Phoebe Taurick: The Next Ashok Kumar — track record? Lauren Woods safety plan, SLAC, and ASM activism. Watch out, world!

“The University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents today (Feb. 9, 2007) approved an amended contract with UW-Madison head football coach Bret Bielema that will increase his compensation package to $1.3 million in the deal’s first year.”

At $10.23/hr, Coach Bielema has to work 127,077 hours, or 3177 weeks per year. I wonder how he’ll fit that much time into 52 weeks?

Care to guess how much of Bielema’s paycheck comes from taxes or tuition?

Great article, Eric Sklarsky.

1:42am—

Clearly any girl that shares the same ideas as a male must be emulating him or manipulated by him, because women are incapable of developing their own thoughts.

I disagree with a couple of Phoebe and Eric’s views on the living wage.

First off, I do agree with the electoral standpoint, especially with the DoIT debacle last year; with the record student turnout in those elections, those ASM elections do indeed bear some weight.

However, I do disagree on the justification of a living wage for rising tuition and expenses for two reasons. First, it is financial aid, federal grants, student loans, etc.; not a part-time job, that is supposed to help pay for tuition and expenses. Second, not everyone on the campus, including those actually in need, as it is impossible for every student to work a campus job.

I also, to an extent, disagree with the “bogus” claim that wages should be based on the free market; that is, based on what other local businesses pay. It would be unfair to local businesses, as many would lose their student employees to the university due to higher wages.

I do understand, however, one can rebut that argument by claiming that enacting a living wage would force local business owners to do the same thing, which I think would be difficult for business owners to do.

One more side comment: Not everyone is a fault for what I will say, but some students (I know some.) do need to practice some frugality - that is, staving off the partying so much, the pizza (I know I have a tough time with that, as well.), the coffee, etc.

-MP

Where is the money coming from to pay the increase of wages? - Germain E. Stemme

“the ever-increasing cost of education makes a part-time job of $10.23 per hour a necessary and helpful drop in the bucket towards paying for tuition.”

You do realize that the salary will be paid for by the increase in segregated fees. So we will have to increase the tuition for all students to pay for the work of some students?

“Where is the money coming from to pay the increase of wages?”

Simple, out of the pockets of those who will be out of work.

The money for the student living wage will come from the large campus employment units. The money can come from cuts to administrators’ salaries. Also, the argument that financial aid is the way to help students’ pay tuition supports the student living wage. Many student employees are on federal work study grants, which is part of financial aid. As opposed to having to work the whole year to earn $2000 of federal work study money on a wage of $8.00, the students can earn it quicker on a wage of $10.23. Therefore, student employees have more time to spend on school work, or on working another job, say at one of these local businesses. A student living wage means more money in the pockets of students for tuition, and more time to spend at their own discretion.

Here’s my story. My Dad teaches physics, and developed a medical physics program, at a community college in the UW system. My Mom works as a Hospice nurse. Combined, their income is such that the UW expects them to dump 20% of their wages into my tuition, yet this only accounts for half of the expected annual costs (roughly $17,000). The UW graciously made up the difference by offering $400 in grants. To top it off, his real wages have decreased every year for the past few years, while tuition has skyrocketed. Think about it— now, professors can’t even send their children to public universities.

To help out, I work 20 hours a week at the hospital, making $10/hr (closer to 7-8 after SS and tax). After classes and work, I put in about 40 hours a week, excluding travel time and homework. Including these, 90 hours a week are devoted to school and work.

Now, I don’t spend all my money on beer. It is to buy groceries other necessities, and to help out with tuition and rent. I can’t remember the last time I drank—when I do I make use of the house cup when my roommates have a party. I don’t drink coffee, I don’t order pizza, and I hardly ever eat out. But usually I’m at the library on Friday and Saturday nights.

Because I’m at the hospital, my wages aren’t directly affected by this sort of increase. But my wages would go up, alleviating some of the pressure. I can assume that most people posting here aren’t in this predicament—i.e. don’t hold jobs, because daddy’s credit card is their best friend.

I’ve even got it good, making $10/hr compared to the $7/hr that students in the union or at the library make. Or even compared to custodians at the Union, who barely make more than me, but are trying to send their kids through college by working the night shift. It’s easy to reduce this to numbers, but there are faces behind those numbers, many of whom are really struggling right now.

There is no doubt that this will increase segregated fees. In fact, it is not even debatable. ASM made recommendations to the Chancellor that included the increased cost of the higher wage.

I find it troubling that we are going to increase the costs to all students on campus in order to pay low skilled student workers a wage that is far above what the market would pay them.

Almost all students either work or take out loans to some degree to pay for school. The cashiers at the Union and the ID scanners at the SERF are not of some special quality to warrant the rest of students paying their way through college.