These phenomena may be standard practice at other universities, but the faculty friends I have at other universities have no where near the contempt for their central campus administrations that the Berkeley faculty I know have for theirs, at least in the department with which I have pretty intimate familiarity. So either something is going wrong at Berkeley, there's a massive disconnect between this particular department and central campus, or other universities simply throw enough money at the problem for faculty to stay. But the department with which I have great familiarity has lost a number of faculty, and failed to laterally hire faculty, because of concerns about the bureaucracy of central campus and the effect it has on the quality of the faculty experience, both in terms of tenure decisions and lateral hiring, and also in terms of how much decisions around funding lines, department funding, etc. are controlled by the department vs. central campus.
(and an addendum: without knowing whether your peers are in a research-grant-predominant department or not, I suspect the experience at Berkeley varies a lot on this basis, because outside money can provide a department with more autonomy. The department I'm familiar with is comparatively less able to rely on outside grants, and so funding decisions are inextricably tied to central campus's prerogatives.)
(and an addendum: without knowing whether your peers are in a research-grant-predominant department or not, I suspect the experience at Berkeley varies a lot on this basis, because outside money can provide a department with more autonomy. The department I'm familiar with is comparatively less able to rely on outside grants, and so funding decisions are inextricably tied to central campus's prerogatives.)