SLAC Response to Human Resources Update of December 2006
<Text of HR Update Here>

President Hennessy and Diane Peck, 

      The release of the December 2006 “Progress Report” by Human Resources marks the conclusion of a process that began nearly four years ago with the implementation of the Living Wage Policy for Subcontracted Workers and the formation of the Presidential Advisory Committee on Workplace Policies. Although the report’s various disappointments and deficiencies were set in motion much earlier – with the selection of the PAC’s members, the limitations in the scope of its charge and access to information, the resultant discretion left to the President and administrative departments on certain issues, and the partial and noncommittal acceptance of the PAC recommendations in the “President’s Response” – the HR report indicates definitively what changes will and will not be implemented. Though a generation of students has cycled through the university since the May 2003 hunger strike that began this process, the prolonged period of waiting for University decision makers to act has now concluded, and the demand for real solutions has lost none of its original urgency.

      As members of the student body whose concern has motivated us to remain engaged and attentive, we would like to respond to some of the items in the Progress Report. Members of the Stanford Community have issued similar responses addressing the aforementioned barriers to a just and productive policy review process; hence the scope of this response will be limited to the specific actions taken (and not taken) by Human Resources, without, we hope, distracting from the more vital role and deeper responsibility of the President’s office, or from the need for much more comprehensive reform to labor policy. We hope that commitment to and implementation of these changes can be made immediately. 

Recommendation 3

The extension of a higher wage floor to temporary and casual workers regardless of hours worked per week is to be applauded, as is HR’s recognition of the frequent disparities in hours scheduled and hours worked. The PAC’s report recommended the same result, though on the more appropriate basis of substantiating the University’s stated commitment to providing a living wage. 

Recommendation 4

The update states that temporary and casual employees who meet the criteria of working at least 30 hours per week for one year should receive those benefits specified for contracted workers under the living wage policy. Since temporary and casual workers are defined by their failure to meet these criteria, this appears to be an entirely unsubstantial commitment, either negligently considered or deceptively presented. The fact that 29 workers happened to qualify puzzles us, as this seems to be possible only in the case of an error in the classification of these employees. The benefits specified in the Living Wage Policy for Subcontracted workers should be extended to all directly hired workers, as recommended by the PAC. 

Recommendation 7

The refusal to report information about contracts and contracted workers threatens the transparency of Stanford’s labor policy and any possibility for accountability. This information, if not reported for indi/vidual contractors, should be regularly reported in the aggregate, so as to ensure whatever standards of confidentiality have been specifically agreed to by contract and at the same time allow for accountability. Such a report should include detailed information about the number, nature and size of all contracts (in terms of dollar value, numbers of workers, and duration), as well as information about these workers wages and benefits, union representation, and any available sociological data such as workers’ gender, ethnicity, etc. 

Recommendation 9

The stated reasons for dismissing the expansion of the living wage policy are entirely insufficient. They appear to reflect a total lack of earnest or good-faith exploration of the issues.

Item 1: The PAC’s full report recommended that the extension of the living wage to employees of tenants at Stanford be investigated. HR failed to address this. 

Items 2 and 7: The supposed difficulty of monitoring contracts is no reason not to make prior stipulations for them. Monitoring is a vital, but secondary imperative that should not delay the initial creation and implementation of contracting requirements. We believe that even the slightest of sincere ingenuity would provide some solution, and given the fundamental and moral imperative to find such solutions, every possible resource should be expended and option explored. 

Item 5: The statement that contractor pricing would increase (an undetermined amount) is a ludicrous reason to dismiss a policy aimed at improving pay standards – higher cost is indeed nearly synonymous with higher pay, and this “finding” is very clearly not the result of serious investigation. The ability of contractors to differentiate wages on chosen criteria would in no way be infringed upon by legislating a wage floor. HR’s response to this item is fully unsubstantial.  

Item 6: The Committee recommended that this stipulation be eliminated contingent upon legality. An administrative department’s vague and unsubstantiated designation of “appropriateness” is in no way equivalent to this standard. 

A Note on Transparency

Transparency and accountability are vital to any just employment policy. Detailed information about the following policies, processes and their results should be reported and advertised. This is not an exhaustive list, but should indicate the general need for an energetic policy of information gathering and reporting, and for mechanisms of accountability. More detailed information should be reported about:

-The phased implementation alluded to in HR’s response to Recommendation 1

-The exact nature of the new worker classifications mentioned in Recommendation 25

-The justifications for dismissal of living wage policy expansions and the associated statistics

-Information on contractor compliance with living wage policies garnered from audits

-Details on the living wage review process conducted by Compensation.

-Any information collected on the status of low-wage directly hired and subcontracted workers and the effects of policy changes on their employment situations