It is doubtful many people on campus would disagree with the belief that people need to be paid a reasonable wage for the work they perform.’
‘
If workers are paid a decent wage it is good for them so that they can have a decent living standard and good for manufacturers so that they will have a larger consumer base.
We as a campus should not be part of worker exploitation by trading with companies that treat workers poorly.
Students Against Sweatshops at UH has been working to promote two main proposals which they believe to be important to preventing the campus from trading with or purchasing products from companies that use sweatshop labor.’
These proposals are to join the Workers Rights Consortium and the Designated Suppliers Program. Both of these proposals have gained the support of the students, staff, and faculty of the campus and there has been little opposition to the proposals in concept.’
The administration has shown its commitment to maintaining that our campus is one that avoids doing business with sweatshops by officially affiliating with the Workers Rights Consortium, though it has not yet taken the step of signing on to the Designated Suppliers Program.’
This was done at the recommendation of a task force created to study the issue of joining the WRC and the DSP.
As reported in The Daily Cougar last week, Students Against Sweatshops has taken the step of filing lawsuit against UH President Renu Khator and several other professors on campus because of a dispute regarding a statement in the report given by the UH apparel task force.’
The task force, which supported the same issues that Students Against Sweatshops at UH is promoting, made a statement Students Against Sweatshops alleges is false.’
According to the report, ‘the Task Force agreed with the report of the UH Students Against Sweatshops that there likely will be little impact from joining (Workers Rights Consortium) or the (Designated Suppliers’ Program).”
Although the task force agreed the University should affiliate itself with the WRC and sign onto the DSP, the student group apparently found the statement damaging enough to file a lawsuit regarding the matter.
The University might have made a mistake in incorrectly quoting Students Against Sweatshops in its report given to the task force, but it is a stretch to believe the statements given in the report amounted to libel or had any negative consequences.’
If the report did indeed make a false statement it should be corrected, but Students Against Sweatshops has made it abundantly clear it does not agree with the above stated quote.’
Rather than focusing on the conclusion of the report – which supports the goals of the group – Students Against Sweatshops has decided to make a fuss regarding a matter that is small in comparison to the University’s overall efforts to support ending sweatshop labor practices.’
The University has been a leader and the first in Texas to affiliate with the WRC, yet Students against Sweatshops would rather take the extreme effort of suing our administration.’
Given that anyone who has been following the issues by this point probably knows the student group’s opposition to the disputed quote, a lawsuit is completely unnecessary and counterproductive to the overall goal of making the University a sweat-free campus.
Chris Busby is a political science and English senior and may be reached at [email protected].
