Posts Tagged: Policy
Employee Comment: Proposed revisions to APM-710, leaves of absence/sick leave/medical leave
The University of California Office of the President invites comments on the following proposed policy:
- APM - 710, Leaves of Absence/Sick Leave/Medical Leave
The policy is proposed to be revised and includes the following key revisions:
- Proposed effective date of the policy revision is January 1, 2025.
- Policy title updated to clarify the policy applies to paid sick leave.
- Policy updated to provide paid medical leave to Agronomists, Astronomers and Curators who have a full-time appointment for at least a full academic year.
- Policy updated to permit paid sick leave accrual and usage to certain academic appointees who have a paid appointment of at least thirty (30) calendar days, and to those with less than 50% appointments.
- Policy updated to provide a paid sick leave bank to all faculty, Agronomists, Astronomers and Curators who have an appointment of at least thirty (30) calendar days.
- Policy updated to provide a paid sick leave bank to academic appointees in university extension who do not accrue sick leave who have an appointment of at least thirty (30) calendar days.
- Policy updated to include protected paid sick leave.
- Policy updated to extend the period during which accrued and unused paid sick leave may be reinstated if an appointee is reemployed after a separation from employment and to address reinstatement of unused days from a paid sick leave bank.
- Policy updated to allow use of paid sick leave for additional reasons, including preventive care and for specified purposes for victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking.
- Policy updated to provide notice requirements for an academic appointee to use paid sick leave.
- Policy updated to include recording of paid medical leave, paid sick leave bank, and paid sick leave accrual and use.
The proposed APM - 710 is posted to the Academic Personnel and Programs website under the “Systemwide Review” tab. It can also be reviewed here: https://ucanr.edu/sites/PCPA/Revisions/.
If you have any questions or if you wish to comment on this policy revision, please contact Robin Sanchez at rgsanchez@ucanr.edu, no later than April 22, 2024. Please indicate “APM-710 Revision” in the subject line.
Pork prices may reflect uncertainty around Prop 12
California's farm animal welfare act, approved in 2018, fully implemented in January 2024 after delays
Since being passed by California voters in 2018, Proposition 12, a farm animal welfare law, has faced a series of legal challenges that have led to uncertainty and delays in the implementation and enforcement of its requirements for the treatment of breeding pigs. A new Special Issue of ARE Update sheds light on its contentious path to eventual full implementation on Jan. 1, 2024, and analyzes how these delays have affected the retail and wholesale pork market.
Preliminary data suggest that Prop 12, and the uncertainty surrounding it, have led to an average retail price increase of 20% for covered pork products (i.e., those included under the regulation, mainly uncooked cuts of pork), as well as significantly higher prices for wholesale pork products during the implementation period and as hog farms nationally continue to adjust to the law.
Prop 12, officially known as the “Prevention of Cruelty to Farm Animals Act,” was approved by 63% of California voters. The law requires housing standards for egg-laying hens, veal calves and breeding pigs for the eggs or meat of these animals or their offspring to be sold in California.
While these standards first went into effect for egg-laying hens and veal calves as early as Jan. 1, 2020, many farms and businesses were hesitant to make large investments in the sow housing and traceability requirements until legal issues were settled for Prop 12-compliant pork.
On May 11, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Prop 12. As a result, and consistent with rulings of the Sacramento Superior Court in California, California began requiring Prop 12-compliant pork on July 1, 2023, while allowing remaining non-compliant pork already in the supply chain to be sold until Jan. 1, 2024. Although full enforcement began almost eight months after the Supreme Court ruling, hog farms, almost all of which are outside California, continue to expand the supply of pork from hogs born of mother pigs that meet California housing and treatment standards.
“A long complicated process is not uncommon for major regulations,” said Daniel A. Sumner, a study co-author and distinguished professor in the UC Davis Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
Economists Hannah Hawkins, Shawn Arita and Seth Meyer with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Office of the Chief Economist have been documenting prices and quantities of hogs and pork as the industry has adjusted to Prop 12. Using Circana retail scanner data, they found that in the past nine months covered pork products sold in California increased in price compared to the rest of the United States. While there was significant price fluctuation between the partial and full implementation dates, the initial price impacts were higher than would be expected after full adjustment, with price increases of 16% for bacon and 41% for pork loin.
Based on USDA Agricultural Marketing Service data, the authors found that wholesale prices for compliant pork cuts also increased substantially during the adjustment period, with an average price premium of 22%. Due to the many delays in implementation, Prop 12-compliant pork volumes are not yet sufficient to meet quantities that would have been demanded without these significant price increases. As the industry catches up to supply sufficient quantities of compliant pork meat to meet the California demand and a new market equilibrium is reached, both retail and wholesale prices may settle at lower price premiums. However, we may still be several months away from understanding the full impact of Prop 12 on meat and egg producers and consumers.
To learn more about the implementation of Prop 12 and its impact on the retail and wholesale pork market, read the full Special Issue of ARE Update 27(3), UC Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics, online at https://giannini.ucop.edu/filer/file/1710543749/20936/.
ARE Update is a bimonthly magazine published by the Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics to educate policymakers and agribusiness professionals about new research or analysis of important topics in agricultural and resource economics. Articles are written by Giannini Foundation members, including University of California faculty and Cooperative Extension specialists in agricultural and resource economics, and university graduate students. Learn more about the Giannini Foundation and its publications at https://giannini.ucop.edu/.
/h3>New presidential practices and policy on anti-discrimination
UC ANR is deeply committed to supporting our community and building a positive work environment that is welcome, accessible and inclusive to all. We are pleased to announce, that in collaboration with the entire UC system, there has been a strategic evaluation of initiatives and activities in relation to the prevention, detection and response to harassment and discrimination. As a result, President Drake shared in his letter to the UC community that a Presidential Workgroup has reviewed and recommended a number of systemwide initiatives including a new policy and procedural framework that will offer enhanced protection, support and resources to the entire UC community.
- The Systemwide Office of Civil Rights: This new umbrella office has just been launched to provide systemwide leadership, uniform guidance and support on issues related to protecting civil rights at UC locations. It will encompass the existing Systemwide Title IX Office, a new Systemwide Anti-Discrimination Office and a new Systemwide Disability Rights Office.
- Systemwide Policy: Effective February 20, 2024, President Drake, has implemented a new consolidated policy on Anti-Discrimination.
- Reporting an Incident: Should any member of our community wish to discuss or share an incident, please continue to utilize the Harassment & Discrimination Assistance and Prevention Program (HDAPP). HDAPPserves as the central office for receiving, maintaining and evaluating harassment, discrimination and Title IX complaints. They provide support in prevention of harassment and discrimination from occurring and by educating the communities about the issues and assisting individuals and units to resolve conflicts and complaints related to harassment, discrimination, sexual harassment, sexual violence and hate and bias.
For more information, please contact humanresources@ucanr.edu. For concerns of harassment or discriminatory activities, please reach out to hdapp@ucdavis.edu.
Bethanie Brown
Interim Executive Director of Human Resources
NPI researchers find school recess varies with school size, family income
New law mandates at least 30 minutes of recess for K-8 public school students
Last year, while working on a bill that would require California public schools to provide at least 30 minutes of recess, State Sen. Josh Newman sought the latest research on youth physical activity. Newman, whose district encompasses parts of Los Angeles, Orange and San Bernardino counties, traveled to the Bay Area to see one of the leading experts in the field.
During several visits with Newman, Hannah Thompson – a Nutrition Policy Institute senior epidemiologist and an assistant research professor in the University of California, Berkeley School of Public Health – shared the most recent science.
Both the American Academy of Pediatrics and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend that children have 20 minutes or more of daily recess. But, when asked about the current “state of recess” across California, Thompson said she only knew of anecdotal evidence at the state level.
“I said, ‘You know what? I don't actually know what is going on in California,'” Thompson recalled. “I contacted a couple of colleagues who had done more national-level work on recess that included samples of California schools – but no one was really able to disaggregate what was happening in California.”
She brought up the bill during a meeting with her fellow researchers at NPI, an institute under UC Agriculture and Natural Resources.
And it turned out that Janice Kao, an NPI academic coordinator, had exactly what she needed.
CalFresh Healthy Living evaluation team provides key recess data
Kao leads a project team that evaluates local health departments' programs of CalFresh Healthy Living – California's version of the educational arm of SNAP (the federally supported Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program).
As part of that evaluation process, Kao's team coordinates questionnaire administration at SNAP-Ed-eligible schools that are partnering with local health departments on CalFresh Healthy Living interventions, ranging from nutrition programs to physical activity initiatives. The survey asks school administrators about their current policies, environments and practices – including the provisioning of recess.
“It was just really good luck that everything was in the right place at the right time to be able to work together,” Thompson said.
At Thompson's request, Kao and her colleagues processed and cleaned that crucial piece of data, comprising responses from 153 low-income elementary schools in the 2021-22 school year.
“Just 56% of schools reported providing more than 20 minutes of recess daily,” Kao said. “So this was a situation where the data showed, ‘OK, there is some room for improvement, perhaps at that state policy level.'”
Thompson and Rebecca London, a sociologist at UC Santa Cruz, wrote a research brief detailing their analysis of the data. They describe disparities in recess time based on school size and income level of families, with students in larger, less affluent schools generally receiving less daily recess.
Thompson said those disparities are related to funding and academic inequities, as the imperative to boost test scores forced schools to increase certain classroom hours at the expense of recess time.
“We did all this work engineering physical activity out of the school day despite the tremendous body of evidence that shows physically active kids not only are healthier but can concentrate better; they have better academic performance, fewer disruptions, better classroom behavior,” explained Thompson, a former physical education teacher in Oakland. “In trying to address that academic gap, we ended up exacerbating a lot of these public health disparities.”
Virtual learning during the pandemic showed educators and parents – firsthand – the harmful effects of children staying sedentary in front of computer screens for hours. But the resulting momentum for restoring recess and time for physical activity was soon stalled as schools tried to make up for “lost time” in returning to classrooms, Thompson said.
NPI resources, expertise invaluable to lawmakers
Newman's bill, SB 291, was an attempt to lock in those recess minutes that are crucial for student health, development and scholastic performance. Both Thompson and London testified before the Senate Education Committee in April 2023, providing the senators with science-based information and context to guide their policymaking.
“Crafting policies rooted in science is critical for legislators to ensure our policies are impactful,” Newman said. “The work of Dr. Thompson and her colleagues at UC provided clear and useful guidance on the benefits of unstructured play and how to improve health and educational outcomes in California schools.”
Gov. Gavin Newsom signed SB 291 into law last October. Starting this coming school year, public elementary and middle schools across California will be required to give at least 30 minutes of recess to K-5 students – and prohibited from withholding recess as punishment.
Kao said her team was excited that their CalFresh Healthy Living evaluation data was useful for lawmakers, illustrating NPI's important role in informing evidence-based policy.
“I'm hopeful that we can use this same data set to also provide key pieces of information on other types of legislation that's in the works, or newly passed legislation,” Kao said.
Thompson said the challenge now will be ensuring schools have the resources and funding to provide quality time for young people.
“If you only have one schoolyard, and it's already dedicated to PE, what do you do now, if you have to increase your time for recess and you don't have that space?” she said.
Thompson added that she is currently applying for a grant to study how schools across California are adjusting to meet the new requirements.
/h3>/h3>/h3>Employee Comment: BUS-50 Controlled Substances Use in Research and Teaching
The University of California Office of the President invites comments on a proposed Presidential Policy BFB-BUS-50: Controlled Substances Use In Research and Teaching. The policy is proposed to be revised and includes the following key issues:
- Clarify in detail the scope of duties of the Campus Controlled Substances Programs and the Controlled Substances Program Officers;
- Define the Campus Designation form of Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) Registration and address requirements applicable to DEA Registrations other than Campus Designation, such as individual schedule I DEA Registrations;
- Provide more specific procedures regarding Powers of Attorney;
- Provide additional guidance as to import, export, interstate and intrastate use, transfer and transport of Controlled Substances, as well as Controlled Substances Analogues and DEA-exempt chemical preparations; and
- Establish responsible units and individuals for patient care and clinical Controlled Substances Program.
The proposed revisions to the policy may be viewed at https://ucanr.edu/sites/PCPA/Revisions/.
If you have any questions or if you wish to comment on this policy revision, please contact Robin Sanchez at rgsanchez@ucanr.edu, no later than April 5, 2024. Please indicate “BUS-50 Revision” in the subject line.