OPINION Page 6 The Michigan Daily Thursday, May 26, 1983 4 The Michigan Daily Vol XCIII, No. 10-S 93 Years of Editorial Freedom Managed and Edited by students of The University of Michigan Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily Editorial Board Black enrollment: Smaller, not better THE UNIVERSITY'S lack of a serious com- mitment to achieve 10 percent black enrollment was sorely evidenced again last week, with the-release of new figures showing yet another decline in black enrollment. The new figures show that for 1982, black enrollment here dropped to 5.2 percent, down from 1981's 5.4 percent figure. The drop might not appear to be substantial, but any decrease in black enrollment at this time is significant. To stop this disturbing trend, the University must change its priorities and seriously com- mit itself to increasing the dwindling black enrollment. The report, issued by the Office of Affir- mative Action, also documents the University's sad record in retaining and graduating black students once they get here. Only 25 percent of the black students enrolled at the University graduate within the standard four-year period, the report states. In contrast, 50 percent of the white students enrolled here graduate within four years. We commend the University for instituting new financial aid programs for black students this fall that will help with recruitment. But this is only a small step in the right direction and much more needs to be done. Minority recruitment and retention programs, for example, are still not adequately funded, even though administrators claim that educating more blacks is a high priority. Merely spending money on these programs will not ensure an increase in black enrollment, but the University's "Five-Year Plan" - a special strategy to channel funds into high-priority areas - doesn't even mention recruitment and retention of black students. The University should seriously consider set- ting up a centralized administrative body to handle minority affairs. Such a body could bet- ter coordinate minority tutoring, counseling, career planning, and financial aid programs. Setting up this administrative body would also show that the University is strongly com- mitted to increasing black enrollment on this campus, a commitment that so far they have not enthusiastically pursued. Unsigned editorials appearing on the left side of this page represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board. Sinclair 4 Y LETTERS TO THE DAILY: AFSCMEedit 'inaccurate' 4 4 4 To the Daily: Your Tuesday, May 24. editorial, "No to AFSCME" was hypocritical and inaccurate. The fact is that 58% of the dues stay in Michigan. It provides for professional staff assistance, legal representation, cost to negotiate a contract, mailings and other useful forms of direct service and benefits. The inter- national portion (about 30%) goes to pay for national legal suits, health and safety programs, economists who analyze the University budget and classification systems to find money for pay hikes, free brochures, congressional lob- bying for increased funding for higher education and student aid, and yes, the expensive cost of organizing. Your editorial reflected a serious bias for the University administration's false claim that "individual" employees can get more than organized groups of employees. The administration loves to deal with individual employees. Who do you think has the upper hand? The individual employee or the multi-million dollar university? With a union, and a contract, however, the individual gains added support and legal rights that protect the employee. It is also a fact that organized office staff make more money than unorganized staff. You don't have to look beyond Ann Arbor to see that. Clericals who work full- time for the "prestigious" University make thousands of dollars less than their counter- parts who work for the City of Ann Arbor or Washtenaw County Community College. University secretaries and clericals have lesser benefits, also. Without a unionUniversity office staff will continue to slip backwards while the University administrators congratulate themselves over their new buildings and progr- ams ("Regents approve $60 million plan: New chemistry building approved", Daily, May 24). , The "right" to base your job's worth on how you dress, on how often you smile at the boss, or how quick you are to work over- time without pay, is no benefit at all. Those in the University ad- ministration who champion this "right" for their predominantly female office staff, have cer- tainly been slow to promote those same "meritorious" women into positions of power and higher pay, haven't they? This sad fact itself belies the notion that your "merit" really gets you anywhere. The lack of women in higher positions at the 'U' has been written about before in the Daily and it is a shame that your editorial chose to forget those facts and jump on the "merit" bandwagon. It is hypocritical reasoning to say that "unions" are O.K. but not "this one". You ignore the fact that AFSCME became the choice here when well over a third of the office staff requested an election with AFSCME on a ballot. But, not to appear blaten- tly anti-union, you merely op- posed the union that clericals and secretaries have worked for, in your hope for reform by the top administrators. The University administration, however, made their intentions clear last year when they attempted to deny a pay hike to office staff. Reality got the best of them, when office staff rallied, spoke out, and organized. They got some of what they deserved and earned, although they lost 6 months of the raise without a contract. It is too bad that the Editorial staff did not consider those recent events and draw more realistic conclusions. -Reg McGhee May 25, 1983 Think before voting To the Daily: I was pleasantly surprised to read your editorial in Tuesday's Daily entitled "No to AFSCME". You mentioned several very im- portant reasons to vote "no". I hope clericals and secretaries think about them before they vote. -Betty E. Cummings May 24, 1983 4 4 4 4