As of Saturday, almost 60 faculty members had signed a letter intended to be mailed to the University's Pension Committee, advocating for more options in socially responsible investments for retirement funds.

The signers argued for a minimum of one socially responsible mutual fund option and one socially responsible bond option. Other options, besides the currently offered College Retirement Equities Fund, should be offered to Brandeis employees, they said.

"Many of us at Brandeis are committed to socially responsible investing (SRI)," the letter read, "which we see as in line with Brandeis's teaching, research, and public programming on human rights, climate change, women's rights, promotion of peace, and so forth."

As mentioned in the letter, the CREF fund screens broadly, but imperfectly. Another fund, the Neuberger Berman Socially Responsive Fund, does not screen for issues such as clean technology, pollution and toxins, community development, board issues and executive pay, according to The Forum for Sustainable and Responsible Investment. It also does not screen for human rights or community investment, according to SocialFunds.com.

In an email interview with the Justice, Prof. Bernadette Brooten (NEJS) wrote that she and other faculty members were working to resolve the issue internally. "I am confident we will find a solution that accords with Brandeis' commitment to social justice," wrote Brooten.

Brooten and others spoke about the issue at the April 11 faculty meeting, during which Chief Operations Officer Steven Manos fielded questions and concerns about changes in retirement fund options.

"I would like to ask that we have an additional fund be added that is more stringent on screens," Brooten said at the meeting. "We have 40 options. I think that at least two of them should be socially responsible."

As Manos and University President Frederick Lawrence explained, the investment options had been reduced to 40, down from 190, due to legal changes that obligated such a restriction.

"None of this involves any change in contributions that are being made to retirement plans," said Lawrence. "This is not about reallocation of costs away from retirement plans. ... The entire effort ... was to focus and restrict to a certain extent our options so our fiduciary obligations can be fulfilled in an appropriate way."

However, Lawrence admitted, communication with employees about the issue has been lacking. "It is clear to me that the best efforts of communicating this aside, that we did not do a great job of getting information out in a way that was useful to everybody in the community," he said. "We will continue to try to do better."
*