Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue


Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

February 21, 1979 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1979-02-21

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Page 4-Wednesday, February 21, 1979-The Michigan Daily
MSA makes progress against stacked deck

-Students suffer from a lack of
meaningful participation in decision
processes at the University. Con-
sidering that the ability to play a part in
decision-making is a vital aspect of a
students' education, it leads one to
think about why any of us are here in
the first place.
One group, allegedly the voice for
students on campus, the Michigan
Student Assembly (MSA) -has, for a
number of reasons, little impact on
what goes on behind the decisions
which make this University run.
HOWEVER, THIS year, the Assem-
bly has finally begun to make some
progress, with such successful projects
as preventing Hill area dining con-
solidation, fighting for a student-
oriented Michigan Union, and
negotiating for more late bus runs to
North Campus.
While these actions are a step in
making an impact on University
decisions which affect students, the
student government is still plagued
with a past of incompetent managing of
student funds, and lack of real
representation among the students at
thie University.
There is a great deal of talk that those
involved in student government are ac-
tivists and simply do not represent the
needs and wishes of most students on
camipus. However, if the making of an
effective student government and ef-
feetive student voice were left up to the
mjority of students, nothing would get
done. An effective student voice rests
on° the shoulders of all students. Not
only should the MSA feel responsible,

By Julie Engebrecht

but the entire student body should as
IF MSA D115 have a real influence,
the students would probably consider it
more representative. However, if the
students did really feel represented,
and that they really could accomplish
something, they would be more likely to
become involved in University affairs,
thus stengthening the voice of MSA.
As it is now, many students get the
impression that all MSA does is pass
resolutions. While this is mostly a
myth, if the Assembly did something
with their resolutions other than simply
debating, passing, and then filing them,
its effect on the University could be
much more potent, and surely a lot
more noticeable.
Its actions in the Union, North Cam-
pus busing, and Hill area dining con-
solidation are all examples of positive,
constructive action taken by the
Assembly. Unfortunately, these in-
cidents have been the exception rather
than the rule. It marks, however, an
upward trend in the changes the
Assembly can make. Assembly mem-
bers are concerned about becoming
visible and about making a difference,
but dealing with the administration
and University bureaucracy is
frustrating enough without the added

grief of internal bickering. Arguments
between and within student groups'
cripples their ability to make an impact
on the decisions facing the University.
MSA IS NOT,or should not be, an
autonomous structure that students
should be for or against, always
criticizing from the outside, but a
resource and facility for student use
and unity.
Unfortunately, the average student is
here to make the grade, allegedly
preparing to assume a role in society.
Most don't really care about moral
issues which confront society or feel
any concern about changing the
educational surroundings which con-
front them daily.
A major problem with student gover-
nment is that ultimately, the Regents
and administration have total control
over the student government. They hold
the purse strings. It is the Regents who
make the decisions about the Michigan
Union or dining consolidation.
AND. ALTHOUGH, advisory com-
mittees for the presidential search
were granted interviewing rights last
week, it is assumed that the Regents
simply did this to quiet MSA for a while.
While MSA did boycott the process
until the middle of December, it is hard

to tell if this did any good. It is however,
probably true that if some activist
students hadn't started yelling about
the treatment students were getting,
something as essential as interviewing
rights would have been held exclusively
for the Regents. Both the faculty and
alumni search groups sat silently while
the students led the way.
The problems of MSA do not simply
lie with the assembly, but with the
students and administrators in the
community it serves. MSA is reaching
out to some of these students by
including them on committees which
have a potential to dynamically effect
the attitudes of both students and ad-
MSA, AS THE government trying to
represent all students potentially has
the resources to implement many
projects which are vital to the students.
MSA has taken a step in the right direc-
tion with its work this year and with
other prospective projects such as the
renovation of the Fishbowl, im-
provements at the Undergraduate
Library, and a CRISP assessment
Student government leaders are just
now starting to realize their potential,
but they also know that they cannot
make any significant changes or be
heard by the powers that run the
University, without input and in-
volvement from all students, and a
drastically changed attitude from the
faculty, administration, and Board of
Julie Engebrecht covers MSA for
the Daily.

R16, H TS
a 2 A-


420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Eighty-Nine Yearsof Editorial Freedom

Vol. LXXXIX, No. 119

News Phone: 764-0552


Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan


/" - -- - -.1 I

a roup
stop co
bers ha
irk dorm
week to
tiat the
a thiso
dorm c
foi dor
with fo
from tin
they ar
: Them
snack b

6ounci's a

nti-nuke gift

" t
sets improper example,
JBERS OF MARKLEY'S dorm of the funds come from the dorm
uncil agreed by one vote last residents themselves, which means
) contribute $50 to the Detroit that in giving money to political
Shareholders Initiative (DESI), organizations, the councils might be
devoted to the task of trying to contributing to something some or all
onstruction of the Fermi II of the residents don't believe in. Com-
reactor. Organization mem- plicating the issue is the fact that the
ve been soliciting contributions councils now have more money than in
is all over campus in the past past years, because Proposal D saves
o further their cause. We feel them money which would otherwise be
e contribution of dorm council spent on liquor for parties.
for a purpose as purely political The major complaint with Markley
one is improper, and urge other Council's action is that the body can
ouncils not to follow Markley hardly be called representative of the
's example. dorm as a whole, especially when it
.do scomes to political issues. Membership
of the dorm councils were is gained by attendance at the
to deal with issues pertaining meetings, b t mdan ree tho
zitory life and not to problems meetings, but many residents who
of this domain. Many council cannot vote yet, or don't attend might
ofreelyamit thistainM an on feel strongly about seeing their money
rs freely admit that their main given to certain organizations. The
is to plan and allocate funds fact that the issue of nuclear power
s also sponsor films and deal plant construction is such a controver-
salo srvices.Oficorsdeahe sial one, with sentiment strong on both
ust deal ihpolicurssue sides, makes the council's action even
me to time, but most of the time This is not to condemn the aims of
e issues which affect the dorms the DESI. Nor is it proper to try to
in some way. The DESI does draw a specific line dictating which
issues are political and which are not.
aney that the councils dole out But before dorm councils allocate
from a variety of sources, in- residents' money, they should be sure
mandatory house dues and they have the majority of the residen-
from pinball machines and ts' support, or they should stick strictly
)ars. But ultimately, nearly all to dorm related issues.

The University has recently
decided not to assist the Child
Care Action Center in finding a
new place to settle. The Center
will soon be moved away from its
housing in the Education
Building because of fire code
violations (Michigan Daily, Feb.
I am appalled by the Univer-
sity's actions, or rather lack of
action. The University is taking
advantage of the fact that CCAC
has heretofore been quartered in
inadequate surroundings, and is
removing the Center from its list
of responsibilities. One is hard
pressed to believe that there isn't
enough space on either the main
or North Campus to house a mere
35 children. And yet that is just
what the Executive Committee,
which made the decision, seems
to be claiming.
IN MY WORK as an intern at
CCAC last term, I was impressed
at how well the Center was run,
especially considering its limited
funds. The teachers are well-
educated, and the establishment
is run in a remarkably non-sexist
There is a real deficit of day
care in the area, and to close a
well-run, well-staffed center is,
quite simply, an abomination.
Something must be done.
I looked for daycare for my
own child last fall, and there was
none available. To get children
into daycare centers near cam-

pus, one needs to enter his/her
name on a waiting list that is
sometimes already 70 or 80
names long. It takes an average
of a year to get a child into a cen-
THERE ARE currently only 14
daycare openings in Ann Arbor,
and none of the centers which
have them is within walking
distance of campus. This means
that the parents of the 35 children
cut loose by the University have
little chance of finding placemen-
ts in other centers. Since 80 per
cent of the children involved are
the offspring of University
students, many of the parents
will have no alternatives but to
drop out.
Students who drop out at this
point in the term will lose all of
their tuition. In view of the fact
that these students had no way of
foretelling the University's rash
and inconsiderate act, financial
repercussions of this magnitude

hardly seem fair.
One course of action disenfran-
chised parents might take would
be to bring their children along
with them to class. Any
classroom blessed with more
than a couple of squirming three-
to-five-year-olds would be very
likely to generate pressure on the
University from parents, non-
parents, and professors alike to
reconsider its stance.
LOOKING AT the daycare
situation at other academic in-
stitutions makes the University's
actions seem all the more
callous. Seven of the Big Ten
schools provide space and/or
subsidy for daycare. In
Washtenaw county, both Eastern
Michigan University and
Washtenaw Community College
support daycare. These colleges,
and universities recognize that
parents need a chance to receive
an education too. Doesn't the
University of Michigan?

Parents lose in
'U' abandonment
of daycare center,
By Karen Haupt

It would seem that the Univer-
sity does, in some measure, ac-
cept children as a part of some
students' lives. 1400 children, 650
of whom are preschool age, live
in the University-owned family
housing on North Campus. It
seems then, a small thing to ask
to replace CCAC's current
housing with space (even half the
space will do), provided it meets
the fire code standards.
The United Nations has
declared 1979 the International
Year of the Child. By refusing to
assist CCAC in finding a location,
the University is directly
challenging the international
body's designation of the year as
such. After the six year stay in
the Education Building, the Cen-
ter is askiing for 13,000 sguare feet
of space. In the psst, the Univer-
sity has helped the Center to
change locations, but evidently
students with children have now
been delegated to second-class
status. And they are not ever
asking for funds - the Center is
self-supporting, outside of
whatever rent it might cost in the
Action must be taken, and
soon, in this matter. Parents
have a right to an education.
Students have a right to learn in
classes undisrupted by young
ones' cries. Let's give CCAC a-
chance for survival.
Karen Haupt is a junior in
the School of Education.

U' Cellar may face loss of tradition

To the Daify:
Students at the University may
well be wondering what is going
on at the University Cellar
bookstore. Just four weeks ago
the employees voted to unionize.
What was that all about? And
then, this week a conflict has
erupted betweerf the
management and the workers
over the decision to create a
managerial hierarchy at the
store. This decision could
drastically change the quality of
the work life at the Cellar and the
employees are protesting its im-
plementation. What has hap-
pened at the Cellar and what is
going on there now is important
for the University community to
know about and understand.
On Jan. 23 the Cellar em-
ployees voted by a greater than 2
to 1 margin to be represented by
the Industrial Workers of the
World, the IWW. Those familiar
with the Cellar may have won-
dered why a union was
necessary. After all, the Cellar is
a non profit organization with a
fairly congenial and cooperative
work atmosphere.
What, then, were the reasons
behind unionization?
Despite appearances, several
basic conflicts have existed bet-
ween the emn1nves and the

centered around the workers' and
managers' differing conceptions
of an appropriate and workable
managerial structure for the
Cellar. Many employees firmly
believed (and still do believe)
that the store could be run in a
more collective manner; that
both the atmosphere of the work-
place and the services to the
students could be enhanced by a
nonhierarchial managerial struc-
ture. Evidence of this can be
found right at-the Cellar where
many of the departments are
being run successfully in various
collective form, without any
departmental supervisors.
Management, in contrast, has
rejected the concept of worker
run departments as "inef-
ficient." Even though it can be
documented that the Cellar's
productivity is among the highest
of bookstores of comparable size,.
Tudor Bradley and John Sap-
pington, the managers of the U
Cellar, are bent on implementing
a traditional managerial hierar-
chy. It is this issue and the
unilateral decision-making
power exercised by Bradley and
Sappington, that compelled U
Cellar workers to unionize.
Last Friday, as employees
punched in at the Cellar, they
found several npuliar items nn

Sappington and Bradley were
taking the first step towards im-
posing a new and rigid
managerial structure on the Qm-
ployees of the University Cellar.
The employees, the people who
would be affected most, were
totally excluded from any input
into this decision.
Besides being detrimental to
the working conditions of the em-
ployees of the Cellar, the student
community that uses the book
store also stands to be adversly
affected if %the new plan is im-
plemented. The Cellar, it is im-
portant to remember, was
created after a strong student
protest demanded an alternative
to the cutthroat expolitation of
the student market practiced by
the traditional Ann Arbor
bookstores. For this reason the
tellar has always offered alter-
native prices to students as well
as an alternative style of doing
business. Students working rush,
part- or full-time at the Cellar,
have found higher wages and a
more comfortable and flexible
workplace where one works with
one's peers and not under.
managerial surveilance. Indeed
the Cellar has been a place where
students and others who work
there can take responsibilities for
their inh andfaeal a enticfnetinn

for this, the employees were
crassly told their IQs were too
high. for the jobs they perfor-
The managers are refusing to
consider the unnecessary finan-
cial burden these new high paid
positions will mean for the store.
They appear not to care that the
vital core of , the Cellar, its
cooperative and collective
nature, will be destroyed by the
imposition of this structure.
Management's decision is
clearly not in the best interests of
the Cellar nor'of the students that
it is designed to serve. The
'strength of the employee sen-
timent against the new
managerial hierarchy has been
The services that the Cellar has
and will continue to provide to the
student body are of paramount
importance to the Cellar
workers. But it is our appraisal
that these services are
strengthened by a collectively
oriented workplace with worker
input into ' how decisions are
made. Many of us are students
also. We are sorry for the ter-
mporary inconvenience that this
struggle may'cause but we ask
that students and faculty support
our position and keep abreast of
the develnnmant a+ nth a



Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan