UC Berkeley doled out almost $150,000 in salary increases to campus deans and a senior administrator while cutting another dean position’s salary, according to reports sent late last month to the UC Board of Regents.
The raises — paid to the deans of arts and humanities for the College of Letters and Science, the School of Optometry and the campus associate vice chancellor for university relations — total $149,700 for the current academic year,according to Bi-monthly Transaction Monitoring reports submitted to the board.
G. Steven Martin, interim dean of biological sciences in the College of Letters and Science, was approved for a salary of $239,700 — $19,400 less than the previous dean’s salary, according to the report.
The reports contain compensation actions approved by campus chancellors and other authorized personnel.
To retain Associate Vice Chancellor for University Relations David Blinder, UC Berkeley offered him a $40,000 raise, according to a Regents Bi-monthly Transaction Monitoring Report.
The UC Berkeley campus cited competition from sister UC campus Irvine as a major factor in favor of the salary adjustment, stating in the report that he was “being recruited aggressively by the Irvine campus for the position of Vice Chancellor of University Relations. The campus offered him over $300,000 in base salary.”
The UC Berkeley campus said in the report that Blinder is a necessary asset for the campus.
“As UC Berkeley comes to rely more on private support, professional development leaders like Mr. Blinder are critical to the campus ability to maximize their philanthropy,” commented the campus in the report.
Raises were also offered to Anthony Cascardi, dean of arts and humanities for the College of Letters and Science, and Dennis Levi, dean of the School of Optometry.
Both Cascardi’s and Levi’s new salaries exceed the Association of American Universities Publics’ average salaries for comparable positions by $39,929 and $28,191, respectively. According to the July Bi-monthly Transaction Report, Levi’s salary adjustment “was required in order to retain Dr. Levi as Dean.”
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.
What are these people being paid so much for anyway? In my experience, these deans and administrators are only physically present 1-2 days per week for a couple hours a day at the most inconvenient of times when everyone else is either in class/at work.
“Both Cascardi’s and Levi’s new salaries exceed the Association of American Universities Publics’ average salaries for comparable positions by $39,929 and $28,191, respectively.”
*Average* the key word here. Checking US News and World Report rankings we see Cal is all but average; #1 public university in the Country. And who suggests we pay the infrastructure of that ranking average, or below comparable? Cal is in comparable.
We all want more of someone else’s for less of our own.
There are some seriously underpaid folks around here who ought to get a raise even in this economic crisis & none of them are high-level administrators making 3 or 4 times the salary of their underlings.
We could’ve saved lots of working stiffs’ jobs if we’d taken a chunk out of every overpaid administrator’s salary when we were busy laying off a bunch of the folks who barely make enough to get by & won’t easily find another job in this economic climate… if those administrators aren’t satisfied that they can no longer afford every luxury they’ve become accustomed to, let them leave. We’re a public school in serious financial trouble. We can’t afford their luxuries.
(Of course, I know you can’t just start lowering a bunch of administrators’ salaries. They have contracts in place dictating their salaries, bonuses, raises, etc., that don’t generally allow for economic downturn. Sure, we can ask them to take a pay cut & they can say, um, no. It’s much easier to terminate a $30-40k position than to get the people who make at least that much over the top of what they could comfortably live on to take a pay cut.)
It’s also much harder to recruit a replacment if the campus reneged on the previous guy’s contract.
Maybe we shouldn’t have retained these Deans. Maybe we should have settled for 2nd best. Or 3rd best. Or 20th best. Maybe we could have used that money to restore the jobs of some laid off custodial workers — lord knows those currently employed are ridiculously overworked. Maybe we could have used that money to restore some GSI positions or tutor positions so that class sizes will decrease and learning will increase. Maybe we could have used that money to hire more writing assistants at the Student Learning Center so that students could improve their written communication and be more competitive on the job market.
I suspect that the raises for the Assoc. VC and the Dean of Optometry will be paid from funds that their departments raise, not State funding. The fund source will eventually be reported on the Regents website. A raise for L&S sounds like such a rarity that I’m surprised anyone finds it objectionable.
UC claims “talent” must be paid market value, thus Blinder’s raise.
What market?
Competition from w/in the UC system? Irvine headhunting administrators from Cal?
If this is true, it’s a sign of total dysfunction w/in the UC at the system-wide level.
Only other option: clear conflict of interest, UCOP makes the call to Irvine, tells them to make a fake offer to Blinder, now Cal is “obligated” to match that offer to keep Blinder.
Blinder is a UC alum, Philosophy, the humanities are worth a damn after all! Who Knew?
Blinder’s a well spoken guy (his propaganda’s on YouTube).
David, don’t hide behind the report, talk to the DailyCal, justify your raise.
While you’re at it, justify headhunting w/in the UC system for non-academics.
I could understand if a campus was building a top notch program in some area, and recruited faculty in that area from another campus.
Grad students apply to an individual department not the UC as a whole. If you want the best students for your kick ass program you better have the best faculty and best facilities.
The game isn’t the same for administration, the intra-system competition is pure poison for the whole system, and this raise right here is proof positive.
“UCOP makes the call to Irvine, tells them to make a fake offer to Blinder”
And JFK was really abducted by Martians.
UC’s hiring is governed by State law. Any qualified person can apply for any vacancy. Do you have a job? Would you accept being told that you may not leave it for a better-paid position?