Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

There are 7 comments on Big Budget: the Big Picture

  1. Thanks for this article! It made the BU money flow so much more transparent to all of us and its exactly what everyone wanted to know.

  2. I don’t understand why benefits expenses grew $10 million this year, when A) So many positions were pulled from postings and remain unfilled, and B) the elimination of health-care for former employees over 55 supposedly saves the University $3 million. This implies that the cost of benefits grew $13M (8.8%) for a shrinking workforce during a recession. I’m calling Bullshit on this.

    I understand that group health-care coverage costs more during economic crisis, but the figures shown exceed the expected national average increase of 7.4% (http://www.businessinsurance.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=16081). I hope the University is simply anticipating and overestimating a growing demand for and utilization of health benefits.

    How about rescinding the eye coverage recently granted to employees? It was basically a token gesture anyway, and provided marginal (if any) incremental benefits over the prior plan, and served only to shift patients to a similarly-priced BU-owned Ophthalmology center. To be fair, the revenues collected by increasing patient volume can only help the University, but if the hiring freeze applies to staff in these clinics then it means longer waits and poorer service for employees.

    Also, energy and utility costs are understandably growing. While I laud the University’s efforts to reduce waste and improve efficiency, I think we still have a long way to go. To balance a student schedule, I work evenings on the medical campus. Leaving work at 7, I pass maybe two dozen empty rooms with lights on and computers buzzing, in my building alone. Installing motion-reactive light switches and mandating the use of power-save features on all terminals idle for, say 45 minutes, could save literally millions across two campuses with as many facilities/offices as BU. I don’t have figures and can’t say for certain, but I bet the payoff in saved energy in the first six to nine months would offset the costs of implementation.

    I’m impressed with the steps the administration has taken to secure our financial future. I think they’ve done a great job, snipping the budget in just the right places and leaving the other (right) parts untouched. But if I can spot a few simple adjustments that could mean big savings, I’m sure there are many more to be found.

  3. I agree with the previous comment about installing motion activated lights. BU could be saving jobs and money just by turning off the lights at night!

  4. I would just like to point out some errors with the post having to do with the new eye care benefit and the faculty and staff benefits budget increase for 2010.

    First and foremost the new eye care benefit is not adding to the benefit budget. The e-mail from the BU HR office on 4/28/09 specifically states so in second sentence of the e-mail:

    “During this time of financial constraints we are able to offer this benefit at no additional cost to you or the University.”

    The New England Eye Institute has simply offered a discount on glasses and waiver of copay to eligible BU employees and their family members.

    Second, the New England Eye Institute clinic at 930 Comm. Ave. is not BU owned or operated.

    Finally the increase in the faculty and staff benefit budget for 2010 is 6.75%, not 8.8% as was estimated in the earlier posting. One cannot simply add any savings from the elimination of the early retiree plan to the faculty and staff benefit budget. All that being said the increase of the faculty and staff benefit budget is really $10M not $13M.

    As an aside, before someone is to call Bullpoop please make sure the items which are being commented on are understood correctly.

  5. Thanks for the great explanation—it really highlights the University’s strategy and thought process on keeping the place secure. Great work.

  6. Is there a website where we can see a more detailed and itemized budget.

    I would like to see just how many people are making what amount of money. How much was each member of the seven member task force organized to save 10 million dollars paid?

    Also this article seems to champion the fact that we do not depend a great deal on financial investments. THIS IS BECAUSE THE UNIVERSITY HAS NO MONEY.
    We are essentially living year to year. A lack of alumni contributions is to blame. I feel these contributions would come in if the university spent more money on student services and increasing student happiness, they might lose a little money in the short term, but will gain money for far more in the future.

    Finally, I think the University has made some progress in going green. Adding geothermal heat to buildings and such bu they can do more. How about talking to students in the dorms about energy conservation. Find a way to do an energy audit so students know just how much electricity they use and will have to pay for when on their own.

  7. I can appreciate the University fine tuning the budget to eliminate waste in these difficult economic times, but I do think it is shameful to take away the medical benefit for those that retired before the age of 65. There must be other places to save.

Post a comment.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *