A "thankless job"

I showed up for the Chancellor’s “forum” up on the 2nd floor of the Library in a room I’d never been in before. It was snazzy, boy.

At first, it didn’t look like there’d be much of a turnout, but, in the end, I counted 19 people, not counting Mathur and Roquemore, who sat up front by themselves like Heckle and Jeckle.

Raghu explained that he thought he’d try “something different” than his usual practice of meeting with each School separately. Hence the “forum.” So, evidently, it was Raghu’s idea.

I asked about reassigned time for Academic Chairs. Thanks to former Trustee Dot Fortune (you remember her: she resigned amid accusations that she had moved to Central California!) and the corrupt bastards who once controlled the faculty union, reassigned time was essentially eliminated, except for union officers, about 8 years ago. Recently, owing to some hard work by Bob Cosgrove, the Chancellor granted the two Academic Senates a significant increase in reassigned time, but the situation for non-union duties like department chair has not improved.

The specific problem to which I referred is that some department chairs are expected to do a very substantial amount of work—tens of hours per week—on top of a full load of instruction, and that workload is insane. Raghu had nothing to offer except to say that reassigned time is a “contractual matter.” We were advised to talk to the union.

Lisa noted another problem: chairs are expected to work during the summer without compensation. “The assumption,” she said, seems to be “that my [time] isn’t worth anything.” Again, Raghu was unhelpful. “Let’s collect the data,” he said. Again, we were advised to go talk to the union.

Someone asked about DRAC, the committee that decides how district funds are distributed. Kathy, who serves on DRAC, said something about how DRAC is like a gizmo with a funnel at each end, and that’s when I fell into a deep coma. I flickered back into consciousness just in time to hear Kathy explain that DRAC is a “much less rancorous place” than it used to be.

Raghu explained the importance of increasing enrollments, which have been shit-tay of late. I asked what he was doing about it, and he said something clever like, “What do you want me to do about it?” Well, hell if I know.

Donna Sneed noted the recent bad press concerning low community college transfer rates. She also referred to the possibility that we at IVC are losing students to Orange Coast College owing to that college’s oft-repeated assertion that it has the “highest transfer rate” or the "most transfers."

A recent Register article that celebrated OCC’s “top ranking” in “Transfers to California State University campuses” (OCC tops) seemed to contain a glaring fallacy, for the relevant statistic (to students who seek to transfer) isn’t the number that OCC transfers, but, rather, the rate at which it transfers (per 100). (Obviously, a small college can have a high rate while a very large college with a lower rate will have much higher numbers.) And yet the article refers only to OCC’s high number of transfers, and the issue of “rate” isn’t even mentioned. Further, the article occasionally lapses into talk of a “transfer rate” as though that were the same thing as the transfer number. Sheesh!

Donna noted that, while OCC never tires of trumpeting its high transfer factoid, IVC doesn’t even know what its transfer rate is, and despite her best efforts, Donna has been unable to get clear data from the state.

If Raghu had anything helpful to say about all this, I sure don’t remember it.

Eventually, the Foundation’s Al Tello noted a problem with Foundation fundraising. More money would be raised if the Foundation were allowed to sell booze at functions. It appears that that is legal, but one or some trustees are resisting the idea.

Sheesh, what’s that all about? Sell booze, I say. Lots of it.


At some point, I mentioned the growing popularity of Study Abroad programs. Two years ago, we had about 14 of ‘em in the district. Now we’re down to two or three. Why? Because the trustees FUBARed Study Abroad into oblivion, that's why.

My question was: Raghu, why didn’t you try to stop them? Shouldn’t you be guiding them away from such folly?

Raghu’s answer seemed to be: well, now, good things are happening. Isn’t a reduction of the liability insurance for trips on the agenda for the next meeting?

Yeah, that’s great, I said, but how come you didn’t say anything when the discussion first came up two years ago? You just sat there as Fuentes yammered about Spain “abandoning our fighting men and women” and Williams fretted about marauding anti-American Italians.

Raghu said that the board votes the way it votes and there’s nothing he can do about it.

That would be a fine answer, I said, if you (Raghu) had done everything in your power to try to steer the board away from their disastrous decision, but you didn’t do that at all. Nope.

Raghu said something like, “Golly, you have no idea the wonderful things I do when you’re not around to see it! I’m really quite remarkable, and selfless, too!”

I mentioned other cases. What about the ALA decision? That was pretty embarrassing. The Accreds said they read about it and it weirded them out from hundreds of miles away! How come you didn’t try harder to steer these people away from that SNAFU?

Mathur pulled another “When you’re not lookin’, I’m workin’ it, baby, like a sonofabitch.” Well, he didn't put it quite that way, but you get the idea.

At one point, he trotted out his best example of Mathurian selflessness and sacrifice: he explained that the faculty contract was approved on a 7-0 vote instead of 5-2. That was his doing, he said. He doesn’t get credit, he said. He doesn’t ask for it. He performs his miracles and then slips quietly into the night. He’s just that kind of guy.

I kept thinking: “Um, what difference does it make if its 7-0 or 4-3, as long as the damn contract is approved?” But whatever.

Eventually, Raghu commenced speachifyin’ about how he’s the kind of guy who “gets things done.” He’s not interested in “settling scores.” No, not him. The bottom line, he said, is that we’ve got to work with people, even if we don’t like ‘em.

At one point, I forget when, he declared that being Chancellor is a “thankless job.” I kept thinking, “Yeah, but those 290 thousand bones you get have gotta wipe away the tears pretty well!”

“I’m a pretty independent person,” he said. He added that he's always working in the background, making his miracles. “Do I always have to say something when I hear bizarre things?”—he was referring to Fuentes’ twaddle about Spain, I suppose.

No! He does things the “professional” way. He’s not the kind to follow a “negative agenda.”

That “negative agenda” stuff. That’s was about me, I guess.

That reminds me! IVC faculty & staff: don’t forget about the Holiday Party Spectacular on the 7th. We’ll have cool entertainment, good food, games, prizes, and general foolishness. “California Santa” will be there with his Harley-Davidson sled, and I’ll be takin’ the pictures of the kiddies on CS's lap! BE THERE OR BE SQUARE!