At the conclusion of voting on the Living Wage referendum and WUFIP, it looks like the Living Wage referendum has passed and the referendum to renovate Memorial Union and build a new Union South has been voted down.
While I don't dispute the results of the election and I applaud the unprecedented number of students who voted, I take issue with the tactics used and statements made by SLAC leading up to the election.
Over the past year or so, while watching other SLAC initiatives, I've noticed a trend of distorting or even making up facts and intentionally provoking controversy in order to achieve a goal. Allow me to cite two recent examples.
Instead of focusing on the issues and trying to collaborate with the university during the sweatshop campaign, SLAC members chose to create a Facebook profile trashing Chancellor Wiley. Joking or not, this was a horribly misguided attempt to influence the university's position.
Most recently, throughout the campaign to pass a living wage referendum, SLAC used inflammatory language and distorted truths to sway students' opinions. For example, SLAC's own website states The UW-Madison uses the limited term employee (LTE) system to deny union rights and benefits to its workers.\ In fact, the LTE system is quite necessary and SLAC in no way tried to eliminate or significantly change the system other than forcing the university to pay LTEs more. No LTE union will be created and no further benefits will be added for LTEs. In fact, I have yet to hear a SLAC member dispute the necessity of LTEs or propose a way to change the system rather than the pay rate.
With the referendum passed, organizations must pay LTEs at least $10.23/hr. This means that a student worker at the SERF reading a book and occasionally scanning an ID will get paid more than most undergraduate researchers. It looks like I should give up my research job, grab some light reading and hope for an opening at the SERF.
Finally, and most appallingly, SLAC pitted the living wage referendum against the WUFIP referendum from the start. In truth, these two referendums are not in conflict in any way. WUFIP would actually have improved working conditions and safety for union employed LTEs.
Unfortunately, SLAC's negative campaigning worked and future students will face the same problems we have today when using the unions.
Although I agree with the sentiments behind most of their proposals, SLAC's campaign to pass the living wage referendum and the accompanying twisting of the truth and intentional stirring up of controversy has caused me to lose all trust in the group. Despite the success of this referendum, I hope students in the future will not be so easily swayed by these tactics.
Doug Lipinski
UW-Madison Junior
Applied Mathematics, Engineering and Physics
\
