Chronicle of Higher Education, Friday, March 25, 2005
Hunger-Striking Students at Georgetown U. Win a 'Living Wage' for Campus Workers By ELIZABETH F. FARRELL Washington
It was impossible to walk through the main square of Georgetown University's campus this week without noticing the 20-foot banner that read "Hunger Strike," and the white, domed tent beside it. Inside, a group of students huddled in sleeping bags and vowed they would not eat until the university gave its janitorial workers a "living wage."
A poster announced how much weight the 26 students had lost as a group. At the end of their eighth day of fasting, the protesters had shed a total of 270 pounds -- about 50 pounds more than Brandon Bowman, the Georgetown basketball team's 6-foot-8 star forward, weighs.
Administrators at the Roman Catholic university were alarmed by the protest from the start. On the third day of the strike, Gladys T. Cisneros, a graduate student involved in the Living Wage Coalition, a group that coordinated the strike, said she saw James C. Welsh, the assistant vice president for student health, scribbling down information from a homemade poster that listed the names of the students participating in the hunger strike.
Dr. Welsh passed the students' names on to Todd A. Olson, the dean of students, who sent a letter, via Federal Express, to each of the students' parents, urging them to tell their children to "begin eating right away." Julia Green Bataille, a spokeswoman for Georgetown, said the March 19 letter had been motivated by concern for the students' health.
But the protesters countered that the administration was using health issues as an excuse to thwart the strike and that the university had violated their privacy rights. "It shocked us that they would do this," said Rachel Murray, a sophomore in Georgetown's School of Foreign Service who participated in the strike. "We thought they would help us if we were feeling bad, not threaten us for protesting."
The strike showed how students who publicly risk their health for a cause can force a university into a thicket of competing legal obligations: students' rights to privacy and protest on the one hand, and the institution's responsibility to look out for their welfare on the other.
At the same time, the protesters proved the power of such a dramatic demonstration: On Wednesday, the ninth day of the strike, Georgetown University agreed to raise wages for the janitors. The strikers, weak but giddy, declared victory on Thursday.
'The Usual Activist Stuff'
During the strike, concerns about the students' health were paramount for administrators. In an e-mail message on Monday to the students, Dr. Welsh said that unless they informed him that they were receiving more nourishment than water, he would make unspecified recommendations to Dean Olson.
The students charged that during a previous discussion with them, Dr. Welsh had threatened to put them on involuntary medical leave, which would require them to withdraw from their classes. When students are engaging in dangerous behavior and refuse medical help, universities sometimes force them to take involuntary medical leave on the grounds that the students are a danger to themselves and others.
Ms. Green Bataille defended the decision to mail the letter to parents, and said the students had voluntarily given up their privacy rights when they began their public demonstration.
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974, designed to protect the privacy of college students, particularly their health and academic records, typically prevents colleges from describing students' health to their parents. But it allows college administrators to disregard privacy rights if they think a student is in immediate danger, an exception Ms. Green Bataille cited in explaining the university's decision to write to the strikers' parents.
"As an academic entity, we're committed to a number of values, including the rights of students to express their opinions," she said. "But it's also paramount that we look after their safety and health, and in this situation, those concerns outweighed the rights of freedom of expression."
Health concerns were a constant distraction for the protesters. On the sixth day of the strike, Michael Wilson, a senior majoring in justice and peace studies, had to go to Georgetown University Medical Center's emergency room because of double vision and dizziness. Another student was treated at a local hospital for chest pains.
Despite the complications, members of the Living Wage Coalition said they knew what they were doing. "We wanted to avoid the usual activist stuff," said Ms. Murray. "We were warned to stay away from a hunger strike because they aren't usually successful, but we just thought that hunger is such a visible thing. And we're at a Catholic school, doing this during Holy Week, which brings in the spiritual element to it."
In Catholicism, fasting, particularly during Lent, is viewed as a form of penance and a means of becoming closer to God. The tradition stems from the biblical account of Jesus' fasting during the 40 days leading up to his crucifixion.
Not all students on the campus were swayed by the strike, however. Some, like the drunken students who yelled "I love food!" as they strolled by the protesters' tent late one night, belittled the effort. On the eve of the eighth day of the strike, two students stopped to sneer. One of the young men said the protesters were "just a little socialist group that are out of touch with the real world." His friend nodded: "They can't really help the workers. ... They're just trying to get attention."
Ms. Cisneros, who helped plan the protest but did not fast, said the demonstrators believed their greatest risk was that other students would dismiss the group as "just a bunch of rich, ignorant college students." As the daughter of working-class Mexican immigrants, Ms. Cisneros said, she can understand why some might have reached that conclusion, because so few of her classmates have a background similar to hers.
"Many students here want to help the workers because they have so many privileges and feel guilty about it," Ms. Cisneros said. "And in a way that's good, but it's also limiting because they don't know how to help in a way that's empowering to the workers."
Ms. Cisneros, who is fluent in Spanish, acted as a liaison between the protesters and the janitorial staff members, most of whom are immigrants from El Salvador. In weekly meetings with them, Ms. Cisneros discussed the students' strategies, to make sure that they are consistent with the workers' goals.
Going without food, she said, gave a sense of urgency to the cause. "The longer we wait," she said, "the longer these workers are living day to day and praying that they don't get sick or their car doesn't break down, because those are problems they can't afford to take care of."
Forcing Change
During the Living Wage Coalition's three-year campaign at Georgetown, the students have enjoyed victories and suffered setbacks. In 2003 the group sent 50 faculty members and administrators a "Living Wage Report" explaining their cause. They also collected more than 1,000 student signatures on a petition that urged the university to better compensate the portion of the janitorial staff members who work for a subcontractor rather than directly for the university.
By December 2004 the administration had offered the workers health benefits and raised their wages to $8.50 per hour, up from $7.25. Yet that raise was less than the "living wage" of $14.93 per hour that the coalition had sought The students continued to push the administration, to little avail, until March 14, the day 26 students stopped eating.
After that, the protesters won support from local religious officials, some of whom publicly pressured Georgetown administrators to accept the students' demands. On March 18, the fourth day of the hunger strike, John J. DeGioia, Georgetown's president, met with two coalition members and three of the city's religious leaders to discuss the issue.
Zach Pesavento, a freshman who attended the meeting, said it accomplished little. But it did give him an opportunity to speak his mind. "I told Mr. DeGioia that I came here because, in all the literature I received about Georgetown, it said it was a Catholic school committed to social justice," Mr. Pesavento said.
Mr. DeGioia, through a university spokeswoman, declined to comment.
By the sixth day of the protest, television camera crews were swarming Georgetown's campus. On the eighth day, local church and labor leaders, along with Richard Trumka, secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO, attended a rally on the campus, where they vowed to begin a two-day "solidarity fast" if the administration did not commit to a living wage for the workers by midnight on Wednesday.
A few hours before that fast was to begin, however, Mr. DeGioia sent an e-mail message to all Georgetown faculty members, staff members, and students informing them that he had approved a policy to raise the workers' wages to a minimum of $13 per hour by July 1, 2005, and to $14 per hour by the same date in 2007. Those figures were "more or less what we we're comfortable with," said one protester.
In his letter, Mr. DeGioia said it was "important to recognize that the passionate engagement of students over the past two years" had been instrumental in the university's decision. Spiros Dimolitsas, Georgetown's senior vice president, drafted a formal agreement of the wage-implementation policy and stated that the terms were "consistent with our Catholic and Jesuit identity."
The protesters said they were shocked that Georgetown had met almost all of their demands. Upon hearing the news, they ran around the campus to spread the news to the janitorial workers on the night shift.
"We found them cleaning toilets and vacuuming classrooms, just doing the things they do every night," said Mr. Pesavento. "And we told them and they were thrilled. There were tears in their eyes, and they kept on saying 'Gracias, gracias.'"
At noon on Thursday, the strikers broke their fast with a meal of strawberries and bread. That afternoon, some of them met with Mr. DeGioia and labor leaders to formally accept the wage-increase agreement.
Although the students remained bewildered by their success, Mr. Pesavento said his group had succeeded because it took such an extreme measure.
"The hunger strike ended up being the right thing for Georgetown because our argument was that this was a moral issue," said Mr. Pesavento. "People were so surprised that we were willing to put ourselves on the line like this, and it ended up working in our favor."
Louis Proyect Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
