Tag Archives: Higher Education

U Washington Pres Demands Answers from Sodexo

10 Jan

In response to increasing pressure from students involved in the University of Washington United Students Against Sweatshops, Interim President Phyllis Wise sent a letter to Sodexo headquarters demanding they account for union-busting and poverty wages paid to their food and cleaning service employees.

“I would be interested in knowing how you have addressed worker complaints and claims filed against you, in particular what steps, if any, you have taken to address problems when identified and what mechanisms you have in place to deal with complaints.  I am also interested in your perspective on the pricing issue that formed the basis of allegations made by the state of New York in its lawsuit filed against your company.”

Wise also raised the possibility of the university cutting the contract.  “Our student group is asking the University of Washington to terminate the contract because of these various concerns… Before considering their request, I told our students I wanted to hear from you.”  Read the entire  letter to Sodexo here.

This is an important development in a national campaign by USAS to target the world’s 23rd largest employer who operates contracts at colleges and universities across the country.  Students at other campuses are now able to use this letter and UW’s questioning of the ethical standards of Sodexo North America to push their own universities to take action.

This is a tactic that works.  When students stood up on campuses to push administrators to use their buying power to force ethical standards on huge corporations significant change occurred in the apparel industry.  In their most recent victory Nike was forced to come to an agreement with the CGT union in Honduras, the first time a major brand took responsibility for the wrongs of their subcontractor.

For more on the tactics and “Kick Out Sodexo!” campaign visit: http://kickoutsodexo.usas.org.

Green Shoots for Young Worker Job Prospects in 2011?

4 Jan

From PBS Newshour last night:

Happy New Year? Job Market Looking Up for College Grads?

Editor’s Note: A poor economy does not bode well for college grads trying to enter the job market.

“The last couple of years have been a very, very tough time to be coming out of college,” said Richard White in our second piece on malemployed grads, airing tonight on the NewsHour.

Head of career services at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, White said he’d recently seen the number of students with a job at graduation cut in half. Our piece earlier last month profiling four recent grads struggling to find paying jobs — let alone jobs in their fields of study — fits right in with what White is seeing. (That piece and a web profile of the four job hunters sparked some interesting comments and mail. The idea of getting a degree seems to have hit on a sensitive nerve.)

But things might be looking up for 2011 graduates according to “Recruiting Trends,” an annual report put out by Michigan State University (emphasis original):

“Despite the gloomy national labor market situation, the college segment of the market is poised to rebound this year. While overall hiring across all degrees is expected to increase 3%, hiring at the Bachelor’s level is expected to surge by 10%.”

From the Michigan State University study:

Over 1,600 companies indicated that they would consider any major for a position. Representing 36% of all respondents, this figure is at a historic high. For all technical and business majors, approximately one-quarter of the employers will be seeking them (a slight decrease from last year). Sixteen percent of the employers will seek all liberal arts majors, which includes the sciences, social sciences, and humanities, and will actually hire more new graduates than the other groups.

  • All Majors: increase hiring 13%, averaging 38 Bachelor graduates per company.
  • All Technical: increase hiring 19%, averaging 24 Bachelor graduates per company.
  • All Business: increase hiring 18%, averaging 34 Bachelor graduates per company.
  • All Liberal Arts: increase hiring 21%, averaging 40 Bachelor graduates per company.

Read the full report here.

WI Students and AFSCME Members Fighting for Human Rights

10 Dec

Great letter to the editor in the University of Wisconsin’s student paper, The Badger Herald, about the Student Labor Action Coalition and AFSCME Local 171 standing together in protest of the privatization of food services at a new facility on campus:

Wisconsin Idea corrupted by WID privatization move

By Letters to the Editor
Wednesday, December 8, 2010 5:00 p.m.
Updated Wednesday, December 8, 2010 11:17:37 p.m.

When students and workers protested the opening of the Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery last week, they did so after a semester-long campaign and as part of a carefully planned escalation strategy.

The issue at hand is the privatization of food service at the WID. As such, the employees of these restaurants are not guaranteed the same benefits or wages as every other campus employee.

The American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees Local 171 represents over 1,600 blue-collar workers on campus and has fought to guarantee them a living wage, affordable health care and fair representation. In contrast, Food Fight, the private company contracted to run the WID restaurants, pays their employees barely above minimum wage and offers an unaffordable health care plan. Working families cannot support themselves on $8.50/hour.

The exploitation of workers on campus is absolutely unacceptable. The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation defends this privatization of food service through a plethora of legal technicalities and in doing so merely proves that they are willing to exploit Madison workers in an effort to turn a greater profit.

The WID validates these actions through the facts that it is part of a “public-private partnership” and that 70 percent of the building is controlled by private interests. The logic that the WID can gerrymander the building into areas where they can disregard the ethics and governing principles of the University of Wisconsin is extremely questionable and becomes even more debatable when the unionized janitorial staff services 100 percent of the building.

The Student Labor Action Coalition and AFSCME understand that these arguments might hold up in court; our outrage is not in regards to legality, but rather, to basic human rights.

SLAC and AFSCME have been running the campaign to stop the privatization of campus jobs for the past four months and are well aware of the legal arguments, despite The Badger Herald’s assertions.

SLAC knows this campaign will not be easily won, but also knows that this fight is critical because it is emblematic of the problems of the public-private partnership model which Chancellor Biddy Martin touts in her mysterious Badger Partnership.

The fact that the WARF is able to blatantly ignore the ethical standards of the university, from which it receives the totality of its funding, demonstrates that the privatization of the UW will result in a destruction of the university’s mission and values.

The Badger Herald argues that the restaurants should be privately run because “Union food sucks.” As logically sound as this argument may appear, the food quality is not dependent on the treatment of the worker who makes it. The WID could easily allow Food Fight to make the food while also requiring that it employ public workers. It could just as easily allow the Wisconsin Union to manage the restaurants while requiring a new menu.

AFSCME and SLAC demand that the WID hires public, unionized employees, because if we allow the WID to trample on workers’ rights, we are sanctioning the corruption of the Wisconsin Idea and the distortion of social justice on this campus.

Jonah Zinn (jzinn@wisc.edu) and Xander Gieryn (gieryn@wisc.edu) are members of the Student Labor Action Coalition.

Can’t Afford College Because of State Budget Cuts

31 Aug

As colleges and universities open up for the fall semester this week and next, more evidence about how state budget cuts are limiting the opportunities of low-income students comes from New Jersey.  Funding for the popular Tuition Aid Grant program has not kept pace with demand, forcing an 8% across the board cut of all recipient grants.  (And this comes after the state actually increased funding for the program by 18%.)  The nearly 1,800 students expecting to receive aid through the program this year are now forced to struggle to make up that 8%, which ranges from $192 to $872.    All this comes as tuition rates soar and campuses cut back on the services they provide.

We should not be putting short-term budget deficits ahead of the need to education the next generation.  This is a continuation of the failure to plan long-term, however this time it is the students who are directly immediately hurt.

N.J. financial aid program slashes assistance to college students

Published: Monday, August 30, 2010, 6:51 AM     Updated: Monday, August 30, 2010, 12:00 PM

Kelly Heyboer/ The Star-Ledger

Low-income college students who rely on New Jersey’s popular Tuition Aid Grant program to help pay their tuition bills will see their aid checks slashed by nearly 8 percent as they return to campus for the new school year, state officials said.

Amanda Brown/The Star-Ledger Rutgers University sign in New Brunswick in a 2002 photo. The maximum Tuition Aid Grant awards at the institution will go down $714 as tuition and fees go up an average of $673.

The cuts — which will affect nearly a third of New Jersey’s full-time college students — mean the state’s neediest students will see their annual grants cut by between $192 and $872 as tuition rates continue to rise.

State funding for the Tuition Aid Grant, or TAG, program increased by 18 percent this year. But the number of New Jersey students qualifying for the the need-based grants surged by nearly 1,800 thanks to the lingering economic downturn.

So, state officials said they were forced to cut the awards for everyone.

“To remain within available resources and to fund all eligible students, it was the necessary to reduce awards for 2010-11,” said AnnMarie Bouse,spokeswoman for the Higher Education Student Assistance Authority, the state agency that oversees the grants. “Students are encouraged to talk to their financial aid administrators to determine if there are other sources of aid for which they may qualify, including private scholarships, institutional aid or federal aid.”

The state’s public, private and county colleges are scrambling to find money to help their neediest students cover the cuts. Many low-income students rely on the TAG program to pay the bulk of their college costs.

“It’s extremely meaningful, not only for these students but for their families,” Bloomfield College President Richard Levao said.

Nearly 90 percent of Bloomfield College’s full-time undergraduates receive state TAG awards to help pay the private school’s $21,200 annual tuition. The college expects its students will lose a total of $1 million due to the TAG cuts, though the school is trying to find money to help the neediest students cover larger-than-expected tuition bills, Levao said.

“We’re trying to do it on a case-by-case basis,” he said.

New Jersey’s $294 million TAG program is considered one of the most generous student financial aid programs in the nation. Only New Jersey residents attending in-state colleges are eligible, but the grants can be used at both public and private schools. The awards do not have to be paid back.

Students are awarded grants on a sliding scale based on family income and the type of college they attend. This year, the TAG awards will range from $978 to $10,468 per student.

The maximum yearly grant will be: $2,318 at county colleges (a $192 cut compared to last year); $6,326 at four-year public colleges (a $526 cut); $8,554 at Rutgers and the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (a $714 cut) and $9,692 at New Jersey Institute of Technology (an $808 cut).

At the state’s private colleges, the top TAG award will be $10,468 (an $872 cut). At DeVry University, Berkeley College and the other for-profit colleges, the maximum grant will be $6,326 (a $526 cut).

This year’s TAG cuts angered many in the higher education community, who noted Gov. Chris Christie and the Legislature were able to find money in the state budget to fund the popular NJ STARS program, which gives merit scholarships to students of all incomes. But the TAG program, which is used solely by low-income students, failed to get enough funding to cover the increase in eligible families.

The TAG awards table was finalized earlier this month by the board at the Higher Education Student Assistance Authority and sent to Christie for final approval.

Jonathan Nycz, one of the student representatives on the student assistance authority board, said it was difficult to cut financial aid for the poorest of New Jersey’s low-income students. But the board felt it was better to lower the awards for everyone, rather than deny grants to some.

“It’s unfortunate they’re going down. But it could have been a lot worse,” said Nycz, 21, a senior industrial engineering major at Rutgers.

Many students said they were still waiting to hear what their TAG award will be this year. Alexandro Ceballo, a mathematics major at Middlesex County College, said he was expecting a $1,900 check based on early estimates.

But if his TAG award is cut by a few hundred dollars, Ceballo expects his federal Pell grant and NJ STARS scholarship will help cover the gap and the 2 percent tuition hike at his school.

“I’m very fortunate,” said Ceballo, 20, of Perth Amboy. “At the end of the day, it’s a lot more affordable to go to county college.”

Students at more costly schools may have a more difficult time covering the cuts, higher education officials said.

At Rutgers, the maximum TAG awards will go down $714 as tuition and fees go up an average of $673. The state university increased its need-based Rutgers Assistance Grants program by $3.5 million to help its 11,000 TAG students cover their bills.

“We are using all of the resources we have available to help our neediest students meet their expenses,” said Sandra Lanman, a Rutgers spokeswoman.

© 2010 NJ.com. All rights reserved.

O’Hare: A letter to my students

24 Aug

Below is an important welcome to campus letter from Michael O’Hare, Professor of Public Policy at the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley.  He describes the great swindle that has made young workers far worse off than their parents.  No introduction needed, just read it.

A letter to my students

by Michael O’Hare
Posted: Monday, August 23rd, 2010 at 12:18 pm

Welcome to Berkeley, probably still the best public university in the world. Meet your classmates, the best group of partners you can find anywhere.  The percentages for grades on exams, papers, etc. in my courses always add up to 110% because that’s what I’ve learned to expect from you, over twenty years in the best job in the world.

That’s the good news.  The bad news is that you have been the victims of a terrible swindle, denied an inheritance you deserve by contract and by your merits.  And you aren’t the only ones; victims of this ripoff include the students who were on your left and on your right in high school but didn’t get into Cal, a whole generation stiffed by mine.  This letter is an apology, and more usefully, perhaps a signal to start demanding what’s been taken from you so you can pass it on with interest.

Swindle–what happened? Well, before you were born, Californians now dead or in nursing homes made a remarkable deal with the future.  (Not from California? Keep reading, lots of this applies to you, with variations.) They agreed to invest money they could have spent on bigger houses, vacations, clothes, and cars into the world’s greatest educational system, and into building and operating water systems, roads, parks, and other public facilities, an infrastructure that was the envy of the world. They didn’t get everything right: too much highway and not enough public transportation. But they did a pretty good job.

Young people who enjoyed these ‘loans’ grew up smarter, healthier, and richer than they otherwise would have, and understood that they were supposed to “pay it forward” to future generations, for example by keeping the educational system staffed with lots of dedicated, well-trained teachers, in good buildings and in small classes, with college counselors and up-to-date books.  California schools had physical education, art for everyone, music and theater, buildings that looked as though people cared about them, modern languages and ancient languages, advanced science courses with labs where the equipment worked, and more. They were the envy of the world, and they paid off better than Microsoft stock. Same with our parks, coastal zone protection, and social services.

This deal held until about thirty years ago, when for a variety of reasons, California voters realized that while they had done very well from the existing contract, they could do even better by walking away from their obligations and spending what they had inherited on themselves.  “My kids are finished with school; why should I pay taxes for someone else’s?  Posterity never did anything for me!”  An army of fake ‘leaders’ sprang up to pull the moral and fiscal wool over their eyes, and again and again, your parents and their parents lashed out at government (as though there were something else that could replace it) with tax limits, term limits, safe districts, throw-away-the-key imprisonment no matter the cost, smoke-and-mirrors budgeting, and a rule never to use the words taxes and services in the same paragraph.

Now, your infrastructure is falling to pieces under your feet, and as citizens you are responsible for crudities like closing parks, and inhumanities like closing battered women’s shelters. It’s outrageous, inexcusable, that you can’t get into the courses you need, but much worse that Oakland police have stopped taking 911 calls for burglaries and runaway children. If you read what your elected officials say about the state today, you’ll see things like “California can’t afford” this or that basic government function, and that “we need to make hard choices” to shut down one or another public service, or starve it even more (like your university). Can’t afford? The budget deficit that’s paralyzing Sacramento is about $500 per person; add another $500 to get back to a public sector we don’t have to be ashamed of, and our average income is almost forty times that.  Of course we can afford a government that actually works: the fact is that your parents have simply chosen not to have it.

I’m writing this to you because you are the victims of this enormous cheat (though your children will be even worse off if you don’t take charge of this ship and steer it). Your education was trashed as California fell to the bottom of US states in school spending, and the art classes, AP courses, physical education, working toilets, and teaching generally went by the board. Every year I come upon more and more of you who have obviously never had the chance to learn to write plain, clear, English.  Every year, fewer and fewer of you read newspapers, speak a foreign language, understand the basics of how government and business actually work, or have the energy to push back intellectually against me or against each other. Or know enough about history, literature, and science to do it effectively!  You spent your school years with teachers paid less and less, trained worse and worse, loaded up with more and more mindless administrative duties, and given less and less real support from administrators and staff.

Many of your parents took a hike as well, somehow getting the idea that the schools had taken over their duties to keep you learning, or so beat-up working two jobs each and commuting two hours a day to put food on the table that they couldn’t be there for you. A quarter of your classmates didn’t finish high school, discouraged and defeated; but they didn’t leave the planet, even if you don’t run into them in the gated community you will be tempted to hide out in.  They have to eat just like you, and they aren’t equipped to do their share of the work, so you will have to support them.

You need to have a very tough talk with your parents, who are still voting; you can’t save your children by yourselves.  Equally important, you need to start talking to each other.  It’s not fair, and you have every reason (except a good one) to keep what you can for yourselves with another couple of decades of mean-spirited tax-cutting and public sector decline. You’re my heroes just for surviving what we put you through and making it into my classroom, but I’m asking for more: you can be better than my generation. Take back your state for your kids and start the contract again.  There are lots of places you can start, for example, building a transportation system that won’t enslave you for two decades as their chauffeur, instead of raising fares and cutting routes in a deadly helix of mediocrity.  Lots. Get to work.  See you in class!

This article originally appeared on www.samefacts.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 34 other followers