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 well. 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- ministrators. 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 projects. 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 Regents. Julie Engebrecht covers MSA for the Daily. SIVDENTS' R16, H TS 1 /J a 2 A- h f 4 f i S i N . 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Eighty-Nine Yearsof Editorial Freedom Vol. LXXXIX, No. 119 News Phone: 764-0552 A ,A Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan a /" - -- - -.1 I -son a roup stop co nuclear bers ha m irk dorm week to tiat the money a thiso dorm c C6uncil 'Most crgated to.dorm oiS©side mnmbe pi#pose foi dor councils with fo gtoups from tin they ar directly not. : Them comesf cluding profits snack b tI 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. 7). 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 fashion. 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- ter. 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 community. 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. LETTERS: 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- med). 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 overwhelming. 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 i f