Monday, 8/11/97 USAC votes to raise its own pay CONTROVERSY:
Members pass initiative giving a stipend increase across the
board
By Frances Lee Daily Bruin Senior Staff It had all the trappings
of a John Wayne western. With "guns" drawn, members of the
Undergraduate Students Association Council (USAC) fiercely debated
the merits of increasing their own pay. Despite strong objections
from the top three executives, when the smoke cleared, USAC voted
7-4 to approve across-the-board raises for everyone in student
government who currently receives a stipend. With a decision
rendered, USAC can now concentrate on passing the budget, already
10 days late. But the political ramifications of the vote may come
up again during the course of the year. Supporters contend that, by
raising the amount of compensation, more people might participate
in student government who normally couldn’t afford to do so. They
also argued that stipends have not increased in 10 years, and that
even with the raise, the pay does not reflect the amount of work
done by USAC members. Academic Affairs Commissioner Max Espinoza,
who voted in favor of the revisions, said, "I’m not afraid to
answer to my constituents in terms of the work I do on campus."
Margarita Gonzalez, a member of El Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano/a
de Aztlan (MEChA), agreed: "I don’t think getting a stipend
increase is going to stop us from organizing. If anything, it’s
going to help us." With a raise, students could work at outside
jobs two or three hours less a week, she added, and that time could
be spent on student government projects. However, opponents of the
financial guideline revisions charged that the pay increase looked
"self-serving" and "corrupt," especially since the move was being
made in the summer when most students were not on campus. President
Kandea Mosley, who stood firmly against the stipend increase,
worried that such an action by the student government would
"jeopardize the trust of the people who voted for us. People
already have a terrible perception (of student government). Our
responsibility to change that perception … (can’t be done) if our
legitimacy and integrity are compromised." However, Chad Williams,
chair of the African Student Union, pointed out that people who
want to work in student government do so regardless of financial
circumstances. "I didn’t get involved for a stipend," Williams
said. "I didn’t even realize we got stipends." Although council
members agreed that jobs in student government are poorly paid,
some wondered where the money would come from to support the pay
increases, which range from $25 to $175. Internal Vice President
Carol Lee expressed concern that there was only enough money in the
budget to pay for the raises of the 13 council members, and not for
officers of student advocacy groups (SAGs) and their assistants.
External Vice President Stacy Lee opposed the proposed funding
source for the stipend increases. The money, according to Finance
Committee Chair Robert Rhoan, would come from "administrative
overhead." Reappropriations were made in the contributions to the
University of California Students’ Association (UCSA), the election
board budget and the UCSA secretary’s office. Traditionally, those
three line items are under-funded during the budget process, with
the understanding that all surplus funds would first be used to
augment those budgets. "The money we end up pulling out of the
pot," is returned with the surplus, Rhoan said. Stacy Lee, who
works closely with UCSA, objected to adjusting UCSA funds, noting
that on a per-student basis, UCLA already makes one of the lowest
contributions to the lobbying group. "By taking money from UCSA,"
she warned, "you’re stabbing yourselves in the back." The revisions
should be viewed "within a fiscal context and not within a
political context," stressed Rhoan. "The No. 1 priority of the
finance committee was to develop a proposal that would not touch
one cent of student advocacy group funding or USAC officer
budgets." But S. Lee noted that, ultimately, "we are impacting what
students get," since the surplus money is never guaranteed. The
issue of students not being on campus to voice their opinions was
also a concern to council members. While supporters of the
revisions argued that students would understand and probably
support the pay raise because of the amount of work done by student
government, others felt differently. "Public opinion does matter,"
said Community Service Commissioner Abi Karlin-Reznick, adding that
it effects how they work as a council. She said that she would not
accept her full stipend, as a "statement I want to make because I
don’t feel comfortable with it." Mosley also noted that since most
students were away during summer, there was "no way of gauging
their stance. How can we vote on this? I can already see the
conversations I’m going to get into, (with people asking) ‘Aren’t
you all the people who voted to increase your stipends?’" She
recognized that student government compensation was poor, but told
the council, "I think it’s something all council members
understood, that it was going to be a sacrifice and hard work."
Previous Daily Bruin Story: USAC must delay pay raise to keep trust
, 8/4/97