The Badger Herald

NEWS

Wiley rebuffs SLAC efforts

SUNDEEP MALLADI/Herald photo

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Andriy Pazuniak:

SSFC wittles Wunk Sheek budget (October 21, 2005)
Cieslewicz, Judge come out on top in spring election (April 9, 2007)
Music industry serves campus (March 22, 2007)
UW to RIAA: No way (March 21, 2007)

by Andriy Pazuniak

Thursday, March 2, 2006

Chanting, yelling and dealing out ultimatums, representatives of the Student Labor Action Coalition stormed Chancellor John Wiley's office Wednesday, demanding the chancellor adopt a new policy for University of Wisconsin-licensed apparel.

Continuing their efforts to reduce the amount of UW-licensed apparel produced in sweatshops, SLAC representatives presented Wiley with an ultimatum demanding he endorse the "full language" of a union apparel policy by March 24.

Among the provisions SLAC representatives asked Wiley to agree to include requiring 25 percent of UW-licensed apparel be produced in factories allowing "legitimate representative labor unions" and making licensees pay a higher price per item, so factories could afford to pay workers a living wage.

However, Wiley said he was "disappointed" in SLAC's tactics Wednesday, and added he has worked extensively with SLAC in recent months to adopt most of the organization's recommendations — including a year-long pilot licensing program last December.

"I don't think those tactics are particularly effective," Wiley said. "We do have a committee that has student representatives on it — including some of the students from SLAC — that sits down and really thinks about these issues and debates them … and that's the body that I listen to on this issue."

During the interview, Wiley espoused patience in judging what licensing policies are and are not effective, especially in regards to the pilot licensing program.

The pilot program aims at reducing the amount of UW-licensed apparel produced in sweatshops by 25 percent and requires that licensees source a quarter of their production to factories that comply with human rights standards set by the Worker Rights Consortium — an international human rights watchdog organization.

"A year-long program takes a year to find out whether it works or not," Wiley said. "It hasn't been a year yet, folks, it's been a few weeks."

However, SLAC representatives insisted on immediate action, claiming the administration has continuously kept "running around in circles."

SLAC representative Chapin Smith said "direct action" was SLAC's best method in trying to convince Wiley to endorse the organization's demands.

"I'm sure he's worried about what we might do," Smith said, threatening future actions if the chancellor does not agree to SLAC's ultimatum. "If he doesn't capitulate with our demands, we will pursue a pattern of escalation via direct action."

When asked if he could elaborate on what such actions could be, Smith said, "to do so would compromise our strategy."

Smith added that SLAC students were "not unreasonable people."

Despite the manner in which they presented their arguments, Wiley said he would take into consideration SLAC's recommendations.

"I will read it tonight, I'll take it home with me," Wiley said.

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (March 2, 2006 @ 4:50am):

More signiture irresponsibility from SLAC.

Anonymous (March 2, 2006 @ 8:53am):

SLAC just embarrasses themselves nowadays.

Their legitimacy as a student organization has decreased and oftentimes, their RSO name is used in a negative connotation.

Maybe they should get over themselves trying to make a career out of being extreme activists and actually listen to what the administration has to do and is doing.

This isn't the first time this year that SLAC has been protesting an issue where one or more of their representatives sit on an official committee dealing with that issue! Stop trying to draw the spotlight on yourselves because, you're just embarrassing this univerisity.

~~concerned student.

Anonymous (March 2, 2006 @ 10:49am):

The fact that there is an official committee doesn't mean that the committee is getting anything accomplished.

Anonymous (March 2, 2006 @ 6:48pm):

The committee is on the ball, but because Wiley has veto power, nothing gets done. Because of this, the university doesn't even follow its own rules regarding licensees.

Obviously the previous posters really have no idea what's going on, or choose to ignore it. We have been trying to quietly deal with the administration, out of the press, but unfortunately Bascom has been stalling and dragging their feet. The policy they proposed last December is a total farce, it's devoid of any actual policy and is solely an implementation plan (for nothing).

The administrators on the committee don't forward messages to Wiley that the entire committee has endorsed--not just students, but faculty and staff who are widely regarded as experts in their fields. The fact that Wiley won't listen to experts who were appointed to advise him makes me question who he really is listening to. I can only guess that it's alumni who have something to gain by killing this policy, like Jerome Chazen, founder of Liz Claiborne, who invented the subcontracting model in the global garment industry that results in "sweatshops."

Wiley has repeatedly talked the talk about supporting human rights and seeking to eliminate use of sweatshops. But the campus has seen no intention to actually walk the walk, and implement this policy.

SLAC is not setting out to make careers for themselves, they merely follow through with what they believe in, which is something most students, on either side of the aisle, neglect to do. Instead of worrying about who's winning "Project Runway" or who we're going drinking with, all members are committed to their values of social justice, equality, and basic human rights. Instead of everyone rushing to get their faces on the front page, many are just as content being in the crowd. But obviously, someone has to answer the press's questions, and that's why there's names in the paper. Students regularly step up and step back if they feel they've been in the public eye to long, to avoid sentiments of "media-seeking" that you claim. This also allows other members to be more involved in the decision making processes, and gain leadership skills and self-confidence.

At least 20 schools around the country were organizing simultaneous events on March 1, including UC-Berkeley, Colorado, Purdue, and Penn State. So it's really not just a bunch of crazy Madison hippies doing this, it's kids around the country who have their shit together and are making sacrifices to create a better world.

And I don't see how SLAC is "embarrassing" the university. Personally, I think it's more embarrassing to UW's image to have children and women in developing countries sewing our apparel, in factories where rape, forced abortion, dangerous working conditions, and sub-poverty wages are prevailent.

In anticipation of future responses: Yes, we are giving those people a job, and poverty wages are better than nothing. But that should be no excuse for blatant exploitation of people just for an extra 25 cents of corporate profit per tshirt. Giving these workers a living wage and the right to organize will not significantly change prices or quantity, and the knowledge that UW merchandise is actually helping to improve the lives of hard-working people all around the world should more than make up for the 2% increase in prices.

Anonymous (March 2, 2006 @ 10:56pm):

I think this article is on the wrong page. Opinions belong on 3A. Save 3A for journalism that's not slanted.

From the title to the last sentence, it was clearly leaning in a certain direction. Even the picture of Wiley is from the BH's editorial room.

Funny story... while Wiley claims he's "worked extensively" with SLAC and "listens" to the LLPC, he has not made any sort of contact with either body or any attempt to even begin drafting an actual policy. But somehow he enough free time that he can hang out with Mac and pose for beauty shots.

Anonymous (March 3, 2006 @ 2:51am):

is the BH actually going to allow all comments, or just ones that are more compliant with their political views? I added a comment this afternoon criticizing the lack of objectivity in this article, and it's still not up. is the moderator on vacation? or can BH just not tolerate criticism?