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