As millions head to the polls to punish an ineffectual governor,
we should take a closer look at the thing that got Californians
into this mess in the first place ““ money.
Money, or the lack of it, has left the state drowning in debt,
the UC system gasping for air, students facing absurd fee hikes
and, in turn, parents looking for a politician’s blood. But
no matter what happens today, students will still be looking for
those extra thousands they will need to complete their educations.
In that regard, issues such as ASUCLA’s 20 hours maximum per
workweek rule becomes an obstacle for students struggling to get
by.
Like many of you out there, I will be forcibly flung into the
part-time student labor market this fall. In years past, one could
get by without that $2,500 from the Work Study program, but
OPEC-like price spikes have necessitated manual labor from the
languid likes of myself. For me, even subsidizing a fee increase
isn’t that easy.
ASUCLA is one of the largest employers on campus, but ASUCLA
jobs really don’t pay that well considering the annoying 20
hours per week limit.
It seems logical that with student fees going up, book prices
going up and more units required per quarter, students would be
allowed to work more hours to make ends meet. I’m not even
asking for higher hourly wages. I’m merely asking for the
privilege of working longer and harder.
Financial aid, while generous, is still not enough to keep
middle-class and independent upper-class students afloat. Loans or
work are the equally ominous choices left for those who cannot
benefit from a cache of scarce private scholarships. Moreover,
because taking out even more loans pretty much equals leaving the
UC system with a hefty five-figure debt, an oncoming wave of
students looking for work while still in college is
foreseeable.
Therefore, if campus jobs will not give students opportunities
to make up the difference and prices continue to rise, the idea of
being able to work one’s way through college becomes a
principle of the past.
Even worse, the reasons
ASUCLA gives for sticking with its antiquated ways are
laughable. It ridiculously maintains that the primary reason for
their weekly cap is to allot students time to concentrate on their
classes. Nobody is asking for mandatory 40-hour work weeks. It just
makes sense for students who are willing and able to work more than
a paltry 20 hours per week to be able to do so. To maintain such a
rigid policy without taking into consideration the needs of the
students does not make any sense.
The real reason for ASUCLA’s reluctance to allow employees
to work more hours is that it would hurt the association
financially and has nothing to do with a concern for the welfare of
students. Right now, it is getting away with not having to offer
students sick days or time off, common benefits all employees
deserve. If students are allowed to work more hours, ASUCLA would
be forced to treat them as full-time employees and offer benefits
““ something I fail to see as a bad thing.
ASUCLA says that those working more than 20 hours a week are
reclassified as career employees. Perhaps this definition should be
reevaluated in light of reality. Students need more money, and a
single job with ASUCLA is not cutting it.
While there obviously are other employment opportunities around
Westwood, I don’t see why those opportunities should be
better candidates for students than jobs from our very own
on-campus association. In that regard, it all comes down to dollars
and sense. The dollars point to a continuing status quo within
Ackerman, while common sense says something has to change.
Hopefully, employment policies will begin to change before the
ideal of an affordable university vanishes forever.
Moon is a second-year pre-psychology student. E-mail him at
jmoon@media.ucla.edu.