“Doctor, is the patient going to live?”
“Well, we’re not sure. The patient won’t allow us all the way in to find out what’s wrong and we’re not allowed to use the ‘tools of the industry,’ so to speak. Plus, this patient’s financial status is questionable, so we hesitate to even get involved.”
“But, doctor, what about the patient’s heart and soul? What about this patient’s dream to some day be something? Sure, it’s looking bad now, but doctor you can’t give up. You must help.”
“Well, I can’t promise anything, but the diagnosis looks bad. You don’t happen to have $30 million to help out with payments do you?”
OK, so that faux exchange is intended as a humorous assessment of the Worker Rights Consortium, at least as it stands on this University campus. But there is a very serious side to the ramifications caused by the possibility of University officials backpedaling out of the student-driven, labor-monitoring organization.
First, however, does the University, especially administrators who are paid to do just that, administrate, have the right to question whether the time, money and effort needed to get it off the ground is going to be worthwhile? Absolutely.
Are there legitimate concerns about this fledgling group that has snagged headlines around the country for the past several months? Yes. Sorry, but in this day and age, a budget of $295,000 doesn’t go very far, especially in New York City, where the WRC office is to be located. Besides, approximately half of that is not even in the group’s bank account yet, but instead is just “hoped-for” funds in the form of grants and gifts.
At the same time, student leaders and WRC officials are correct in their opinions that the organization’s goal is a good one, with designs — admittedly long-range plans — on rooting out unfair labor practices at overseas apparel-industry factories. Even University officials agree that the desired goal of the WRC is an admirable one.
And one of the University’s conditions set at the beginning of this whole drama, more representation on the WRC governing board, was addressed and changed at Thursday’s meeting, if not necessarily to President Dave Frohnmayer’s and Vice President for Public Affairs Duncan McDonald’s complete satisfaction.
And what about industry representation on the WRC board? Almost everyone involved with the WRC says that is not going to happen, although the group’s treasurer, Marcella David, does say that she welcomes outreach and dialogue with the various apparel industries that eventually will be monitored. The kind of relationship that is established will be crucial to the WRC’s success and longevity, however, because gaining access to the thousands of factories will depend on industry’s willingness to open the doors.
Demonizing the corporations in this case will not fly and shouldn’t be expected to work. Direct representation on the board isn’t necessary, but corporations need to be included in pertinent discussions surrounding the monitoring process. We’re in the year 2000 and there is little disagreement among all parties that sweatshop conditions are unacceptable, but finding ways to eliminate the last vestiges of them needs to be a collaborative effort.
The University’s beef that WRC board meetings should be open to the public and the media is a very credible one. We’re not sure how things are done over on the East Coast, but here in Oregon meetings are generally open, as they should be.
Open the doors and let the sunshine in, people.
So, how can this “patient” survive? How does the WRC show that it can become something?
With a little bit of patience.
Nobody knows what is going through Frohnmayer’s mind concerning the future status of a WRC-UO partnership except the president. His comments to the media are far from circuitous, however: He’s not impressed at this juncture. The University Senate committee set up to regularly review the WRC reads the newspapers and watches the TV news, if they aren’t getting direct input from Frohnmayer himself.
So, the plug could be pulled before next April, when the year commitment evaporates.
But, it shouldn’t be yanked just yet, no matter how loudly the University donors and alums howl or how “disorganized” the organization may seem. Give the WRC a chance to work out its problems, if for no other reason than to follow through on the commitment that was made on April 12.
Remember the last time someone broke a commitment over this issue, the scene wasn’t pretty.