regents tried to slip in), and student fees going directly to student services(not related to education), it is safe to say that 10.5% would, in definition, be the increase in tuition.
and greedy regents i mean this, quoted from UCSA:
“UC Regents voted for a salary pay increase of $27,500 for Patrick Lenz, Vice President of Budget and Capital Resources on the same day that they approved such an extensive tuition increase which brings his salary up to $300,000″
Sorry, I’m with UC on this one—it is the total price that matters, not the artificial split into tuition and fees. The price increase is bad either way, though.