“Central Student Government
is currently working with the
Dean of Students office and
MDining to provide individual
pots and pans for each student.”
Dissatisfaction with meal
service
In addition to issues with
the cleanliness of the rooms,
students
isolating
expressed
dissatisfaction with the meal
service. Students are instructed
to fill out a form every day by
midnight to receive food the next
day.
If
students
arrive
at
Northwood past 12:30 p.m.,they
can submit a form for a late
afternoon delivery that goes
until 4 p.m., according to the
meal request form. It is unclear
whether students arriving at
Northwood after 4 p.m. can
submit a meal request for that
night.
“Please complete the form
daily by Midnight the night
before if you wish to have food
delivered for the next day,” the
form reads.
Sullivan said when she arrived
at Northwood apartments at 7:45
p.m., she was given a bag of chips
for dinner.
Broekhuizen said Michigan
Dining is currently working
to streamline the system so
students are able to order food
up to 8 p.m. for doorstep delivery
that evening.
Whether
or
not
students
without a meal plan are charged
for University meal delivery
while in quarantine housing
was another source of confusion.
According to the meal request
form, if students request meals
and do not have a meal plan, they
will be billed $20 per day for each
day they request food delivery.
They are responsible for paying
the charge “in a timely fashion.”
However,
the
email
from
Aiken says the Office of the Dean
of Students covers this charge,
adding that those with a meal
plan will see the charge for three
meals per day deducted from their
account.
Initially, students were not
provided microwaves. Students
told The Daily that the food was
delivered in plastic, so they were
not able to heat it in the oven or
on the stove if they did not have
cooking supplies.
In an email to students, faculty
and staff on Friday, Schlissel noted
some of the students’ complaints
about quarantine conditions.
“(The
University
is)
also
addressing
concerns
about
the quarantine and isolation
housing
we’re
providing
to
students,” Schlissel wrote. “Our
commitment to providing meal
delivery
is
continuing,
and
Student Life staff check in with
each student daily. From now on
in response to feedback, we will
be providing microwaves, and all
Michigan Dining meals will come
in microwavable packaging.”
As of Sunday, Bickel said he has
not received his microwave. After
calling DPSS Saturday evening, he
was told he would not receive one
until next week.
“The food situation here is
abysmal,” Bickel said. “We have
been told we will be receiving
microwaves, but I have not
received mine yet. The food that
they provide is low-grade and
cold. Nothing like what we paid
for in the dining halls. I have not
brought myself to eat any of it.
Most food deliveries occur close
to noon, so there really is not a
chance for breakfast. The vast
majority of my meals have been
through DoorDash.”
Students
unsatisfied
with
the meal plan can order food
from online delivery services
or local businesses. However,
Burnstein said he worried local
workers could be put at risk
when delivering food, noting
there are no signs indicating
that the Northwood housing is
filled with COVID-19 positive
residents. The Daily confirmed
the lack of signage.
“You’ll
regularly
see,
especially at meal times, just
random delivery drivers walking
around the apartment, because
there’s no clear cut protocols
like where to drop off food or
interact with your driver, and
it just puts the drivers at risk,”
Burnstein said.
Schlissel
did
not
address
safety
precautions
for
meal
delivery in his email. According
to
the
meal
request
form,
University-provided meals are
delivered
by
a
“University-
appointed contractor.”
Smith said she was concerned
about the potential spread of the
virus at Northwood.
“The man who came and
delivered our meals, first of
all, he wasn’t wearing a mask,”
Smith said. “He opened the
screen door and put the food
behind the screen door, which
made me a little uncomfortable
because the person in the
apartment across from me …
actually had COVID and had a
fever.”
When asked what precautions
are in place so Unive rsity staff
members coming in contact with
students do not spread the virus,
Broekhuizen declined to offer
details but clarified that meals
are delivered to the students’
doorsteps and DPSS officers
wear appropriate PPE.
Protocol uncertainty
If
students
living
off-
campus need to quarantine
or
isolate,
the
Washtenaw
County
Health
Department,
in
coordination
with
the
University’s
Environmental,
Health and Safety Department,
will determine if their living
situation is fit to safely do so.
If it is not, off-campus students
may need to move to University-
provided quarantine housing
or return to their permanent
residence as well.
University
Health
Service
tracks
positive
COVID-19
results. Students who are not
tested at UHS can submit a form
to notify the University they
tested positive for the virus.
Washtenaw County is also
filtering
test
results
in
an
attempt to identify students who
test positive. Students who are
known to have tested positive
will be contacted by a contact
tracer and asked for the names
of those with whom they have
had close personal contact.
Sullivan
had
symptoms
of COVID-19 and stayed at
Northwood for one night until
her test came back negative.
UHS then authorized her to
leave. Other students, including
Bickel,
were
instructed
to
continue quarantining for 10 to
14 days, even if their test results
were negative.
According to Burnstein, the
University is keeping students in
the same complexes who tested
positive for the virus and those
who tested negative but both
must continue quarantining.
“Basically there’s … four or
five of these apartment clusters,
and in each of these cluster
apartments there’s students who
are exposed but are negative or
students who are just straight-
up positive, and they’ve just been
mixing these students together,”
Burnstein said.
The
Daily
interviewed
students who tested positive
and those who tested negative,
both after being in contact with
COVID-19 positive individuals
and after developing symptoms
similar to COVID-19. All these
individuals were being housed
in Northwood apartments.
In her email to The Daily,
Broekhuizen elaborated on how
the Northwood apartments are
being used for quarantine and
isolation.
“There
are
five
different
neighborhoods in Northwood
Community
Apartments,”
Broekhuizen
wrote.
“Units
in Northwood I-III are used
for isolation and quarantine
housing.
These
are
private
apartments with no forced air
system connecting them to other
units.”
Broekhuizen also clarified
that “students are free to leave
their rooms, but should not
access
communal
areas,
in
accordance with public health
guidelines.”
Burnstein’s roommate tested
positive and reported his case to
the University, listing Burnstein
as someone with whom he had
close personal contact. Soon
after, Burnstein tested positive
and
has
been
isolating
at
Northwood since.
Burnstein
said
the
University’s
procedure
for
reporting positive COVID-19
cases is not well-defined.
“There
was
no
clear-cut
protocol for how to report this
stuff,” Burnstein said. “It was
very unclear … If he hadn’t
reported it, I don’t know how
they would have found out.”
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Wednesday, September 16, 2020 — 3
QUARANTINE
From Page 2
RAs have also requested
additional personal protective
equipment for move-in duties,
mailroom services and other
tasks
requiring
in-person
contact.
On Aug. 23, more than 80
resident
advisers
drafted
an open letter to University
Housing,
asking
for
more
resources to protect against
COVID-19. They said University
Housing was not responsive to
their demands, and they felt
scared for their safety. More
than 750 people signed their
open letter expressing support
for the RAs’ demands.
After the letter was sent,
University Housing scheduled
two town halls with the RAs
in an effort to strengthen
communication.
During
the
first town hall, many RAs
asked University Housing to
address each of their concerns
in the open letter through a line-
by-line
response.
University
Housing complied and sent
an edited version of the letter,
which was reviewed by The
Daily, addressing each of their
demands on Aug. 27. In addition,
Housing said they had ordered
face shields and each ResStaff
member would also receive an
additional COVID-19 safety kit.
Despite the order for more
personal protective equipment,
some RAs told The Daily they do
not feel well-equipped to handle
their other tasks. Noah said one of
the reasons he quit was because
of a modification to Community
Center responsibilities. The CC
is a lobby-like area generally
situated in a high-traffic location
in a dorm where residents can
ask ResStaff members questions.
Previously, each staff member
only had to work in their
residence hall’s CC. But now,
ResStaff members might be
required to work in CCs outside
of their residence hall. Noah
argued this new requirement
was unsafe.
Additionally, Noah said he
didn’t feel comfortable enforcing
social
distancing
policies,
since they could jeopardize
his
health.
The
University
requires residents to maintain
health
precautions
outlined
in Community Living at the
University at Michigan (CLAM),
the handbook all students living
in residence halls must abide by.
“I didn’t feel safe being the
person to break up a dorm party
in the middle of the pandemic,”
Noah said. “I think putting
that responsibility on other
students, especially students
who are dependent on their jobs
for housing, is just not a good
solution.”
In response to the pandemic,
the guest policy in dorms has
been updated. An Aug. 26
email from University Housing
leadership obtained by The
Daily states that outside guests,
or people living outside of one’s
dorm, are not permitted in
residence halls, but residents
living in the same dorm are
allowed to visit each other.
Once the “no guest policy”
took effect after residents move
into their dorms, RAs were
instructed
to
tell
outsiders
that they are in violation of the
CLAM. Emily said it will be
difficult to differentiate who is
an outside guest and who lives
in a different part of the dorm.
Baghdadchi
wrote
in
an
email to The Daily that staff
has a shared responsibility for
“cultivating a culture of care.”
He wrote that the hall director
— the leader of each residential
building — is responsible for
holding students to community
standards. University Housing’s
conduct office will manage
students who repeatedly break
them.
Emily said there is no way
to enforce the policy. Currently,
the only repercussion from
breaking this rule is equivalent
to violating the CLAM: the case
is forwarded to Housing Student
Conduct and Conflict Resolution
for the staff to review.
“There’s really no teeth to
this policy,” Emily said. “Yes,
on paper it sounds good … but in
terms of enforcement, as an RA,
we’re really relying on a bluff.”
Approximately two weeks
after the town halls, some
RAs announced plans to strike
claiming no concrete action
has been taken. They also
added new demands including
hazard pay, a statement of non-
retaliation should they form a
union, and the inclusion of “real
consequences” should a student
break social distancing policies.
In an email to ResStaff sent
Wednesday night, Rick Gibson,
director of Michigan Housing,
responded to some of the RA’s
demands. He began the letter by
acknowledging ResStaff’s need
for action and thanked ResStaff
members for their commitment
to public safety and change.
He listed various efforts
Housing has made to adapt to
the RAs complaints, noting
that under the University’s
surveillance testing program,
RAs will receive priority status.
He said because compensation
for ResStaff primarily comes in
the form of room and board, the
University would not provide
hazard pay.
In his email to ResStaff,
Gibson
also
elaborated
on
consequences
for
residents
who fail to abide by community
guidelines, noting that follow up
measures may include contract
termination.
“Given
the
gravity
of
COVID-19, that means contract
termination may be appropriate
after
one
or
two
serious
violations,” Gibson wrote.
Communication
Disconnect
The three RAs also expressed
frustration and discontent with
the
lack
of
communication
between Housing and ResStaff.
Noah said the University did
not let ResStaff know if they
would still have a job or housing
in the fall until he received his
letter of appointment the first
week of August.
“That was really stressful as
a student who depends on them
for housing,” Noah said.
Olivia said she’s often put
into a difficult situation when
the first time she hears about
housing updates is through a
general email that was also sent
to residents. It can be difficult to
guide residents and make them
feel secure when RAs have the
same questions, Olivia said.
To
help
increase
communication between RAs
and Housing, the letter sent
to University Administration
asked for the creation of a
student
liaison
elected
by
ResStaff members to advocate
for their concerns and inform
them of updated plans and
policies.
Emily said the liaison will
help RAs feel more heard.
“As staff members, we are
consistently asked to be flexible
and adaptive to our community
needs,” Emily said. “However,
when we ask for changes or
attempt to voice our concerns
with policies and how they’re
being implemented, we are told
that we should not do that.”
University Housing has not
yet addressed the demand for a
student liaison.
With limited channels to
voice concerns, both current
and former RAs said there is a
disconnect between policy and
implementation.
According to alum Deryl
Long, this disconnect is not
new. During her time as an RA
from 2018-19, she said she was
instructed by leadership to
call DPSS when mental health
incidents arose. She said many
of the RAs who experienced
mental health crises firmly
believed engaging the police
would worsen the situation,
and RAs are put in difficult
situations when determining if a
situation needed the police.
“If you were the RA on duty
and this kind of situation was
unfolding, you had to decide
whether or not you were going
to involve the police, which is a
terrible idea, obviously,” Long
said. “Or you had to risk your job
security, housing security and
food security, to go around the
procedure and just deal with the
situation yourself.”
Other
members
of
the
campus community have taken
issue with the University’s ties
to law enforcement. Similar
to the RAs, The Graduate
Employees’ Organization, which
represents more than 2,000
graduate student instructors
and
graduate
student
staff
assistants, announced a strike
on Monday in protest of the
University’s reopening plans.
One of GEO’s demands was
cutting funding to the Division
of Public Safety and Security
and reducing law enforcement’s
presence on campus.
Long also recalled the job
taking a large toll on her and
other
RAs’
mental
health,
especially
because
they
weren’t trained mental health
professionals but were often put
in serious situations.
This
policy
has
been
confirmed by several current
RAs and is still active.
Fear of Retaliation
RAs have told The Daily they
are concerned about losing their
jobs for speaking out.
Each ResStaff member has
to sign a letter of appointment
saying they must uphold all
expectations of the role. Failure
to meet the expectations and
duties
outlined
may
result
in dismissal from the role,
according to the LOA.
The letter contains a non-
disparagement
clause
that
says ResStaff cannot publicly
criticize any University Housing
policies. Student staff members
who disagree with any policies
are encouraged to ask their
supervisor questions, but they
should
continue
to
enforce
all policies and “show public
support” for them.
The Daily could not confirm
if an RA has been fired for
criticizing
Housing
or
its
policies, however many RAs
have said they are fearful of
breaking their contract. As a
result, Olivia said many students
on ResStaff did not want to voice
their concerns publicly.
“I’ve been really afraid there
will be consequences for me even
though … (I just want to) ensure
we’re actually safe,” Olivia said.
“The fear of retaliation is on all
of our minds.”
ResStaff
requested
the
University
administration
to write a statement of non-
retaliation,
as
one
of
the
demands sent in a letter to
University Housing on Aug. 23.
Since they still had not received
a written statement by the Aug.
24 town hall held between RAs
and University leadership, over
half of the attendees turned
off their cameras and signed in
anonymously.
Martino
Harmon,
vice
president
of
Student
Life,
later sent a written statement
promising non-retaliation.
RA
From Page 1
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com
Schlissel
later
added
that
“we don’t want anyone to feel
threatened simply for wanting to
go to class.”
“Going to the court was our
only choice after learning that the
strike would continue,” Schlissel
said.
GEO’s strike began last Tuesday
in response to the University’s
plans to reopen for the fall
semester. Some of GEO’s demands
include the universal right to work
remotely without documentation,
more robust testing plans and a
partial reallocation of funds from
the Division of Public Safety and
Security
to
community-based
organizations.
In a statement Monday, the
union assured the striking graduate
students that no individual member
was at risk because the University
had filed for an injunction.
“We’re
disappointed
that
President Schlissel has chosen
to immediately abandon these
promises in favor of trying to shut
down our strike by brute force,”
GEO’s statement reads. “Shame
on the University of Michigan for
using their immense resources to
bully their graduate workers out
of striking — instead of using those
same resources to create a safe and
just campus for all.”
The union’s members voted
overwhelmingly to reauthorize
their strike Sunday night, saying
their demands were not met.
In
a
Sunday
night
email
informing members that the strike
would continue for another week,
GEO leadership said the strike had
made a major impact on campus.
“Last week, we proved to
University leaders, to the University
community and to each other that
GEO is committed to fighting for
a safe and just community, and we
are not prepared to stop until we
get it,” the email read.
The union, which represents
more than 2,000 graduate student
instructors and graduate student
staff assistants, previously voted
to reject the University’s proposal
on Wednesday, which gave GSIs
and GSSAs the ability to cancel
class if a student did not wear a
mask and pledged to increase the
transparency of COVID-19 case
data but did not address the union’s
demands regarding policing.
Other University groups have
echoed GEO’s demands for a
safer pandemic response — more
than
100
residential
advisers
announced a strike on Wednesday,
arguing that the University did
not provide adequate COVID-19
protections. Dining hall employees
also conducted a “slow down” of
operations across campus Friday
after initially planning a walkout.
The walkout was postponed due
to fear of retaliation from the
University.
The request for an injunction
isn’t the first time the University
administration has sought outside
involvement in the ongoing labor
dispute. On Tuesday, the first
day of the strike, the University
filed an unfair labor practice
charge against GEO, asking the
Michigan Employment Relations
Commission to weigh in on the
strike. The charge names GEO
President Sumeet Patwardhan.
In
an
email
sent
to
all
undergraduate
students
Wednesday, Provost Susan Collins
called
the
strike
“disruptive,
confusing and worrisome,” noting
that it violates both state law and
the union’s contract, which was
ratified in April.
“The strike violates Michigan
law; in addition, GEO has agreed
by contract not to take actions
that interfere with the University’s
operations, in this case, your
education,”
Collins
wrote
in
the
email.
“Nonetheless,
the
University’s team will continue
to meet with GEO in good faith to
resolve remaining issues.”
GEO has repeatedly noted that
the strike is illegal, including joking
about it online. In a document
addressing concerns about the
work stoppage, GEO described
possible consequences for graduate
students who participate in the
strike.
“If GEO strikes when the
contract is in force, the organization
may not be able to collect dues,”
the document reads. “We would
also be open to lawsuits and
could be forced to pay damages.
If the contract is not in force, the
likelihood of a lawsuit is lower, but
UM could still get a court order
for us to stop striking and if we do
not obey it, the coordinators of the
strike (the GEO officers) could be
placed under arrest. GEO has done
work stoppages in the past, and the
university has not retaliated.”
In its statement Monday, GEO
leadership said they were “not
surprised” that the University had
turned to the court system.
“We always knew legal action
was a possibility, and this was a
transparent part of our multiple
member-wide discussions about
the risks of authorizing a work
stoppage,” the statement reads.
“Moreover, this legal move is a clear
sign that withholding our labor is
working: The University is feeling
our power.”
In the video released Monday,
Schlissel
said
the
University
administration
welcomed
the
chance to negotiate with the union
but would not allow the work
stoppage to continue indefinitely.
“The issues raised are very
important and we’re committed to
addressing them, but we can’t do
it at the expense of our students’
education,” Schlissel said. “We
need our classes to be in session
while we work out our differences
together.”
Schlissel and Collins will hold
a public conversation on Tuesday
to discuss COVID-19, campus
planning efforts and the impact of
the pandemic on members of the
community.
“No questions or topics related
to these issues will be off-limits,” an
email announcing the event reads.
The
conversation
will
be
live-streamed
here.
University
community members can submit
questions here.
Managing News Editor Leah
Graham can be reached at leahgra@
umich.edu. Daily News Editors
Barbara Collins, Emma Stein and
Liat Weinstein can be reached at
bcolli@umich.edu, enstein@umich.
edu and weinsl@umich.edu.
COURT
From Page 1
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com