University administrators oppose labor reforms proposed by the WROC

On Feb. 15, members of the Workers' Rights Organizing Committee met with Vice President of Finance and Administration Richard Spies GS '75 and other administrators who manage Princeton's lowest-paid workers. We had high hopes for the meeting, but our proposals for treating workers fairly were rejected on almost every issue. Aside from a willingness to discuss some of the obstacles which face "casual" workers in the dining halls, Spies told us that the administration feels "pretty comfortable" with its current policies, and that "unless some dramatic new event occurs, we don't see them changing."

This meeting came on the heels of a kickoff event in support of workers attended by over 200 students, staff and faculty, and covered extensively by the local media. Since that event, WROC has accumulated the official support of dozens of faculty, religious leaders, politicians and student groups. The list of supporters includes economics professor Alan Krueger, history professors James McPherson and Daniel Rodgers, African-American Studies chair Nell Painter, Rev. Stephen White, Rabbi James Diamond, Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson-Coleman, the SVC Board and the Organization of Women Leaders.

In our meeting, administrators repeatedly insisted that Princeton treats its lowest-paid workers in accordance with the demands of the market. We have argued that the market should not trump all other values, especially in the current case where it is widely acknowledged that the market has not efficiently given low-wage workers their due in this booming economy.

There are many times when Princeton goes far beyond the demands of the market because it is the right thing to do and because we have the means to do it, as with the recent extension of financial aid for undergraduate and graduate students. WROC and its supporters are not asking for anything nearly so generous: we are simply asking that the 'invisible' folks who keep the University running be treated fairly and with respect.

Spies and his fellow managers did not provide any new justifications for the university's current labor practices. They claimed that they had outsourced jobs because Princeton's workers lacked "efficiency" and "expertise," and yet the outsourcing company which now staffs those jobs, Monarch, uses more janitors than Princeton did; Monarch achieves its savings by paying its workers $3-$4 less per hour and denying benefits.

On wages, the administration says that it's "competitive," even though plant manager Michael McKay has noted the difficulty of attracting and keeping workers. This could be because Princeton's janitors and dining-hall workers have fallen behind inflation in the last ten years. Meanwhile, the endowment has quadrupled and tuition costs have outpaced inflation by 21 percent. WROC's bare-bones proposal that the University pay a cost-of-living increase tied to the consumer-price index was rejected outright.

In fact, the administration wants to do away with across the board increases altogether and make all yearly increases dependent on subjective performance reviews. While there is nothing wrong with providing incentives to work hard, we believe that workers who are already just getting by (a Princeton dining hall worker supporting a family of four qualifies for food stamps) deserve a minimal guarantee that their base wages will keep up with the cost of living. Performance bonuses can be paid on top of base wages, just like the investment banking industry. The administration rejected this one, too.

On weekend pay, Dan Scheiner, the university's compensation director, noted that five-day shifts which include weekend work shouldn't include extra compensation for weekend days because "we don't see Saturday and Sunday as sacred." Many Christians and Jews would disagree.

Those who support Princeton's lowest-paid staff were sorely disappointed by the unwillingness of the administration to seriously consider treating workers fairly. Administrators could agree to immediately renegotiate its current contracts with the poorest workers to reflect our concerns, or simply pledge to incorporate WROC's suggestions in future contract negotiations. Instead, they have comprehensively rejected our suggestions.

Holding meetings when there is no room for negotiation or hope for change is futile. As a result, WROC will be staging several public events over the next few weeks to demonstrate the campus' support for the workers who serve us every day — including a rally on Alumni and Parents' Day this coming Saturday. We hope to build on current support from students, faculty, religious leaders and politicians, and add the support of concerned alumni and parents.

At our meeting, Spies said that the test for any new policy would be whether it improves the University's goal of having "the best people."

Treating workers fairly would allow us to hold on to the best workers, and halting the decline in worker morale would positively affect all areas of campus life. Above all, giving workers the respect they deserve when we have the means to do it is simply the right thing to do. David Tannenbaum, a WROC leader, is a philosophy major from Great Neck, NY. He can be reached at tanenbam@princeton.edu.