The Making of a Movement

A few days ago, I was thinking of a metaphor for the way the University has regarded its service-related staff during the past decade, and the following image popped into my head: the three monkeys, with their eyes, ears and mouths covered.

However, the message for Princeton workers is not that of "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil." What it indicates instead is the inability of the University to open its eyes and ears to the needs of its lowest-paid workers, as well as its unwillingness to speak about improving wages and benefits.

Even as the endowment soars to over $8 billion, the University has remained myopic to the needs of its human capital — the hundreds of Princetonians who work for this University. In-deed, many refused to even think of these workers as Princetonians, viewing them instead as factors of production that could be squeezed and outsourced.

Events from the past few months, however, indicate a shift in the ways that we (students, faculty, staff and trustees) relate to the concerns of Princeton's lowest-paid employees.

First came the part about opening our eyes and ears. David Tannenbaum's article in The Prince Magazine last November went far in getting us to pay attention to the needs of Princeton's workers. Some of us had already heard the frustrations of workers in private conversations with library staff workers and dining services employees. We had heard of out-sourcing and stagnant pay, as well as previous attempts to push for improvements in medical and dental benefits. David's article, however, tied these stories together and broadcast them to a much wider audience, thereby opening the eyes and ears of the campus community to the concerns of working Princetonians.

Then came the part about opening our mouths. As more and more people saw and heard the needs of Princeton's workers, they started to add their own voices to the issue. Several students began to meet regularly to voice their willingness to act on behalf of workers' rights. These voices soon organized and strategized under the rubric of the Workers Rights Organizing Committee (WROC). As their voices grew louder and more widespread, faculty began to hear of efforts to improve worker conditions. Soon, they, too, added their institutional voices to the movement by formally affiliating with WROC. Some, like Professor Peter Singer, even went so far as to write a supportive column in The Daily Princetonian, making the link between getting an ethical education and treating workers fairly.

These developments, in turn, opened an even greater set of eyes, ears and voices that are receptive to the needs of Princeton's lowest-paid workers.

Over 200 students and workers attended a kickoff rally for workers' rights during reading period. Despite the fact that students had papers to write and exams to study for, they thought it important to lend their voices to the movement. More faculty began to affiliate, and even elected officials such as Assemblyman Gary Guear voiced their support for Princeton workers. Finally, even religious institutions such as the Episcopal Church at Princeton began to affiliate, making the push for workers' rights a mainstream movement of social conscience.

Now it is time to open the eyes and ears where it really matters — the University administration and the Board of Trustees. So far, both have indicated a willingness to study the concerns and recommendations brought up by WROC.

Whether the Board of Trustees will give these considerations institutional voice and change University policy remains to be seen. Last week, the Trustees lent their voices of conscience on matters such as undergraduate financial aid and graduate student support. In the coming weeks, we can remain hopeful that they shall expand the University's voice of conscience to include the needs of all working Princetonians.

(S. Karthick Ramakrishnan is a politics and Office of Population Research graduate student from Holden, Mass. He can be reached at karthick@princeton.edu)