• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Labor center made effort to include Wal-Mart

The UCLA Labor Center is proud to be a co-sponsor of a conference titled “Is Wal-Mart Good for America?” on June 4. Wal-Mart was not unfairly excluded from the conference. Indeed, every effort has been made to include Wal-Mart in the lunchtime debate.

They are still invited, and the conference organizers hope they attend.

The conference is the culmination of a two-quarter Community Scholars class at UCLA. The Community Scholars class includes a dozen community and labor leaders who have been participating in a thoughtful research project that has examined the impact of Wal-Mart on the local, national and international economy.

The class has included both pro-Wal-Mart and anti-Wal-Mart speakers. Readings have included multiple perspectives, like Sam Walton’s book, and some students attended Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott’s talk when he came to Los Angeles.

While it is true that many of the Community Scholars are opposed to Wal-Mart’s policies, which they believe involve a failure to pay a living wage, degradation of the environment and perpetuation of global sweatshops, many of these perspectives have not been given adequate attention either within the University of California or within the media.

Unlike Wal-Mart, these community and labor leaders do not have access to millions of dollars in corporate advertising to present their views.

Wal-Mart is the largest and most powerful corporation in the world. In their letter to the editor (“Wal-Mart unfairly excluded from talk,” May 26), they complain that they weren’t included in the conference planning committee.

This claim is rather ironic, since many community and labor leaders complain that they have never been included in Wal-Mart’s planning process when Wal-Mart enters their communities, drives out small businesses, harms the environment and pays workers low wages.

We extended an invitation to Wal-Mart on April 20, and have promptly responded to Wal-Mart’s requests for information.

The conference is a public event, and they are welcome to send representatives to all of the workshops. We have reserved a prominent position for them to speak at the noontime debate, which will be moderated by Nancy Cleeland, a reporter from the Los Angeles Times.

We encourage the UCLA community to join us on June 4 to participate in this important debate.

Kent Wong Director, UCLA Center for Labor Research and Education

Commencement ticket limits create frustration

As graduation nears, I have found myself in an unpleasant situation. A few days ago I received a notice on MyUCLA informing me that my request for extra tickets to the sociology department’s commencement ceremony had been denied.

According to the mass announcement, there was an unprecedented amount of ticket requests, and therefore anyone who requested more than eight tickets was denied.

This placed a crucial decision in front of me that will surely leave someone disappointed. I am currently stuck between the people I want to invite and the people I am obligated to invite. But no matter what decision I make, eight tickets is just not enough.

I understand that there is limited space on the campus, but I don’t understand why we can’t figure out some way to accommodate everyone on what is sure to be one of the most important days of many students’ lives.

To many students, the graduation ceremony is more for their parents and families than for them. Every student should have the right to participate in it without finding themselves battling family members.

As students, we have worked hard toward one common goal, often making sacrifices along the way, and now it is our turn to have our hard work acknowledged. I have been looking forward to my college graduation for four years, but now I have come to fear it. It has become more of a headache than a celebration.

Perhaps there is nothing we can do for the Class of 2005. Graduation is a few weeks away, announcements have been sent out, caps and gowns have been bought and parties have been planned. But for the Class of 2006, I hope there can be some solution to this unnecessary and unfair problem.

I strongly believe that the ticket limit should be raised to at least 10. I know that this would result in increased attendance and therefore a need for the already busy larger venues.

We could try splitting the larger ceremonies in half and having them at two different times and locations, so that the smaller venues can still be used. Also, maybe we could extend the graduation festivities past these three days and hold ceremonies on the following Monday.

No matter how it’s done, we need to find a way to accommodate all the people students wish to have at their graduation. For many students, they will be the first in their family to experience the sense of accomplishment in receiving a college degree. In my opinion, it is unfair to rob anyone of their chance to witness such an important occasion.

Stephanie Hail Fourth-year, sociology