The University of Hawaii Board of Regent is poised to consider a resolution declaring a financial emergency and authorizing the administration of President David Lassner “to utilize whatever available means it has to reduce the operating costs and expenses of the University, including but not limited to, reduction-in- force, furloughs, retrenchment, freeze or reduction in remuneration, etc.”
The resolution is on the agenda for the board’s regular meeting on Thursday, July 16. According to the published agenda, “this will be a virtual meeting and written testimony and oral testimony will be accepted in lieu of in-person testimony.”
The resolution cites the expected dramatic fall in state tax revenues and “anticipated significant declines in University of Hawaii general fund appropriations and tuition revenues” over the next several years.
The BOR will also consider a letter asking Governor David Ige to open negotiations seeking to defer previously approved raises for public employees. The draft letter explains that the board does not believe it makes common sense “to give a pay increase one day and reduce pay or terminate employees the next….”
“We, therefore, respectfully request that negotiations with the relevant public worker unions take place to defer the pay increases and adjustments until the State is in a better economic condition,” the draft letter states.
If adopted by the BOR, the emergency declaration would open the door for drastic spending cuts.
The resolution directs that “the Administration should, if necessary, use its system-wide authority to consolidate from the individual units and campuses, any revenues, reserves, programs, facilities, and vacant personnel positions for reallocation of those assets for the benefit of the University as a whole.”
The range of actions could include furloughs and even potential layoffs of faculty, up to and including tenured professors, under contract provisions regarding “retrenchment,” which refers to “the termination of the employment of any Faculty Members during any appointment as a result of lack of work or other legitimate reason…such as fiscal exigency….”
It isn’t known whether the public employee unions were given advance notice of the proposed BOR actions.
See:
Board of Regents Agenda for 7-16-2020, including proposed resolution and letter to the governor.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Most of the regents are wealthy. This is a conflict of interest for them since the alternative is to mobilize politically and demand we tax the rich instead of making cuts. Moreover the research on this is clear: this kind of austerity will worsen the crisis.
So Kudo and Lassner will be demonstrating their sincerity and the gravity of the situation by resigning?
It could be worse; the last time UH declared exigency was in super-secret executive session, probably with a tiny bit of time travel added on. See Ian’s column on it here: https://www.ilind.net/2009/10/22/uh-board-of-regents-may-have-violated-sunshine-law-in-secret-discussion-of-financial-exigency/
For reference, the contractual clauses concerning faculty retrenchment are here: https://www.uhpa.org/contracts/2017-2021-uhpa-bor-contract/article-xvi-retrenchment/
Given the state of the economy, the BOR’s recommendation is sound and the BOR should be commended. Why give a raise and then cut back salaries and layoff personnel? Giving a raise at this time would only mean that more people will have to be laid off to account for the raises.
I wonder why they’re anticipating declines in tuition revenues.
College enrollment typically tracks negatively with the economy and availability of jobs.
There are also local kids who normally would attend mainland schools who will instead be attending UH schools because of the pandemic.
@zzzzzz For one thing, international student tuition revenue will be way down. See
https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/sevp-modifies-temporary-exemptions-nonimmigrant-students-taking-online-courses-during
So this would mean the end of football?
UH must first cut the assistant VP and VC positions; already there are directors and deans in each unit/department to work with VC and VP. Also, those assistant VP (SYSTEM) must go. If VP and VC , with salary of more than 200K, don’t know how to work with their many directors/deans/faculty specialist/APTs, etc. then they either learn how to hassle or get a 30-50% cut. Assistant VP/VC are more like middle men who have nothing better to do but relaying messages from VC/VP to the rest of the crew! What a waste of time and money! The cut must start at the Executive branch; those who are just warming chairs & waiting for retirement without much work to do must get a cut! Also, the Executive, staff and faculty must pay a higher gym fee! So many students don’t even have time to go to the gym, and yet they still pay for student fees? BTW, BOR should establish a non-biased review committee NOW to seriously evaluate who is doing what, and what should get cut!
Nobody in the Executive should be part of this review committee!
Cuts at the executive level don’t require a declaration of exigency, which is the nuclear option in academics and only ever gets considered by people who don’t understand it or where the institution is on its last legs. Other than McClain’s whispered declaration in 2009 no full System has ever declared exigency except Alaska, and they then thought better about it and revoked the declaration. (Though by then the damage had been done: their Moody’s rating dropped from A1 to Baa3, and enrollment dropped over 20%.)
This move from the BOR is just vandalism, though my experience attending (and testifying at) BOR meetings is that getting up and accusing them of vandalism is not likely to sway them from this destructive path.