The San Francisco Chronicle has published several critical stories on UC compensation issues, with a particular focus on senior management. This Web site provides UC’s response to these stories, and relevant background and context regarding the University’s compensation needs and practices.

Critical issues: While we take issue with some of the Chronicle’s characterization of UC compensation issues, the story underscores two very important concerns for the University:

Marketplace demands: UC’s quality is built and sustained by many people and UC is operating in a very competitive market for talent. As the Chronicle itself writes, such compensation packages are “not uncommon in higher education or private enterprise. Like big companies, elite universities around the country give top employees bonuses and other compensation.”

UC must be able to offer competitive compensation packages in order to recruit and retain the caliber of talent we need to keep UC and its contributions to society strong. While compensation or benefits for certain employees may look high or inappropriate to some, they reflect very real marketplace demands, and still continue to lag the market in many instances, which the Chronicle failed to adequately explain.

Public accountability: As an institution established by and for Californians, UC takes seriously its accountability to the public and we believe we must work continually to ensure transparency and openness about how we conduct our business. While we are very public about much of our activities, some of the issues raised by the Chronicle story suggest that some of our policies and practices deserve review. We welcome that input and we have already begun to examine many of our practices.

Thwarting salary erosion and improving compensation for all employees: UC has been working hard toward stopping salary erosion and ensuring competitive compensation and benefits for all employees, and we will continue to do so. For instance:

> Read more about key facts on these issues…