News
Students stage Main Hall sit-in
|
|
Story by Mark Page | April 17, 2008
Montana Kaimin
At the end of normal business at the University of Montana on Wednesday evening, administrators in Main Hall faced down a crowd of about 50 protestors chanting and drumming in the hall, while nine students and a legal observer sat in the president’s office refusing to leave.
“J-U-S, J-U-S-T-I-C-E, what we want is justice in our factories,” the group chanted while stomping around the hallway.
Protests started in the free speech zone between the University Center and the Mansfield Library at noon, while nine members of Students for Economic and Social Justice barged into President George Dennison’s private office, refusing to leave.
Dennison is currently traveling in China, but SESJ wanted Executive Vice President Jim Foley to sign a worker’s rights agreement called the Designated Suppliers Program. By agreeing to be part of the program UM would pledge not to buy apparel from factories with erroneous labor records in developing countries.
“It’s either this or we keep waiting and waiting and waiting,” said Katie Pritchard, a spokeswoman for SESJ.
Eventually they did leave though, after the nine in Dennison’s office were charged with disorderly conduct and criminal trespass. They were let go one at a time starting at 6:25 p.m., through a side door after being processed in a conference room in the president’s suite.
Moments before the students were removed from the office, Pritchard was on a loudspeaker urging cooperation from her fellow demonstrators.
“They are taking the cuffs off so the media can’t get pictures, but they are getting arrested and that is what the university wants to do, so don’t get in their way,” she said through a bullhorn.
The names of the students in the order of their release are: Pat CoatarPeter, Hunter Baldwin, Matt Fennell, Gabriella Torti, Prairie Wolfe, Kendra Kallevig, Saara Snow and Kacie Engum. Rod Palmquist, who is not a student at UM, was also cited. The name of the legal observer, who did not face charges but entered with the group, is Michelle Frix.
Similar actions recently took place at Appalachian State and Penn State. The Penn State sit-in resulted in 31 arrests, while at Appalachian State there were six. The last time this sort of event happened at UM was during the Vietnam War, said Rita Munzenrider, director of University Relations.
“If you’re keyed in you would know this is happening around the country,” Pritchard said.
The protest looked like it may take a violent swing at about 1:45 p.m. when the larger group of students tried to storm into the office.
Dennison’s assistant Cathleen Collins tried to forcibly remove a sign that creative writing freshman Leo Brett was holding up against the door of the office suite that read “Fuck Sweatshops.” This seemed to rile up a large group who were demonstrating outside but who were only occasionally marching through the building.
Collins had to leap in front of the group to stop them from joining their companions in the president’s private office. A moment later Dean of Students Charles Couture ran in front of the students holding his hands up and keeping them back. Soon after, Provost Royce Engstrom showed up to calm the crowd and hustle them out the door with a promise of a meeting.
The students were making a lot of noise in the suite, chanting, “Up, up with a sweat-free nation, down, down with exploitation,” but Couture said at no point did he feel physically threatened.
“I didn’t at all feel threatened, other than making noise and chanting and drumming, they were all well-behaved,” he said. “They are causing a disruption though.”
Couture, before the attempted break-in by the larger group, said the first group had no right to be in the office, and could be violating the privacy rights of students.
“Folks on this campus and the general public only have access to offices by invitation,” Couture said. “These are working spaces, oftentimes there are confidential documents being worked on and it is important to protect their privacy.”
Other administrators took a lighter view of the protest. In passing, Bob Duringer, vice president for Administration and Finance said, “That’s what makes universities great.”
Students did not accomplish their ultimate objective of the protest in having a document signed pledging UM to the DSP, but they have set up a meeting with Dennison next Wednesday. They saw this action as their only option though.
“At a lot of schools there is a kind of progression of action, and this is the last resort,” Pritchard said.
Provost Engstrom said no decision has been made today, and they did not attempt to contact Dennison, who was traveling in Asia discussing academic exchanges.
“Our minds haven’t been changed, our minds haven’t been made up on the issue,” Engstrom said. “All we can say to that is that we have a meeting scheduled on Wednesday.”
Foley, who the students claimed had the authority to sign the agreement, said students had not called and requested a meeting for today, but he knew an action would take place. He said repeatedly the students were “very respectful,” and it was “a good healthy dialogue.”
The main sticking point for him and Dennison, he said, is that the U.S. Department of Justice has not approved of the organization, and therefore he is concerned that UM could face anti-trust suits as a result of the work done through the DSP. Foley said the organization that runs the program has pulled back the request for the DOJ letter until the spring because they don’t see it as forthcoming.
“We work for the institution, and we must protect the institution,” Foley said.
University Legal Counsel David Aronofsky said the legal ramifications of the DSP need to be worked out because universities have faced suits in the past. He also cautioned that a letter from the Department of Justice might never come. Despite this 42 other universities have signed on.
“They don’t have to issue such letters, but they usually do in good time,” he said. “Which can mean anything from 30 days to 30 months.”
In a speech before all of the protestors, Engstrom had expressed UM’s appreciation for the cause, despite the legal hurdles facing the commitment.
“The spirit of what you folks are interested in is a really great cause,” he said. But later mentioned the drawbacks, “there may in the end be legal issues to prevent us from signing this.”
After UM student Kendra Kallevig was cited and told to leave the office, she commented that she was still hopeful for a resolution.
“I think they realize this is something people care about, care about enough to get arrested,” she said.
Pritchard wasn’t so sure of the outcome though.
“The thing would be, we would like to believe it would be a few days, but so far they haven’t shown us anything that could make us trust that,” she said. But then Pritchard echoed Kallevig’s sentiments, saying, “They’re good people, they’re good men. I know they want this to happen.”
This story has been viewed 831 times.
Comments
After five years of an illegal, trillion-dollar war—in which thousands of U.S. soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died—it truly amazes me that the best UM students can find to protest is clothing manufacturing and Coca-Cola.
Posted by Patia on 04/17/2008 at 10:14 am
Patia- please explain how the students of UM could make any effective protests against the Iraq War? Maybe doing a sit-in at the ROTC?
These are issues directly related to an institution they’re involved in. All the anti-war movement has come up with so far is bad bumper stickers and pissing in the wind.
If it’s your bag to sit around Caras Park every time the anniversary of “shock and awe” rolls around and watch a bunch of idiots play with paper maiche puppets of Bush and Cheney, be my guest. Just don’t think you have anything to say about people who are actually doing something.
The problem with activism right now is that it IS an Iraq War monoculture. There are issues other than Iraq, there were before the war started and they’ll be there after the war ends (if it does, that is).
Taking a stand for greater economic justice on a local-to-global basis is fighting the injustices that breed resentment. This resentment leads to groups like Al-Qaeda to easily manipulate young men into carrying out attacks like 9/11, one of the major (false) pretexts for the Iraq War.
Think outside of the box for once. I used to involve myself with quite a bit of activism before the short attention span you promote became the main consensus.
The fact that there are people like SESJ getting involved and actually DOING things (other than standing on the Higgins St. bridge or raising “peaceful energy” in a drum circle) makes me want to get involved again too. I hope others feel the same way.
Posted by Charles Copeland on 04/17/2008 at 11:10 am
The greatest injustice to the third world people who create these shirts would be to impose trade restrictions. Although it is unpleasant to think about, there is a trade off between labor and necessities. By parching goods from the indigent countries, they receive money that can be the difference between life and death.
Posted by Rob on 04/17/2008 at 11:42 am
SESJ is lucky we live on a campus that receives their antics so well. This movement pleases me, just sometimes I wish SESJ, the Kaimin, or whoever would detail to me that SESJ exhausted all avenues for change that regularly occur in the adult, university system. I’m sure they did, but until I hear so I can’t really buy that this was a ‘last resort’ because they said so. Invasions and protests should be a last resort for people who want to actually get heard and have credibility.
Posted by Nick on 04/17/2008 at 11:47 am
Good point, Rob.
Posted by Nick on 04/17/2008 at 11:50 am
This cause is a positive one because it speaks on behalf on those who have no alternative to the “dollar a day” labour cycle that has persisted in places such as Latin America and Asia for decades, everyone knows what a sweatshop is: no maternity leave, no bathroom or lunch breaks, young children, and most importantly wages so low that the family’s basic needs cannot possibly be met not matter how many of them work everyday. It is not a complex political or moral matter rather a question of humanity. Does anyone deserve to exist in such degrading conditions? especially with reasonable alternatives!
Posted by John on 04/17/2008 at 11:55 am
Yes, Rob. Exactly. Whatever would these people do without these wonderful sweatshop jobs that often turn sons into slaves and daughters into prostitutes?
It’s a little known fact that the countries where these sweatshops are located had absolutely NO human habitation before the building of the factories.
The reason for this is simple- there was simply no way to make a living!
Posted by Charles Copeland on 04/17/2008 at 11:58 am
Hey good job! You wasted an entire day, got arrested, and still nothing has happened.
Way to go, SESJ children. Mission NOT accomplished.
And don’t say that the “mission” was to raise awareness. The mission was clearly stated when you barged in on the empty office: sign the document or we don’t leave. Oops. You FAILED.
FAILURES.
Posted by Fred Stapleton on 04/17/2008 at 3:18 pm
Good point, Fred. The only people who have ever changed anything through civil disobedience have only made significant accomplishments upon their first attempt.
Posted by Charles Copeland on 04/17/2008 at 3:25 pm
So if the areas where sweatshops are located were not inhabited by people before their existence and they are now currently populated, it could be inferred that workers migrated there to find better paying jobs. We could further deduce that if the jobs did not meet their expectations, they could return to their previous occupations.
Just to reiterate, it is not a glamorous trade off. The living conditions in these countries are abhorrent, the life expectancies are short and many of the government regimes are unstable. Through greater economic interdependence though, progress is possible.
Posted by Rob on 04/17/2008 at 3:42 pm
Congratulations, SESJ, for taking a stand on sweatshop labor. Your efforts last year lead to the UM’s adoption of the Workers Rights Consortium, and I am confident that your latest actions will push the president to sign on to the Designated Suppliers Program. Thank you for your efforts to help build an ethical purchasing policy for our university!
Fellow activists, let’s not lash out at one another over petty arguments. Yes, there is a war raging, but that should not detract from our efforts to build a more environmentally sustainable and socially just world. We must continue to speak out against the war and gather in protest without forgetting the vast number of other injustices that exist all around us. It is ridiculous to assert that: “All the anti-war movement has come up with so far is bad bumper stickers and pissing in the wind.” Just last month I was involved in organizing an anti-war event that raised over $1000 for impoverished military families. The Jeannette Rankin Peace Center’s coordinating council was recently given a private audience with Max Baucus to air grievances congress has not done enough to end the war. Every day, those involved in the antiwar movement are making real impacts, not just “sitting in drum circles.”
I hate to get sucked into an argument, but I would also like to comment on what Rob has written concerning sweatshop labor. Rob, you are obviously a proponent of globalization and the Bretton Woods institutions. I have a faint hope that globalization might actually lead to a robust health for developing economies. I cannot, however, stomach the moral implications of allowing mass suffering and death in the short term in order to achieve some far off global economic stability. The IMF and the World Bank have decimated the poorest people in the word by forcing their governments to cut domestic spending in order to make the interest payments on their loans. For every dollar the first world gives to the third world in aid, three dollars are shipped right back to the first world. We are seeing a new economic colonialism. After decimating the infrastructure and employment rates of third world countries, international corporations move in with their sweatshop jobs. The poor have two choices, starve or work in horrible conditions. These corporations are making billions of dollars off the pain and suffering of the global south. We have to hold business accountable!
Posted by Sean Gibbons on 04/17/2008 at 4:56 pm
"So if the areas where sweatshops are located were not inhabited by people before their existence and they are now currently populated, it could be inferred that workers migrated there to find better paying jobs”
Congratulations- you just completely demonstrated how clueless you really are, Rob. I suggest you go to a dictionary, look up “sarcasm” and read my post again.
As far as “activists” “lashing out at eachother,” I don’t see any of that going on, Sean. I see a bunch of people who don’t care or want to being corrected by a bunch of people who do, and are informed.
Posted by Charles Copeland on 04/17/2008 at 5:23 pm
Sorry Charles, I must have misinterpreted the tone your statement. Nevertheless, I am disappointed you have to resort to Ad Homian attacks to make your point.
Sean:
I know the labor is barbaric, but the long term gains from trade can be realized. While the situations vary, China and India are great examples. I agree though, more aid needs to be given to these countries so they can improve their infrastructure and alleviate the rampant poverty. This is an arduous process, but it is attainable.
Posted by Rob on 04/17/2008 at 6:14 pm
Rob: you mean “ad hominem.”
If you’re disappointed in me, I guess I must be doing something right, though.
Posted by Charles Copeland on 04/17/2008 at 9:32 pm
Yeah, I guess there is spell check for a reason. Once I posted I couldn’t edit. Well, I hope that doesn’t destroy my credibility too much, but if it does I’ll get over it.
Posted by Rob on 04/17/2008 at 11:20 pm
As a slightly older fellow who
had the oppertunity to watch this
action from beginning to end I
have to say that it renewed my
hope for the country to see that
many young people that actually
care about human rights is a refreshing breath of air, keep up the good work you are the future
of our country and it will take
the energy of the youth to turn things around for the future, thanks again.
Posted by Rick Evans on 04/18/2008 at 7:41 pm
” ... a sign that creative writing freshman Leo Brett was holding up against the door of the office suite that read ‘Fuck Sweatshops.’”
Ooooooooh, so CREATIVE, Leo!
What a joke.
Posted by Fred Stapleton on 04/29/2008 at 8:19 pm
