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