See The Power Dynamic Part I: Beyond Our Control for background information.
In the summer of 2009, University Wisconsin Madison Student Government leadership was irate at the thought student money would be taken in the Auxiliary Enterprise Sweep.
Unfortunately, the debate about what should be done was largely confined to the group of students who remained in Madison over summer and finally expanded in November of 2009 when a senior member of ASM decided to request a report be prepared on the transfer and handed down to ASM in the end of November by our Chair (student government leader). When the report was delayed until early March, I began acquiring my own facts.
To make a long story short: enough issues (in my opinion) that weren’t given enough attention were uncovered in the process. This justified consultation with legal expertise (which until this point in time had been declined).
In a rather irrational move, ASM leadership went ahead with drafting of a Memo of Understanding (MOU). This to my knowledge would do nothing but open better lines of communication between administration and students if this were to happen in the future. There would be no attempt to protect student money from the “sweep”. In defense of said leadership, there is nothing legally binding about a MOU so it doesn’t mean we can’t fight the “sweep” in the future; I just found it strange we wouldn’t try to protect the money in the MOU and build from there.
By this time I realized something more needed to be done. In an ASM student council meeting I suggested that the student negotiators (a select few chosen by the Chair) come in to negotiation with their guns blazing i.e. requiring the administration to provide the information that was still under lock and key (information such as how the numbers were selected, why certain accounts were hit differently than others, and what percentages were actually taken from the different accounts). This would have more clearly defined the rationale for the action that was taken. I was quickly shot down and gathered that
“if there was ever a need for real negotiations there could be no upsetting the administration power structure for fear of potentially damaged relationships”.
I promptly set up a Facebook group with contact information for parties involved and urged students to lobby on behalf of their dollars. I was told by the same leadership of ASM that this was an unwise move and would disrupt any negotiations that could transpire.
My response was simply that there were no negotiations; only discussions. Negotiations do require discussion, but that discussion must have an aim: an agreement of sorts. In my eyes, a student negotiator on behalf of all students could never come to an agreement where student dollars were being taken. It turned out that the total amount of segregated fees that were included in Madison’s transfer amounted to $981,000 (or $23 a student).
If each student on student government (around 26 at the time) would have seen to it that ten of their closest friends made calls to the administration inquiring about the sweep I can guarantee you that the negotiations would have been much more effective. If half of those students would have filed open records requests to the office involved we would have made progress. If action would have been taken to shine light on this issue so that all students would know just what happened, instead of blindly trusting their student leaders, I am positive that an agreement involving a rearranging of the “bill” to ASM could have been reached.
As a student government leader I believe you must remember; there is a fine line between maintaining a relationship with the administration and effectively arguing for student rights. Sometimes those relationships with their wonderful perks (hint of sarcasm folks), must be sacrificed in order for you to do your job.
What do student government members think? How valuable is a good relationship with campus administration and does that ever have its negatives? In what context?
P.S. something a friend of mine on our SGA pointed out is that I have never had experience negotiating with administration. While I do concede this fact, I think it is rational to expect our student leaders to come into negotiations with a solidified goal with meaningful effects.
Do you disagree? I’m definitely open to opinions and would love to hear how you would have handled this situation!
