Bethany Horne, Copy Editor
On Wednesday, Nov. 24, the University made a final financial offer to the student union for control of food services in the student union building. Exactly one week later, on Dec. 1, council members will be expected to vote on whether or not to accept this offer.
John Doucette, the 2009/10 member of council for Computer Science, says that it saddens him that the Dalhousie Student Union (DSU) executive would even be considering the deal.
He wrote as a comment on our website that the union’s consideration of the deal “demonstrates what a thoroughly good job the university has done of turning the DSU into a neutered organization … rubber stamping whatever the university’s latest scheme for screwing students is.”
Doucette says he voted for most of the current executive and respects them, but would lose that respect if they voted for this deal.
The Gazette was intrigued by his perspective as an alumnus of both Dalhousie and DSU council, and conducted a brief interview with him over email to hear more on what he had to say.
What are the initial red flags that pop out at you about this proposal from the university? What risks does the proposed agreement pose to the student union?
There are two issues that strike me as potentially damaging. First, there’s the economic incentives issue. It would be a great idea to merge the DSU and university food service contracts if both organizations shared the same motivation in seeking those contracts.
But the DSU and the university actually have competing motivations here. The DSU is supposed to maximize the benefit to students. This means maximizing payments from a food service provider, but also minimizing costs and maximizing the quality of the food provided.
The university might claim to share this goal, but, to put it bluntly, the bottom line’s going to come first. If company X offers five per cent more expensive food, but two per cent higher payments to the university, does anyone really expect the university to say no?
Students want to maximize the availability of fast, cheap, and/or healthy food options. The university wants to maximize the price companies pay them for a monopoly. The only way those companies can pay the university more is by making more money with their monopoly. They can accomplish this best by cutting costs and raising prices, exactly the things students don’t want. The bargaining system would provide enormous incentives to screw over students, and little or no incentive to benefit them.
Second, there’s the autonomy issue. Right now, if the DSU suddenly decides to do away with the food monopoly (which many students are asking them to do), they just need to let their contracts expire and not renew them. If they merge their contract with the university’s, then this is no longer the case.
Additionally, the current wording of the proposal suggests that the university, not the union, will have final say about which food services to offer in the SUB. The DSU will be relegated to managing the Grawood and a single other business of their choice. Giving up control within the student union building, which was built primarily with student money and which the university does not own, strikes me as a bit ridiculous.
Do you think there is anything redeemable about the proposal by the university to swap food contract control for money to renovate the SUB? The current offer would see the university put up to $6 million dollars towards an expansion of the student union building. The expansion would include a lounge, a cafeteria geared towards students with residence meal plans, and more rooms and study spaces in upper floors.
I think there are some redeemable features to the proposal. For example, we get new study space in the SUB, and the union will receive more money for student events and trips.
However, I expect that the executive has failed to recognize or use the position of strength it negotiates from, as usual. The university wants to build an extension to the SUB so it can address its own failings in study space provisions, and to provide space for a new cafeteria. The fact that the university wants these things is no secret.
The union also has a strong bargaining chip in that the presence of it’s separate food service providers on campus is likely far more damaging to the university’s attempts to sell monopoly rights than the university’s services are to the union.
The fact that we could, in principle, start letting not-for-profit student groups sell food at cost in the SUB at any time is the sort of thing that is going to make companies exact a premium from the university. A monopoly on campus isn’t much good if someone can start to sell way cheaper products in the middle of it.
The union exec could use these points to get a better deal for students. Remember, the status quo hurts us far less than it hurts the university.
Recent Comments