University of California continues to screw its employees

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Thursday August 06, 2009 · 7:20 PM PDT

2009/08/06 · 19:20

I work for University of California San Diego. I've only been there a few months, but I have a good enough form of job security that I'm not worried about losing my job. But about a month and a half ago they announced furloughs for all staff. Everyone. The thing about a lot of people at the UCs, especially UCSD, is that a significant part of staff salaries come from grants and NOT the University. So the broad reduction of salary that they technically don't have any control over was one of the first points that my union UPTE jumped on and started fighting over.

This whole process of finding money has been ridiculous, as one would expect from a public system in California. It just got a whole lot more ridiculous today.

evolutionarybeagle

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Tuesday November 04, 2008 · 8:29 PM PST

2008/11/04 · 20:29

Here it is, folks: CA election results.

11:45 pm PST Results: Prop 1A has swung to Yes, Prop 4 to No. Prop 8 is still trending Yes -- the gap is between 5 and 7 percentage points.

This blog is part of the Election Day Live Blogging project.

Please do not recommend this diary. Recommend the Mothership Diary instead.

Added to the bottom: List of CA propositions where the results have been called.

evolutionarybeagle

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Tuesday December 05, 2006 · 3:39 AM PST

2006/12/05 · 03:39

In 1996, there was a case in front of the Connecticut State Supreme Court called Sheff vs. O'Neill. The case began in 1989, when Elizabeth Horton Sheff and other parents brought a case against then-governor William O'Neill. The issue was school districts: the way that lines were drawn meant that city districts were largely black, and suburban districts were largely white. The plaintiffs argued that this effectively amounted to discrimination.

The 4-3 decision handed down said that, in fact, the current educational districting policy was against state law. But it wasn't until 2003 that anything was done about it.

The 2003 settlement set a timetable for voluntary desegregation efforts, and provided state funding to meet these goals. By June 2007 (so they have another six months or so to do this), at least 30% of Hartford's schoolchildren, mostly at the bottom rung of the socioeconomic class structure, must be in racially desegregated schools.

However, Sheff vs. O'Neill could potentially run afoul of national law. There is a case in front of the Supreme Court where parents from Louisville and Seattle are arguing that the use of race to determine where students go to school is unconstitutional.

RSS

University of California continues to screw its employees

Election Liveblog: CA-04, CA-11, CA-50; Propositions 1A, 4, and 8

Race in public schools