> I noticed Carol's mention of Mazzoleni being paid using the "trick" all
> the schools are using to keep their second assistant for another year.
> So they really can get away with this money jockeying, huh?  Must be an
> idea from the same guys who're doing all that "deficit reduction" maneuvering
> using such wonderful shenanigans as changing the date members of the armed
> forces received their paychecks.
 
[If I got any details of this wrong, sorry... it is by memory]
 
I read in the newspaper sometime last fall that the UCLA football coach
is the highest paid state employee in California. However, his "salary"
is 50,000 and his "professional fees" (or something like that) are some
huge number (several hundered thousand dollars). According to the
article, "professional fees" are paid to anyone who regularly makes
public appearances as part of his or her job (speeches, press
conferences, interviews). Others in the system who get "professional
fees" are the University President, and Chancellors.
 
The reason his (the coach's) pay is structured that way is that
a salary above $50,000 requires approval by the regents.
Professional fees are not salary, and therefore do not need to be
approved by the regents.
 
	--david