The people say...
An open letter to Dean Surface
Dear Dean Surface:
In your recent letter responding to our request to Chancellor Wescoe that the Kansas Union establish a minimum wage of $1.25 per hour you gave essentially three reasons why the University does not plan to grant our request.
You stated that you recognize that University funds for student help are inadequate, but pointed out that the same condition applies to other aspects of the University budget.
IN REPLY, we wish to point out that our request did not concern student wages which are part of the general University budget, but only those wages paid to employees of the Kansas Union, whose budget is separate from that of the rest of the University.
Second, you stated that the sum of money which can be spent by the University on student wages is set by the Kansas Legislature, and already fixed through the period ending June 30,1967.
In reply, we point out that our request concerned wage increases for employees paid from the separate funds of the Kansas Union, which have nothing whatever to do with the Kansas Legislature. (We add, however, that we are seriously concerned by the fact that the Legislature has seen fit to so shockingly underpay its student employees.)
FINALLY, YOU stated that "The University recognizes that some of its divisions or activities could raise wage rates at this or any time because they are not restricted by legislative action..." but that "For some time the University has followed the policy of not allowing wage rate differentiation among its units because it believes that the consequence of multiple standards within the University would be harmful to all members of the University community."
In reply, we would like to state that we fail to see how the minor and problematic disadvantages of this particular wage differential outweigh the definite benefits which would accrue. We are not requesting that you take money from one employee to give to another. The choice is between a uniform standard which is uniformly too low and a non-uniform standard in which one set of employees receives the same low wage all now receive under the uniform wage system, while the other set receives a higher wage. Perhaps the end result of such a non-uniform pay scale will be
that the University, or the Kansas Legislature, will find the money necessary to re-institute a uniform minimum pay scale at the higher rate, not the lower. You yourself hint at this possibility in your letter, as we indicate below.
WE WOULD also like to point out that your statement that "The University has followed the policy of not allowing wage rate differentiation among its units" is not correct. The University has had a non-uniform salary policy for some time, for instance with respect to faculty salaries, which are higher for some departments than for others.
We would also like to comment on several other remarks in your letter.
You stated that "for several months" plans have been under discussion to improve the hourly rates paid to students working for the University, and that you have hopes of being able to implement those plans effective September, 1966.
WE ARE HAPPY to receive this news. However, in view of the fact that student salaries have been so very low for so very long, we wonder why the University only recently found that it might be able to secure funds to raise salaries. We are struck by the coincidental fact that the University seriously started to secure funds to wage student salaries only after the students organized the Student Labor Organization to further their cause. Will the students always have to protest before the Administration takes their wishes into account?
You also stated that you concur with our position " . . . that the University's minimum rates are too low," and state that you are "endeavoring to improve the situation."
We reiterate. Student salaries have been too low for a long long time. Will the students always have to protest before the University endeavors to improve matters?
YOU ASKED about our agreement with you to prepare a report for the University which would help the University make a case for higher salaries before the Board of Regents. Yes, of course we still intend to cooperate with
2
Daily Kansan editorial page Thursday, April 14, 1968
the centennial university
DAILY KANSAN
serving k.u. for 76 of its 100 years
For 76 Years. KU's Official Student Newspaper
LITTLE MAN ON CAMPUS
KANSAN TELEPHONE NUMBERS
Newsroom—UN 4-3646 — Business Office—UN 4-3198
The opinions expressed in the editorial column are those of the students whose names are signed to them. Guest editorial views are not necessarily the editor's. Any opinions expressed in the Daily Kansan are not necessarily those of The University of Kansas Administration or the State Board of Regents.
The Daily Kansan, student newspaper at The University of Kansas, is represented by National Advertising Service, At 18 East 50 St., New York, N.Y. 10022. Mail subscription rates are $14.95 per month. Education services, Kan., every afternoon during the University year except Saturdays and Sundays. University holidays and examination periods. Accommodations, goods, services and employment advertised in the University Daily Kansan are offered to all students without regard to color, creed or
EXECUTIVE STAFF
Managing Editor ... Fred Frailey
Business Manager ... Dale Reinecker
Editorial Editors ... Jacke Thayer, Justin Beck
NEWS AND BUSINESS STAFFS
Assistant Managing Editors ... E. C. Ballgwe, Rosalie Jenkins
    Karen Lambert, Naney Scott and Robert Stevens
Sports Editor ... Steve Russell Merchandising ... Linda Simpson
Photo Editor ... Bill Stephens Promotion Manager ... Gary Wright
Circulation Manager .. Jan Parkinson Wire Editor ... Joan McCabe
City Editor ... Tom Rosenbaum Advertising Manager ... John Hons
Feature Editor ... Barbara Phillips Classified Manager ... Bruce Browning
FACULTY ADVISERS: Business, Prof. Mel Adams; news. Marvin Arth;
    tutorial. Calder Pickett
the Administration on this endeavor. However, we must sadly report that at least one unit of the University has not cooperated with us on this matter, in that they would not divulge information concerning salary ranges which would be helpful in making our report. But in spite of this we are hopeful that we will be able to prepare a report to present to the Regents, as planned.
Finally, we would like to comment on the recent announcement by Chancellor Wescoe that effective July 1, 1966, all students employed by the University will receive a minimum wage of $1.00 per hour. We are pleased by this news. However, we still feel that the great state of Kansas, and its university, The University of Kansas, are able to pay their employees at least the national minimum wage of $1.25 per hour.
- Student Labor Organization
Comment on 'Voices.' Viet Nam
To the Editor:
Long live those men who are courageous enough to be artistic and suffer for their convictions—who write and think with soul and sinew instead of being ruled by crass circulation—or something like that.
Being somewhat of a dog of a journalist, I have "viewed with alarm" the "grave crisis" that has descended over the UDK editorial page like a "pall of doom." Yes, who can fail to be moved by the soul-bearings of two artists "crying in the wilderness" against the cruel usage they have been subjected to by that journalist, Jacke Thayer.
Perhaps a definition of "journalist" might be provided to strengthen my case. A "journalist," to me, is someone who desires to see his words disseminated to the public for pay (either monetary or egotistic). Therefore, is not the public preachment of an "artist" actually journalism?
The two artists who "preferred obscurity rather than falling under the heel of a crass editor" have bitten the dust. Alas, before someone could capitalize on their heroism and turn it into a best-selling novel or television scenario (like Batman?).
I am actually bored by people who always snipe at journalists. (If you want to suffer discrimination, just enroll in an English class with a classification "4 J.") Inanity is not solely the property of journalists. Journalists are simply forced to deal with realities instead of being able to use "art" as a rationalization for lack of success.
—T. Lorent Joslin
Ignored reality
To the Editor:
"Other techniques, usually designed to force onlooking [Viet Cong] prisoners to talk, involve cutting off the fingers, ears, fingernails or sexual organs of another prisoner. Sometimes a string of ears decorates the wall of a government military institution. One American installation has a Viet Cong ear preserved in alcohol."—Beverly Deepe, "New York Herald Tribune," April 25, 1965.
This is not very pleasant reading material, but then I suppose war is never particularly delightful. Indeed, war is a nice thing to forget when you are nestled safely within the ivied walls of a middle-class campus in the "heartland" of America. It seems to me that KU students on the whole have forgotten about reality—especially the brutal reality of the war in Viet Nam. Amid the ringing excitement of Spring Flings and student elections and centennial weeks, KU students have turned their backs on a very tragic aspect of American history.
The Daily Kansan fills its pages day after day with fascinating accounts of track meets, election campaigns, moot contests, and Australian aborigine art exhibitions—all of which are vitally important to the improvement of the human condition. Obviously the Daily Kansan has only a very tiny space to give to a protest March 26 during which a small group of students voiced their opinions concerning a savage, animalistic war in which thousands of innocent people—both American and Vietnamese—have been brutally slaughtered. Obviously the Daily Kansan realizes that our students must concern themselves with the important things in life: a track meet is more important than a "search and destroy" mission in which whole villages are burned; a free election at KU is more important than the free elections which have been consistently denied the Vietnamese people; a moot contest is more important than a Vietnamese woman wailing for her murdered children; and obviously aborigine art is more important (and more aesthetic) than a Vietnamese baby scorched to the bone by napalm gas.
When hundreds of students line up to buy tickets to the "Rock Chalk Revue," and only a handful show up for a debate on the Viet Nam war. I begin to wonder about our hundred-year-old university. When 40,000 fans boisterously back their beloved university during a football game, and only 50 (at most) express concern about their country's cute little human "football game" in a foreign country. I begin to wonder what we have really achieved in the last 100 years. It seems to me that any university must be dedicated to the development of inquiring young minds—minds that yearn to speak out on vital issues. But then, what is more vital than frat parties, football games, and Vox Populi?
This is KU's centennial year, but I seriously wonder: do we really have so much to be proud of? Are we really turning out intelligent, clear-thinking young
people who are concerned about the welfare of their fellowman? Or are we turning out neatly packaged boxes of computerized machines called B.A.'s and B.S.'s who are concerned about a new Lincoln and a $20,000 job? What are we at KU really achieving when our students care little or nothing about civil liberties—as long as they have their own little dorm liberties tucked away?
I wonder: might not this centennial year—and the upcoming centennial week—be a sadistically ironic celebration? We celebrate 100 years of democratic education, Viet Nam celebrates at least ten years of death and destruction—and we all sip our cocktails, grab our centennial flags, and hustle off to a lecture on "The Prospects for Humanity." Funny, isn't it? Yup—and terribly, terrily sad.
Hamilton J. Salsich
Asst. Instructor in English
To the Editor
Please Cancel
Cancel my subscription.
You've got gall. You gather together a few crummy class assignments from the Folks-in-Flint. You put in the ads from everyone, "enticing" the huge consumer-on-the-Hill. You add a touch of UPI for God knows what reason. You publish all this five times a week. And finally you conspire with the University to get the students to pay for this. (I'm referring to the statement in the Schedule of Classes: "Payment of the above fees entitles (sic) the student to . . . a University Daily Kansan.") (Well, you've got me over the barrel—I won't be able to cancel my subscription after all.)
What sort of crack in your iron curtain allowed us to hear the "Voices from the Wilderness"?? That column was, as its authors stated, the only part of the UDK which was worth the trouble. I, for one, looked to that column for the spontaneous creativeness which your newspaper (sic) all too often lacks. By silencing the "Voices from the Wilderness," you effectively perpetuate the stagnation which exists at KU.
Due to the fact that the affairs of the students are controlled by a select few, I even hesitate to voice an opinion. After all, I'm only a "Voice from the Wilderness."
-Frank A. Janzen
-Ralph D. Hile