qq
41
Monday, June 4, 2007
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com
C, be Michigan Dailu
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@umich.edu
IMRAN SYED GARY GRACA
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. Allother
signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
Tex fttbook solution
Plan brings relief, but needs participation
Supremely unjust
Wage inequality left unresolved by Supreme Court, University
D iscrimination has many faces. For some, discrimination means blatant vio-
lations of the law as in segregation and hate crimes. For others, discrimina-
tion happens every two weeks when they receive a smaller paycheck than
their white, male peers. Unfortunately, both the U.S. Supreme Court and the Univer-
sity seem to think that the latter is of less concern.
I
For the first time in years,
relief from astronomic
textbook prices is in sight
- or so it seems. Responding to
a study that ranked the Univer-
sity next to last in a college text-
book survey, Senior Vice Provost
Lester Monts and a Michigan
Student Assembly taskforce are
ready to roll out a new online sys-
tem that could make book buying
cheaper and easier.
The new plan expects depart-
ments to list required texts at
least 10 weeks prior to a new
term, allowing students to order
books online if they wish and
have the materials by the first day
of class. Additionally, under the
plan, campus book retailers can
provide more discounted used
books because the advance notice
allows them to gather a larger
supply of needed textbooks.
But these are things that have
L E TTER T E EDITOR
IFC responds to
Daily editorial
TO THE DAILY:
The Interf'raternity Coun-
cil would like to share its dis-
approval and disappointment
regarding a recent editorial in
The Michigan Daily (A Greek
tragedy, 05/21/07). The article
disturbed the executive board
and most IFC members because
it relied heavily on assumed past
actions and a cloud of unsup-
ported speculation.
In what seems to be the main
been known for a long time. It
shouldn't have taken a study that
put the University at number 38
out of 39 to determine that there
was a problem. In addition, the
plan does not obligate professors
to post required materials online.
This stems from a concern that
making textbook lists a require-
ment would step on professors'
toes. However, because most
classes reuse course materials
yearly, enforcing earlier book list-
ings isn't much of burden. At the
very least, it isn't half the burden
that is on students' wallets.
Still, there is a lot to like about
Monts's and MSA's joint effort. For
once, students who buy their books
online are getting the advance
notice they need to get their books
on time. Even the students who
are still shopping at the bookstore
will receive some relief.
It's been a long time coming.
point of the editorial, the Daily
blames the IFC for letting the
situation with Beta Theta Pi "get
so out of hand that the national
organization needed to step
in." However, this accusation is
unfounded.
Chris Haughee, the assistant
director of Greek Life, was in
constant contact with the nation-
al and chapter organizations of
the Beta Theta Pi fraternity since
winter 2006, including monthly
conference calls with the execu-
tives of the University chapter,
alumni and national officers and
staff. Furthermore, the IFC did
punish the chapter for violations
In a split decision last week,
the Supreme Court ruled that
employees who want to sue their
employers for wage discrimi-
nation must do so within 180
days of the date when their sal-
ary was determined. Ironically,
the Court's conservatives, who
supposedly practice judicial
restraint, ignored a mountain
of precedent in their decision.
But more importantly, this rul-
ing makes future pay challenges
unnecessarily difficult.
The Court's decision ignores
one major detail: most people
don't know how each coworker's
salary compares with their own.
Putting a 180-day restriction
on the period of time a person
has to prove pay inequality is
unreasonable, unconstitutional
and absurd. Apparently, the
Court believes that discrimina-
tion is okay as long as the vic-
tim is unaware of the injustice
for six months. Seems a little
contradictory to the Fourteenth
Amendment, doesn't it?
Sadly, another reality in the
workplace is that pay discrimi-
nation happens frequently. The
most common scenario of this
injustice is the male employee
who makes more than his female
coworker. Although women may
not enter jobs at lower wages
than their male peers, they
are often given smaller raises
or passed up for promotions.
Unfortunately, this form of
discrimination is even present
within the University.
A recent study by the Office
of the Provost found that female
employees at the University
make 2.5 percent less than their
male counterparts. While this
percentage may be relatively
better than the trend at other
universities nationwide, that
should not be an excuse for inac-
tion. For a university that prides
itself as a defender of diversity
and equal opportunity, discrimi-
nating against female employees
is nothing short of hypocritical.
Even more troubling is the
University's apparent indiffer-
ence to this problem. Sure, the
University conducts studies
occasionally through the Office
of the Provost to determine if
pay differences exist; it did one
in 1999, and it promises to con-
duct another next year. Howev-
er, it continues to find the same
results each time: Men are mak-
ing more than women.
What is missing from these
studies is a solution. For this
reason, the University's stud-
ies seem like nothing more
than public relations gimmicks,
creating a fagade of awareness.
How many times does the Uni-
versity need to identify a prob-
lem before it acts to fix it? With
another study scheduled for
next year, it's time for the Uni-
versity to implement change.
Perhaps then there would be
something new (and more
encouraging) to report.
In her dissent to the Supreme
Court ruling, Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg asserted that now "the
ball is in Congress's court" to
correct the Supreme Court's
unjust decision. Likewise, the
ball is in the University's court
to correct the injustice here in
Ann Arbor.
9
Editorial Board Members: Mike Eber, Jennifer Sussex, Kate Truesdell,
Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Wagner
SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU
of its policy by placing the chap-
ter on social probation in the fall
of 2006.
The national organization
took action as a result of a breach
in its directives, but the IFC
has no place or jurisdiction to
enforce directives prescribed by
the national organization. The
national organization imple-
mented a series of highly restric-
tive conditions that required the
chapter to remain alcohol free
and to restrict social events with
more than six chapter members.
Any supplemental sanctions by
the IFC would have been exces-
sive. The IFC cannot impose a
more restrictive penalty on the
chapter.
The real issue should be the
IFC's ability to enforce the sanc-
tions set forth by the national
organization. To correct this
problem, the IFC Executive
Board is currently in the process
of creating a bylaw that would
bind disciplinary sanctions cre-
ated by the national organization
to IFC policy, subjecting frater-
nities to punitive IFC action and
enforcement.
As a result, the only fault fall-
ing on the IFC rests on its inabil-
ity to enforce the sanctions
created by the national organi-
zation. The council will contin-
ue to push the passage of a bylaw
that prevents this unfortunate
situation. On the other hand, the
IFC remains firm in its opinion
that the editorial falsely accuses
the organization of letting "the
situation spiral out of control."
In cooperation with the national
organization, the IFC did every-
thing it could at the first sign of
danger to the chapter and great-
er Greek community.
Evan Waters
LSA senior
The letter writer is the vice president of
public relations for IFC.
0