Thursday, March 5, 2015

You Want Caps? And a Path of "Unknown Sums" and Unknown Timelines.

see East Bay Express: Should the University of California Cap It’s Pay at Half a Million?
California Assemblymember Roger Hernández, a Democrat representing West Covina, has introduced a bill that would put a $500,000 cap on the maximum allowable compensation paid to University of California employees.
Daily Bruin: Delays to UCPath Project to Cost Millions

The UC Office of the President would not provide specific information on the added costs despite multiple requests, Cianca said. He added that the new timeline has not been finalized yet.

University of California officials said this week that a University-wide payroll and human resources project is now two years behind schedule and will cost millions more than originally expected.

The UC Payroll, Academic Personnel, Timekeeping and Human Resources project, or UCPath, was initially slated to cost about $175 million but will now likely cost much more since its deployment date has been delayed multiple times and the UC has had to modify its loans to pay for the project. At the July 2014 UC Board of Regents meeting, officials estimated that the project would cost the University $220.5 million, about $45 million more than the initial estimate.

The project, which began in 2011, seeks to replace campuses’ outdated and decentralized systems with one processing center. The program, part of the UC’s Working Smarter initiative, was initially predicted to save up to $123 million annually by cutting down on administrative inefficiencies.

The University has delayed the project because testing has not yet been completed thoroughly enough, said Mark Cianca, the UC deputy chief information officer in charge of the project, in an email.

Daily Bruin Editorial Board: Costly delays in implementing UCPath reflect poorly on UC
What was supposed to be one of the University of California’s biggest cost-saving initiatives is draining hundreds of millions of dollars and lagged in development for more than four years.

Now, because of yet another logistical delay, it will take even longer and likely cost more money for the University to see any benefits of the project.

The University began the UCPath initiative in 2011 to create a uniform payroll system to replace its outdated, unsustainable 35-year-old one. At its launch, officials boasted that the initiative serves as proof of the University’s financial efficiency amid lower state funding. In May 2012, officials said they expect to save up to $100 million annually by the eighth year of its implementation.

But a disturbing number of delays with the project – and the extra expenses that come with them – mean that campuses have to wait much longer for the savings they were promised, while the University’s pockets continue to be drained.

In January 2012, the UC Board of Regents was told to expect the new payroll system to go live in January 2013. In March 2013, that launch date was pushed back to July 2014. Then again to December 2014. Finally, UC officials revealed to The Bruin this week that the system is now expected to launch no earlier than September 2015.

and includes: "The delays are costing not just UC headquarters, but money from our own campus. Associated Students UCLA, which has been working with UCPath to test the new system, has said the most recent delay will cost its own departments an unknown sum of money."
remember Napolitano to Sac Bee:
"Every time CSU or UCs give out raises, journalists write about them.

And you’re wrong.

How do you explain to a student that pay raises are justified?

I know these people. I have worked with them for a year. They work all the time. They are among the hardest-working individuals I have ever seen. But they haven’t had raises and, in their market, the University of California is like falling off the low end. The raises that were given are an attempt to bring us up over time, not even at top of the comparator schools but toward the middle. If these were football coaches, nobody would raise an eyebrow."

No comments:

Post a Comment