What will be the fate of the campus Taco Bell? Why did the
Associated Students of UCLA board of directors reverse itself
Friday and allow Taco Bell to renew its contract despite
allegations of labor abuses in southern Florida tomato fields?
Right now, only one thing is clear ““ Taco Bell failed to
meet a May 10 deadline to submit a third-party report on the labor
practices of its tomato growers, but ASUCLA apparently considers
the issue moot.
Friday’s 9-0 vote, with one abstention, comes only days
after the ASUCLA Services Committee had approved a resolution that
would have forced Taco Bell off campus. With the new vote, Taco
Bell will be free to negotiate a new contract of indefinite length.
Frankly, that makes little sense.
Dria Fearn, chairwoman of the Services Committee, said the new
contract could be a “carrot” for Taco Bell, prompting
them to improve labor conditions. But Taco Bell has already had six
months to investigate the allegations, and so far it has reported
nothing. If the company doesn’t respect students enough to
fulfill its obligations, it should not be on campus.
ASUCLA’s directors should force Taco Bell to comply with
their rulings. If Taco Bell doesn’t, the board should not
renew its lucrative contract.