By James Hohmann

Tuesday, May 9, 2006

President John Hennessy announced yesterday that the University will increase the so-called living wage paid to subcontracted workers by 10 percent starting in September.

The announcement comes as the Stanford Labor Action Coalition (SLAC) prepared for a Tuesday protest to demand an acceptable living wage for workers. The University said the increase followed a human resources study that found Stanford fell short compared to nearby cities with a living wage and did not provide enough to account for the local cost of living.

The announcement will raise the minimum wage for subcontractors working on campus and receiving employer-provided health coverage to $11.15 per hour, a 10.4 percent increase. Campus workers without health benefits will earn a minimum wage of $12.59 per hour, a 10.9 percent increase. The policy also requires that eligible employees be offered 10 days of paid vacation annually.

University Human Resources Executive Director Diane Peck praised Hennessy’s announcement and said that the wage increases make the University an even more attractive place to work.

“I am pleased our recommendation to adjust our living wage rates has been accepted,” she said in a statement. “I believe this adjustment is consistent with Stanford’s long history of concern for all people who are part of the University community. It is a commitment that is a critical part of Stanford’s desire to achieve its mission of excellence in teaching and research.”

In April 2003, the University established the living wage rules for contracting companies. The policy was implemented as new contracts were signed and existing contracts were renewed. The University agreed to conduct a regular review of salaries in comparison to nearby municipalities and other employers as part of the living wage plan.

Stanford completed its first review and wage comparison this year. The Human Resources Department will now begin annual reassessments of the living wage.

University officials did not announce the increase as part of any kind of compromise or negotiation with workers, their representatives or officials. In fact, the change does not apply to workers represented by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

SLAC Spokesman Matt Seriff-Cullick, a sophomore, called the announcement a step in the right direction, but said that more needs to be done by the University to protect its workers.

“It’s a well-timed PR move that’s not insubstantial,” he said.

Seriff-Cullick added that, even with the increase, some workers will still earn less than a report from the California Budget Project, a non-partisan left-leaning think tank, said was necessary to live in this area.

He also criticized the living wage policy for its exemptions.

“One of the main problems with the living wage is how heavily it is restricted, and that hasn’t really changed with this announcement,” he said. “The living wage policy applies to contracted workers, whose contracts last for more than one year, who aren’t unionized and who are part of a contract of over $100,000 with the University.

“It only applies to workers on the core campus, which means that Hospital and Stanford Linear Accelerator workers are excluded,” he added. “It also only includes those who work more than 30 hours a week.”

Seriff-Cullick said recent efforts by SLAC to draw attention to the living wage issue — including a rally last week and a banner unveiled at an event Hennessy spoke at during Admit Weekend — “absolutely” played a part in driving the University to make the announcement.

“The timing definitely reflects that the University was paying attention to what we were doing,” he said.

The demonstration scheduled for today has been postponed. SLAC leadership planned to discuss the University’s announcement and decide on further action this week.

Peck did not return a message left last night. The spokesman for Stanford’s unionized workers, Zev Kvitky, and SEIU 715 Spokesman John Vellardita did not return calls for comment.

http://daily.stanford.edu/tempo?page=content&id=20413&repository=0001_article

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=421685&forum_id=1)#5841946)