The Associated Students of Madison announced last week that members of the Student Services and Financial Committee will be compensated $20 per meeting starting in fall 2008. The SSFC is responsible for allocating over $19 million in funding from segregated student fees to various student organizations. This compensation will account for the 15 to 20 hours of work they put in per week, or approximately $1,200 dollars per academic year.
Those in favor of paying the committee claim that SSFC members are responsible for tasks that require long meetings and hours of necessary preparatory work before these meetings, which makes holding a part-time job unrealistic. The intent of the monetary incentives is to make for better-quality candidates, such as those who would not apply without financial compensation.
However, this puts ASM and the SSFC on a slippery slope because other student organizations will begin demanding funds in a similar fashion. Many other students put in over 20 hours of work per week in various student organizations, willingly donating their intellectual property without compensation. Who's to say that these students deserve compensation less than members of the SSFC?
Further, claims that this incentive will increase the quality of candidates are idealistic at best. Only six out of 42,000 UW-Madison students are running for SSFC for the coming academic year. Of these six students deciding to run, it is very improbable to assume that $20 a meeting convinced them to run. The six candidates would probably have run regardless of compensation, and ASM's decision is a waste of segregated fees that should be used in other ways.
Time commitments aside, the purpose of the SSFC is to provide a service to UW-Madison students, and no service positions should be paid unless all service positions are paid. To designate one group as more important than another is completely unfair to other organizations that serve a similar function.
Ideally, candidates who apply to be on SSFC should do so for altruistic reasons instead of monetary ones. That is why the ASM Student Council should reverse its decision and save $18,000 that could be used much better elsewhere.
