|
Return to Index of Campus Dining News Articles Return to Campus Dining Homepage
Source: The Wesleyan Argus Date: October 14, 2003 Byline: Josh Brandstadter United Student Labor Action Coalition (USLAC) presented a resolution to the WSA calling for several changes in dining service and a condemnation of Aramark. Their presentation, made near the end of the WSA meeting Sunday night, was followed by fifteen minutes of debate on topic. The debate was tense at times as members of USLAC and members of the WSA accused each other of being purposefully misleading about dining issues. Further debate and the vote on the resolution was postponed until the next WSA meeting in two weeks. USLAC proposed a series of changes in dining services such as the prevention of the use of points at off-campus non-unionized restaurants, better breakfast options for freshmen, more late-night dining and a requirement that all changes in dining service be approved of by the WSA and USLAC. Several WSA members argued that breakfast for freshmen and late-night dining options are already being addressed by the WSA. USLAC said it sees off-campus points as a threat to the jobs of campus dining employees. Many of the WSA members said that the off-campus points plan would be temporary and not result in any of the purported harms. Many WSA members were caught off-guard when a WSA member motioned to hear USLAC’s presentation as it was not part of the night’s agenda. Members of the WSA and USLAC agreed that the confusion was caused by a WSA member at the last meeting who suggested the dining issue be moved to last Sunday but did not formally table the issue to be included in Sunday night’s agenda. “It hadn’t been formally tabled so it hadn’t been put on the agenda,” said WSA President Sohana Punithakumar ’04. During the meeting, ULSAC member Ben Somberg ’05 said that to not entertain the issue would be to mislead USLAC. Chair of the Student Activities Committee (SAC) Rebecca Solow ’04 said later that she had suggested that USLAC come the next meeting. “I’m pleased that we got to discuss the topic,” she said. The motion to present was eventually approved and USLAC member Acacia Stevens ’07 gave a PowerPoint presentation to the WSA on their resolution. The resolution said that Aramark was not providing satisfactory on-campus service and that the plan to allow the use of points at off-campus restaurants strains relations between Middletown residents and the Wesleyan community. “Be it resolved, that Aramark shall immediately implement the following changes,” states the resolution. Along with the changes, the resolution also suggests the restoration of the nineteen-mean plan, hot food late at night, Campus Center salad bar and off-campus points at only unionized restaurants. Solow had said earlier in the evening in her committee report that the SAC has succeeded in getting meal equivalency for freshman at breakfast, a few more hot items served after 8 p.m. in the Campus Center and more toppings at the salad bar. She also said that there will now be union representation at the upcoming first meeting of the SAC Dining Committee. In response to the resolution, she said that many of the changes demanded were already being made. “I think USLAC raised some important considerations, but none that haven’t been voiced before,” Punithakumar said. One WSA member asked if USLAC knew of any unionized restaurants on Main Street. USLAC member Joanna Lawler ’05 said she did not but that if there are not any, then no off-campus points should be allowed. USLAC also presented the WSA with a list of what USLAC said are 759 signatures favoring their position. “We have gotten more signatures on this petition than the number of yes votes in the WSA’s illegitimate election,” Somberg said, referring to the referendum for voting for or against off-campus points in the last WSA election. “The referendum was a little too-flawed to be considered unquestionable proof [of student support for off-campus points],” Stevens said. Stevens also said in her presentation that the referendum violated the WSA’s constitution, should not have been paired with the representative elections, allowed no time for public debate, and unfairly excluded workers from voting. Punithakumar, according to the WSA’s last meeting minutes, said that USLAC had agreed to add the referendum in the last election. Solow said she thought USLAC had embedded the clause about the prohibition of off-campus points in the petition among other less controversial dining changes, potentially confusing signers. "I consider this petition to be a little misleading,” she said. Punithakumar said that the demand for late-night dining will be addressed when the renovated Summerfields reopens. After the meeting, Solow said that off-campus dining is an “interim dining option” until the facility renovations and Flexpoints are put into effect. Flexpoints is a plan for next year in which non-point money can be used on a Wesleyan card for a variety of purposes including laundry and for off-campus stores and restaurants. “I’m disappointed that USLAC has been taken such a confrontational attitude with the WSA. I wish that rather than being so combative, they would work with the WSA to make dining better for everyone,” Solow said. She commented USLAC’s attitude was confrontational in their accusations that the WSA was being deceptive and manipulating the referendum and its own freshmen representatives. WSA members will be trying to draft a compromise resolution for the next meeting, according to Solow. She said she had invited USLAC to help compose the resolution, but did not receive a favorable response and may consider asking the union stewards for the dining service employees for help in drafting the compromise. “I, as an individual, think that it really isn’t a compromise,” Somberg said, adding that he did not speak for the entire group. He said that dining workers had already compromised earlier and shouldn’t have to keep conceding ground. “I think picking something in between and calling it a compromise isn’t exactly what’s right,” he said. During its presentation, USLAC criticized the compromise proposal in last Tuesday’s Argus Editorial. “The Argus editors were already willing to sacrifice post-8 p.m. dining on campus on the notion that pizza delivery would suffice for student needs,” read one of USLAC’s Powerpoint slides. Dining worker union stewards were present at the meeting as well, but for the most part refrained from entering the debate. While most of USLAC’s presentation focused on action against Aramark, union representatives said it was the University’s plan to introduce off-campus points, and that they had threatened to terminate Aramark’s contract if it did not comply. Somberg said he was not sure whether the idea for off-campus points originated from the University or Aramark, adding that Aramark claims it is responding to student demand, a claim with which he disagrees. Solow said she is not surprised that Aramark was against off-campus points as their profits would decrease if points were spent off-campus. She said that because of this, USLAC’s concern might be valid had the proposal been for an expanded or long-term off-campus points plan. She said the off-campus points plan being discussed is only temporary and will not have these effects. Despite USLAC’s request to vote on their resolution that night, the vote was postponed until the next meeting in two weeks. USLAC said they will make some minor changes to the resolution by then and will provide copies to the WSA members so they can review the resolution themselves. “I think the WSA is certainly somewhat divided, I think there is really a broad range of opinions,” Somberg said. The dining issue, particularly the topic of off-campus points, will be debated more thoroughly and voted on in the WSA’s next meeting after fall break. “I think it should be a collaborative approach to find a mutually satisfactory solution,” Solow said.
Wesleyan University's student governing body. For questions regarding the website and its content, please email our webmaster. |