4A the university daily kansan
opinion
---
friday,october 7,2003
talk to us
Michelle Burhenn-Rombeck editor
864-4854 or mburhenn@kansan.com
Lindsay Hanson and Leah Shaffer managing editors 864-4854 or thanson@kansan.com and lishaffer@kansan.com
Louise Stauffer and Stephen Shupe
Louise Stauffer and Stephen Shupa
opinion editors
864-4924 or opinion@kansan.com
Amber Agee
business manager
864-4358 or adddirector@kansan.com
Taylor Thode
retail sales manager
864-4358 or adalses@kansi.com
Malcolm Gibson
general manager and news adviser
864-7687 or mgbison@kansan.com
Matt Fisher
sales and marketing adviser
864.7666 or mfisher@kanan.com
perspective
Free for All
Call 864-0500
Free for All callers have 20 seconds to speak about any topic they wish. Kansas editors reserve the right to omit comments. Slanderous and obscene statements will not be printed. Phone numbers of all incoming calls are recorded.
Is it weird that I write all of my poetry in the bathroom?
For more comments, go to www.kansan.com
I made four gallons of chili last night. Delicious.
perspective
You know what is making me really happy is all of the holiday commercials on the TV and the radio. I love the holidays.
This is to the guy that made a comment about the guy wearing a Starter jacket on campus; They are probably not wearing it for a trend, a-hole. They probably just can't afford anything better.
The KU timetable sucks ass. Come on and give us the old one back.
perspective
I just want to say that I kept my bull dog in my dorm room for three weeks and nobody found out about it. Is this a bad thing?
图
I love cheerleaders.
I dig that Jesus guy. The kids love him.
clarification
The letter to the editor, "Column skews pledge issue." (Oct. 30, Kansan) was not written by Kevin Hess. Garth Kimbrell, Wichita freshman in English and philosophy, was the correct author.
reality check
Store does not sell quality clothes
COMMENTARY
Jennifer Wade for The University Daily Kansas
Jonathan Sternberg opinion@hansan.com
I love clothing. I love the history, style, business and science of clothing. I sell clothes for a living. As such, I cannot keep within me any longer my utter disgust and disregard for one clothier in particular: Abercrombie & Fitch. I am not one of the unwashed masses complaining about the corporation's blantant disregard for human rights or complaining about the "flock" mentality of A&F's customer base. Although these arguments certainly have validity, and I do agree with them, my biggest problem is with its products and business practices.
The original A&F, the one founded in 1892, was an illustrious New York rugged outdoor tailor who manufactured uniforms for Theodore Roosevelt and his Rough Riders. They went bankrupt in 1777. In 1980, the Official Preppy Handbook mentioned A&F in a list of clothiers who were "gone but not forgotten." Abercrombie, however, was not gone; its production line was dormant. In 1988, The Limited bought its name for a paltry sum and began producing lines of casual wear that had little to do with the original 19th Century company.
Today, as one can see by simply looking around campus, A&F is one of the most popular brands for our age demographic, which, according to DNR, a fashion magazine, ranges from 16-25. What does A&F really produce? It is not a quality line of casual clothing designed for function, durability and style? Abercrombie's clothes themselves are walking advertisements, designed in a style that imitates some blend of
Eddie Bauer's functionality, Kurt Cobain's scrappiness and Ralph Lauren's prices. Its clothes have perverted middle-America's conception of "prepy," telling their customer base that they, too, can be "prepy" by simply wearing their clothing, proper preparatory education not required. A&F, however, is no J. Press, Brooks Brothers, Paul Stuart or Lacoste.
The clothes themselves are merely the root of the problem. Abercrombie further perverts the industry through its employment practices. A friend of mine used to work at A&F. Through him, I have learned quite a bit about its commercial ethos. Other sources include a Wall Street Journal article last spring about a California A&F employee suing the company and a recent article in The New York Times about a class-action suit against A&F in Federal Court for racial and ethnic discrimination.
Abercrombie pays its associates minimum wage and forces them to wear only their clothes currently on the floor, which the employees must purchase on their own at a nominal
discount, which makes the take-home pay less than minimum wage. This policy violates uniform statutes, which state that a business must either reimburse its employees' required clothing or the clothing must be tax-deductible. Abercrombie refuses to comply with these statutes, which most states, including Kansas and Missouri, have on the books.
Furthermore, A&F employees are not paid to sell clothing. Corporate dicta state that employees need not help customers if they wish not to. In the words of my friend, they are paid to "look good" and "fold clothes." When I asked why he still worked there when the pay was so horrid, he replied that "people think it's cool if you work at Abercrombie." I do not see how "cool" it is when my pay is several times his for doing essentially the same thing at another high-end clothier.
A&F has distorted the market and style for our generation. Whereas twenty years ago we would have been scrambling to Brooks, Ralph Lauren and Lacoste to buy good-looking, well-fitting, quality clothes, now the majority cannot wait to buy the latest walking-advertisement for a nonexistent corporate rugby team at a clothier with a purchased name that produces shoddy merchandise using third-world labor with an outrageous profit margin and discriminatory hiring practices. None of this is "cool," and like all fads shall pass. I only hope that it passes as soon as possible.
Sternberg is a Leawood senior in history
perspective
Students should be informed about tuition revenue
A recent University Daily Kansan editorial, "Know where your tuition money goes," urged KU students to know where the money generated by recent tuition increases is going. I couldn't agree more.
Eleven categories receiving tuition revenue this school year, from libraries to student hourly wages, were listed in a front-page article in the Oct. 29 Kansen, "Tution funds technology." The newspaper story is one of many detailing tuition dollars at work. Computer labs are better equipped. Classrooms have new media equipment. Career and placement services have been expanded. New faculty have been hired. A University of Kansas wireless zone has been created and other technology improvements made across campus. The list goes on.
Two points distinguish our approach to tuition increases: First, the University is one of a handful to set aside a sizable portion of tuition revenue and target it to students with financial need to
GUEST COMMENTARY
David Shulenburger opinion@kansan.com
keep a college degree affordable. Secondly, tuition revenue is being used to improve the University academic experience and not to compensate for state budget cuts.
How are we keeping the University affordable? About 30 percent of the University's tuition revenue is being funneled back to students, in the form of need-based tuition grants and improved salaries for student workers.
On the Lawrence campus this fall, tuition revenue allowed us to award $3.4 million in need-based grants for students; $2 million to graduate teaching
assistant salaries, $750,000 to graduate research assistant grants, and $300,000 to raise the hourly wages of students who work in campus jobs.
Redistribution of revenue from our moderate tuition increases on a need basis allows us to protect access to the University. At the end of our five year plan, the University will have $8.6 million in tuition grants to award annually. The higher education grant fund administered by the Kansas Board of Regents for the entire state is currently only $4.6 million. This fall, 4,000 students received University tuition grants of up to $1,000 for undergraduates and $800 for graduate students.
We have deliberately avoided using tuition revenue as a dollar for dollar substitute for reduced state funding. This strategy has required establishing priorities and making tough decisions. But it has enabled us to provide much needed funding for high priority programs such as student advising, minority recruitment and mentoring programs and career and placement services.
Fall enrollment data already give strong indications that this strategy protects student investments in a University of Kansas degree. In fall 2002 and 2003, we have seen record increases in overall student retention and minority student recruitment and retention. A better retention rate is the surest path to improving our graduation rate.
The plan for spending tuition revenue is the product of unprecedented cooperation between the administration and students, faculty and staff in University governance. All of us care about protecting the quality of a University of Kansas degree and keeping the University affordable for our students. This is what every student should know about how the University's tuition revenue is being spent.
Shulenburger is provost and executive vice chancellor for the Lawrence campus,
editorial board
Board owes students real results
Additionally, the continuous increase in tuition is a sign that student voices are not being heard or represented in the Kansas Legislature. So far this semester, the only progress made in this area by SLAB has been a meeting with Governor Kathleen Sebelius' education taskforce. However, the governor's taskforce does little to nothing for higher education, which means it can't help decrease our college tuition. This is a state legislature issue now, perfect for the Student Legislative Awareness Board to take action against.
The job of alleviating higher tuition costs and representing students has fallen into the lap of the Student Senate Executive Secretary, Marynell Jones. Thanks to her, students will be able to voice their opinions about tuition at the Higher Education Rally later this month.
A
As students continually face stifling tuition increases and under-representation on the Board of Regents and the school administration, we deserve the full attention of the only student group on campus designed to speak up for student rights. Students deserve representation and should demand accountability for their paid student representatives.
The Student Legislative Awareness Board is a student-funded organization within Student Senate. It is responsible for providing a voice for students in various legislative arenas regarding budget and social issues. In years past, SLAB has been responsible for nationally recognized voter registration drives, city council, forums and campus debates with elected officials. This year, none of these things have been included in SLAB's list of accomplishments. In fact, this year the group has accomplished nothing for the student body.
SLAB does have an agenda. However, it appears to only involve good ideas without a lot of action. In the future, SLAB should strive to have the most successful lobbying season in University history. In order to do this, it needs to increase student participation. Unfortunately, it appears that it has not begun to prepare for this project with the legislative session only two months away.
Specifically, the legislative director, Blake Shuart, the leader of the organization, has spent the semester figuring out how the lobbying process works and who is who. That's not to say that this process did not start during the summer months, but it continues to fill his entire agenda for this semester. In turn, the voices of students are placed on hold. In the future it would be helpful to appoint a legislative director with Kansas legislative experience.
X
Amanda Flott for the editorial board