I thought that insurance covered the vast majority of the settlement? This article seems to contradict that. Not good if true.
General gist is the workers are voting on a strike due to benefits & retirement plans being cut. According to respiratory therapist Brian Dedoro, the school cut employee's benefits due to the $852 million settlement. Is this posturing?
eta: further quote, "The university plans to pay out the settlement "largely through a combination of litigation reserves, insurance proceeds, deferred capital spending, sale of non-essential assets, and careful management of non-essential expenses," USC President Carol L. Folt said in a letter to the school community.
And what is this about UEI suing the school and threatening not to post? I can understand if you don't want to answer on this forum, but it does seem somewhat troubling. Certainly the optics are not the best.
"However, the UC faces a financial loss of almost $1.2 billion from mid-March to April because of the pandemic." UCLA us the sloppiest--"Among the University of California campuses, UCLA has faced the greatest financial impact, with a revenue shortfall and added COVID-related expense that currently stands at about $725 million."
It does appear to me - mho - that both sides are not being entirely honest. No doubt since Covid the workers are pushing hard for more rules and entitlements. But the pay gap between SC workers and ucla workers is not good. 16% supposedly. But the question is that there might be more benefits like housing that ucla doesn't offer. Cutting benefits - if true - is never a good thing. My guess is the biggest issue is the subcontracting of some jobs to non union. Looks like the issue is more complicated than either side will admit.
"litigation reserves, insurance proceeds" are whaat they are; aren't they? Labor unions have grown radical including the nursingnunion. They want to lock in "workers on-top" givingnthe nurses cushy work rules and more authority over doctors.