Almost lost in the perfunctory mumbo-jumbo, though, is this pearl:
[Yudof] has indicated that the decision was necessary as part of his effort to insure that the faculty furloughs will not be continued into a second year.Oh? We are surprised, first of all, because there no such motivation in the now (in)famous Pitts memo, where UCOP was mostly concerned in laying down the law. But, second, the connection between the implementation of the furloughs and their continuation into a second year is one that UCOP has never bothered explaining to the faculty. This would, of course, be completely in keeping with the culture of secrecy and lack of budgetary transparency at UCOP, but another explanation is possible: there is no such discernible connection, and Powell and Simmons are just engaging in cognitive dissonance and post factum rationalization.