Last year, around the time she was presented with the opportunity to run for undergraduate student government, Savannah Badalich’s family began experiencing financial trouble.
After speaking with her family, she made the decision to run for Student Wellness commissioner anyway. But her father said they would still need her financial contribution despite the new and time-consuming responsibility of being a council member, Badalich said.
In the coming year, Badalich will be working as a learning center consultant for the Office of Residential Life and as a nanny, in addition to her role as a council member. Council member responsibilites can easily take up 30-40 hours a week, Badalich said, including time spent at Tuesday night meetings, committee meetings and planning for programs.
Badalich and future council members’ financial pressures might be eased if the Undergraduate Students Association Council adopts a plan to increase student government stipends that was discussed at the July 15 USAC meeting.
If the council votes on the increase, it will go into effect this year. Currently, the stipend for council members is a flat rate of $355 per month.
Increasing compensation for members of student government would also mean that more students will find themselves financially capable of running for council positions, ensuring that we do not restrict the opportunity to serve on council to those who can afford to forgo the hours of paid work.
The plan presented at last week’s meeting by UCLA Student Union Director Roy Champawat and Student Government Services Manager Patricia Zimmerman would completely change the way the council and other positions funded by USAC are compensated, paying them minimum wage for a reasonable estimation of the number of hours they work instead of the flat rate of $355 per month.
Champawat
proposed three different plans to council: One is based on a 20-hour work week, the other on a 15-hour work week, and the third on an 11.5-hour work week, all at the California minimum wage of $8 an hour. The plan that is based on a
20-hour work week most closely resembles the hours that the council puts in. The council would do well to adopt that plan if the proposal comes to a vote.
For students who need to work in order to keep up with the rising costs of attending the university, the time commitment of being a council member simply isn’t feasible.
The proposal is based on a system of hourly pay, which is the way other California public universities compensate their student governments. UC Irvine, for example, pays its student government for 16 hours per week at the rate of $9 per hour.
USAC President John Joanino has expressed reservations about increasing stipends for fear that it will take away from student group funding.
But in all of the plans presented July 15, the money for the increase would come from two funds: the Student Government Operational Fund and the Student Organizations Operational Fund.
While student groups might feel the reduction in these funds, programming would be unaffected because these funds pay for operational needs like office supplies, as well as funds for advertising and retreats.
Moreover, the effect on student groups would be eased by the historically large surplus in both of these funds, as well as the fact that both have received an influx of funds due to increased enrollment for this year.
Trading some historically underused funds for increased access to student government positions simply makes sense. The additional benefit of ensuring that our current council members are fairly compensated and can allocate more time to their positions and less to other jobs makes the trade-off even better.
If the stipend increase passes, Badalich might be able to quit one of her jobs, which will not only take some pressure off of her, but also give her more time to devote to the Student Wellness Commission.
“If the community is against this and they don’t want it, then I’m okay with that,” she said. “But this is a way for me not to spend so much time trying to pay rent.”
The council voting on the council’s compensation for the same members during the same year is indefensible: the incentive is perverse and unjust. Imagine the outrage if the POTUS was allowed to increase their salary the same year they served. The council should vote on their compensation… that is fine. It shouldn’t take effect until the next year.
The council should consider waiting until school regains session (if fee-sable) as to be able to better illicit students input. This idea sounds reasonable to me but council should not do it if their constituents (the students) don’t want it and don’t feel as though they are getting proper value from student government activities to warrant a nearly double increase to their stipend (as the 20 hour plan would do). Also Jame’s suggestion of voting for next year’s and not this years is a decent idea that should be given thought, so to reduce the appearance of an obvious conflict of interest; maybe an advisory vote on the next ballot?
I would also encourage those councilmembers who wouldn’t otherwise have to take jobs to forgo their stipend. This would assuage student concerns about overpaying the council, as well as free up more money to support the councilmembers who really need it.
What about the 30-40+ hour weeks members of student groups put in? Being on council isn’t the only time-consuming thing students choose to be involved in and make sacrifices for. The leaders of other student orgs aren’t compensated through student fees, why should the funds from the Student Organizations Operational Fund go only to council?
If they can afford to divert funds from office supplies/advertising/retreats from the Student Government Operational Fund to pay higher stipends, that’s a different story, as long as there isn’t new money funneled in, or increases to the SGOF to accommodate the increased (up to double) stipend. It also shows that there might be an opportunity to shave the SGOF budget, if there is such room to increase council members’ stipends.
Bullshit. If you can’t afford to be in the position, then don’t take it. Your job is to represent the UCLA community, not for the UCLA community to pay for your rent.