Category Archives: Working conditions

#UBC time to change motto (beyond tuum est) #ubcnews #ubc100 #bced #highered

mace1477

Whereas things at UBC are too messed rather than Tuum Est, and whereas symbolic speech plays a significant role in governance, we propose that the Board of Governors change the University’s coveted motto to Potentia ad Populum, “Power to the People.”

This change would do justice to UBC President Wesbrook’s anticipation in 1916 that UBC would be the “people’s University,” which could hardly be translated into a condescending corporate brand or real estate agency. Or could it?

Each time Admin chants Tuum Est, an entire history of bad Latin is recalled in mistranslation. In context of its initial translation from Greek to the Latin Lord’s Prayer (i.e., Pater Noster) and later in Jerome’s translation of the Book of Jeremiah, tuum est refers to deference and reverence to the power, right, and glory of God’s Kingdom. In Horace’s Melpomene, it is rendered as reverent debt and duty to the muse.

A decade or so after UBC’s first President uttered Tuum Est in the 1916 Invocation, the motto was secularized with relative hubris: “It is Up to You.” Or alternatively and eventually, as in the classic Seinfeld episode, to “Master of my domain.” By the 1930s and 40s, this was perfect for advertising Felix Dry Ginger Ale. As the ad went, Tuum Est “can well be carried into business.” Nowadays, we notice that the Board and Admin are giving lip service– labellum officium or otherwise hypocrisis in Latin– to the meaning of the motto.

For the next century, how about a new UBC motto? Potentia ad Populum

#UBC faculty vote no confidence in Board of Governors #ubcnews #ubc100 #bced #highered

Faculty members at the University of British Columbia overwhelmingly approved a motion of no confidence in the Board of Governors. This is unprecedented at the University and demonstrates the ineffectiveness of this governing body.

For seven months, the University and its Board have been entirely unaccountable to faulty, staff, and students. On 7 August, the University announced the resignation of President Arvind Gupta and immediately began a process of sweeping evidence under the rug by shielding records in non-disclosure agreements.

On 27 January, through records embedded in a FoI release, UBC disclosed that members of the Board of Governors were colluding in shadow systems of governance.

For faculty members, the unaccountability and disclosure of shadow governance combined to a no confidence vote.

The Faculty Association will now take next steps in acting on the vote.

#UBC faculty voting on no confidence in Board #ubcnews #ubc100 #bced #bcpoli

Since University of British Columbia executives scrambled on 7 August 2015 to announce the sudden resignation of President Gupta and seal records related to the resignation, confidence in the Board of Governors has progressively waned. The Board has been entirely unaccountable to its actions and unresponsive to consistent calls from faculty, students, and staff to come clean.

On 22 March, faculty members assembled to move and debate the no confidence motion. UBC faculty members are now voting on the following:

“Be it resolved that the Faculty Association of the University of British Columbia has no confidence in the University of British Columbia Board of Governors.”

#UBC admin again dodges accountability in report on privacy breach @ubcnews #ubcnews #ubc100 #bced #highered

Yet another “investigation” into administrative mismanagement at the University of British Columbia has failed to find any facts related to leadership. Today’s report on the investigation into the “privacy breach” or leak of records related to President Gupta’s resignation fails to find accountability at the top of the Office of the University Counsel. From within this Office was an inadvertent leak of records supplementing UBC’s official disclosure.

Made aware of the “privacy breach,” on 27 January VP External Relations Philip Steencamp and University Counsel Hubert Lai announced that they would “immediately launch an independent investigation into how the material became public.”

Well, here is how, kind of, not really, not at all, nothing

Already on 28 January, Steencamp and Lai were back-pedalling: “UBC deeply regrets the error that led to this privacy breach…. To that end, UBC has retained an external expert to review its disclosure practices and provide recommendations.”

So, was there an investigation or just a review?

The Smith Report on breaches of academic freedom UBC following the announcement of Gupta’s resignation cost the University about $78k.

Now, UBC likely paid about $25k for a legal consultant to give instructions to University Counsel on embedding files in a PDF and on how to protect and redact a record.

So taking the Review of UBC’s Processing of Freedom of Information Requests as an investigation report, UBC is now 0/3 in finding facts of accountability in its recent reports.

The first was the Fact Finding Report: Commerce Undergraduate Society (CUS) FROSH CHANTS. The second was the Summary of the fact-finding process and conclusions regarding alleged breaches of academic freedom and other university policies at the University of British Columbia.

The only fact is that UBC has been increasingly reluctant to find any form of accountability with its senior and middle managers.

Since August and the announcement of President Gupta’s resignation, avoidance of accountability has grown progressively worse.

Avoidance of accountability is now UBC’s greatest liability.

At the same time, faculty members’ access to information regarding the budget and governance on campus is increasingly blocked and ridden with obstacles. Denied access to basic files and information, including budgets, faculty members are now forced to submit Freedom of Information requests.

And with that said, Information and Privacy within the Office of the University Counsel is swamped and overburdened, understaffed and unable to provide timely access to records.

Wary of corruption and cronyism, on 22 October, the Information and Privacy Commissioner for BC released a scathing report of the practice of withdrawing decision-making to shadow systems. In Access Denied, Denham begins:

Democracy depends on accountable government. Citizens have the right to know how their government works and how decisions are made.

This holds for UBC, by the University Act a corporation bound to accountability to its members: faculty, staff, students.

#UBC faculty moving to ‘no confidence’ in Board of Governors #ubcnews #ubcbog #ubc100 #bced

Building from the power of petition, faculty members at the University of British Columbia are moving toward a vote of no confidence in the Board of Governors.

A “no confidence” vote will set a new precedent at UBC wherein accountability in shared governance takes on meaning.

Since University executives scrambled on 7 August 2015 to announce the sudden resignation of President Gupta and seal records related to the resignation, confidence in the Board of Governors has progressively eroded.

The Faculty Association of UBC has scheduled a Special General Meeting to discuss the motion on Tuesday, March 22 from 2 pm to 3:30 pm.

Members should have received a notice regarding the presentation of a petition to the UBC Faculty Association signed by over 450 faculty seeking to have a membership vote on a no confidence motion. The motion, sponsored by Jonathan Ichikawa (Philosophy), Juliet O’Brien (FHIS), and Alan Richardson (Philosophy) is as follows:

“Be it resolved that the Faculty Association of the University of British Columbia has no confidence in the University of British Columbia Board of Governors.”

#UBC operating under ‘constrained funding’ means what? #ubcnews #ubc100 #highered #bced #bcpoli

In the opaque cloud of process, the University of British Columbia announced yesterday that it is operating “in a constrained funding environment.” So what in the world does “constrained funding” mean?

Of course, UBC’s faculty and students have grown accustomed to “constrained funding” if this means few to no internal funds for research and teaching despite millions in revenue for more administrators and capital projects. Yes, we know what “constrained funding” means in that sense.

But what exactly does “a constrained funding environment” mean at the University level? Does it mean a $120m deficit? $30m deficit?

Does it simply mean that the economy and Loonie and are nosediving, so expect the worst in 2016-17?

Quite an elusive report on UBC finances

#UBC vague on budget, opaque on process #ubcnews #ubc100 #bced #bcpoli

Lo and behold, the University of British Columbia finally made an announcement about the budget leading into a new fiscal year (1 April 2016). Trouble is, the budget news is vague and the process opaque.

Compared to other Canadian universities, UBC faculty, staff, and students are in the dark on the budget, whether it be at the University or local unit levels.

Today’s news that “UBC continues to operate in a constrained funding environment” is clear as mud. How “constrained”?

The Provost continues to hold a freeze on faculty hiring and a balance of Faculties are running up deficits. Come September, the University will most certainly face another $100m deficit with expenses increasing.

UBC announced that “many central administrative units absorbed significant budget reductions in the last year, and most of these flow into 2016/17” but admin bloat continues unchecked.

For various reasons, the Deans have been pampered by a central administration looking the other way when it comes to the bloat and deficits.

Since the 7 August announcement of the sudden resignation of President Gupta, UBC has been silent about the budget. Actually, save for a very partial disclosure of records given a volume of FoI requests, UBC has been silent about most issues of accountability.

In the meantime. the Council of Senates’ Budget Committee has been left to tinker with Student Information Systems instead of holding UBC’s executives to account.

#UBC deans in hot-seat for mere assertion of excellence #ubcclean #ubc100 #ubcnews #bced

In an era not too long ago, deans were able to assert their authority on most matters of governance, finance, management, and planning. Now, with credibility and legitimacy eroding, with shadow systems opening to scrutiny, can mere assertion of authority and excellence continue to pass for reality or truth at UBC?

So what part of the “Deans support UBC leadership” Op-Ed is believable or persuasive? Can the Deans support their “strongest” assertion?

We want to make clear in the strongest possible terms that we are absolutely committed to the pursuit of academic excellence and have consistently supported initiatives to promote such excellence.

Let’s test this assertion of commitment “to the pursuit of academic excellence” with a graduate program on campus:

  1. A graduate diploma mill, which in 13.5 years graduated 680 masters students but did not hire a single FT faculty member. Yes, 680 masters students and 0 FT faculty hired in 13.5 years.
  2. Instead is an exploitation Sessional labour—85% of all the courses—to teach at a piecemeal per student wage while their benefits start and stop at the term’s beginning and end. Staff members are hired to teach, who then double-up on their M&P jobs and displace the Sessionals from additional course assignments. The Sessionals are denied office space or worse:
    1. Per the policy and requirements of space usage in [the academic building] for Sessional instructors, the [123] temporary office space, must be cleared of all personal belongings, borrowed library items and additional furniture installed.
    2. If, by Dec 1, 2015, the space is not restored to its original condition, items will be disposed of, and you shall be invoiced for the cost of clearing and removal.
    3. As requested, I attach the photos of the room in its original condition, taken prior to it being temporarily assigned to you in February 2015.”
  3. It took 8 years of agitation across two Faculties to complete a single Self-Study and Program Review. There are 7 administrators overseeing this Program but not a one could initiate a Review. Effectively, when it finally did happen, well, let’s just say that an expectation of arm’s length Reviewers was mocked.
  4. Did I mention that this was a revenue generating program and maybe there is something to shield from scrutiny? When in April 2015 the Associate-Provost reviewed the Office (yes, Office) that runs and manages the Program, he reported:
    1. “Shadow systems are used more than University systems which is concerning because the data in the shadow systems are not verifiable, and because of the opportunity for misuse of funds.”
  5. In the last four years, this program generated about $5.4m in total revenue but we cannot account for expenses or overhead “because the data in the shadow systems are not verifiable.”
  6. Where does the money go then?
  7. Is it just thrown at the deficit that’s run up elsewhere year after year?
  8. But still, where does the money go? Is it just paying for administrative bloat?
  9. Did I mention 680 masters student graduates and 0 FT faculty in 13.5 years?

If this is “academic excellence” we’d hate to see academic mediocrity or compromise…

We want to make clear in the strongest possible terms that we are absolutely committed to the pursuit of academic excellence and have consistently supported initiatives to promote such excellence.

Lowering the bar of excellence? No, just inflating the envelope of greatness.

Why are #UBC managers resisting change? Follow the $$ #ubcclean #ubc100 #ubcnews #bced #ubysseynews

Since University of B. C. President Arvind Gupta resigned unexpectedly last August, the institution’s managers and governors agreed to remain silent and move records and answers to non-disclosure agreements and privacy protection.

After five months of Freedom of Information requests, UBC released a partial disclosure of records related to Gupta’s resignation. One answer is implicit and explicit in the disclosure: if you want to know why UBC managers resist change, follow the money.

On the record, a rift formed between Gupta, the Dragon’s Den leader, and emotionally vulnerable middle managers. “You are deemed too quick to engage in debate in a confrontational or dismissive manner,” Gupta was scolded, “which is demoralising to a group of executives in fear of their employment security.” Gupta was not Presidential.

Off the record, there’s another storyline, perhaps more realistic.

One of the largest employers in British Columbia – $2.1 billion operating budget – the university and its Properties Trust have for years been given free passes in the court of accountability. This conceit percolates down through the ranks of middle management.

Gupta was hired in the fallout of serious financial fraud cases within the Faculties of Medicine and Dentistry. Controversies, such as the Sauder School of Business students’ rape chant in September 2013 had chipped away confidence in the ranks of management.

Senior campus administrators had seemingly looked the other way as internal investigations into management pointed to no one and nothing for accountability. The free pass for managers was status quo when Gupta was hired at UBC.

Three months in, Gupta targeted university finance and management for overhauls. The Vice President Finance was let go and the Provost was moved to an adviser’s post.

At this point, it began to look like a policy of administrator accountability had suddenly arrived on Point Grey. Administrative bloat and perks were finally called into question. The pushback was fierce as middle managers, deans, and their numerous assistants and associates, grew anxious and more insecure.

Stamping out fires, Gupta wrote on May 1 to the Chair of the Board of Governors: “Things seem to be going well with the Deans now (or at least I think so).” The doubt signalled that behind-the-scenes middle managers were conspiring under turf war conditions.

Accountability was pushed back up to the President: “we are still not certain that you fully appreciate the scope of your accountability,” Gupta was told in mid-May. “You must refrain from thinking controversial thoughts out loud.

Gupta redirected priority to allocating finances to classrooms and hiring of faculty members, and away from bloated administrative ranks. For instance, the ranks of assistant and associate deans swelled from 47 in 2000 to 72 in 2015. Senior administrators and deans had long protected their prerogative of appointing at these managerial ranks and resisted even the slightest consideration of regulation through a proper hiring policy.

It didn’t matter to a balance of managers that Gupta was successful in attracting $66.5m in Federal research funding in late July. At the same time, he was called into meetings to answer to pushback. The Board formed an ad hoc committee to erode confidence. On August 7, he resigned.

Not one to rock a boat at a birthday party, Interim President Martha Piper stepped in to celebrate UBC’s 100th and restore business as usual and the free pass for management. Champagne corks were popping in September.

In December, Piper rushed the Board to once again approve student tuition increases across the campus. At the year’s major budget meeting in mid-January, with all the deans providing their faculty’s financial status and plans, the sole message to members of UBC was that the president said the ‘presentations were excellent.’ With deficits run up in the faculties, budgets are in a mess, but the PowerPoint slides are beautiful.

Of course arrogance, cronyism, and hubris have their limits, even at UBC. Since Gupta’s resignation, the university has bounced from one crisis to the next. The university is slipping again into a crisis of financial management. Why are managers resisting? Follow the money.

Stephen Petrina, Sandra Mathison, and E. Wayne Ross are Professors in the Faculty of Education at the University of British Columbia and co-directors of the Institute for Critical Education Studies.

#UBC BoG: time for Nolan Principles #ubcnews #ubc100 #ubcclean #bced

Give us break UBC: Board of Governors, Senate, and other admin committee work is not rocket science. However, given the release of records and findings of shadow systems and backroom deals, it’s time for the basics: adopt the Nolan Principles of Standards in Public Life.

In brief, for universities, the Nolan Principles are:

  1. Selflessness: University and public interest opposed to self-interest.
  2. Integrity: Decision-making integrity opposed to coercive power.
  3. Objectivity: Merit, affirmative action, and diversity complemented.
  4. Accountability: Decisions and actions accountable to peers, public, and open to scrutiny.
  5. Openness: Decisions and actions open and transparent opposed to restriction and secrecy.
  6. Honesty: Self-interest openly declared when in conflict with best interests of the University or public interest.
  7. Leadership: Principles supported by example of leadership (i.e., leaders model the principles).

#UBC shadow systems of admin and FoI #ubc100 #ubcnews #bced #caut #highered

As the economy tanks with questions of whether governments, banks, manufacturers, and universities are “too big to fail,” the concept of “shadow systems” takes definition.

it was riddled with contradictions: ubiquitous negotiations on all levels, informality, and a huge shadow system. (Kisser & Kalb, 2010, p. 173)

Sound familiar? Zola suggests in the exhilaration, like gambling, of governing through a “shadow system– a place where free from outside scrutiny and evaluation a miniature version of the game of life can be played”– “the demands of the outside world seem distant” (1974, p. 61).

That’s the point– shadow systems provide a sense of control… but within the systems “too big to fail” when you get caught, what happens? When that outside world sees what’s going on, what happens?

In an extensive analysis and critique of management and governance models at UBC, the Faculty Association Executive expresses our

concern about how much UBC business is conducted in such a manner (i.e., “secret, in camera processes” or shadow systems) and hence not captured by FOI requests….

We are deeply concerned by the evidence that a culture exists in UBC whereby the Chair of the Board is personally involved with managing university personnel and their concerns, and whereby back-channels exist between the Board and the University which bypass formal governance structures.

Shadow systems wherein business is conducted that cannot be “captured by FoI requests” have become business as usual, at UBC and the provincial government. In April, we found that  “the British Columbia government is routinely blocking access to documents that should be made public by claiming that the records don’t exist.”

Wary of corruption and cronyism, on 22 October, the Information and Privacy Commissioner for BC released a scathing report of the practice of withdrawing decision-making to shadow systems. In Access Denied, Denham begins:

Democracy depends on accountable government. Citizens have the right to know how their government works and how decisions are made.

This holds for UBC, by the University Act a corporation bound to accountability to its members: faculty, staff, students.

UBC Management, from top to middle (Deans, ADS & Directors) has lost a sense of how to govern faculty, staff, and students. It has also lost a sense of judgment of what is important and what is not.

UBC’s shadow systems have now come back to haunt a university “too big to fail.”

#UBC FA questions FoI disclosure and calls for review of BoG #ubc100 #ubcnews #bced

The Faculty Association has levelled an extensive critique of senior management and governance of the University of British Columbia. The FAUBC begins:

Information that has come out from freedom of information requests, as well as Wednesday’s leak of documents, has justified our concern that the Board of Governors had acted via secret, in camera processes that do not meet the standards of best practices for public bodies in British Columbia. Worse, it is becoming apparent that such a lack of public accountability is the normal mode of operation for the UBC Board of Governors, and we are concerned that the actions of the Board may expose the University to charges of contravention of the University Act and provincial privacy and access to information laws….

It is alarming to us that the records supplied in response to a formal request under the Access to Information laws should be incomplete, and that University Counsel should be supplied with incomplete records. As such, this would appear to be a violation of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA)….

What remains unknown about Board procedures is, we think, significant in the matter of Dr. Gupta’s resignation. Board procedures, more generally, appear not to be documented. Instead, they appear to be maintained as some form of “oral knowledge” managed by either the Board Secretary or the University Counsel, depending on the matter. This is at variance with best practices, and certainly inconsistent with a notion of open and transparent university governance….

Given the events that have unfolded thus far and the information that has been revealed, we believe it is time for an external review of the UBC Board and its practices. Such a review should be an open process that engages fully the faculty, students, staff, and alumni of the University of British Columbia.

Superb work on behalf of members of the University and the public good.

Dear John, head’s up, Arvind is now talking RE #UBC disrespect #ubcnews #ubc100 #bced

Dear John, how goes it?

Did you hear what happened? Spoiler Alert: you’re not going to believe it!

Just a bit of a head’s up cause Arvind is now allowed to talk! (Hey, see if you can get UBC to say something lol)

First Law of UBC’s Statement on Respectful Environment: Thou cannot complain up.

You and our good ‘ol Board of Governors knew this better than everyone; after all, pursuant to Policy #1, you administrated all 97 Policies, plus the Statement.

And we all know what that Statement says about complaining up: “Bullying or harassment does not include the exercise of appropriate managerial or supervisory direction, including performance management.”

The President, of all people, has the right under the Statement to be uppity, snippity, and, to be candid, John, “void of empathy” whenever he, she, or they exercise/s managerial direction. It’s b&w in the Statement. It’s in the book.

Truth be told John, if the middle managers deemed Arvind “too quick to engage in debate in a confrontational or dismissive manner, which is demoralising to a group of executives in fear of their employment security,” you should have enforced the First Law, took those managers to task, and protected that top level.

Remember, the purpose of the Statement is not only to pit faculty against faculty, staff against staff, and student against student. It is all that, secondarily for sure.

The primary purpose of the Statement is to protect managers from any bottom up criticism. That toxic critique of Arvind should’ve been nipped in the bud.

Top down, never bottom up.

It’s awesome to know you and we all now feel we know you even better. You now know us a little better too! Sometimes a “course correction” is ok.

Be good (and if you can’t be good at BMO, by all means, be bad).

#UBC will not be commenting, say what? #ubcnews #ubc100 #ubysseynews #bced

UBC, famous for its pots calling kettles black, is now scrambling to explain why its unaccountable Board of Governors is lecturing its President on accountability. “We are still not certain that you fully appreciate the scope of your accountability,” Gupta was told last May.

UBC, famous for cutting off its nose to spite its face and body, is now in reaction mode trying to explain why its President, having just secured $66.5m of federal research funds is the same day hauled into meetings and told “You are deemed too quick to engage in debate in a confrontational or dismissive manner.”

UBC, famous for redecorating its deck chairs as its leadership sinks, is now back-pedalling to explain why its Chairman is dressing down its President for not addressing the Board “in a manner that is ‘Presidential’.”

VP External Relations Steencamp, welcome to UBC. Suddenly there is a lot of communicating to do. “UBC will not be commenting.” Say what?

#UBC Arvind Gupta speaks and sorts out distortions #ubcnews #ubc100 #bced #highered

After six months of silence, Arvid Gupta is speaking and sorting out distortions of his resignation and what transpired behind the scenes. The Globe and Mail posted a summary last night and this morning Gupta took to the airwaves on CBC.

A one-sided story prompted the University of British Columbia’s ex-President to introduce a reality check. UBC fumbled with Freedom of Information requests for six months but finally disclosed a package earlier this week. UBC Insiders detailed the serious implications of  the embedded files, and by yesterday’s end Gupta broke the silence.

Turns out UBC’s Board of Governors formed an ad hoc committee to deflect the President’s attention from reform to their concerns with his style. Listen to CBC for Gupta’s side.

#UBC perchance FoI records were tampered with? #ubcnews #ubc100 #bcpoli #bced

Suggestions that records were “unintentionally leaked” in the University of British Columbia’s Disclosure of FoI records seem a bit of a leap. UBC’s VP External Relations and University Counsel’s only statement on this says nothing about this being unintentional. “UBC deeply regrets… this privacy breach” but says nothing else.

Embedding files within a pdf is extremely intentional.

We need to establish that the embedded files are original records or were tampered with. The docx files embedded (e.g., in record 491) have no time or date stamp in the properties. When were they written or edited?

I’m not yet convinced that these two embedded docx files are the actual or entire records (i.e., “RE: Review of Meeting Held on May 18” and “Follow-Up to Our June 2nd Conversation”).

If the embedded records @ 491 are original, then this level of communication between the Board of Governors and the UBC President is another sign that this BoG has to go.

All who are calling for wholesale resignations across UBC’s BoG? Yes.

#UBC budget deficits, pampered deans and admin bloat #ubc100 #ubcnews #bced #ubysseynews

The University of British Columbia is renowned for its lack of accountability and transparency in budget practices. This past year, with sustained failures of accountability and transparency since President Gupta’s resignation in August, the handling of UBC’s budget has reached a new bottom.

Early last week, VP Finance Simpson assembled the Deans and Directors of Finance from each Faculty to present their budgets. The optics are that they played patty-cake over the budget for two days. President Piper is on record commenting that the ‘presentations were excellent’. Yes, many of the Faculties’ budgets are a mess—in perennial deficit– but the PowerPoint slides the Deans presented are a thing of beauty. So that’s where we’re at here at UBC.

Yes, the administrators all get a trophy for participating. Is this not the ‘pampered Dean syndrome’?

Yes, you’ve been pampered, cosseted, doted upon, helmeted, bubble-wrapped…. You’ve been feted and fawned over and called sweetie pie. Yes, you have. And, certainly, we’ve been to your games, your plays, your recitals, your science fairs. Absolutely, smiles ignite when you walk into a room, and hundreds gasp with delight at your every tweet. 

In the meantime, too messed (tuum est, eh?) is the budget that in December President Piper rushed the Board of Governors to once again approve international student tuition increases across the Faculties, e.g.:

  • An increase in tuition for new incoming international students effective May 1, 2016 and for the two succeeding academic years:
  • (a) International undergraduate students (including baccalaureate and post baccalaureate programs):
  • 15% increase for all programs (listed in Appendix A), except the Bachelor of Education (0% increase) and the Bachelor of Commerce (23.5% increase) for 2016-2017 and 2017-2018.
  • A range of increases from 0% to 15%, as specified in Appendix A, for 2018-2019.
  • (b) Non-thesis-based international graduate students:
  • A range of increases from 3% to 100%, for programs specified in Appendix A, for 2016-2017.

The PPT slides are a thing of beauty.

Meantime, administrative bloat continues unabated at UBC. Some of the administrators, with their Faculties in deficit, walked out of last week’s budget meeting with the President’s and VP Finance’s approval to hire, yes, more administrators.

Meanwhile, graduate student funding has stagnated; internal graduate funding in some Faculties has not increased for 15 years. Departments have been starved for FT faculty hires and postdocs face an increasingly bleak academic job market.

Meantime, agencies of budget accountability and transparency at UBC, such as the Council of Senates’ Budget Committee, have been reduced to attendants of minutiae. In September, the Budget “Committee Chair noted that the Committee’s formal mandate to advise the President on the University budget, but that it now tended for focus on areas of particular interest to its members, such as the new Student Information System.”

Such is the state of UBC’s budget accountability and transparency. Please, someone has to hold these Deans to account for their budgets.

Oh yea, almost forgot again, happy new year + #100!

#UBC sinks to new low in mistreatment of PT faculty #ubc100 #ubcnews #caut #bced #highered

At the University of British Columbia, there are depths, and then there are new depths, in the mistreatment of PT faculty members. In the midst of a teaching term, a faculty member received this directive from UBC’s administration:

  1. Per the policy and requirements of space usage in [the academic building] for Sessional instructors, the [123] temporary office space, must be cleared of all personal belongings, borrowed library items and additional furniture installed, by December 1, 2015.  The same applies to the personal belongings being stored in the mailroom. You will be responsible for the cost for clearing and removal of items. Unwanted items may be left with E-Waste by the backside door of [the academic building].
  2. If, by Dec 1, 2015, the space is not restored to its original condition, items will be disposed of, and you shall be invoiced for the cost of clearing and removal.
  1. As requested, I attach the photos of the room in its original condition, taken prior to it being temporarily assigned to you in February 2015.  Please refer to the photos along with a list of furniture items below, confirming the items that shall remain in [123] as of December 1, 2015.
  • 1 corner desk with mobile file storage (under desk)
  • 2 task chairs
  • 1 coat rack
  • 1 Cisco phone

Yes, sad as it is, there are new lows in the mistreatment of faculty members.

For an analysis of the new academic work and workplace, see “Threat Convergence.”

Oh yea, almost forgot, happy birthday UBC!

More bucks than brains: James Ramey and the ruination of the University of Louisville

[Cross-posted from Where the Blog has No Name]

What was he thinking? - University of Louisville president posed for photo in sombrero, poncho at the his 2015 Halloween party

University of Louisville president James Ramsey  posed for photo in sombrero, poncho at the his 2015 Halloween party

In the late 1990s, Kentucky’s legislature initiated a program to upgrade and reform the state’s postsecondary education system, it was called “Bucks for Brains.” (The state’s promotional tagline at the time was “Open for Business.”)

I was recruited to the University of Louisville in 2001 and spent two-and-a-half years on the faculty there as a department chair and distinguished university scholar, which gave me an up close and personal experience with a university administration that’s, as they say where my family’s from, sigogglin.

John W. Shumaker, a classics scholar, was UofL president when I arrived and he proved to be an incredible fund raiser, increasing the university’s endowment from under $200 million to $550 million.

Of course, the UofL has long been the recipient of corporate largesse, especially from the Louisville’s corporate giants Brown-Forman (one of America’s largest spirits and wine companies); Brown & Williamson (which chemically enhanced the addictiveness of cigarettes, remember whistleblower Jeffrey Wigand? No? Well I’m sure you remember Russell Crowe playing Wigand the blockbuster movie The Insider); Papa John’s Pizza (UofL football Cardinals play in Papa John’s Cardinal Stadium); and Yum! Brands (“feeding the world” crap food via KFC, Pizza Hut, and, of course, Taco Bell, more on the Mexican connection later).

The Brown & Williamson Club at the University of Louisville's Papa John's Cardinal Stadium

The Brown & Williamson Club at the University of Louisville’s Papa John’s Cardinal Stadium

After Shumaker left to head up the University of Tennessee (where he resigned in disgrace after 3 years), he was replaced by James R. Ramsey, who had been Kentucky’s state budget director under Gov. Paul E. Patton (who became wealthy by exploiting Kentucky’s coal miners).

Patton’s major achievement as governor was overhauling postsecondary education in the Kentucky. But Patton’s political career was de-railed by duelling scandals: (1)  an extramarital affair and a sex-for-favors scandal; and (2) pardoning four of his political advisers who were indicted for violating Kentucky’s campaign finance laws and for allegedly abusing his patronage powers.

All of this is just everyday Kentucky politics, so Patton wasn’t distracted enough to forget he had to find a soft-landing for his budget director, thus Ramsey, with no university administration experience, became the 17th president of the University of Louisville.

Since Ramsey has been in office the UofL, in endowment has continued to grow and is now pushing the $1 billion mark, which is really the only logical explanation for why he hasn’t been bounced because Ramsey’s administration has more ethical lapses than Carter has liver pills, pretty much proving that the UofL has more bucks than brains.

Robert Felner: Former Dean, Convicted Felon

Felner arrived in Louisville with some spiffy credentials: PhD in psychology from Yale; former head of the department of psychology at the University of Illinois; a CV packed with pages upon pages listing his publications in top journals and, most importantly for the UofL administration, a staggering number of grants.

Despite several red flags about Felner’s candidacy for dean of UofL’s College of Education and Human Development, Ramsey and his long time provost, Shirley Willihnganz, couldn’t wait to get Felner on campus.

Ramsey was in such as rush to land Felner he and Willihnganz forgot to tell the interim dean (and other finalist for the position) they hired Felner, so he was left to discover the decision when Felner call his secretary and started giving her instructions. So much for that HR seminar!

Things in CEHD soon started to fall apart.

I resigned from my department chair position two weeks after Felner took over as dean and later moved to UBC.

Within a few years, there had been 30 grievances filed by faculty and students against Felner for a wide range of abusive managerial practices and a faculty vote of no-confidence in Felner’s leadership of the CEHD. Reasons given by faculty for the vote of non-confidence included:

Public humiliation of faculty, work place harassment, retaliation for voicing opinions, little or no governance, decisions that hurt College, unacceptable and unfair hiring practice; rude, offensive, unethical behavior by CEHD representatives; denial of support for research to those who differ in opinion; and extreme inequity of pay. (See CEHD meeting notes published here.)

Despite the abominable conditions in CEHD, UofL Provost Willihnganz and Ramsey both supported Felner publicly.

One year after the vote of no-confidence, Felner announced he was leaving the UofL to become president of the University of Wisconsin, Parkside.

The Chronicle of Higher Education described Felner as “riding high” a couple of years into his deanship at UofL, well-paid, and having secured a $700,000 grant from the US Department of Education. However, he “pressed his luck” during his last weeks in Louisville.

Even though only $96,000 remained in the account, he implored Louisville officials to approve a $200,000 subcontract with a nonprofit organization in Illinois that had already received $450,000 from the grant. Perhaps, he suggested, the university could draw on a special fund that had been established by the daughter of a former trustee.

The Illinois group, Mr. Felner said, had been surveying students and teachers in Kentucky. That survey would “let us give the feds something that should make them very happy about the efficiency and joint commitment of the university to doing a good job with an earmark, as I know we will want more from this agency,” he wrote in an e-mail message on June 18.

But on June 20, his last day as Dean of CEHD before he headed off to Wisconsin, those big black SUVs with government plates (like the ones you see on Criminal Minds) rolled into the CEHD parking lot. US Secret Service, US Postal Inspectors, and UofL Police questioned Felner and escorted him off campus, along with his computers and records.

There was a simultaneous raid on UW-Parkside to confiscate material Felner had shipped ahead of his arrival there.

In October 2008, a federal grand jury indicted Felner on nine counts of mail fraud, money laundering, and tax evasion. According to the indictment,

the Illinois nonprofit group, known as the National Center on Public Education and Prevention, was simply a shell that funneled money into the personal bank accounts of Mr. Felner and Thomas Schroeder, a former student of his and the group’s “executive director.” Prosecutors say the two men siphoned away not only the $694,000 earmarked grant, but also $1.7-million in payments from three urban school districts, money that ought to have gone to the legitimate public-education center that Mr. Felner had created in Rhode Island.

In January 2010, Felner pleaded guilty to nine Federal charges, including income tax evasion.

In May 2010, Felner was sentenced to 63 months in US Federal Prison for his role in defrauding defrauding the UofL and the University of Rhode Island, where he had been director of the School of Education, of $2.3 million of US Department of Education funds earmarked for No Child Left Behind Act research.

aka Robert Felner

10775-033 aka Robert Felner was released from US Prison in May 2014

For a a short course on the felonious Felner see the PageOneKentucky.com summary of events. For a full course on the Felonious Felner and the incompetence and ethical lapses of Ramsey’s UofL administration click here. (Shout out to Jake at PageOneKentucky for excellent investigative reporting on Felner and the UofL.)

For Workplace Blog coverage of Felner click here.

And here is a Louisville Courier-Journal profile of Felner that pretty much sums up the guy that Ramsey defended until he pleaded guilty: Robert Felner profile: Arrogant, outrageous, abusive and duplicitous.

Felner Footnotes: Indians, John Deasy, Non-Disclosure Agreements & Ramsey as the Frito Bandito

(1) When Felner announced his resignation, UofL president Ramsey wroted to Felner and said he was worried about “letting the Indians get back in control of the reservation.” That’s some serious respect for university faculty and the idea of shared governance, eh?

(2) Los Angeles school superintendent, John Deasy, has had his academic credentials called into question. Deasy was given a PhD by the University of Louisville after he was enrolled for four months and received a total of nine credits.

Deasy’s doctoral advisor was, surprise, Robert Felner! Deasy had previously awarded $375,000 in consulting contracts to Felner, while Deasy was Superintendent of Santa Monica schools.

Ramsey appointed a “blue-ribbon” panel to investigate Deasy’s degree. The panel found that getting a PhD in four months at the UofL was not cause for concern, thus plunging the UofL’s academic reputation down into the neighbourhood of fly-by-night for-profit “higher” education.

Deasy is now working in an unaccredited training program sponsored by educational de-formers the Broad Foundation, which teaches school leaders business methods and supports charter schools and closing public schools.

(3) Ramsey has been making double retirement payouts to UofL administrators for their silence.

Records show that the school paid a full year’s salary to outgoing vice presidents Michael Curtin ($252,350) and Larry Owsley ($248,255) and to assistant to the president Vivian Hibbs ($66,391) to induce them not to “disparage, demean or impugn the university or its senior leadership.”

In March 2014, UofL made a $346,000.00 settlement with university counsel Angela Kosawha:

The University of Louisville is paying another large settlement in connection with the retirement of a high-ranking official — this time, $346,844 to its top lawyer. University counsel Angela Koshewa is on a three-month leave of absence before she officially retires June 1. Documents obtained under the Kentucky Open Records Act show the university is paying Koshewa — who has questioned some expenditures and proposals backed by President James Ramsey and Dr. David Dunn, the executive vice president for Health Affairs — twice her final salary.

It costs a lot for Ramsey to cover up details of his administration’s incompetence and shenanigans, but remember there are lots of bucks at UofL.

(4) Provost Shirley Willihnganz stepped down as UofL provost earlier this year. The Louisville Courier-Journal reported that

Under her watch, however, university employees have stole, misspent or mishandled at least $7.6 million in schemes at the health science campus, the law school, the business school and the athletic department’s ticket office.

Willihnganz also was criticized for approving about $1 million in buyouts for former high-ranking employees, some of which included agreements not to disparage the university or its leaders.

She also was forced to apologize to CEHD faculty in 2008 for failing to take any common-sense action against Felner for his intimidation, harassment, humiliation and retaliation against faculty, staff, students and alumni.

Willihnganz said at the time that she tended to dismiss the early complaints against Felner — including a no-confidence vote by faculty — because he was a “high performer” and because the complaints came from professors and staff “entrenched in their ways and resistant to change.”

She later told faculty at a meeting that she was sorry. “Mostly what I think I want to say is people have been hurt and something very bad happened, and as provost I feel like I am ultimately responsible for that,” she said.

No duh! She actually is directly responsible for the Felner disaster (along with Ramsey), that’s probably why she feels that way. And speaking of resistance to change …

(5) This next item has nothing to do with Felner, except that his former boss and advocate, James Ramsey, is also the long time boss of UofL basketball coach Rick Pitino who admitted to having sex with a women in a swanky Italian restaurant in Louisville. Apparently that’s not a problem with Ramsey and the UofL because Pitino said it wasn’t rape.

And, now Pitino is using hookers and strippers to recruit high school basketball players to come to the UofL. See Dave Zirin’s pieces on the latest Ramsey supervised scandal:

(6) And I almost forgot. Remember the Taco Bell/Mexican connection. This week Ramsey had a little halloween party at the UofL. Ramsey goes racist (again). Yes, he dressed up like the Frito Bandito.

UofL President James Ramsey illustrating his knowledge of multiculturalism

UofL President James Ramsey says “Yo quiero Taco Bell.”

And you thought the HR training at UofL was bad, get that guy to the diversity office and cross your fingers that they’re better than the university’s accounting folks.

YouTube Preview Image

#UBC Senate defeats transparency motion #ubc100 #ubcnews #ubysseynews #highered #bced #ubcgss

A few weeks ago, we posted “Shared governance hits rock bottom at UBC.” Respondents noted that there was still a glimmer of hope for governance and recoiled at the suggestion that “equally futile in introducing even a modicum of accountability or insight into the non-disclosure scandal is the UBC Senate.”

At this evening’s Senate meeting, Senator Anstee moved a motion for transparency in the confidentiality agreement between UBC and past-President Arvind Gupta, but the motion was defeated. Yes there was debate but the motion for transparency was defeated.

The initial premise holds: equally futile in shared governance– when it really counts– is the UBC Board of Governors and Senate. Sure, faculty, staff and students can banter over the objectives of a new course or the fine print of a new policy. But on the meaningful decisions at this point at the University of British Columbia, governance is dominated by developers and investment bankers and confined by legalism. The two are hand in glove.

Again, the BoG’s, Senate’s and Senior Administration’s rejection of multiple requests and appeals for accountability in the President’s resignation marks the low point of shared or faculty governance at the University. Hoping to rise to the occasion of its 100th, UBC instead sunk to rock bottom.