100%

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

Share

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 11, 1975 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1975-02-11

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


Whe i tian Daily
Eighty-four years of editorial freedon
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan

r
t

Tuesday, February 11, 1975

News Phone: 764-0552

420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mi. 48104

Strike: Time to draw the line

N THE MORN of what promises to
be the first forced shutdown of
University classes in over four years,
GEO stands as an aberration in the
midst of hibernating political passions
and a re-emerging work ethic among
students.
While others blankly consumed
regimen and worse, campus TAs un-
flinchingly refused to yes their way
into compromised security and the
University's heart.
At this time there is no telling what
fate awaits the GEO gambit. The next
twenty-four hours will probably tell
the story.
The Graduate Employes Organiza-
tion is not the first to meet University
opposition in their requests for better
working conditions and compensation.
The trail of frustrations and empty
promises followed by GEO in their
negotiations is a well-worn one. What
sets the student teachers apart is the
maverick route they've chosen to back
up their demands.
ECONOMIC EQUITY IS the crux
of the groups complaints, and it
is in this area of funding priorities
that the strike movement may face
its largest barrier to success.
Teaching assistants certainly aren't
the only campus group facing a severe
financial pinch. Soaring tuitions and
shrinking dollars are a complaint
universal to the student community.
A significant number of undergradu-
ates and non-teaching graduates still
dismiss the strike as a coercive at-
tempt to further decrease their own
meager portions of the funding pie.
What they fail to realize is that to
thwart the TAs bid for improved con-
ditions would in no way affect under-
graduate tuitions-GEO has rejected
a tuition hike as a solution to the
stalemate-and that the strike's fail-
ure would serve as an overwhelming
endorsement of preserving the under-
graduate experience in its present
sorry state.
ERE CAN BE NO overstating the
crucial role TAs play in deter-
mining the quality of education here,
especially at the undergraduate level.
For most undergrads-and almost all
first and second year students-TAs
represent the primary bridge between
mechanistic mass instruction and a
meaningful educational experience..
How administrators can continue to
declare this University among the
finest in the nation, while their treat-
ment of undergraduates ranks among
the worst, remains an imponderable.
TODAY'S STAFF:
News: Gordon Atcheson, Jo Marcotty,
Sara Rimer, Jeff Ristine, Tim Schick
Editorial Page: Vincent Badia, F r e d
Clark, Barbara Cornell, Alan Gitles,
Paul Hoskins, Debra Hurwitz, Stev-
en Theodore
Arts Page: David Blomquist
Photo Technician: Pauline Lubens

It would be foolish to suggest that
there is no risk inherent in taking
up the GEO banner. Certain faculty
members have already served notice
to class members that they will be
held accountable for all work, strike
or no strike. A strike might also inn-
volve a number of non-academic in-
conveniences, especially if the Team-
sters decide to honor GEO picket lines
and withhold deliveries to dorms and
other University buildings.
BUT THE SPECTOR of temporary
privations must not deter us from
seizing the opportunity to inform the
administration that "priorities" is no
acceptable excuse for lavishing re-
sources on administrators and bur-
geoning slush funds at the expense of
University students.
The lack of good faith demonstrated
by the University in its negotiations
with GEO cannot be lightly dis-
missed. It has publicly misrepresented
GEO positions when they weren't ig-
noring them altogether. The chal-
lenge is clear.
The success of the GEO strike would
mean much more than an improved
lot for TAs. It would require a long
overdue recognition on the part of
the University that, regardless of the
amount of bureaucratic window-
dressing with -which it chooses to
adorn itself, the quality of a univer-
sity lives and dies with the treatment
of its students.
THE UNIVERSITY HAS already
shown its colors on the matter.
We are left with no recourse but to
honor GEOupickets or resign our-
selves to student equity as an ex-
pendable commodity.
-THE DAILY STAFF
Business Staff
MARC SANCRAINTE
Business Manager
Sue DeSmet .................Finance Manager
Amy Kanengiser ............Advertising Manager
Jack Mazara.... .. ......... ..Sales Manager
Linda Ross...Operations Manager
DEPT. MGRS. Laurie Gross, Ellen Jones, Lisa
Kannenger, Steve LeMire, Debby Novess,
Casse St. Clair
ASSOC. MGRS. Rob Cerra, Kathy Keller
ASST. MGRS. Dave Schwartz
STAFF John Ataman, Dan Brinza, Peter Caplan,
Nina Edwards, DebbieaGerridh, Amy Hart-
man, Jayne H90, Karl Jennings, Carolyn
Kathstein, Jackie Krammer, Sue Lessino,
Becky Meyers, Dave Piontkowsky, Amy Quirk,
Ann Rizzo, Susan Shultz, Judith Ungar, Au-
drey Weil, Ruth wolman.
SALES PEOPLE Mike Bingen, Cher Bledsoe, Syl-
via Calhoun, Rich Flaherty, Beth Friedman,
Linda Jefferson, Ellen Mechinger, Amyi
Photography StaffZ
KAREN KASMAUSKI
Chief Photographer
KEN FINK
Picture Editor
STUART HOLLADER ......Staff Photographer
STEVE KAGAN .............Staff Photographer
PAULINE LUBENS...........Staff Photographer
zernow.

Feldkamp's Folly
Rate hi
By RICHARD MUNSON
ON Febriary 20 the Regents will con-
sider two alternative recommenda-
tions regarding dorm rates for the up-
coming year. The first, proposed by the
student and Housing -- staff Rate Study
Committee (RSC), and endorsed by
the student and faculty Housing Unit
Committee, recommends a rate reduc-
tion of $17.25 (or down 1.23 per cent).
The second, proposed by John Feldkamp,
the Director of Housing, recommends
a $43.05 rate increase (or up 3.08 per
cent). Although both the committee and
Mr. Feldkamp used the same inflation
percentage and agreed that no substan-
tial services to the students should be
reduced, there are four major differenc-
es between the recommendations.
1. Reserve Budgets - On June 30,
1974, the combined reserve funds (used
for construction and maintenance) for all
Housing units totaled $4.7 million. This
balance has increased by 171 per cent
in the past three years. Housing admin-
istrators admit that the adequate mini-
mum balance is only $800,000. So what is
the extra $3.9 million?
Five years ago, it was generally
agreed that many of the dormitories
needed major repair and remodeling.
Since then Housing rates have been rais-
ed to finance an active construction cam-

now in relatively good condition and in-
discriminate spending would only add to
the unnecessary purchase; milk shake
machines, donut machines, expensive
(and destructable) furniture, peep holes,
etc. The committee recommended the
second alternative: temporarily reduc-
ing reserve contributions. They found
that there are significant reserve funds
within most halls to maintain a full con-
struction program for 1975-76, while
maintaining a sufficient balance, without
making any additional reserve contribu-
tion beyond that required by the bond
agreements. Although both Mr. Feld-
kamp and the committees agree that
necessary construction projects should be
fully funded, Mr. Feldkamp, not want-
ing to deplete the reserve balance, has
recommended tha tcontributions be con-
tinued.
2. Budget Projections - For each of
the past five years the Housing Office
has generated approximately 20 per
cent more net revenue than they budget-
ed. This extra money was transferred to
the reserve funds. Although Housing ad-
ministrators state this this situation will
not recur during 1974-75, the evidence
shows that most of the ten traditional
halls are doing equal to, if not better
than, what they were doing at the same
time last year. For 1974-75 housing ad-

room and board dollars.
3. Administrative Costs - Housing Ex-
penses in the central and area offices
have increased significantly over the
past several years. For example, the
total number of administrative positions
has increased from 31 to 76 (145.1 per
cent) over the past seven years. Thirty-
two of the new positions were financed
from room and board dollars and thir-
teen were financed from the General
Fund. Further, non-salaried administra-
tive expenses have increased 82 per
cent over the past three years: this in-
cludes increases of 73 per cent for in-
terior design, 63 per cent for telephones,
181 per cent for supplies, and about 300
per cent for a controversial (and as yet
inoperative) data processing system.
NOTING A NEED to establish cer-
tain belt-tightening measures, the com-
mittee recommended that the total ad-
ministrative budget -- salaried and non-
salaried items - be reduced by 1 per
cent from the 1973-74 budget. This ac-
tion would save each dormitory resident
$12.10. Mr. Feldkamp does not want to
reduce the administrative budget beyond
what the legislature will require; in
other words, he now requests a 6 per
cent increase in total administrative ex-
penses.
4. Occupancy - The percentage of
empty spaces in the dorms obviously af-
fects the amount of revenue received,
The vacancy rate for 1973-74 was 3.8
per cent and Housing administrators pro-
ject it will be 4.7 per cent for 1974-75.
Mr. Feldkamp believes administrative
measures can reduce this figure to 3
per cent for the upcoming year and thus
increase revenue. However, the commit-
tee, viewing the historical record, was
more cautious and projected a 3.6 per
cent vacancy rate. Thus, if the Regents
accept the committee's other arguments
and Mr. Feldkamp's vacancy percent-
age, rates can be decreased even more
significantly.
Although these are the four major dif-
ferences between the Rate Study Com-
mittee's and Mr. Feldkamp's recom-
mendations, two other factors should be
considered regarding dorm rates. First,
although it is difficult to directly com-

!ke: Priority or padding?

Feldkamp

::F ;;:t:>:{"{:{::. , ::':i ........:.'"........... .....45 "v :v: ...... v..
Although both the committee and Mr. Feldkamp used
the same inflation percentage and agreed that no sub-
stantial services to the students should be reduced, there
are four major differences between their recommendations.
1'. g:sansmaneSAP. asgmaeena .' -msammmmmet

pare services, it is clear that Michigan
has the highest dorm rate in the Big
10 and provides the fewest services (it
is the only school which offers just 13
meals per week and it is one of the
few schools without linen or towel serv-
ices). Second, it seems clear that ever
increasing dorm rates and student fees
minimize the opportunity for students
from lower income families to attend
the University of Michigan.
At their meeting last year sevaral Re-
gents complained that Housing admin-
istrators offered them no alternatives
to an 8 per cent hike. This year staff,
students, and faculty spent a great deal
of time examining the Housing Office's
complex $12 million budget and came to
conclusions which directly challenge
some administrative practices. In spite
of inflation, they found that stricter bud-
geting procedures, reduced reserve bal-
ances, and reduced administrative costs
can result in a $17.25 rate reduction. This
year the Regents have their clear and
available alternative.
Richard Munson is Director of the
Pilot Progran.

paign to achieve those ends. Yet, in spite
of the significant increase in construction
speding, the Housing Office has accum-
ulated a $4.7 million balance. Perhaps
the rates have been higher than neces-
sary.
TO REDUCE this balance Housing ad-
ministrators can either spend significant-
ly more money or they can temporarily
reduce their annuol contributions to these
funds. The committees feel the former
was inappropriate since the dorms are

ministrators predict that actual expens-
es will be $202,531 over what was budget-
ed. Noting past practices and current
evidence, the committee predicted, ex-
penses would be only $38,195 over the
budget. This difference affects the pro-
jected expenses for 1975-76. Although
everyone admits that predicting expens-
es a year in advance is difficult, the
committee felt that stricter budgeting
measures need to be taken, within the
Housing Office to eliminate the habit of
producing excess monies from students'

Homophobia:

Paranoia or prejudice?

By JOHN ELLIS
THE PROSECUTION of peo-
ple because of whom they

GEO has proposed that sexual
preference be included in the
non-discrimination clause of tis

Can paranoia seriously explain the demand
for protection by gay graduate employees?
Many people will not have to look beyond their
own fears and stereotypes for an answer.

tives, the first response of some
University bargainers was stor-
ies of sexual assaults. The basis
of projudice is often ignorance,
where the undesireable behavior
of a few is attributed to a
group.
Three reasons were cited sub-
sequently by University repre-
sentatives to explain their op-
osition to written protections for
gay graduate employees.
* No such' discrimination
against gay employees current-
ly exists.
* Sexual preference is not
an appropriate category for a
non-discrimination clause.

love is one of the oldest and
basest forms of human cruelty.
It is an issue presently in the
University-GEO negotiations.

contract. The University has
refused, citing a number of

grounds.
According to

GEO representa-

Letters to The Danily

LAUNCNtV1G'- P.O

Ic The Daily:
IT IS AMAZING to me that the Michigan
Daily. has chosen to ignore several important
events that have recently occurred on th3 Ann
Arbor City Council.
Last week, Councilwoman Kozachenko (HRP-
2nd Ward) introduced a resolution welcoming the
American Indian Movement representatives to
Ann Arbor and supporting the AIM program
for Native American control over the Bureau of
Indian Affairs and the honoring by the govern-
ment of the 371 treaties they have broken with
the Native American people.
That resolution, of course, was unceremonious-
ly defeated. But the racism and white chaavin-
ism evident in that discussion should be a mat-
ter for public knowledge for those who think'
of this as "liberal" Ann Arbor. The usual Repub-
lican blatherings about this not being a "proper"
issue for the Council to consider were raised,
in spite of the fact that we white Americans are
literally the inheritors of stolen property. Uni-
versity students are also in this position, by virtue
of the now-dishonored Fort Meigs Treaty. Incred-
ibly, "liberal" Jamie Kenworthy (D-4th Ward)
voted no with the Republicans because no one
had shown him the 371 broken treaties. That Mr.
Kenworthy never bothered to look for himself, be-
ing the "American Studies" (or should I say
white American Studies) major he is, is of course
a tribute to the ostrich-like attitude of most poli-
ticians when it comes to ehe plight of Native
Americans.
THEN LAST MONDAY, when Clyde Colburn
finally appeared to answer quesitons of the Coun-
cil members (well, at least Kozachenko asked
some) on his proposal for the $2.4 million Com-
munity Development Revenue Sharing program.
a story which the Daily has at least made some
attempt to watch in previous issues, the Daily
ignored the event, but did cover Clyde's appear-
ance at a fashion show.
Finally, and perhaps most vexingly, an incred-
ible dialogue occurred between Councilwoman
Kozachenko and City Administrator Murray which
should send shivers up the spine of anybody who
thought that the word "police state" was an exag-

INCREDIBLY, Murray refused to answer some
of even the most basic and elemental questions
because he said to do so would jeopardize the
operation itself. Of course, it hardly need be
added that at no time did Kozachenko seek the
names or locations or individual salaries of the
officers or informants involved. Yet she was
told that to find out how much things cost, how
effective operations realy were, whether the
objectives of the operation were legitimate or
mere p-r gimmicks - all these were "classi-
fied". Whatever happened to investigative jour-
nalism?
-Frank Shoichet
February 5
To The Daily:
REGARDING YOUR article, on the Cobb af-
fair which appeared in the Feb. 6 issue of The
Daily, I would have preferred that I had been
referred to as "a", instead of "the", senior cell
biologist in the Zoology Dept., since some of my
cell biology colleagues outrank me in age and
tenure at UM. I should also correct your quote
that "I asumed they (the Dept. Exec. Commit-
tee) would contact me." I neither made that
assumption nor was I surprised that I was not
asked to evaluate Dr. Cobb for a tenured position
in this department. The article appears otherwise
accurate.
--Robert E. Beyer
Professor of Zoology
February 6
To The Daily:
MUCH IS BEING made of the detente between
the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Detente is viewed
as much more than the prevention of hostilities
between the two countries; it is rather something
positive; positive cooperation. The Soviets, it
seems, view detente in an entirely different way
that it was conceived by many in this country.
Only recently the Soviets were granted Most
Favored status by the Congress with the provision
that the Russians would relax immigration re-
strictions for Jews and cease harassment. No
sooner did the U.S. Congress pass this legislation
than the Soviets denounced the immigration pro-
vision and handed out an 8-year prison sentence

* Such a ban would not be
workable, since relevant statis-
tics are not available.
THE IMPROMPTU reaction
of University bargainers belies
the first reason. The strong and
automatic association of sexual
preference with sexual miscon-
duct makes fair treatment
doubtful. But are the University
bargainers truly "representa-
tive" in this regard?
The clear answer from g a y
members of GEO is yes. Many
consider being open about gay-
ness a real risk, which may in-
volve los of recommendations,
fellowship money or a GSA ap-
pointment. Is this merely para-
noia?
GEO and the University have
agreed to a clause which pre-
cludes discrimination on the
basis of race, color, creed, na-
tional origin, sex, marital sta-
tus, and physical incapacity not
related to job performance.
Those who oppose the inclusion
of sexual preference argue that
it is not a similar category.
Should the University's non-
discrimination policies be open-
ended, they say, with n : w
grounds added any time individ-
uals identify a possible reason
why they are disliked, real or
imagined?
WON'T SHORT people demand
height be added? What about
protection for vegetarians or
left-handed people? Look at the
absurd possibilities, assert op-
ponents.
In one sense, all prejudice is
"absurd." What could be more
absurd than discriminming
against someone because of the
color of their skin?
What becomes clear is that
protection against discrimiiati-n
is necesary on whatever the ab-
surd grounds a given peonle at
a particular time in history
have chosen to oppress each,
other. Few would dispute that
gayness is 'among the gr wnds
on which American society ets
people apart.
A standard which emerges is
that discrimination bans are
necessary where culture-wide
norms have already created a
target. On this basis, protection
for people on the basis of their
gayness seems very appropriate.
University representatives also
assert that such a ban would
not be workable because statis-
tics on the number of gay stu-
dents or gay employees are not
available. Discrimination rnas-
ores which are used for miaor-
ity groups and women could
not be arnolied to grievances are

Can paranoia seriously ex-
plain the demand for protection
by gay graduate employees?
Many people will not have to
look beyond their own fears and
stereotypes for an answer.
Underlying the reluctance to
include sexual preference as a
legitimate- grounds for job pro-
tection may well be the false
bases of gay oppression itself.
Many continue to believe at a
gut level that attacks are like-
ly, in spite of the evidence.
(GEO has used the statistic trat
by far the greatest number of
sexual crimes are committed by
heterosexual men against wo-
men.) Homosexuality continues
to be regarded by some as a
sickness, though even the con-
servative American Psychiatric
Association no longer makes
that claim.
PERHAPS a deeper cause of
homophobia is the threat which
gayness poses to accepted sex-
ual roles. It may also be that
suppression of love requires
such force that any challenge to
the taboo can not be tolerated.
The G E O contract
clause is an unmistake-
able parallel to early
stages of other civil
GEO contract clause
rights struggles. This
nta' make it possible
for more gay people to
lead a wider effort
(Igainst such injustice.
However, one need not agree
with such speculations to sup-
port the principle. GEO h a s
riised sexial preference as part
of the rights of all employees
to fair treatment.
Privately, political repercus-
sions are cited to explain oppo-
sition to public protections for
gay employees. The claim "at-
titudes are not changed by
changing laws" is in the air.
THE GEO contract clause is
an unmistakeable parallel to

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan