Undergraduate Organizing Committee: Explaining our sit-in
The Undergraduate Organizing Committee is grateful for the News’ coverage of our activities, but in the face of the accusations made by Kate Maltby and the misunderstandings that could have dictated such a response, we would like to take this opportunity to explain more fully the context in which Tuesday’s sit-in took place.
Jose Landino, a cook who works at the Hilton Long Beach Hotel in California, came to our campus this week to inform the Yale community of the conditions he faces under the management of HEI Hotels & Resorts. Yale invests in HEI, having contributed at least $120...
"The UOC was not demanding instant gratification and did not in any way seek to shut down or hinder the work of the Investment Office."
You actually did hinder the work of the Investments Office - you took up the time of one of the employees and tried to take up time of additional employees. Yale has established the Advisory Committee on Investor Responsibility as a mechanism for considering your concerns, as explained by Professor Macey in his column today. You assert that is a dead-end but don't explain why, while Professor Macey makes clear that the door is open for you to pursue your concerns.
But when you go to make that case, you better do your homework. No one is going to act based on the say-so of one union organizer who seems to have persuaded you of the merits of the union's position. If you want to pursue this, you need to study and develop the facts, taking into account the views of all the relevant parties. If that seems too cumbersome and time consuming to you, well maybe you should focus your energies elsewhere.
Who footed Mr. Landino's airfare?
The patronizing comment by "Alum" above totally misses the point of the important work these students are doing.
"You actually did hinder the work of the Investments Office - you took up the time of one of the employees and tried to take up time of additional employees."
This is laughably question-begging. The whole point is that taking seriously the moral consequences of what they do should be part of "the work of the Investments Office." It should be part of the work we all do, whatever our professions. So to call it a hindrance misses the point.
"You assert that the ACIR is a dead-end but don't explain why, while Professor Macey makes clear that the door is open for you to pursue your concerns."
The students say explicitly in this very op-ed that they received a response from "the Advisory Committee on Investor Responsibility on Oct. 28, which told them that it does not do fact-finding and so it would be unable to further investigate the matter." Professor Macey doesn't dispute this characterization of the meeting or clarify the fact-finding powers of the ACIR in his piece.
These students deserve praise and thanks for the important work they're doing -- all the more so because they have to do it in a climate of such instinctive and unthinking skepticism and criticism.
Someone needs to recognize a load of b.s. when they hear it, rather than repeat it in print and look foolish:
"Landino told an audience of 200 about increased workloads for housekeepers in his hotel, the unresponsiveness of managers to injuries caused by these increased workloads, and the inability for workers to receive treatment for these injuries because of prohibitively high premiums."
If Mr. Landino or other workers are injured on the job, all states require that the worker receives treatment through the workers' compensation system. The employer pays 100% of the workers' compensation premium. An employee does not use personal insurance, or even his/her employer's health insurance, to receive treatment.
In addition to asking "poor" Mr. Landino who footed his airfare, someone should have asked WTF? when he made this absurd claim.
States can require whatever they like; it doesn't make any difference unless employers respect the law. I think it's been established that HEI doesn't pay the NLRA or health and safety laws too much heed.
My guess is the union. Ditto on the workers comp comment. The guy sounds suspicious. Does he represent the majority or is this just some crazy guy? Also, if things are that bad, why don't they go to the government agencies that handle these things?
I believe this is the same union that was recently ordered to pay CINTAS $5 million for illegally obtaining license plate numbers and personal information on employees to use in organizing efforts. I would be careful in giving much credence to someone just flying in like this to push Yalies into a protest. You students should do a little more research into the union and perhaps talk to management before such actions.
Mr. Landino is free, I am sure, to secure better employ elsewhere.
As for the UOC: get OVER yourselves! Despite what your parents have told you, the universe does NOT revolve around 4-year residents of our fair community.
"Is this really too radical for Yale?"
What a load of self-important crap. I almost gagged after reading this sentence. I hope you "radicals" enjoy trust-fund supported post-graduate hipster life in West Bushwick, Brooklyn.
Hey, YDN: perhaps it would be worthwhile for you, as a sidebar to whatever follows from this, to set a reporter to the task of figuring out how it came to be that Mr. Landino made his way to Yale. Did he reach out to the UOC? Did the UOC reach out to him? What's his history in Long Beach/LAX area labor disputes? Hint: check Google. Reasonable people can understand the activist impulse, especially where students are concerned, but the UOC should be guided by the same principles of transparency they insist should govern the YIO.
Well said.