Draft Minutes:  CUCEA Meeting

October 27, 2011

UC Davis

 

Attending:

CUCEA Officers:  Ernest Newbrun (SF) Chair/Alternate Campus Rep; W. Douglas Morgan (SB) Chair Elect/EA President; Charles Hess (D) Past Chair; Charles Berst (LA) Past Chair/Honorary Member; Louise E. Taylor (B) Past Chair/Information Officer; Lyman W. Porter (I) Treasurer; Marjorie Caserio (SD) Web Manager/Editor; William Ashby (SB) Secretary/Campus Representative; Ralph Johnson (LA) Archivist/Alternate Campus Rep; Adrian Harris (LA) Joint Benefits Committee Chair.

Emeriti Association Presidents: Bill Rains (D) EA President/Campus Representative; Ted Quilligan (I) EA Pressident/Campus Representative; Anthony Norman (R) EA President/Campus Representative.

Emeriti Association Representatives and Alternates: C. Roger Glassey (B); Paul Sheats (LA); Robert Heath (R); Richard Attyeh (SD); Dorothy Rice (SF); Michael Warren (SC).

CUCRA Officers: Marian Gade (B) Chair; Lee Duffus (SC) Vice Chair.

Center Directors: Patrick Cullinane (B); Sue Barnes (D); Jeri I. Frederick (I); Eddie Murphy (LA).

Guests: Janice Patten (M); Nancy Groves (SD) Retirees Association President.

Minutes of the April 27, 2011 Meeting:

Copies of the April 27, 2011 meeting at UCLA were distributed prior to the meeting and are also available on the CUCEA website (http:cucea.ucsd.edu). One typo was noted.  The minutes were approved unanimously.

Officers’ Reports:

Chair’s Report:

Chair Newbrun gave the following report:

First I wish to thank all the CUCEA officers, but especially Louise Taylor, Information Officer, Marjorie Caserio, Web Manager and Newsletter Editor, and Doug Morgan, our Vice Chair, without whose advice, help and support I could not manage. Also Marian Gade, chair and Lee Duffus, vice chair, of CUCRA who have been pillars of strength as we work to preserve our retirement benefits and our status within the University of California. Secondly we are much indebted to Sue Barnes, Program manager at UC Davis Retiree Center, Bill Rains, president of UC Davis Emeriti Association, Ted Hillyer of UCD Retirees Association, Charley Hess and the local organizing committee for their hard work in ensuring this meeting runs smoothly and productively.

There are two issues that wish to address this afternoon:
1) concerns the University of California in general,
2) concerns the relationship of emeriti & retiree associations to UC

In both my message at our April CUCEA meeting and in the CUCEA Newsletter that you all received when you came here, I expressed my serious concern over the future of the University of California resulting from the State’s inability to sustain support for higher education. Two score and ten years ago when I came as a graduate student to California, the attraction was that UC was the best public university system in the U.S.A., bar none. At that time, in 1961, undergraduate students paid a nominal amount of student service fees for athletics and the gym and for student health coverage, but their education was free. Those days are long gone, the sad thing is that UCOP’s response to the recent draconian budgetary cuts by the State has been to view students and/or their parents as a cash cow from whom they can wring ever increasing tuition in an effort to balance the university budget. The Academic Senate has gone along with this policy of exorbitant increases in tuition; rather than opposing such measures, when asked to jump their response has been ”how high?” One would like to think that the Senate agreed in order to preserve the UC’s premier standing, but perhaps its members are motivated by self-interest in preserving their salaries. Without a firm commitment of State financial support we are unable to recruit the best and brightest young faculty. Over time we will loose our status of being “the best” public university. I do not have a solution to this dilemma; I do know that we have passed the tipping point of being a public university when student tuition fees of $2.8 billion exceed the $2.4 billion amount of state support.

The second issue concerns the relationship of emeriti and retiree associations to UC. We were surprised to learn at our last meeting that we lacked liability insurance and legally we were not really entitled to use the UC designation for our organization and campus associations. Accordingly we proceeded to try to remedy this problem by drafting Regents Policy 5204 that would grant us official UC status and liability insurance coverage, analogous to that enjoyed by UC alumni associations. In June we submitted this Policy to President Yudoff with a request to transmit it to the Regents for approval.

We expected plane sailing, as this Policy was little different from Regents Policy 5203 that had been approved to include UC alumni associations. To quote Bobby Burns: "The best laid schemes o' mice an' men / Gang aft agley." (The best laid schemes of mice and men / Go oft awry.) The Chairs of the Academic Senate and UCFW objected to one paragraph that would have entitled emeriti to be represented on Senate committees addressing benefits and related issues. The committee chairs consider that is a matter for Senate determination and should not be directed by Regental policy. We subsequently modified the wording of our request to the Regents to satisfy these objections from UCFW and Academic Senate chairs. However they still insisted on going back to their campus committees (it's called covering your backside). This has delayed the issue from going to the Regents' September meeting and has now been scheduled, as best as I can determine, for the November meeting. Until such time neither UC emeriti nor retiree organizations are covered by UC liability insurance nor are we officially recognized by UC. So please be very careful driving or flying home from this meeting.

The fact that the Senate was not asked to review the policy before it was sent to the President may have been a reason for finding fault with the policy. Currently CUCEA is represented, ex officio, by its Chair on statewide UCFW; similarly at each campus emeriti serve on the campus faculty welfare committees, albeit the Academic Senate selects them. I consider the whole issue a storm in a teacup, but it has consumed a considerable portion of my time.

Chair Elect’s Report:

Douglas Morgan reserved his remarks for the discussion on the Report of the Committee to Review the Joint Benefits Committee.

Secretary’s Report:

William Ashby thanked the membership for electing him, but had no report at this time.

Treasurer’s Report:

Lyman Porter distributed copies of spreadsheets showing CUCEA’s net worth as of 9/30/11, cash flow as of 8/31/11, dues payments over 4 years, and the budget for 9/1/11 to 8/31/12.  While CUCEA maintains a net worth of approximately $25,000, the budget for 2011-12 projects a net income loss of some $2000.  This is primarily due to the loss of the $1500 annual support traditionally given by the Academic Council.  President Newbrun initiated discussion on this issue, urging members to make economies whenever possible.  One idea proposed (discussed below) was to put the Bio-bibliographic Survey on a three-year, rather than a two-year cycle.  This would align the Survey with the UC practice of reviewing full Professors every three years.  Another idea was to increase dues charged to campus associations from $1.00 per member to $1.50.  Charles Hess brought up the suggestion made at the April 2011 meeting to ask the Academic Council to reconsider its decision to eliminate its support entirely.  If the Council could restore at least a partial amount, this would not only help CUCEA’s budget, but would be a “place holder” for the full contribution when better budget times return. 

Action: Chair Newbrun promised to approach the Academic Council to discuss the issue.  Charles Hess agreed to draft an appropriate letter for Chair Newbrun.

Anthony Norman wondered whether it would be feasible for CUCEA to meet only once per year, rather than biannually, which would reduce travel costs incurred by CUCEA officers.  Marian Gade stated that CUCRA would be “disappointed,” should CUCEA make this decision.  She noted the fruitfulness of the CUCRA/CUCEA collaboration and the difficulty in communication that would ensue, should CUCEA decide to meet only once per year.  Adrian Harris and Lyman Porter both expressed the opinion that there was no need to take action at this time, in view of CUCEA’s ample reserve.  This seemed to be the general consensus, and discussion was put on hold for now.

Information Officer’s Report:

Louise Taylor presented the following report:

The Information Officer is responsible for maintaining the CUCEA Roster of Officers, EA Presidents, Representatives and other members, and for circulating information concerning meetings and other topics of interest to CUCEA’s member. At this meeting, I will circulate the current 2011-12 CUCEA List and ask for updates and corrections.  The Information Officer is responsible for maintaining the CUCEA Roster of Officers, EA Assuming some changes, I will send a revised list shortly thereafter.

You may recall my reporting in April that Joe Lewis and his staff and I worked on a protocol for a standard list of data UCOP will share with all the Centers and how best to share data with Associations that may not have any paid staff to monitor use of the information.

As a reminder, with the help of Daniel Scuiry of Joe Lewis’s staff, we made considerable progress this spring. On March 27, 2011, I emailed EA Presidents, CUCRA officers, and Center Directors advising them of: (1) A Standard demographic data report, which could be requested quarterly or semi-annually by all campuses.  (It is the UCD standard report.) (2) An ad hoc economic impact report, which provides the number of retirees, by zip codes or city locations, and total annual payment to these retirees. (3) A second ad hoc report of zip codes for a campus.

The standard demographic data report, which can be in excel or text delimited format, includes:

Š                Retiree’s last and first name, middle initial, suffix;

Š                Deceased Member’s DOD, last and first name, etc.;

Š                3 addresses, if needed;

Š                Title code and name of code when active;

Š                Academic Senate member (Yes); and

Š                File Date, Last COLA Date, Retirement Date, Birth Year.

 

At our April meeting, Eddie Murphy volunteered to help develop data from these reports for any campus without a Retirement Center.  Having heard nothing further, I am assuming that all is going well and our data needs are satisfied, to the extent that Joe and his staff can help us.

It is a pleasure working with everyone.  E-mail is wonderful and brings me closer to so many of you with our brief exchanges.

Web Manager’s Report:

Before giving the floor to Marjorie Caserio, Chair Newbrun proposed that the Web Manager’s title be changed to Web Manager/Editor.  This change would reflect the current scope of Ms. Caserio’s activity and would recognize the stellar job she has done in editing and producing the new CUCEA Newsletter.  This change was agreed by informal consensus.

Marjorie Caserio had no formal (written) report.  She expressed appreciation for the change in title.  She noted that she had distributed hard copies of the latest edition of the newsletter (October 2011), which will be posted to the CUCEA website once approved.  She thanked in particular E. Newbrun and C. Berst for their contributions.  She invited CUCEA members to provide information about emeriti awards on the campuses that might be included in the Newsletter.  She noted some technical problems that arose in the production of the latest issue and stated that she would be requesting funds for some needed software updates. Chair Newbrun again thanked Marjorie for her efforts and accomplishments, and the Newsletter was approved.

Historian’s Report:

Chair Newbrun stated that John Craig was unable to attend the meeting.  A written copy of his report will be forthcoming, and his historical lists were distributed.

Archivist’s Report:

Ralph Johnson distributed copies of the CUCEA Bylaws, which, he noted, are also posted to the CUCEA website.  He also invited members to look at the guide to the archives on the website.  Discussion followed about the status of local archives.  To Mr. Johnson’s knowledge, only UCLA and UCD have an archive.  Space could be an issue for the campuses.  Marian Gade noted that the Berkeley archives are housed in the Bancroft Library, which would perhaps accept the archives of other campus associations.

Bio-bibliography Survey:

Charles Berst expressed support for the recommendation to conduct the Survey every three years.  He noted the impact of the most recent Survey, which, as an appendix to the Report of the Task Force on Post-Retirement Benefits, made its way up the chain all the way to the Regents.  It was agreed that the Bio-bibliography Survey will henceforth be conducted every three years.  The next Survey will be initiated in Fall 2012. 

Campus Reports:

Roger Glassey (B), Ted Quilligan (I), Paul Sheats (LA), Tony Norman (R), Richard Attyeh (SD), Dorothy Rice (SF), Bill Ashby (SB), and Michael Warren (SC) each presented a summary of Emeriti Association activities on their campuses.  Copies of most reports were distributed and all will be posted on the CUCEA website (http:cucea.ucsd.edu).

Joint Benefits Committee:

Adrian Harris deferred to Doug Morgan and Dick Jensen, co-chairs of the Committee to Study the Joint Benefits Committee.

JBC Review Committee Report:

Speaking on behalf of the Committee, Doug Morgan referenced the Report of the Committee to Study the Joint Benefits Committee (appended) and the Actions Regarding the “Report of the Committee to Study the Joint Benefits Committee” approved by CUCRA on October 26, 2011 (also appended).  Mr. Morgan then called for a motion to endorse the three recommendations of the Report.  It was noted that the Bylaws committee would need to propose a revision to the Bylaws to include reference to the JBC.

It was moved that the three recommendations of the Report be approved.  Paul Sheats seconded the motion.  The motion was approved unanimously, with one abstention. 

Chair Newbrun urged that the professional background of appointees to the JBC be given careful consideration.  Adrian Harris expressed the opinion that institutional memory is as important as expertise in the selection of appointees.

Action:  Chair Newbrun to appoint a Bylaws Revision Committee.

Status of Emeriti Serving on the Health Care Task Force:

Charles Hess noted that The Health Care Task Force (HCTF) reports to The University Committee on Faculty Welfare (UCFW).  It is desirable that emeriti serve on the HCTF, and Mr. Hess noted that three emeriti currently are members.  Mr. Hess suggested that an emeritus member of the HCTF be identified as an informal liaison to the Joint Benefits Committee or even be appointed as a member of the JBC.  Various candidates were discussed, and it was decided that Chair Newbrun would pursue this, along with Dorothy Rice.

New Business:

Panunzio Committee:

Paul Sheats announced a forthcoming call to campuses for nominations of one active faculty member and one emeritus faculty member to serve on the Panunzio Committee.  The Panunzio Committee will meet on March 22 at UCLA.  Three members of the committee are from UCLA, but a member is required from another campus.  Mr. Sheats noted that the travel expenses of this member will be reimbursed.

 

Other New Business:

Charles Hess pointed out that the CUCEA Executive Committee exists, but is not mentioned in the Bylaws. 

Action: The Bylaws Committee should include mention of the Executive Committee in a subsequent revision of the Bylaws.

Charles Berst drew attention to the letter addressed to President Yudof on August 4, 2011, by 22 former Chancellors, proposing a new funding model for the University of California.  Mr. Berst proposed that CUCEA formally endorse the gist of the letter.  Chair Newbrun felt that CUCEA needed more time to study the issue and that it would be premature to vote on endorsing the letter.  It was also noted that the model proposed in the letter is one of several alternate funding models currently under discussion. 

Respectfully submitted,

 

William J. Ashby

Secretary

First draft:  11/01/11