The Badger Herald

OPINION & EDITORIAL

SSFC stipend appropriate

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

Also by Letters to the Editor:

SSFC stipend appropriate (December 11, 2007)
Poor plowing cuts off handicapped access (December 10, 2007)
Cars that actually help the environment (December 10, 2007)
Organic food: Deliciously safe (December 10, 2007)
Diversity deserves attention at UW (December 7, 2007)

by Letters to the Editor

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

I am writing in response to the recent editorial ("$$FC," Dec. 6) that denounced the $20 per meeting stipend for Student Services Finance Committee members as a "wasteful" allocation of segregated fees. Until recently I sat on that committee and want to address several concerns regarding the stipend.

To clarify, Brittany Wiegand did not reintroduce the stipend; I did. On the original vote I abstained because I was concerned it would appear to be inappropriate for SSFC to approve its own stipends. I reintroduced it at a reduced level for the following reasons:

The overriding goal of the stipend is to attract and retain qualified and diverse committee members. I believe this has been a problem for SSFC. At the time of my application, seven of 16 seats were unfilled. Another member has subsequently resigned.

SSFC is no small time commitment. SSFC members must meet twice a week in meetings that often run to midnight. Further, not having a stipend discriminates against students with limited finances. To offset rising tuition and book costs, many students must work part-time concurrent to their class commitments. Without a stipend, a student in this financial situation would have little time left to give for a student-faculty committee such as SSFC.

Finally, it is inaccurate and offensive to claim SSFC members are voting to line their own pockets with these stipends. I reintroduced the funding with the understanding that I would not see a single cent. Additionally, members voted on the issue with an understanding that ASM bylaws prohibit representatives from receiving pay raises for which they voted. The entire committee was advised that these bylaws likely applied to the creation of this stipend.

To ensure the sustainability of the segregated fee system, it is imperative that qualified and committed students sit on SSFC. To attract qualified candidates, a stipend is necessary.

Jordan Lippert

UW senior, economics

jlippert@wisc.edu

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (December 11, 2007 @ 7:48am):

weak.

Anonymous (December 11, 2007 @ 10:15pm):

Just because no one wants to put up with the headaches from SSFC meetings does not mean the people that do put up with them deserve to be paid. And just because you pay people doesn't mean you will attract better people. If anything you will simply attract useless people just looking to get some money.
You decide to run for SSFC. Deal with it.

Add a comment

We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.