O

n 
March 
7, 
2023, 
University 
President 
Santa 
Ono 
was 
inaugurated 
as 
the 
15th 
President of the University of 
Michigan, and was immediately 
greeted with a crisis inherited 
from presidents past. Promptly 
after his inauguration ceremony, 
freshly minted President Ono was 
met by hundreds of students in 
front of Hill Auditorium. Among 
those present were members 
of 
the 
Graduate 
Employees’ 
Organization 
carrying 
signs 
with their demands for the 
University, 
ranging 
from 
increased 
compensation 
to 
better 
healthcare 
coverage 
and childcare benefits. This 
picket comes on the heels of 
another unfruitful month of 
bargaining between the labor 
union and the University. On 
many occasions, GEO and the 
University have been able to 
come to a compromise — but at 
this moment in time, a strike is 
imminent. 
GEO last went on strike in 
Fall 2020; for nearly two weeks, 
thousands of graduate student 
instructors didn’t show up to 
work. Discussion sections went 
unattended, 
some 
professors 
canceled class in solidarity and, 
for some students, education 
ground 
to 
a 
halt. 
Despite 
allegations by the University 
that the strike violated the 
bargaining agreement the union 
signed — a claim the University 
is making again — GEO was 
successful: They were able to 
achieve better childcare options, 
greater support for international 
graduate students and a safer 
working environment at the 
height of the pandemic. This 
strike, 
although 
generally 
disruptive 
to 
the 
learning 
environment of the University 
and its students, increased the 
visibility of graduate student 
conditions 
and 
inspired 
the action of other student 
employees. 

Strikes are rarely a positive 
thing for the reputation of the 
aggrieving 
employer. 
Several 
times in its history, GEO has 
protested against the University, 
and each time these protests 
have 
negatively 
harmed 
the 
University’s 
reputation. 
Canceled 
classes, 
increased 
media 
attention 
and 
many 
dissatisfied 
members 
of 
the 
U-M community could prove 
unpredictably damaging to the 
foundation of the institution, and 
could even dissuade parents of 
high school seniors from sending 
their children to the University 
of Michigan. In an ideal world, 
the University would be able 
to take GEO’s concerns into 
consideration 
without 
taking 
damage to its public image. 
However, 
the 
University’s 
lackluster reactions to GEO’s 
demands and proposals have 
all but necessitated this drastic 
turn.
These 
consequences 
are 
revealing. If GSIs can turn the 
campus upside down it is proof 
of the critical role that graduate 
students play in the University’s 
operations. GEO is well within 
their right to strike and, in using 
that power to attempt to change 
the framework of campus, they 
are making their platform and 
purpose at the University known. 
Whether they are in classrooms 
or lecture halls, labs or offices, 
graduate students play pivotal 
roles in the functioning of the 
University and undergraduate 
students’ lives.
Undergraduate students will 
be one of the primary groups 
affected by the strike. Many 
undergrads 
interact 
with 
a 
Graduate 
Student 
Instructor 
almost every day, whether that 
be in a lecture hall, office hours 
or in a GSI-taught class. Although 
many undergraduate students 
support GEO’s cause, they are 
nervous about what a strike 
will mean for their academic 
experience, especially as the end 
of the term nears. The campus is 
looking down the barrel of a full 
fledged disaster, a dissolution 
of trust built between students 

and the University — between 
students who picket and students 
who will eventually cross the 
picket line. In addition to upset 
undergrads, the domino effect of 
disaffected parents and donors 
could cause the University an 
even greater headache in the long 
term.
It is important to recognize, 
however, that this point could 
have been avoided by action 
on both sides. There have been 
moments where GEO’s demands 
have 
seemed 
superfluous 
in comparison to their core 
grievances, and there is a chance 
that if they had been left out, 
an agreement would have been 
reached by now. But it is the 
University that has, more often 
than not, prevented progress: the 
U-M administration has failed 
to handle these negotiations 
artfully, 
downplaying 
the 
necessity 
of 
their 
solution 
and conclusion. GEO’s most 
important demand, a $14,500 
raise (about 60%), was initially 
met with a paltry $481.10 (a 
2% raise) in the first year. 
After months of negotiations, 
the University increased their 
counterproposal to $721.65 (a 
3% raise) in the first year. Most 
recently, the University offered 
a 5% raise in the first year, 
followed by 3.5% and then 3% 
raises in the second and third 
years of the contract.
Regardless, 
GSIs 
deserve 
competitive wages and should 
feel that the academic institution 
they are a member of is there to 
support them — not to diminish 
the importance of the GSIs’ other 
needs. It is of utmost importance 
that, in the midst of a strike, the 
University thinks critically about 
the impact such a protest will 
have on student life and campus 
culture.
 While also acknowledging 
the difficulty of meeting certain 
GEO demands, the University 
should come to a measured and 
considerate decision that not 
only reflects the importance of 
GEO’s requests, but also of the 
well being of both graduate and 
undergraduate students.

Opinion

From The Daily: A strike would be 
bad on your record

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
9 — Wednesday, March 29, 2023 

Stanford Lipsey Student Publications Building
420 Maynard St. 
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.

SHANNON STOCKING 
AND KATE WEILAND
Co-Editors in Chief

QUIN ZAPOLI AND 
JULIAN BARNARD
Editorial Page Editors

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of The Daily’s Editorial Board. 
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

Ammar Ahmad

Julian Barnard

Brandon Cowit

Jess D’Agostino

Ben Davis

Shubhum Giroti

Devon Hesano

Jack Kapcar

Sophia Lehrbaum

Olivia Mouradian

Siddharth Parmar

Rushabh Shah

Zhane Yamin

Nikhil Sharma

Lindsey Spencer

Evan Stern

Anna Trupiano

Jack Tumpowsky

Alex Yee

Quin Zapoli

JULIA VERKLAN AND 
ZOE STORER 
Managing Editors

Debates 
on the 
Diag

T

he University of Michigan 
community 
faces 
an 
important 
decision 
this week. All students in the 
University’s 19 schools and colleges 
are eligible to vote in the presidential 
election 
for 
Central 
Student 
Government, and though these 
elections have had a low turnout in 
the past, the CSG executive is still 
an influential position on campus, 
acting as the primary interlocutor 
between students and the U-M 
administration. The University’s 
student government has defined the 
campus conversation on a number of 
important issues, from successfully 
centralizing the vibrant Vietnam 
War protest movement on campus 
to eliminating general admission 
tickets for football games. These 
examples highlight two distinct roles 
that CSG has embodied in the past: a 
megaphone for nation-wide activism 
and a persistent voice for issues that 
affect students — particularly ones 
for which no other organization is as 
effective an advocate. 
It is with this dual mandate in 
mind that The Michigan Daily 
Editorial Board voted to endorse 
Zaynab 
Elkolaly 
and 
Salma 
Hamamy, 
running 
under 
the 
MPower ticket, for CSG president 
and vice president in the election 
on March 29 and 30. Though all 
four tickets interviewed by the 
editorial board would bring a wealth 
of 
experience 
and 
substantive 
proposals to the CSG executive, 
Elkolaly and Hamamy’s focus on 
accessibility, 
accountability 
and 
outreach set them apart. Multiple 
tickets expressed concerns about the 
culture and approachability of CSG; 
in the end, Elkolaly and Hamamy 
brought the best combination of 
concrete solutions and passion 
to address these issues and best 
improve the wellbeing of U-M 
students.
Elkolaly, 
the 
presidential 
candidate, is a senior in the College 
of Engineering Honors program, 
majoring in nuclear engineering 
with a minor in political science. 
Elkolaly has a well-documented 
background in student advocacy and 
University affairs. She served on the 
Coordinated Community Response 
Team, 
a 
University-organized 
initiative that assesses and works 
toward combatting the persistence 
of sexual assault on campus, and as 
the DEI coordinator within CSG 
itself. Through these efforts, and 
through a history of advocacy on 
issues ranging from criminal justice 

to climate change, Elkolaly has 
supported a diverse set of student 
voices. Outside of these spaces, she 
is energetically involved in different 
student 
organizations, 
such 
as 
the 
Asian 
Student 
Association 
and Students Allied for Freedom 
and Equality, giving her a unique 
perspective as an organizer, in 
tandem with her work in student 
government. 
Hamamy, the vice presidential 
candidate, is a senior majoring in 
Biology, Health and Society and 
Middle Eastern and North African 
Studies in the College of LSA. Aside 
from being a research and medical 
assistant, Hamamy has experience 
with various positions in LSA 
student government and in leading 
multiple projects. She was the 
Sisterhood Director for the Muslim 
Students’ Association, where she 
created a mentorship program 
and a sisterhood discussion series, 
and co-founded the organization 
One Mind At a Time, which seeks 
to improve literacy rates around 
the world. Like Elkolaly, Hamamy 
has a wide range of experiences in 
student government and student 
organizations, with a focus on 
building communities and working 
toward positive, material change.
Crucial to the MPower platform 
is inclusion: Elkolaly and Hamamy 
provide a set of innovative, actionable 
steps that not only promote true 
inclusion by uplifting voices on 
campus that are often left unheard, 
but also center the grassroots 
advocacy already embedded in this 
campus. Elkolaly and Hamamy’s 
commitment to uplifting student 
voices is best characterized by their 
support for the Ethical Investment 
Project, where they plan to “establish 
compensation 
to 
organizations 
engaging in activism and civic 
action” through a simple application 
process. Their platform also calls 
for solidarity with the Graduate 
Employees’ Organization, who just 
announced their plan to go on strike, 
and for reallocating Division of 
Public Safety and Security funding 
to organizations that are more 
focused on helping students, such 
as Counseling and Psychological 
Services and the Sexual Assault and 
Prevention Awareness Center.
Beyond 
that, 
Elkolaly 
and 
Hamamy 
are 
committed 
to 
increasing the accessibility and 
transparency of CSG’s Student 
Organization Funding Committee. 
The ticket told the editorial board 
they 
hope 
to 
provide 
public, 
periodic and detailed information 
on where CSG allocates student 
funds. This would go further than 
the financial transparency CSG 

currently offers, and would include 
graphics and presentations that are 
more accessible to students, such 
as a newsletter. Multiple tickets, 
including candidates serving on the 
CSG Assembly, expressed concern 
and confusion around CSG’s current 
financial transparency measures to 
the editorial board.
Elkolaly 
and 
Hamamy 
also 
emphasized 
simplifying 
the 
SOFC reimbursement application 
process, which they described as 
“byzantine” in nature. More than 
just streamlining the application 
form, the MPower ticket told the 
editorial board that they would 
like to prioritize SOFC funding for 
smaller or newly-formed student 
organizations, which often lack 
the financial resources to pay for 
events out-of-pocket and hope that 
SOFC is able to reimburse them 
later. Though we have concerns 
around 
SOFC 
giving 
student 
organizations funding up front 
— as those organizations might 
overestimate their expenses and ask 
for more money from SOFC than 
they need — Elkolaly and Hamamy’s 
commitment to helping clubs with 
fewer resources is clear.
Underlying the MPower platform 
and its initiatives is something 
undeniably unique about Elkolaly 
and 
Hamamy. 
Their 
ticket 
registered only two days before the 
deadline and — unlike the other 
three tickets we interviewed — 
without an associated party. The 
candidates told the editorial board 
they felt their campaign was more 
a result of necessity than desire. As 
representatives of student voices they 
consider often unacknowledged, 
Elkolaly and Hamamy decided to 
run to change the culture of CSG. 
They are not concerned about 
running without a slate of Assembly 
candidates, either. Elkolaly and 
Hamamy told the editorial board 
that they have strong relationships 
with Assembly members and would 
prioritize building a new coalition by 
making student government more 
hospitable to its own members and 
to communities outside of CSG.
After careful consideration of 
four persuasive CSG tickets, Elkolaly 
and 
Hamamy’s 
overwhelming 
commitment 
and 
authenticity 
convinced the editorial board to 
endorse MPower. By prioritizing 
an 
inclusive 
environment 
and 
delivering 
actionable 
proposals, 
we 
believe 
they 
will 
do 
an 
overwhelming amount of good 
for the University and its students 
should they be elected into office. 
Vote Zaynab Elkolaly and Salma 
Hamamy on March 29-30 for CSG 
President and Vice President.

From The Daily: Vote Zaynab 
Elkolaly, Salma Hamamy, 
MPower on March 29-30 

THE MICHIGAN DAILY 
EDITORIAL BOARD 

Design by Haylee Bohm

Spring Break woes

THE MICHIGAN DAILY 
EDITORIAL BOARD 

