CSU Board of Trustees meetings provide an opportunity for the University community to address the appointed officials directly and publicly. CSUEU Bargaining Team members spoke during the Nov. 15 Public Comments section, calling special attention to the Board's budget proposal which does not adequately address pay inequity issues - the subject of a $2 million CSU salary study completed this year. The following are remarks from CSUEU leaders. Video clips of the meeting are posted here . Tessy Reese, Chair, Bargaining Unit 2, Health Care Licensed Vocational Nurse II, San Diego State University The Board of Trustees budget proposal is largely – and unfortunately - a political gimmick. The proposal takes the $227 million Gov. Newsom allocated to the University in the state budget and buries millions of dollars in hard-to-measure categories like the Grad Initiative. The Compact between the Governor and the CSU is that the state would provide annual 5% funding increases. The current Board proposal allocating Compact money will not close equity gaps for staff or faculty. The CSU budget proposal barely covers a 2% General Salary Increase. That rate will not keep up with inflation or provide funding needed to close equity gaps at the CSU. It is very clear that the current board budget proposal does not prioritize programs that benefit our students, our faculty or our staff. We demand a CSU budget that serves the whole University community. Pam Robertson, Vice Chair, Bargaining Unit 2, Health Care Clinical Assistant, CSU Sacramento Throughout the pandemic, we saw how much we could accomplish together when Labor and Management fully collaborated. Not one day of classes was shut down. Thousands migrated from in-person to online instruction. We were able to continue operationally with no significant hiccups – and that should tell you just how committed CSU employees are to the mission of serving students. The CSU Board of Trustees will have to step up in 2023 and show us you value our work and will do what it takes to provide fair wages. We are telling you now: The status quo has to change. The CSU brand is only as good as the staff and faculty behind it. This Board will need to decide whether to join us in building a CSU community for all. Don Moreno, Vice Chair, Bargaining Unit 5, Operations Custodian, CSU East Bay The Board of Trustees budget proposal does not prioritize students' basic needs. You don’t need to pay for any survey. Ask any college student and they will tell you their constant stresses are food and shelter. How can the CSU not make housing and food priorities? The housing shortage in California has left tens of thousands of students without stable places to live. Most campuses don’t guarantee housing for all four years and in some cases don’t guarantee it for any students. Add to that the fact that high rent markets such as LA, Long Beach and the San Francisco Bay Area are simply not affordable – not even for working families among your CSU workforce. The CSU budget proposal is an utter failure if it does not help students in the critical areas of food and housing. Dawn McCulley, Chair, Bargaining Unit 7, Clerical/Administrative Administrative Coordinator, CSU Stanislaus Administrative and Clerical workers make up the largest segment of nonfaculty employees at the CSU. They are represented in our CSUEU Bargaining Unit 7 and by and large they are misclassified. This topic was raised in 2008 and remains in the contract today. Mercer identified this lack of clear job duties and titles as a major stumbling block to conducting accurate market studies and creating an equitable wage scale. The CSU has not even constructed an opening proposal to begin to cure this defect in its largest job family. Thousands of workers in this unit are women and hold 'working titles” that sound impressive, but do nothing for identifying actual job duties. I call upon you, the Board of Trustees, to require accountability and action to immediately address this long-standing issue. Martin Brenner, Chair, Bargaining Unit 9, Technical Instructional Technology Specialist, CSU Long Beach After much fanfare this year about the CSU staff salary study, conducted by Mercer, we were assured the resulting recommendations were embraced by the CSU. It is profoundly disappointing to see that the Board of Trustees budget proposal relegates funding for the study’s recommendations to the category “other considerations.” Upon completion of the independent salary study, which was authorized by the Legislature and supported by the previous chancellor and vice chancellor, it was unequivocally agreed upon that CSU employees are in stagnant wages, with no path forward for thousands of Support Staff because the current compensation structure generally does not allow this. In the limited cases where it does, the CSU chooses not to fund these paths. Following the departure of the previous Chancellor, Vice Chancellor, the Board and CSU bargaining team, have returned to the pre-Salary Study days of neglecting staff and passing the buck to the Governor or the Legislature for an alleged funding shortage. Funding is always short; what gets funded is always matter of priorities. Once again, fair compensation for anyone who isn’t an executive level employee is simply not on the CSU RADAR! This body underfunds employee wages to the detriment of this institution and those it serves. What good does it to remove barriers from disadvantaged students when you plan to serve them solely by the employees you can attract and retain at less than market wages, these employees increasingly supplemented by minimum bid contractors, who have no commitment to the institution and the mission and values it espouses? Any CSU budget proposal that does not commit to following through on the recommendations from the salary study is fatally short-sighted. It shortchanges the employees, the taxpayers, the institution, as well as students and members of the public who depend upon the CSU as a way to gain a well-educated public which can move positively towards equity in a modern society. Andrea Skinner, Vice Chair, Bargaining Unit 9, Technical Academic Programs and Planning Analyst, CSU Channel Islands The Board of Trustees budget proposal charges the State of California $13 million for the CSU's increase in Liability Insurance due to leadership inability to rein in executive corruption and astounding sexual harassment/abuse on college campuses. Sure, $13 million may be a small number in CSU universe – but do not mistake it to be an insignificant cost to the University. The cost is high – because it is a reflection of poor leadership and absence of accountability. Let me cite just the latest example: An investigation, ordered by the Board of Trustees earlier this year, found former Chancellor Joseph Castro failed in every way as University President at Fresno State in allowing a top administrator to engage in inappropriate behavior, including sexual harassment and intimidation. This Board awarded Mr. Castro a $400,000 exit package, and how he is planning to teach at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo.