It was just half a year ago that the Oregon State Board of Higher Education got burned for playing footsie with the University of Oregon on a public matter. You’d think it would learn, or at least get its higher principles in order. But its effort to derail the role of the Worker Rights Consortium at the University suggests otherwise.
First time around, it approved an appeal by University President Dave Frohnmayer to allow the University to keep the names of major donors anonymous. Collusion between the Board and the University would have been successful had it not been reviewed by the mass media. Objections were raised statewide. The issue was the public’s right to know. Also at stake was the dangerous side effect of anonymity, allowing the possibility of significant donors influencing University policy in scheming privacy.
Now the Board claims it was not trying to stifle campus efforts to improve factory working conditions at companies that supply Oregon universities when it approved a new policy barring membership in labor-monitoring organizations. The policy stipulates that schools can’t have rules or procedures “which have the effect of eliminating the ability to compete.”
In effect, that is what the University might do as a result of the Licensing Code of Conduct it adopted. The code sets standards for companies producing merchandise that carries the University’s logo or name. On behalf of big business, the Board insists on narrow criteria for barring companies from campus contracts: evidence of illegal activity, inability to do the job or any condition not allowed by state rule or law.
Consider some of the standards that apparently don’t fit the Board’s criteria:
* Having safe and humane work places
* Banning child and forced labor
* Paying a fair wage
* Allowing collective bargaining
I’m tempted to say, “give us a break!” But it’s obvious the State Board is interested in giving breaks only to corporations who donate big money.
The University proposed membership in another supposed watchdog group, the Fair Labor Association. Student activists objected because the FLA gives industry representatives a seat on its board and a say in the monitoring process.
The University of Illinois, one of 67 college members of the WRC, also joined the FLA. Illinois publicly stated that “both groups have a role to play.” Both reacted to allegations that workers in the Kukdong International factory in Mexico had been attacked by company police and then lost their jobs. Nike is one of the companies buying sweatshirts made at Kukdong. Oregon, as well as Illinois, is among schools whose logos are used. In this case, collaboration between the WRC and the FLA has gotten results, as Nike, under pressure, pressured factory managers to reinstate all workers.
Some WRC members complain that having industry representatives on the FLA board is like having the fox guard the chicken coop. Still, the Kukdong experience suggests the two boards may be able to work in tandem, if the State Board would give them a chance. But there will be no chance if valid human rights standards can’t be used by universities.
Unless the Oregon University System changes its subservient posture to corporate influence, the state will be left with a dictatorial image it can ill afford, and would fully deserve.