When Student Action Labor Movement (SLAM) members took over thestage of Cohen Auditorium during the welcome event of Tufts' AprilOpen House, they succeeded in creating a hullabaloo that only ahandful of current Tufts students witnessed. But once again theydropped in the administration's lap an issue that has troubled theuniversity since it subcontracted custodial services to OneSourcein 1997.
The movement to increase wages and benefits for janitors is notunique to Tufts; it is part of a national movement in Americancolleges and universities, including Northeastern University,Fairfield College, Washington University in St. Louis, and StanfordUniversity, to just name a few. The Service Employees InternationalUnion (SEIU) unifies each campus' group with the Justice forJanitors program that provides leadership, advice, and inspirationto janitors, whether they work for universities, local and federalgovernment, or large corporations.
SLAM has a legitimate concern, one that all students at Tuftsshould share if they truly believe in social justice. The problemgoes much deeper than OneSource. The minimum wage in Massachusettsis $6.75 per hour, but the federal minimum wage is only $5.15 perhour. Had it been adjusted for inflation since 1985, the federalminimum wage should be $8.50. But $8.50 is still not a living wagein the United States. The Department of Health and Human Servicesdetermined that the requisite salary for a worker, who works fortyhours a week and fifty weeks a year supporting a family of four, is$23,562.50, or $11.78 per hour. While OneSource workers at Tuftsmake $11.45 per hour -- reasonably close to this living wage -- theproblem is that this figure in itself is a baseline and barely anacceptable figure. Small groups such as SLAM are seeds for a biggermovement that, along with a President who favors workers over bigbusiness, is needed to make salaries in America more equal.
But the question facing Tufts is whether or not it wasappropriate for SLAM to take over the stage at April Open House infront of visitors. While it may have embarrassed theadministration, it is unlikely that signs of social activism andconsiderate protest on campus turned prospective Jumbos away. Theproblem is that prospective students, their families, and anembarrassed administration are unlikely to change the plight ofOneSource employees. The real push must come from current studentsbacking a reasonable proposal that also considers the university'sneeds.
