<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Letters To The Editor</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.newuniversity.org/2009/10/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.newuniversity.org/2009/10/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 03:30:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Bruning</title>
		<link>http://www.newuniversity.org/2009/10/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/comment-page-1/#comment-519</link>
		<dc:creator>John Bruning</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:32:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newuniversity.org/?p=9610#comment-519</guid>
		<description>I wrote the original article that Megan is responding to.  I know that the administration is very receptive to some groups, and not to others.  Basically, this is the litmus test for meeting with groups: If the change that the group wants is controversial or would hurt the corporate interests of the university, no meeting will ever take place, unless students can mobilize effectively and find other ways to put pressure on the university.  Other groups, specifically social clubs and very moderate environmental groups, do have the ear of the administration, and much of the sustainability work has been done with cooperation between administrators and students.

But issues like labor are different.  Environmental policy can be paraded by administration to show how progressive and eco-friendly they are (although we have seen the administration repeatedly lie).  However, when it comes to labor (eg paying our workers more), the administration has no problem bargaining in bad faith, suppressing wages, firing organizers, and threatening female workers, anything to keep costs down.  Despite Drake&#039;s comments to protesters at the University Club last winter, there are no proper channels to work through, and believe me when I say we&#039;ve tried.  Many of the administrators in the units, such as John Daly, are pathological liars, openly racist, and completely uninterested in collaboration.  

More importantly though, is that all of these &quot;proper channels,&quot; when they do exist, are hidden from students or unproductive.  When students began looking at where UCI clothing is made, specifically targeting Russell Athletic (there was a New U article back in April I think), we couldn&#039;t find any information about who to even talk to.  It wasn&#039;t until that article was published that we found some contacts, who have since ignored our attempts to meet.  But at other universities, in fact every university that I&#039;m aware of, sweatshop activists have ALWAYS initiated contact with the Chancellor or President first, and the Chancellor would delegate further work to Vice Chancellors or special assistants, or take care of the matter themselves.  Often, it&#039;s a mixture of the two.

And when very controversial issues emerge which are deeply entrenched in power and financial structures, such as around animal testing (yes, animals like cats are killed on campus), administrators will without a doubt refuse to meet with students much less concede anything.  Then what?

For many UCI students, I suppose that Drake&#039;s behavior seems acceptable.  But for many grad students and transfer students who have been involved in activism elsewhere, we understand just how sub-par it is compared to most other institutions of comparable size and quality.  Quite honestly, it&#039;s embarrassing how bad it is here, and my friends at other UC, CSU, Big Ten, ACC, and East Coast schools have been speechless when I&#039;ve described Drake&#039;s behaviors.

As for AGS and ASUCI, many of us who have dealt with these organizations have been turned off because of the unnavigable bureaucracy and crabby staff, and again they are organized very differently than most other universities.  This also says nothing of the  many rumors and allegations of subordination to the administration--closed meetings, instructions for votes, etc--which defeats the purpose of more conflictual organizing and dissuades many activists from even approaching ASUCI/AGS.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wrote the original article that Megan is responding to.  I know that the administration is very receptive to some groups, and not to others.  Basically, this is the litmus test for meeting with groups: If the change that the group wants is controversial or would hurt the corporate interests of the university, no meeting will ever take place, unless students can mobilize effectively and find other ways to put pressure on the university.  Other groups, specifically social clubs and very moderate environmental groups, do have the ear of the administration, and much of the sustainability work has been done with cooperation between administrators and students.</p>
<p>But issues like labor are different.  Environmental policy can be paraded by administration to show how progressive and eco-friendly they are (although we have seen the administration repeatedly lie).  However, when it comes to labor (eg paying our workers more), the administration has no problem bargaining in bad faith, suppressing wages, firing organizers, and threatening female workers, anything to keep costs down.  Despite Drake&#8217;s comments to protesters at the University Club last winter, there are no proper channels to work through, and believe me when I say we&#8217;ve tried.  Many of the administrators in the units, such as John Daly, are pathological liars, openly racist, and completely uninterested in collaboration.  </p>
<p>More importantly though, is that all of these &#8220;proper channels,&#8221; when they do exist, are hidden from students or unproductive.  When students began looking at where UCI clothing is made, specifically targeting Russell Athletic (there was a New U article back in April I think), we couldn&#8217;t find any information about who to even talk to.  It wasn&#8217;t until that article was published that we found some contacts, who have since ignored our attempts to meet.  But at other universities, in fact every university that I&#8217;m aware of, sweatshop activists have ALWAYS initiated contact with the Chancellor or President first, and the Chancellor would delegate further work to Vice Chancellors or special assistants, or take care of the matter themselves.  Often, it&#8217;s a mixture of the two.</p>
<p>And when very controversial issues emerge which are deeply entrenched in power and financial structures, such as around animal testing (yes, animals like cats are killed on campus), administrators will without a doubt refuse to meet with students much less concede anything.  Then what?</p>
<p>For many UCI students, I suppose that Drake&#8217;s behavior seems acceptable.  But for many grad students and transfer students who have been involved in activism elsewhere, we understand just how sub-par it is compared to most other institutions of comparable size and quality.  Quite honestly, it&#8217;s embarrassing how bad it is here, and my friends at other UC, CSU, Big Ten, ACC, and East Coast schools have been speechless when I&#8217;ve described Drake&#8217;s behaviors.</p>
<p>As for AGS and ASUCI, many of us who have dealt with these organizations have been turned off because of the unnavigable bureaucracy and crabby staff, and again they are organized very differently than most other universities.  This also says nothing of the  many rumors and allegations of subordination to the administration&#8211;closed meetings, instructions for votes, etc&#8211;which defeats the purpose of more conflictual organizing and dissuades many activists from even approaching ASUCI/AGS.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->
