News
SLAC demands meeting with chancellor
Student group marches to Bascom Wednesday to discuss UW’s labor practices with apparel companies
BOBBY BREITENBACK/Herald photo
Student group marches to Bascom Wednesday to discuss UW’s labor practices with apparel companies
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Kyle Mianulli:
- Finishing touches leave Randall prepped for puck (February 1, 2010)
- Year of the Tigger! (February 1, 2010)
- Ad hoc report denies reform (January 25, 2010)
- Restructuring no longer dire (January 17, 2010)
- Snow fight set for today (December 9, 2009)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
The Student Labor Action Coalition marched on Chancellor Biddy Martin’s office Wednesday in protest of the University of Wisconsin’s agreement with multinational corporations that manufacture UW apparel.
SLAC has been holding such marches on the chancellor’s office for three years, according to SLAC member Jan Van Tol. Wednesday was the first time they have been granted entry and given the chance to engage in meaningful dialogue with the chancellor regarding the issue.
According to Daniel Cox, SLAC organizer, multiple attempts had been made to communicate on behalf of the coalition with the chancellor’s office this semester without response.
Once admitted to the chancellor’s office, however, a “thoughtful and productive dialogue” took place between Chancellor Martin, Special Assistant to the Chancellor for Community Relations Dawn Crim and SLAC members, Van Tol said.
Of particular concern to SLAC are two documented cases of serious workers’ rights violations that occurred in two factories in Honduras where UW apparel is manufactured.
“One of those cases there, in particular, were fairly serious freedom of association violations, where workers were prevented from forming a union,” Van Tol said.
He added an estimated $2.5 million of owed wages has yet to be honored between the two cases.
“It does tarnish the name of the university if students can’t trust that when they go into the bookstore that [apparel] is made under moral and just conditions,” Cox said.
While the Worker Rights Consortium, an international group that enforces workers’ rights by upholding codes of conducts, has not filed an official report regarding the two incidents yet, Crim said once they do, the best course of action would be to get a comprehensive group of universities throughout the country together to talk with the licensees.
A central focus of the discussion hinged around the Collegiate Licensing Company’s ER6 program, in which $50,000 of university funds could be used in the future to fly in representatives of UW apparel licensees to educate them about their responsibilities under the code of conduct for apparel manufacturers — a legally binding document that ensures they honor proper labor standards, Crim said.
Crim assured Martin and SLAC, in addition to educating the licensees, the program also elicits a commitment from corporations that they will uphold proper labor codes.
Crim also confirmed that of the total, $25,000 could come from funds that would otherwise go to need-based financial aid. The program is in the intermediate stages of planning, however, and the program details are not concrete as of yet.
Martin said she would like to learn more about the program, but if it will take money away from need-based aid, “the chancellor’s highest priority,” she would really want to hear a strong case.
“It takes $50,000 from university money to get corporations that have an army of lawyers to know what they are expected to do and what they are expected to follow legally,” Cox said. “It is a suspect situation.”
Ultimately, SLAC is pushing for substantial implementation of the another program known as the Designated Suppliers Program, according to Van Tol.
The program would designate certain factories for UW apparel manufactures where working conditions have been positively demonstrated.
UW signed onto the program in principle a couple of years ago but has not displayed sufficient dedication, according to Van Tol.
23 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Top Classified Ads (view all)
Place your classified ad online and have it show up here. Your ad will hit thousands of viewers a day!
DON'T READ ME! Too late. If you're reading this, guess how many other people are reading it. See... advertising in The Badger Herald does work!
IP hash: d4d7e9de
It’s disturbing that an angry mob can effectively run the schedule of the university’s chancellor, especially when the mob is a very small portion of campus. And way to go, SLAC, for your attempt to cut need-based aid for low-income UW students. Shame on you!
IP hash: 7ea25fbf
Haha you need to go back and read the article. The University was taking money away from Need-based grants. SLAC is trying to get the money put back into need-based grants. If you don’t know how to read, maybe you should head back to elementary school.
The University is proposing TAKING MONEY AWAY FROM NEED-BASED GRANTS to pay for a vacation for apparel companies to come to Madison and have the law read to them (apparently they can’t read either).
IP hash: d4d7e9de
“Crim also confirmed that of the total, $25,000 could come from funds that would otherwise go to need-based financial aid.”
Maybe I’m misreading the article, but it sounds to me like SLAC is pressuring to have $25k taken from need-based financial aid and given to enforce contracts.
“SLAC is trying to get the money put back into need-based grants. If you don’t know how to read, maybe you should head back to elementary school.”
I know what SLAC is trying to do, but it doesn’t work that way. Money is fungible. $25k doesn’t grow on trees, and it has to come from somewhere. Biddy is trying to put as much money as possible into need-based aid (a commendable goal), so giving money to contract enforcers takes away from the possible pool of funds.
I’ve almost completed a PhD here at the UW, and I certainly know how to read. The SLAC supporter just doesn’t understand the fungibility of money and unintended consequences.
—6:17
IP hash: 7ea25fbf
Wow, you almost completed a PHD and you are still remarkably dense.
Chancellor Martin was herself surprised to hear Dawn Crim tell her that half of this money (25K) would be taken FROM need-based tuition funds and given to a program, entitled ER6, which would essentially pay for apparel company reps to fly to Madison and be told what their legal obligations are.
Are students supposed to believe that apparel companies don’t know the contracts they signed?
This money is not going to be used to enforce labor contracts. The enforcement of labor contracts already falls under the jurisdiction of the WRC (Workers Rights Consortium). Instead, this money would be taken FROM students and given to apparel companies, and would do nothing for workers’ rights in the process.
SLAC’s position is to keep this money in need-based grants. SLAC’s position is that apparel companies know their contractual obligations and can’t plead ignorance when it comes to the law.
IP hash: 7ea25fbf
Haha Are you still having trouble reading?
Dawn Crim is NOT a “SLAC supporter,” she is” Special Assistant to the Chancellor for Community Relations” (and just in case you’re having trouble reading, that is from the 4th paragraph).
p.s. what is your PHD supposed to be in anyways?
IP hash: 7ea25fbf
LOL He must be a PHD in Dyslexia Studies
IP hash: 7ea25fbf
SLAC was trying to get the University to put the money back into need-based scholarships….so by your logic…”Shame on the University”
IP hash: 174fe30b
At least someone is doing something about something man. Have you ever gone and done something like this?
IP hash: cca41a3e
6:17AM, way off base. Re-read the article?
The mob was far from angry. BH staff can attest, SLAC took quite an amiable approach. SLAC hired a ‘labor detective’ (read SLAC member in trench coat and fedora carrying large magnifying glass) to investigate as to the location of documents and responses to letters sent by SLAC to the Chancellor’s office weeks ago. I have no idea how an action designed to open dialogue between the organization and the University in such a unique way could be construed as angry. And yes, there is video.
Dawn Crim is not a SLAC member, she is an assistant to the Chancellor. Crim acknowledged that if the UW goes through with the CLC’s ER6 program, $25,000 of scholarship funds will be taken from the students. SLAC is obviously against this, and this is one of the main reasons why SLAC sought to speak with the Chancellor on the issue: to assure the University wasn’t spending our money in such an irresponsible way.
-someone who was there
IP hash: 7ea25fbf
Very small portion of campus? I think the vast majority of campus would think that taking 25 thousand dollars from need-based grants and giving it to Reebok, Nike etc. is absurd.
IP hash: ce48f843
who cares where our clothes are made as long as its cheap. not worth wasting money on an investigation for.
IP hash: 84662a21
Well said. You suck.
IP hash: 2226a170
most epic picture EVER!
IP hash: 8a01a267
You’ve been doing this stuff for three years. Seriously, just make an appointment.
IP hash: 7ea25fbf
Chancellor Wiley refused to make an appointment with SLAC, and other student organizations, for three years. That was one of the many reasons his tenure as Chancellor was so unpopular.
IP hash: 308e7e55
Just your average bunch of progressive tools. The same stunt gets old.
IP hash: 50b19101
SLAC is unstoppable!
IP hash: c7c27e5c
Wait a minute. So, SLAC an organization which tries to promote “fair labor practices” and ensure them by convincing admins and public officials to not enter deals/contracts with producers who do not uphold these standards, is arguing against putting money toward a program that assists this purpose?
I agree, we shouldn’t reallocate financial aid dollars (or any dollars for that matter) to this type of cause, but I am a little confused about what side SLAC is on in this issue and where the university position is.
IP hash: 7ea25fbf
This program does not “assist” in this in any way. Think before you post
IP hash: 9cad29c0
SLAC is against giving $50,000 to the Collegiate Licensing Company. SLAC doesn’t believe corporations need to be educated about how to not violate labor rights, especially not with student money. They know the rules. Every licensee that wants to produce Bucky Badger clothing needs to sign a contract with UW. On every contract are codes of conduct, labor standards, that brands agree to uphold in order to do business with us. They know what they’re doing. They have armies of lawyers. They just often times don’t care about labor rights, unless they are forced to care (ie. when the UW cuts contracts with them).
IP hash: 7ea25fbf
The $50,000 is being used to circumvent the WRC(Workers Rights Consortium), which is already in charge or making sure apparel companies follow the law. Apparel companies have signed contracts under which they are supposed to follow the Code of Conduct. They are fully aware of their obligations under the law. Why should they be given $25,000, which would be taken from needy students, in order to be read a contract they have already signed.
IP hash: 49cf1adb
The Workers Rights Consortium cannot make sure of anything. I worked at UW Milwaukee with Students for a Democratic Society to get the Designated Suppliers Program signed and the WRC admitted themselves that though they have ‘codes of conduct’, they have no authority nor the ability to enforce these codes. The only way anything is going to change is if the university signs onto the DSP or makes sure in their own means that their clothes are sweat-shop free.
IP hash: 7ea25fbf
Which is what SLAC is/has been pushing for years.