Around noon Monday, approximately ten students from the University of Wisconsin Student Labor Action Coalition came knocking on Chancellor John Wiley's door.

The SLAC members presented staff members in Wiley's office with what they called an "ultimatum," insisting the university take a position against proposed alterations to the Designated Suppliers Program.

DSP is a plan formulated by United Students Against Sweatshops and the Worker Rights Consortium to regulate the way companies choose manufacturers of university apparel. DSP looks to make licensed manufacturers use unionized factories rather than sweatshop labor to manufacture products utilizing university logos.

According to LaMarr Billups, senior special assistant to the chancellor, UW was the first university in the nation to support DSP in 2005.

"If it wasn't for us, no universities would be at the table at all," Billups said. "This wouldn't be a discussion. They would still be out on Bascom Hill protesting."

In the ultimatum, SLAC addresses a part of the DSP proposal UW senior and SLAC member Nick Limbeck referred to as a "three-year exit."

According to Limbeck, the three-year exit would allow licensed companies to cut ties with unionized factories and revert to sweatshop labor.

"A factory would unionize, they would improve their situation, and after three years the factory would lose all the business," Limbeck said. "And that would be that."

Billups, however, said SLAC's ultimatum to the chancellor's office has "not accomplish[ed] anything."

Billups said DSP marks a major change in the way business is conducted between universities, licensees and suppliers and noted negotiation is part of the process. Billups added the three-year exit is a compromise SLAC members agreed to just last month.

If SLAC members wanted to make progress with the DSP initiative, Billups said, they should direct ultimatums to college students at other universities that have high university apparel sales rather than at the UW administration.

"I find what they are so-called demanding [to be] disingenuous," Billups said. "Instead of … working with their colleagues, which is critical to the success, they're playing games. That is not advancing the plight of workers around the world at all."

Limbeck said SLAC recognizes UW's leadership role in DSP, and added that is why SLAC presented the administration with their ultimatum Monday. The three-year exit would make it "impossible" to convert sweatshop labor into unionized factory work, Limbeck said.

The next Worker Rights Consortium meeting is in two weeks, and according to Limbeck, SLAC wants UW to represent their views.

"The students agree with the DSP, but by no means do we agree with this watered-down version," Limbeck said. "It undermines the goal of using factories, not sweatshops."

The demand from SLAC gave the university a deadline of Oct. 16 to state its position against the three-year exit program, which is one week before the next WRC and DSP working group meetings, which take place Oct. 23 and 24, respectively.

"We want the university to endorse our proposal and take a stand against the three-year policy as soon as possible, so that we can go into the working group meeting with a strong stance in support of the union factories — not sweatshops," Limbeck said.

When asked what they would do if the university does not meet their requests, Limbeck said any further actions have yet to be determined. It is the second time in as many years that SLAC has presented the chancellor with an "ultimatum" concerning sweatshop labor and university apparel.

Billups said the group's assertions about UW's position on DSP in the demand are erroneous, and he is a "little more than excited" about the issue.

"Students here have indicated that somehow the university and John Wiley are backing off this agreement," Billups said. "[But] if anybody's reneging, it's them."