Sodexho Workers Continue to Press for UC Jobs Amid Hardball Tactics by Vanderhoef

Yesterday I got a call from the campaigners for the Sodexho Workers that there was a meeting between Chanceller Vanderhoef, Vice Chanceller Dennis Shimek, an ASUCD Senator Andrew Peake, Patricia Zermeno a student career worker, and a Food Service Worker. The meeting was ostensibly to discuss possible solutions to the dispute and a means to arrive at a settlement whereby the Sodexho Food Service workers would get UC jobs.
A number of supporters gathered as well. This time without signs, without chants, they were just there to support the meeting. They tried to wait outside for the decision, but were locked out of the fifth floor of Mrak hall. They locked down the elevators, locked down the stairwell, and posted at a guard at the top of the stairwell preventing anyone from getting in.

The California Aggie was apparently called and refused to report on it, since according to them, this was not newsworthy.

According to one of the organizers, Katie Davalos, a UC Davis student:

“The chancellor wants the opportunity to explain the chancellor’s side of this issue, and issue a statement, and Patty is going to issue our statement, and let them know what our opinions are and where we’re coming from. We’re also giving them a packet of information with facts, statistics, and a list of our supporters to let them know what we’re talking about. Basically from there they’re just going to discuss the issues and we’re hoping to get a union organizer in there that can actually start negotiations, but right now they are not letting anyone from the union in. They are not talking to anyone.”

The chancellor refused to allow any union organizers into the meeting. Some of them managed to get up to the fifth floor before it was shutdown, but they were denied any union representation in the meeting itself.

As I was outside taking pictures, it apparently was about to turn 5:00 pm. I walked toward Mrak Hall and reached for the door. Suddenly, the door was pulled shut just as I reached for it and locked. I looked up and there was Robin Souza, wife of City councilmember Stephen Souza, shutting the door and preventing anyone else from getting inside. She also pulled the door shut behind other students who were exiting the building. Ms. Souza works for the admissions office in Mrak Hall.

I spoke briefly with Stephen Souza last night before the Davis City Council meeting and he said that Robin Souza was very upset about the actions of the activists. That they had banged on the glass so hard at their May 23rd demonstration that it nearly broke the glass and this left the employees inside traumatized psychologically. They were under strict orders to lock and close the building Tuesday precisely at 5 pm.

It is unclear why the university is putting its employees in the position of being “security guards” at the door–as this is not a part of their job description. While I’m sure that the situation on May 23, 2007 was at times uncomfortable for the employees, it is also important to keep in mind, that it must be very tough to try to survive on such low wages and poor benefits. The organizers had attempted to rally in the streets on May 1, 2007, and were ignored by administration and thus had to take their action directly to Vanderhoef. It is unfortunate that other employees got caught up in this, however, Vanderhoef is pitting employees against employees as well as students against workers, in his bid to break the will of the organizers.

In contrast to the Souzas, Councilmember Lamar Heystek arrived at the protest to show his support for the students and the Sodexho workers on his way to the evening’s city council meeting.

The negotiators came out of the building, visibly distraught at their treatment by Vanderhoef and especially Vice Chancellor Dennis Shimek. Apparently, Shimek during the talks got into the face of one of the students, which was a very intimidating situation.

According to Patricia Zarmeno,

“They are not really actively seeking a way for us to have UC jobs. They know that the issue exists, but they are looking for every other single way possible except for the actual solution. “

Zarmeno did not believe that the university was sincere in holding these talks. They did not appear to be seeking any kind of solution or resolution.

“I feel like we’re in the exact same spot we were before we even had this meeting.”

There were complaints by both Zarmeno and the Food Service worker who was at the meeting as well that they did not respect them. There was a strong implication that this had to do with the fact that they were both Latina females.

According to Zarmeno:

“They would interrupt us all the time, asking us questions, specifically when I stated that I wanted to finish my statement, I was not respected at all, when I was in the hallway, we were talking about this meeting, Shimek said something about us misunderstanding the purpose of the meeting, and I wanted to clarify, and he cut me off and said that I should let him and Andrew [Peake] finish, and I said fine, I let them have their conversation until the very end of the conversation, then I clarified my point, and clarified that we do understand what the purpose of the meeting was, it is important to have the university represented, and he completely cuts me off and tries to disregard me, and so I asked him to please let me finish, because I respected their request, and he should respect mine as well, and he still didn’t let me finish my view, and I finished it anyway… “

The lack of respect was evident.

“I did not feel very respected in that meeting at all… They had this meeting to say that are listening to your views, but we are not going to actually listen to them. We are just going to keep going the way they wanted to originally.”

There was frustration at the tactics and the process, but also very clear conviction on the part of the students. The administration had the clear intention of pitting the workers against the students in these talks and breaking the will of the protesters. They dismissed them as representing only a small minority of the students and a small minority of the food service workers.

However, the protesters made the point that the May 1, 2007 action shows that they are not in the minority. Moreover, there is a letter signed by 9 of the 12 ASUCD Senators that demonstrates the strong support that the students have for the Food Service Workers’ movement to become UC employees.

Assemblyman Dave Jones and Assemblywoman Lois Wolk will also be meeting with the Chancellor to express their strong conviction that this process is wrong and to complain about the university tactics.

The activists vowed to press on through the summer and fall and to continue to make things as uncomfortable for the Chancellor as possible until there is a real resolution and conviction on the part of the university to change their tactics and their viewpoint.

—Doug Paul Davis reporting

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

172 Comments

  1. Anonymous

    Mr Greenwald. It is unfair of you to criticize employees for doing their job. It is unfair of you to infer an employee’s personal beliefs about this situation because they were doing their job. I very much doubt that you have read anyone’s job description or know what their responsibilities are as you claim. It is unfair of you to single out one employee who was doing their job in order to make your political point. It was unfair of you to infer that Councilman Souza is not sympathetic toward the workers, because he was not standing outside the doors with Heystek who has the luxury of hanging out with protestors, while Souza was more than likely working at his livlihood. Why don’t you just stick to the facts that you know and not make unfair inferences.

  2. Anonymous

    Mr Greenwald. It is unfair of you to criticize employees for doing their job. It is unfair of you to infer an employee’s personal beliefs about this situation because they were doing their job. I very much doubt that you have read anyone’s job description or know what their responsibilities are as you claim. It is unfair of you to single out one employee who was doing their job in order to make your political point. It was unfair of you to infer that Councilman Souza is not sympathetic toward the workers, because he was not standing outside the doors with Heystek who has the luxury of hanging out with protestors, while Souza was more than likely working at his livlihood. Why don’t you just stick to the facts that you know and not make unfair inferences.

  3. Anonymous

    Mr Greenwald. It is unfair of you to criticize employees for doing their job. It is unfair of you to infer an employee’s personal beliefs about this situation because they were doing their job. I very much doubt that you have read anyone’s job description or know what their responsibilities are as you claim. It is unfair of you to single out one employee who was doing their job in order to make your political point. It was unfair of you to infer that Councilman Souza is not sympathetic toward the workers, because he was not standing outside the doors with Heystek who has the luxury of hanging out with protestors, while Souza was more than likely working at his livlihood. Why don’t you just stick to the facts that you know and not make unfair inferences.

  4. Anonymous

    Mr Greenwald. It is unfair of you to criticize employees for doing their job. It is unfair of you to infer an employee’s personal beliefs about this situation because they were doing their job. I very much doubt that you have read anyone’s job description or know what their responsibilities are as you claim. It is unfair of you to single out one employee who was doing their job in order to make your political point. It was unfair of you to infer that Councilman Souza is not sympathetic toward the workers, because he was not standing outside the doors with Heystek who has the luxury of hanging out with protestors, while Souza was more than likely working at his livlihood. Why don’t you just stick to the facts that you know and not make unfair inferences.

  5. Mike

    “However, the protesters made the point that the May 1, 2007 action shows that they are not in the minority. ”

    Come on, really?

    That protest had to be one of the most generic forms of mild public entertainment in years. Most of the people there thought it was about Iraq! Look at the signs people were carrying… Yes, there was a core of people there who want the food service contracts. But of the few hundred people who actually came, the overwhelming majority were there for the entertainment value of the event. That, or they were part of the cadre of Davisites who would protest the rising of the sun as long as they got to chant and carry a sign.

    The solution lies in spreadsheets, not in protest marches… The folks who want to see this happen need to identify funding sources. Alienating the administration is probably not the wisest path.

  6. Mike

    “However, the protesters made the point that the May 1, 2007 action shows that they are not in the minority. ”

    Come on, really?

    That protest had to be one of the most generic forms of mild public entertainment in years. Most of the people there thought it was about Iraq! Look at the signs people were carrying… Yes, there was a core of people there who want the food service contracts. But of the few hundred people who actually came, the overwhelming majority were there for the entertainment value of the event. That, or they were part of the cadre of Davisites who would protest the rising of the sun as long as they got to chant and carry a sign.

    The solution lies in spreadsheets, not in protest marches… The folks who want to see this happen need to identify funding sources. Alienating the administration is probably not the wisest path.

  7. Mike

    “However, the protesters made the point that the May 1, 2007 action shows that they are not in the minority. ”

    Come on, really?

    That protest had to be one of the most generic forms of mild public entertainment in years. Most of the people there thought it was about Iraq! Look at the signs people were carrying… Yes, there was a core of people there who want the food service contracts. But of the few hundred people who actually came, the overwhelming majority were there for the entertainment value of the event. That, or they were part of the cadre of Davisites who would protest the rising of the sun as long as they got to chant and carry a sign.

    The solution lies in spreadsheets, not in protest marches… The folks who want to see this happen need to identify funding sources. Alienating the administration is probably not the wisest path.

  8. Mike

    “However, the protesters made the point that the May 1, 2007 action shows that they are not in the minority. ”

    Come on, really?

    That protest had to be one of the most generic forms of mild public entertainment in years. Most of the people there thought it was about Iraq! Look at the signs people were carrying… Yes, there was a core of people there who want the food service contracts. But of the few hundred people who actually came, the overwhelming majority were there for the entertainment value of the event. That, or they were part of the cadre of Davisites who would protest the rising of the sun as long as they got to chant and carry a sign.

    The solution lies in spreadsheets, not in protest marches… The folks who want to see this happen need to identify funding sources. Alienating the administration is probably not the wisest path.

  9. Vincente

    Oh come now anonymous. That is just a bunch of crap that you have posted.

    First, I guarantee you if we come down to Mrak together today we will not see Robin standing by the door at 5 pm shutting it.

    Second, I think we all have a pretty good idea that shutting doors is not in Robin’s job description.

    Third, I think most people I know that are committed union supporters would never do that job. Robin has enough seniority that she would never get fired or reprimanded if she refused to follow orders and aid in the breaking of the strike. And if she did her union, assuming that she is in one, would file an unfair labor practice’s complaint against the university.

    She chose to do this BECAUSE she was angry at the strikers.

    I’m guessing neither she nor Stephen expressed any support to DPD, and if they had, he would would have reported it.

    So I think it was completely fair.

  10. Vincente

    Oh come now anonymous. That is just a bunch of crap that you have posted.

    First, I guarantee you if we come down to Mrak together today we will not see Robin standing by the door at 5 pm shutting it.

    Second, I think we all have a pretty good idea that shutting doors is not in Robin’s job description.

    Third, I think most people I know that are committed union supporters would never do that job. Robin has enough seniority that she would never get fired or reprimanded if she refused to follow orders and aid in the breaking of the strike. And if she did her union, assuming that she is in one, would file an unfair labor practice’s complaint against the university.

    She chose to do this BECAUSE she was angry at the strikers.

    I’m guessing neither she nor Stephen expressed any support to DPD, and if they had, he would would have reported it.

    So I think it was completely fair.

  11. Vincente

    Oh come now anonymous. That is just a bunch of crap that you have posted.

    First, I guarantee you if we come down to Mrak together today we will not see Robin standing by the door at 5 pm shutting it.

    Second, I think we all have a pretty good idea that shutting doors is not in Robin’s job description.

    Third, I think most people I know that are committed union supporters would never do that job. Robin has enough seniority that she would never get fired or reprimanded if she refused to follow orders and aid in the breaking of the strike. And if she did her union, assuming that she is in one, would file an unfair labor practice’s complaint against the university.

    She chose to do this BECAUSE she was angry at the strikers.

    I’m guessing neither she nor Stephen expressed any support to DPD, and if they had, he would would have reported it.

    So I think it was completely fair.

  12. Vincente

    Oh come now anonymous. That is just a bunch of crap that you have posted.

    First, I guarantee you if we come down to Mrak together today we will not see Robin standing by the door at 5 pm shutting it.

    Second, I think we all have a pretty good idea that shutting doors is not in Robin’s job description.

    Third, I think most people I know that are committed union supporters would never do that job. Robin has enough seniority that she would never get fired or reprimanded if she refused to follow orders and aid in the breaking of the strike. And if she did her union, assuming that she is in one, would file an unfair labor practice’s complaint against the university.

    She chose to do this BECAUSE she was angry at the strikers.

    I’m guessing neither she nor Stephen expressed any support to DPD, and if they had, he would would have reported it.

    So I think it was completely fair.

  13. Anonymous

    Get off Greenwald’s case, what Robin did is akin to crossing a picket line as far as I am concerned. She is in a position where she doesn’t have to carry out those kind of orders. She chose to. She’s a public figure, the wife of a councilmember. The councilmember apparently did not express support for the strikers, he has not written a letter like some of his fellow colleagues. Why should he get the benefit of the doubt?

  14. Anonymous

    Get off Greenwald’s case, what Robin did is akin to crossing a picket line as far as I am concerned. She is in a position where she doesn’t have to carry out those kind of orders. She chose to. She’s a public figure, the wife of a councilmember. The councilmember apparently did not express support for the strikers, he has not written a letter like some of his fellow colleagues. Why should he get the benefit of the doubt?

  15. Anonymous

    Get off Greenwald’s case, what Robin did is akin to crossing a picket line as far as I am concerned. She is in a position where she doesn’t have to carry out those kind of orders. She chose to. She’s a public figure, the wife of a councilmember. The councilmember apparently did not express support for the strikers, he has not written a letter like some of his fellow colleagues. Why should he get the benefit of the doubt?

  16. Anonymous

    Get off Greenwald’s case, what Robin did is akin to crossing a picket line as far as I am concerned. She is in a position where she doesn’t have to carry out those kind of orders. She chose to. She’s a public figure, the wife of a councilmember. The councilmember apparently did not express support for the strikers, he has not written a letter like some of his fellow colleagues. Why should he get the benefit of the doubt?

  17. Anonymous

    The Vanderheofs of the UC system are an endangered species on the brink of extinction. Our next CA governer will ring in their final death knell.

  18. Anonymous

    The Vanderheofs of the UC system are an endangered species on the brink of extinction. Our next CA governer will ring in their final death knell.

  19. Anonymous

    The Vanderheofs of the UC system are an endangered species on the brink of extinction. Our next CA governer will ring in their final death knell.

  20. Anonymous

    The Vanderheofs of the UC system are an endangered species on the brink of extinction. Our next CA governer will ring in their final death knell.

  21. Anonymous

    Dear David, it was interesting to read about myself in your blog this morning. I am old enough and liberal enough that I have participated in many many protests over the years, in Washington DC, Nevada Test Site, Farmworkers, etc etc, so I do have a little experience with protests. My point in mentioning that is that I know what peaceful protests are and while I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were not non-violent (such as chaining the doors shut), and these tactics were traumatizing to many staff in Mrak Hall. Your readers may pooh-pooh that, but it’s a fact You have never asked me what my thoughts are about the Sodexho workers, in fact we have never really met. I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, and my primary responsibility in my job is toward the safety and security of the staff in our department. I serve, along with many others in Mrak Hall as a Safety Coordinator, and in that role we make sure that the safety of our staff is maintained. The building doors were locked at 5 pm and several of the safety coordinators served to make sure that no one unauthorized entered. This morning Steve said to me that you stated to him that I said to you to “go away”. You know and I know that that is untrue. I did not speak to you. I pointed at my watch which was about 2 minutes after 5 pm when you tried to enter the building. Anyone who has worked for UCD for as many years as I have, has had to experience times when we do not always agree with decisions or policies or processes that the administration does, however in general, I am proud to be a UCD employee and to do the work I do in support of students achieving their academic dreams. If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees? David, it is very odd to have this public discussion about my work and I think it would be very civilized of you to have a personal conversation with me rather than to write about me on your blog. Sincerely, Robin Souza

  22. Anonymous

    Dear David, it was interesting to read about myself in your blog this morning. I am old enough and liberal enough that I have participated in many many protests over the years, in Washington DC, Nevada Test Site, Farmworkers, etc etc, so I do have a little experience with protests. My point in mentioning that is that I know what peaceful protests are and while I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were not non-violent (such as chaining the doors shut), and these tactics were traumatizing to many staff in Mrak Hall. Your readers may pooh-pooh that, but it’s a fact You have never asked me what my thoughts are about the Sodexho workers, in fact we have never really met. I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, and my primary responsibility in my job is toward the safety and security of the staff in our department. I serve, along with many others in Mrak Hall as a Safety Coordinator, and in that role we make sure that the safety of our staff is maintained. The building doors were locked at 5 pm and several of the safety coordinators served to make sure that no one unauthorized entered. This morning Steve said to me that you stated to him that I said to you to “go away”. You know and I know that that is untrue. I did not speak to you. I pointed at my watch which was about 2 minutes after 5 pm when you tried to enter the building. Anyone who has worked for UCD for as many years as I have, has had to experience times when we do not always agree with decisions or policies or processes that the administration does, however in general, I am proud to be a UCD employee and to do the work I do in support of students achieving their academic dreams. If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees? David, it is very odd to have this public discussion about my work and I think it would be very civilized of you to have a personal conversation with me rather than to write about me on your blog. Sincerely, Robin Souza

  23. Anonymous

    Dear David, it was interesting to read about myself in your blog this morning. I am old enough and liberal enough that I have participated in many many protests over the years, in Washington DC, Nevada Test Site, Farmworkers, etc etc, so I do have a little experience with protests. My point in mentioning that is that I know what peaceful protests are and while I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were not non-violent (such as chaining the doors shut), and these tactics were traumatizing to many staff in Mrak Hall. Your readers may pooh-pooh that, but it’s a fact You have never asked me what my thoughts are about the Sodexho workers, in fact we have never really met. I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, and my primary responsibility in my job is toward the safety and security of the staff in our department. I serve, along with many others in Mrak Hall as a Safety Coordinator, and in that role we make sure that the safety of our staff is maintained. The building doors were locked at 5 pm and several of the safety coordinators served to make sure that no one unauthorized entered. This morning Steve said to me that you stated to him that I said to you to “go away”. You know and I know that that is untrue. I did not speak to you. I pointed at my watch which was about 2 minutes after 5 pm when you tried to enter the building. Anyone who has worked for UCD for as many years as I have, has had to experience times when we do not always agree with decisions or policies or processes that the administration does, however in general, I am proud to be a UCD employee and to do the work I do in support of students achieving their academic dreams. If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees? David, it is very odd to have this public discussion about my work and I think it would be very civilized of you to have a personal conversation with me rather than to write about me on your blog. Sincerely, Robin Souza

  24. Anonymous

    Dear David, it was interesting to read about myself in your blog this morning. I am old enough and liberal enough that I have participated in many many protests over the years, in Washington DC, Nevada Test Site, Farmworkers, etc etc, so I do have a little experience with protests. My point in mentioning that is that I know what peaceful protests are and while I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were not non-violent (such as chaining the doors shut), and these tactics were traumatizing to many staff in Mrak Hall. Your readers may pooh-pooh that, but it’s a fact You have never asked me what my thoughts are about the Sodexho workers, in fact we have never really met. I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, and my primary responsibility in my job is toward the safety and security of the staff in our department. I serve, along with many others in Mrak Hall as a Safety Coordinator, and in that role we make sure that the safety of our staff is maintained. The building doors were locked at 5 pm and several of the safety coordinators served to make sure that no one unauthorized entered. This morning Steve said to me that you stated to him that I said to you to “go away”. You know and I know that that is untrue. I did not speak to you. I pointed at my watch which was about 2 minutes after 5 pm when you tried to enter the building. Anyone who has worked for UCD for as many years as I have, has had to experience times when we do not always agree with decisions or policies or processes that the administration does, however in general, I am proud to be a UCD employee and to do the work I do in support of students achieving their academic dreams. If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees? David, it is very odd to have this public discussion about my work and I think it would be very civilized of you to have a personal conversation with me rather than to write about me on your blog. Sincerely, Robin Souza

  25. Doug Paul Davis

    Robin:

    Thank you for posting your thoughts on the board, they are appreciated.

    I do need to clarify something as I did not tell Steve that you told me to go away. You are correct you said nothing of the sort and I did not report that you did.

    While we have not met, you likely knew who I was at the time I attempted to reenter the building. If you knew who I was, you also knew it was likely I was there to report on what was going on in the building and that I would probably comment about what had happened.

    No one from the building wanted to talk to me, or let me in to talk so that I could get another perspective. So I was forced to report on what I saw happening.

    Robin you ask:

    “If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees?”

    Robin I think you are missing the point here. They are striving to become UCD employees precisely because they need improved wages and benefits.

    Robin, I am most willing to meet or talk with you at your convenience.

    DPD

  26. Doug Paul Davis

    Robin:

    Thank you for posting your thoughts on the board, they are appreciated.

    I do need to clarify something as I did not tell Steve that you told me to go away. You are correct you said nothing of the sort and I did not report that you did.

    While we have not met, you likely knew who I was at the time I attempted to reenter the building. If you knew who I was, you also knew it was likely I was there to report on what was going on in the building and that I would probably comment about what had happened.

    No one from the building wanted to talk to me, or let me in to talk so that I could get another perspective. So I was forced to report on what I saw happening.

    Robin you ask:

    “If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees?”

    Robin I think you are missing the point here. They are striving to become UCD employees precisely because they need improved wages and benefits.

    Robin, I am most willing to meet or talk with you at your convenience.

    DPD

  27. Doug Paul Davis

    Robin:

    Thank you for posting your thoughts on the board, they are appreciated.

    I do need to clarify something as I did not tell Steve that you told me to go away. You are correct you said nothing of the sort and I did not report that you did.

    While we have not met, you likely knew who I was at the time I attempted to reenter the building. If you knew who I was, you also knew it was likely I was there to report on what was going on in the building and that I would probably comment about what had happened.

    No one from the building wanted to talk to me, or let me in to talk so that I could get another perspective. So I was forced to report on what I saw happening.

    Robin you ask:

    “If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees?”

    Robin I think you are missing the point here. They are striving to become UCD employees precisely because they need improved wages and benefits.

    Robin, I am most willing to meet or talk with you at your convenience.

    DPD

  28. Doug Paul Davis

    Robin:

    Thank you for posting your thoughts on the board, they are appreciated.

    I do need to clarify something as I did not tell Steve that you told me to go away. You are correct you said nothing of the sort and I did not report that you did.

    While we have not met, you likely knew who I was at the time I attempted to reenter the building. If you knew who I was, you also knew it was likely I was there to report on what was going on in the building and that I would probably comment about what had happened.

    No one from the building wanted to talk to me, or let me in to talk so that I could get another perspective. So I was forced to report on what I saw happening.

    Robin you ask:

    “If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees?”

    Robin I think you are missing the point here. They are striving to become UCD employees precisely because they need improved wages and benefits.

    Robin, I am most willing to meet or talk with you at your convenience.

    DPD

  29. Anonymous

    What has gotten lost in this Souza debate and it is unfortunate are the tactics used by Vanderhoef and Shimek to intimidate and marginalize the students. We need to focus on these issues.

  30. Anonymous

    What has gotten lost in this Souza debate and it is unfortunate are the tactics used by Vanderhoef and Shimek to intimidate and marginalize the students. We need to focus on these issues.

  31. Anonymous

    What has gotten lost in this Souza debate and it is unfortunate are the tactics used by Vanderhoef and Shimek to intimidate and marginalize the students. We need to focus on these issues.

  32. Anonymous

    What has gotten lost in this Souza debate and it is unfortunate are the tactics used by Vanderhoef and Shimek to intimidate and marginalize the students. We need to focus on these issues.

  33. Peaceful Protestor

    Dear Vander-Guard:

    Thank you for reporting on the hypocrisy of UCD and the employees who wish to make excuses for the chancellor’s behavior. There is a name for it, but we won’t go there.

    In her statement, Robin Souza said:

    “I am old enough and liberal enough that I have participated in many many protests over the years, in Washington DC, Nevada Test Site, Farmworkers, etc etc, so I do have a little experience with protests. My point in mentioning that is that I know what peaceful protests are and while I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were not non-violent (such as chaining the doors shut).”

    If Robin had in fact marched with the farmworkers she would know that chanting is very much a part of the United Farm Workers way of protesting. i.e. Si Se Puede!!!

    If she in fact protested over the Nevada Test Sites she would know or would have seen that many protestors chained themselves to gates in protest.

    If she in fact protested in Washington D.C. she would know from various marches and protests that chants, songs, and other forms of “peaceful disruption” are very common.

    Just look at the civil rights movement, peace movement, women’s rights, etc. these same methods have been used for many, many, many years. Just open up the history books.

    To say, “I know what peaceful protests are…I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were NOT non-violent,” is trying to take attention away from Chancellor Vanderhoef’s unwillingness to negotiate.

    The courageous students and the courageous Sodexho workers who are exercising their freedom of speech and assembly are using the same NON-VIOLENT methods of protesting that have been used over the years.

    Souza may be uncomfortable because the curtain is being pulled back on Mrak hall for all to see the hypocrisy of our fine UCD institution, the institution where she works.

    I have worked at the university and I know for a fact that it is not in the job description of an MSO to act as a security guard for Mrak Hall.

    To use an old chant from days gone by:

    You can run and
    You can hide,
    But we can see your guilty side Larry!

    Sit down and negotiate!

    Signed,Peaceful Protestor
    UCD Alum / UCD Employee

    P.S. No justice, no peace! Keep up the great work – change doesn’t come easily.

  34. Richard

    It is unfortunate in Robin’s case that her need to satisfy her UCD employer is preventing her from recognizing and acknowledging the obvious: that the acrimony being generated by this dispute can be ascribed wholly to the administration because of its unwillling to address the reasonable demands of the Sodexho workers.

    It is even more unfortunate that someone with the history of activism that she describes would try to implausibly suggest that the tactics of the Sodexho workers and organizers were dangerous and intimidating. As I have said before, if people in Mrak Hall find them so threatening, they should go and complain to the administration for creating the conditions that resulted in the protest.

    It is truly sad, because this is clearly becoming one of the propaganda cards being played by Vanderhoef and other administrators, that the Sodexho workers are threatening, belligerent and unreasonable, as a means of undermining community support for them, just as they are trying to undermine student supporter by threatening the students with residence hall fee increases.

    It is too bad that Robin, because of her position at Mrak, finds herself having to facilitate the public relations strategy of the administration in their attempts to resist meeting the demands of the Sodexho workers.

    –Richard Estes

  35. Peaceful Protestor

    Dear Vander-Guard:

    Thank you for reporting on the hypocrisy of UCD and the employees who wish to make excuses for the chancellor’s behavior. There is a name for it, but we won’t go there.

    In her statement, Robin Souza said:

    “I am old enough and liberal enough that I have participated in many many protests over the years, in Washington DC, Nevada Test Site, Farmworkers, etc etc, so I do have a little experience with protests. My point in mentioning that is that I know what peaceful protests are and while I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were not non-violent (such as chaining the doors shut).”

    If Robin had in fact marched with the farmworkers she would know that chanting is very much a part of the United Farm Workers way of protesting. i.e. Si Se Puede!!!

    If she in fact protested over the Nevada Test Sites she would know or would have seen that many protestors chained themselves to gates in protest.

    If she in fact protested in Washington D.C. she would know from various marches and protests that chants, songs, and other forms of “peaceful disruption” are very common.

    Just look at the civil rights movement, peace movement, women’s rights, etc. these same methods have been used for many, many, many years. Just open up the history books.

    To say, “I know what peaceful protests are…I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were NOT non-violent,” is trying to take attention away from Chancellor Vanderhoef’s unwillingness to negotiate.

    The courageous students and the courageous Sodexho workers who are exercising their freedom of speech and assembly are using the same NON-VIOLENT methods of protesting that have been used over the years.

    Souza may be uncomfortable because the curtain is being pulled back on Mrak hall for all to see the hypocrisy of our fine UCD institution, the institution where she works.

    I have worked at the university and I know for a fact that it is not in the job description of an MSO to act as a security guard for Mrak Hall.

    To use an old chant from days gone by:

    You can run and
    You can hide,
    But we can see your guilty side Larry!

    Sit down and negotiate!

    Signed,Peaceful Protestor
    UCD Alum / UCD Employee

    P.S. No justice, no peace! Keep up the great work – change doesn’t come easily.

  36. Richard

    It is unfortunate in Robin’s case that her need to satisfy her UCD employer is preventing her from recognizing and acknowledging the obvious: that the acrimony being generated by this dispute can be ascribed wholly to the administration because of its unwillling to address the reasonable demands of the Sodexho workers.

    It is even more unfortunate that someone with the history of activism that she describes would try to implausibly suggest that the tactics of the Sodexho workers and organizers were dangerous and intimidating. As I have said before, if people in Mrak Hall find them so threatening, they should go and complain to the administration for creating the conditions that resulted in the protest.

    It is truly sad, because this is clearly becoming one of the propaganda cards being played by Vanderhoef and other administrators, that the Sodexho workers are threatening, belligerent and unreasonable, as a means of undermining community support for them, just as they are trying to undermine student supporter by threatening the students with residence hall fee increases.

    It is too bad that Robin, because of her position at Mrak, finds herself having to facilitate the public relations strategy of the administration in their attempts to resist meeting the demands of the Sodexho workers.

    –Richard Estes

  37. Peaceful Protestor

    Dear Vander-Guard:

    Thank you for reporting on the hypocrisy of UCD and the employees who wish to make excuses for the chancellor’s behavior. There is a name for it, but we won’t go there.

    In her statement, Robin Souza said:

    “I am old enough and liberal enough that I have participated in many many protests over the years, in Washington DC, Nevada Test Site, Farmworkers, etc etc, so I do have a little experience with protests. My point in mentioning that is that I know what peaceful protests are and while I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were not non-violent (such as chaining the doors shut).”

    If Robin had in fact marched with the farmworkers she would know that chanting is very much a part of the United Farm Workers way of protesting. i.e. Si Se Puede!!!

    If she in fact protested over the Nevada Test Sites she would know or would have seen that many protestors chained themselves to gates in protest.

    If she in fact protested in Washington D.C. she would know from various marches and protests that chants, songs, and other forms of “peaceful disruption” are very common.

    Just look at the civil rights movement, peace movement, women’s rights, etc. these same methods have been used for many, many, many years. Just open up the history books.

    To say, “I know what peaceful protests are…I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were NOT non-violent,” is trying to take attention away from Chancellor Vanderhoef’s unwillingness to negotiate.

    The courageous students and the courageous Sodexho workers who are exercising their freedom of speech and assembly are using the same NON-VIOLENT methods of protesting that have been used over the years.

    Souza may be uncomfortable because the curtain is being pulled back on Mrak hall for all to see the hypocrisy of our fine UCD institution, the institution where she works.

    I have worked at the university and I know for a fact that it is not in the job description of an MSO to act as a security guard for Mrak Hall.

    To use an old chant from days gone by:

    You can run and
    You can hide,
    But we can see your guilty side Larry!

    Sit down and negotiate!

    Signed,Peaceful Protestor
    UCD Alum / UCD Employee

    P.S. No justice, no peace! Keep up the great work – change doesn’t come easily.

  38. Richard

    It is unfortunate in Robin’s case that her need to satisfy her UCD employer is preventing her from recognizing and acknowledging the obvious: that the acrimony being generated by this dispute can be ascribed wholly to the administration because of its unwillling to address the reasonable demands of the Sodexho workers.

    It is even more unfortunate that someone with the history of activism that she describes would try to implausibly suggest that the tactics of the Sodexho workers and organizers were dangerous and intimidating. As I have said before, if people in Mrak Hall find them so threatening, they should go and complain to the administration for creating the conditions that resulted in the protest.

    It is truly sad, because this is clearly becoming one of the propaganda cards being played by Vanderhoef and other administrators, that the Sodexho workers are threatening, belligerent and unreasonable, as a means of undermining community support for them, just as they are trying to undermine student supporter by threatening the students with residence hall fee increases.

    It is too bad that Robin, because of her position at Mrak, finds herself having to facilitate the public relations strategy of the administration in their attempts to resist meeting the demands of the Sodexho workers.

    –Richard Estes

  39. Peaceful Protestor

    Dear Vander-Guard:

    Thank you for reporting on the hypocrisy of UCD and the employees who wish to make excuses for the chancellor’s behavior. There is a name for it, but we won’t go there.

    In her statement, Robin Souza said:

    “I am old enough and liberal enough that I have participated in many many protests over the years, in Washington DC, Nevada Test Site, Farmworkers, etc etc, so I do have a little experience with protests. My point in mentioning that is that I know what peaceful protests are and while I am sympathetic to the Sodexho workers, I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were not non-violent (such as chaining the doors shut).”

    If Robin had in fact marched with the farmworkers she would know that chanting is very much a part of the United Farm Workers way of protesting. i.e. Si Se Puede!!!

    If she in fact protested over the Nevada Test Sites she would know or would have seen that many protestors chained themselves to gates in protest.

    If she in fact protested in Washington D.C. she would know from various marches and protests that chants, songs, and other forms of “peaceful disruption” are very common.

    Just look at the civil rights movement, peace movement, women’s rights, etc. these same methods have been used for many, many, many years. Just open up the history books.

    To say, “I know what peaceful protests are…I do not appreciate the tactics that have been used, which were NOT non-violent,” is trying to take attention away from Chancellor Vanderhoef’s unwillingness to negotiate.

    The courageous students and the courageous Sodexho workers who are exercising their freedom of speech and assembly are using the same NON-VIOLENT methods of protesting that have been used over the years.

    Souza may be uncomfortable because the curtain is being pulled back on Mrak hall for all to see the hypocrisy of our fine UCD institution, the institution where she works.

    I have worked at the university and I know for a fact that it is not in the job description of an MSO to act as a security guard for Mrak Hall.

    To use an old chant from days gone by:

    You can run and
    You can hide,
    But we can see your guilty side Larry!

    Sit down and negotiate!

    Signed,Peaceful Protestor
    UCD Alum / UCD Employee

    P.S. No justice, no peace! Keep up the great work – change doesn’t come easily.

  40. Richard

    It is unfortunate in Robin’s case that her need to satisfy her UCD employer is preventing her from recognizing and acknowledging the obvious: that the acrimony being generated by this dispute can be ascribed wholly to the administration because of its unwillling to address the reasonable demands of the Sodexho workers.

    It is even more unfortunate that someone with the history of activism that she describes would try to implausibly suggest that the tactics of the Sodexho workers and organizers were dangerous and intimidating. As I have said before, if people in Mrak Hall find them so threatening, they should go and complain to the administration for creating the conditions that resulted in the protest.

    It is truly sad, because this is clearly becoming one of the propaganda cards being played by Vanderhoef and other administrators, that the Sodexho workers are threatening, belligerent and unreasonable, as a means of undermining community support for them, just as they are trying to undermine student supporter by threatening the students with residence hall fee increases.

    It is too bad that Robin, because of her position at Mrak, finds herself having to facilitate the public relations strategy of the administration in their attempts to resist meeting the demands of the Sodexho workers.

    –Richard Estes

  41. Don Shor

    DPD: “Robin, I am most willing to meet or talk with you at your convenience.”

    That would have been more appropriate before you identified her in this article. Getting both sides of the story first, and all that, since you are now subjecting her to the hostile commentary of some of your readers.

    I would not assume that Robin recognized you. But you could have just asked her that before you posted this article.

  42. Don Shor

    DPD: “Robin, I am most willing to meet or talk with you at your convenience.”

    That would have been more appropriate before you identified her in this article. Getting both sides of the story first, and all that, since you are now subjecting her to the hostile commentary of some of your readers.

    I would not assume that Robin recognized you. But you could have just asked her that before you posted this article.

  43. Don Shor

    DPD: “Robin, I am most willing to meet or talk with you at your convenience.”

    That would have been more appropriate before you identified her in this article. Getting both sides of the story first, and all that, since you are now subjecting her to the hostile commentary of some of your readers.

    I would not assume that Robin recognized you. But you could have just asked her that before you posted this article.

  44. Don Shor

    DPD: “Robin, I am most willing to meet or talk with you at your convenience.”

    That would have been more appropriate before you identified her in this article. Getting both sides of the story first, and all that, since you are now subjecting her to the hostile commentary of some of your readers.

    I would not assume that Robin recognized you. But you could have just asked her that before you posted this article.

  45. Anonymous

    This blog is the only thing that tells most of us what is actually going on this community. I’m very grateful that it is around. As we can see, there were no other news services willing to come out and report, not even the Aggie.

  46. Anonymous

    This blog is the only thing that tells most of us what is actually going on this community. I’m very grateful that it is around. As we can see, there were no other news services willing to come out and report, not even the Aggie.

  47. Anonymous

    This blog is the only thing that tells most of us what is actually going on this community. I’m very grateful that it is around. As we can see, there were no other news services willing to come out and report, not even the Aggie.

  48. Anonymous

    This blog is the only thing that tells most of us what is actually going on this community. I’m very grateful that it is around. As we can see, there were no other news services willing to come out and report, not even the Aggie.

  49. Richard

    I think that it is important to keep our eyes on the ball here.

    Robin works for the administration, and is constrained to accept their public relations strategy, at a regrettable personal cost. It’s a side issue, except to the extent that it reveals the administration’s strategy.

    The real issue is, when are Vanderhoef and the administration going to do what is right by the Sodexdo workers? Because they want to talk about anything but that, the purportedly uncouth, belligerent protest tactics, the alleged need to increase student residence hall fees, how Robin is supposedly being victimized by all this . . . .

    anything to avoid talking about why UCD insists upon treating low wage workers so poorly while trying their administrators so well

    –Richard Estes

  50. katie

    The issue at hand has two problems:
    1. the spectacle caused at yesterdays meeting was created by the administration, not the organizers.
    2. the significance of the meeting in the 3 year campaign is being ignored.
    The UC Police shut down the elevators and posted a guard at the locked stairwell to prevent organizers to show their support outside the meeting. They chose to escalate the tension, not the organizers. We came to support our friends in the meeting, and nothing else, and to be locked out and patrolled by police presence is humiliating, degrading, and completely absurd. A police patrol car sat outside, causing us to go inside. Then, two men with walkie talkies conveniently decided to sit in the lobby with us and walk around watching us, as we sat on couches and snacked on trail mix. Additionally, the administration told employees that “The Sodexho Organizers are coming back”, causing many 1st floor employees to shut their blinds and peer through them. Some even poked their heads through office doors to see what we were up to. Around 4:40 in the afternoon, employees started flooding out of upstairs offices, unable to use the elevators, and told some of us that the organizers were here and about to start protesting (news to us, seeing as how we weren’t starting anything). Finally at 5, a police officer and several employees, including Robin Souza, locked down the doors, and then escorted us out of the building. After we were outside, they maintained their presence at the locked doors as employees filed out, and asked each employee to make sure no one walked in when they opened the door. If a door shut too slowly, Robin would walk up and shut it, so that we didn’t try to get back in. This behavior was unnecessary and demeaning, and certainly unbecoming of employees meant to work for the university and represent us, the students. Their fear for their worker’s sanity, although thoughtful, is ludicrous. If they really cared, they wouldn’t tell their employees lies about the organizers or attempt to demonize our campaign. Their actions were alienating for all involved. If safety is their first issue, they should consider offering UC jobs to the contracted out workers who can’t tend to their own health because they aren’t paid decent wages. I am extremely disappointed with the way the administration handled yesterday’s meeting.
    Additionally, I hope some people put our actions in context, instead of attributing our protests to the actions of rash individuals. This was the 1st time in 3 years that the chancellor has agreed to meet with student and career workers. The first two years, which were spent going through traditional channels of voicing grievances and requesting meetings with administrators, went by without any progress or attention at all. The campaign and the workers were completely ignored. The only time this administration has shown any concern is during the past 3 months, when we have stopped following their directions and have staged protests and meetings of our own. Its sad that disruption is the only way we can get any attention, but that is not our call—the administration has the power to change that whenever they wish to. However, we will not go away simply because Shimek lacks manners and is disrespectful to the people he meets with. We will continue with the campaign until UC Jobs are put on the table, and we are allowed to bring a union representative to a meeting.
    Until the chancellor agrees to see a Union organizer, this is not an issue of money. Right now it is about people, and what they’ve asked the administration to do. They need UC Jobs, and they need the health care that goes with them. Until Chancellor Vanderhoef recognizes that, there’s nothing to be done about money. We need to bring in the union to talk to the administration, so that they can discuss where to find the money and how to handle costs. The union does not want to screw the university or the students, and they will look for reasonable ways to make UC Jobs a possibility, but without access to administrators, solutions can’t be found.
    –and on a personal note, i personally feel disrespected and alienated by all those who work in Mrak Hall, be it administrators or dutiful employees. Both treat the organizers as a spectacle, as something to watch for entertainment value, and not as people with important issues to discuss. i feel that i was treated rudely yesterday by Robin Souza, who, precisely as she stated, did not speak to us once. We were escorted out of the building like criminals, and Robin barely even looked at us. She couldn’t care less who we were as individuals, and she only cares about doing her job and protecting the administrator’s wishes. if she really cared, she would take it upon herself to talk to the administration and tell them to stop spreading lies about us. And she would look us in the eye when she shuts us out of our university and have the decency to ackowledge that what she’s doing is descpicable. Robin, i am disappointed in you, and i want you to know that.

    if we were going to plan some sort of action or civil disobedience, we would have announced it, and we would have been sucessful. if the administration thinks that they avoided some sort of show down, they can stop congratulating themselves, because they avoided nothing. We planned nothing, and even though we were provoked, we did nothing. They have only proven to me that something needs to change up there, and i personally will not rest until i see that change.

  51. Richard

    I think that it is important to keep our eyes on the ball here.

    Robin works for the administration, and is constrained to accept their public relations strategy, at a regrettable personal cost. It’s a side issue, except to the extent that it reveals the administration’s strategy.

    The real issue is, when are Vanderhoef and the administration going to do what is right by the Sodexdo workers? Because they want to talk about anything but that, the purportedly uncouth, belligerent protest tactics, the alleged need to increase student residence hall fees, how Robin is supposedly being victimized by all this . . . .

    anything to avoid talking about why UCD insists upon treating low wage workers so poorly while trying their administrators so well

    –Richard Estes

  52. katie

    The issue at hand has two problems:
    1. the spectacle caused at yesterdays meeting was created by the administration, not the organizers.
    2. the significance of the meeting in the 3 year campaign is being ignored.
    The UC Police shut down the elevators and posted a guard at the locked stairwell to prevent organizers to show their support outside the meeting. They chose to escalate the tension, not the organizers. We came to support our friends in the meeting, and nothing else, and to be locked out and patrolled by police presence is humiliating, degrading, and completely absurd. A police patrol car sat outside, causing us to go inside. Then, two men with walkie talkies conveniently decided to sit in the lobby with us and walk around watching us, as we sat on couches and snacked on trail mix. Additionally, the administration told employees that “The Sodexho Organizers are coming back”, causing many 1st floor employees to shut their blinds and peer through them. Some even poked their heads through office doors to see what we were up to. Around 4:40 in the afternoon, employees started flooding out of upstairs offices, unable to use the elevators, and told some of us that the organizers were here and about to start protesting (news to us, seeing as how we weren’t starting anything). Finally at 5, a police officer and several employees, including Robin Souza, locked down the doors, and then escorted us out of the building. After we were outside, they maintained their presence at the locked doors as employees filed out, and asked each employee to make sure no one walked in when they opened the door. If a door shut too slowly, Robin would walk up and shut it, so that we didn’t try to get back in. This behavior was unnecessary and demeaning, and certainly unbecoming of employees meant to work for the university and represent us, the students. Their fear for their worker’s sanity, although thoughtful, is ludicrous. If they really cared, they wouldn’t tell their employees lies about the organizers or attempt to demonize our campaign. Their actions were alienating for all involved. If safety is their first issue, they should consider offering UC jobs to the contracted out workers who can’t tend to their own health because they aren’t paid decent wages. I am extremely disappointed with the way the administration handled yesterday’s meeting.
    Additionally, I hope some people put our actions in context, instead of attributing our protests to the actions of rash individuals. This was the 1st time in 3 years that the chancellor has agreed to meet with student and career workers. The first two years, which were spent going through traditional channels of voicing grievances and requesting meetings with administrators, went by without any progress or attention at all. The campaign and the workers were completely ignored. The only time this administration has shown any concern is during the past 3 months, when we have stopped following their directions and have staged protests and meetings of our own. Its sad that disruption is the only way we can get any attention, but that is not our call—the administration has the power to change that whenever they wish to. However, we will not go away simply because Shimek lacks manners and is disrespectful to the people he meets with. We will continue with the campaign until UC Jobs are put on the table, and we are allowed to bring a union representative to a meeting.
    Until the chancellor agrees to see a Union organizer, this is not an issue of money. Right now it is about people, and what they’ve asked the administration to do. They need UC Jobs, and they need the health care that goes with them. Until Chancellor Vanderhoef recognizes that, there’s nothing to be done about money. We need to bring in the union to talk to the administration, so that they can discuss where to find the money and how to handle costs. The union does not want to screw the university or the students, and they will look for reasonable ways to make UC Jobs a possibility, but without access to administrators, solutions can’t be found.
    –and on a personal note, i personally feel disrespected and alienated by all those who work in Mrak Hall, be it administrators or dutiful employees. Both treat the organizers as a spectacle, as something to watch for entertainment value, and not as people with important issues to discuss. i feel that i was treated rudely yesterday by Robin Souza, who, precisely as she stated, did not speak to us once. We were escorted out of the building like criminals, and Robin barely even looked at us. She couldn’t care less who we were as individuals, and she only cares about doing her job and protecting the administrator’s wishes. if she really cared, she would take it upon herself to talk to the administration and tell them to stop spreading lies about us. And she would look us in the eye when she shuts us out of our university and have the decency to ackowledge that what she’s doing is descpicable. Robin, i am disappointed in you, and i want you to know that.

    if we were going to plan some sort of action or civil disobedience, we would have announced it, and we would have been sucessful. if the administration thinks that they avoided some sort of show down, they can stop congratulating themselves, because they avoided nothing. We planned nothing, and even though we were provoked, we did nothing. They have only proven to me that something needs to change up there, and i personally will not rest until i see that change.

  53. Richard

    I think that it is important to keep our eyes on the ball here.

    Robin works for the administration, and is constrained to accept their public relations strategy, at a regrettable personal cost. It’s a side issue, except to the extent that it reveals the administration’s strategy.

    The real issue is, when are Vanderhoef and the administration going to do what is right by the Sodexdo workers? Because they want to talk about anything but that, the purportedly uncouth, belligerent protest tactics, the alleged need to increase student residence hall fees, how Robin is supposedly being victimized by all this . . . .

    anything to avoid talking about why UCD insists upon treating low wage workers so poorly while trying their administrators so well

    –Richard Estes

  54. katie

    The issue at hand has two problems:
    1. the spectacle caused at yesterdays meeting was created by the administration, not the organizers.
    2. the significance of the meeting in the 3 year campaign is being ignored.
    The UC Police shut down the elevators and posted a guard at the locked stairwell to prevent organizers to show their support outside the meeting. They chose to escalate the tension, not the organizers. We came to support our friends in the meeting, and nothing else, and to be locked out and patrolled by police presence is humiliating, degrading, and completely absurd. A police patrol car sat outside, causing us to go inside. Then, two men with walkie talkies conveniently decided to sit in the lobby with us and walk around watching us, as we sat on couches and snacked on trail mix. Additionally, the administration told employees that “The Sodexho Organizers are coming back”, causing many 1st floor employees to shut their blinds and peer through them. Some even poked their heads through office doors to see what we were up to. Around 4:40 in the afternoon, employees started flooding out of upstairs offices, unable to use the elevators, and told some of us that the organizers were here and about to start protesting (news to us, seeing as how we weren’t starting anything). Finally at 5, a police officer and several employees, including Robin Souza, locked down the doors, and then escorted us out of the building. After we were outside, they maintained their presence at the locked doors as employees filed out, and asked each employee to make sure no one walked in when they opened the door. If a door shut too slowly, Robin would walk up and shut it, so that we didn’t try to get back in. This behavior was unnecessary and demeaning, and certainly unbecoming of employees meant to work for the university and represent us, the students. Their fear for their worker’s sanity, although thoughtful, is ludicrous. If they really cared, they wouldn’t tell their employees lies about the organizers or attempt to demonize our campaign. Their actions were alienating for all involved. If safety is their first issue, they should consider offering UC jobs to the contracted out workers who can’t tend to their own health because they aren’t paid decent wages. I am extremely disappointed with the way the administration handled yesterday’s meeting.
    Additionally, I hope some people put our actions in context, instead of attributing our protests to the actions of rash individuals. This was the 1st time in 3 years that the chancellor has agreed to meet with student and career workers. The first two years, which were spent going through traditional channels of voicing grievances and requesting meetings with administrators, went by without any progress or attention at all. The campaign and the workers were completely ignored. The only time this administration has shown any concern is during the past 3 months, when we have stopped following their directions and have staged protests and meetings of our own. Its sad that disruption is the only way we can get any attention, but that is not our call—the administration has the power to change that whenever they wish to. However, we will not go away simply because Shimek lacks manners and is disrespectful to the people he meets with. We will continue with the campaign until UC Jobs are put on the table, and we are allowed to bring a union representative to a meeting.
    Until the chancellor agrees to see a Union organizer, this is not an issue of money. Right now it is about people, and what they’ve asked the administration to do. They need UC Jobs, and they need the health care that goes with them. Until Chancellor Vanderhoef recognizes that, there’s nothing to be done about money. We need to bring in the union to talk to the administration, so that they can discuss where to find the money and how to handle costs. The union does not want to screw the university or the students, and they will look for reasonable ways to make UC Jobs a possibility, but without access to administrators, solutions can’t be found.
    –and on a personal note, i personally feel disrespected and alienated by all those who work in Mrak Hall, be it administrators or dutiful employees. Both treat the organizers as a spectacle, as something to watch for entertainment value, and not as people with important issues to discuss. i feel that i was treated rudely yesterday by Robin Souza, who, precisely as she stated, did not speak to us once. We were escorted out of the building like criminals, and Robin barely even looked at us. She couldn’t care less who we were as individuals, and she only cares about doing her job and protecting the administrator’s wishes. if she really cared, she would take it upon herself to talk to the administration and tell them to stop spreading lies about us. And she would look us in the eye when she shuts us out of our university and have the decency to ackowledge that what she’s doing is descpicable. Robin, i am disappointed in you, and i want you to know that.

    if we were going to plan some sort of action or civil disobedience, we would have announced it, and we would have been sucessful. if the administration thinks that they avoided some sort of show down, they can stop congratulating themselves, because they avoided nothing. We planned nothing, and even though we were provoked, we did nothing. They have only proven to me that something needs to change up there, and i personally will not rest until i see that change.

  55. Richard

    I think that it is important to keep our eyes on the ball here.

    Robin works for the administration, and is constrained to accept their public relations strategy, at a regrettable personal cost. It’s a side issue, except to the extent that it reveals the administration’s strategy.

    The real issue is, when are Vanderhoef and the administration going to do what is right by the Sodexdo workers? Because they want to talk about anything but that, the purportedly uncouth, belligerent protest tactics, the alleged need to increase student residence hall fees, how Robin is supposedly being victimized by all this . . . .

    anything to avoid talking about why UCD insists upon treating low wage workers so poorly while trying their administrators so well

    –Richard Estes

  56. katie

    The issue at hand has two problems:
    1. the spectacle caused at yesterdays meeting was created by the administration, not the organizers.
    2. the significance of the meeting in the 3 year campaign is being ignored.
    The UC Police shut down the elevators and posted a guard at the locked stairwell to prevent organizers to show their support outside the meeting. They chose to escalate the tension, not the organizers. We came to support our friends in the meeting, and nothing else, and to be locked out and patrolled by police presence is humiliating, degrading, and completely absurd. A police patrol car sat outside, causing us to go inside. Then, two men with walkie talkies conveniently decided to sit in the lobby with us and walk around watching us, as we sat on couches and snacked on trail mix. Additionally, the administration told employees that “The Sodexho Organizers are coming back”, causing many 1st floor employees to shut their blinds and peer through them. Some even poked their heads through office doors to see what we were up to. Around 4:40 in the afternoon, employees started flooding out of upstairs offices, unable to use the elevators, and told some of us that the organizers were here and about to start protesting (news to us, seeing as how we weren’t starting anything). Finally at 5, a police officer and several employees, including Robin Souza, locked down the doors, and then escorted us out of the building. After we were outside, they maintained their presence at the locked doors as employees filed out, and asked each employee to make sure no one walked in when they opened the door. If a door shut too slowly, Robin would walk up and shut it, so that we didn’t try to get back in. This behavior was unnecessary and demeaning, and certainly unbecoming of employees meant to work for the university and represent us, the students. Their fear for their worker’s sanity, although thoughtful, is ludicrous. If they really cared, they wouldn’t tell their employees lies about the organizers or attempt to demonize our campaign. Their actions were alienating for all involved. If safety is their first issue, they should consider offering UC jobs to the contracted out workers who can’t tend to their own health because they aren’t paid decent wages. I am extremely disappointed with the way the administration handled yesterday’s meeting.
    Additionally, I hope some people put our actions in context, instead of attributing our protests to the actions of rash individuals. This was the 1st time in 3 years that the chancellor has agreed to meet with student and career workers. The first two years, which were spent going through traditional channels of voicing grievances and requesting meetings with administrators, went by without any progress or attention at all. The campaign and the workers were completely ignored. The only time this administration has shown any concern is during the past 3 months, when we have stopped following their directions and have staged protests and meetings of our own. Its sad that disruption is the only way we can get any attention, but that is not our call—the administration has the power to change that whenever they wish to. However, we will not go away simply because Shimek lacks manners and is disrespectful to the people he meets with. We will continue with the campaign until UC Jobs are put on the table, and we are allowed to bring a union representative to a meeting.
    Until the chancellor agrees to see a Union organizer, this is not an issue of money. Right now it is about people, and what they’ve asked the administration to do. They need UC Jobs, and they need the health care that goes with them. Until Chancellor Vanderhoef recognizes that, there’s nothing to be done about money. We need to bring in the union to talk to the administration, so that they can discuss where to find the money and how to handle costs. The union does not want to screw the university or the students, and they will look for reasonable ways to make UC Jobs a possibility, but without access to administrators, solutions can’t be found.
    –and on a personal note, i personally feel disrespected and alienated by all those who work in Mrak Hall, be it administrators or dutiful employees. Both treat the organizers as a spectacle, as something to watch for entertainment value, and not as people with important issues to discuss. i feel that i was treated rudely yesterday by Robin Souza, who, precisely as she stated, did not speak to us once. We were escorted out of the building like criminals, and Robin barely even looked at us. She couldn’t care less who we were as individuals, and she only cares about doing her job and protecting the administrator’s wishes. if she really cared, she would take it upon herself to talk to the administration and tell them to stop spreading lies about us. And she would look us in the eye when she shuts us out of our university and have the decency to ackowledge that what she’s doing is descpicable. Robin, i am disappointed in you, and i want you to know that.

    if we were going to plan some sort of action or civil disobedience, we would have announced it, and we would have been sucessful. if the administration thinks that they avoided some sort of show down, they can stop congratulating themselves, because they avoided nothing. We planned nothing, and even though we were provoked, we did nothing. They have only proven to me that something needs to change up there, and i personally will not rest until i see that change.

  57. Anonymous

    Dear Katie, I was not an escorter, maybe you have me mixed up with an escorter. I was standing at the glass door on the North side from about 5:02 til about 5:20 making sure that no one unauthorized entered the building. Lamar saw me, and we waved at each other, and of course David saw me too. I don’t know you so it is interesting that you despise me without ever talking to me or knowing me. I really think that the blog should address the issues and not be a personal attack, I don’t understand what purpose these personal attacks serve. Sincerely Robin Souza

  58. Anonymous

    Dear Katie, I was not an escorter, maybe you have me mixed up with an escorter. I was standing at the glass door on the North side from about 5:02 til about 5:20 making sure that no one unauthorized entered the building. Lamar saw me, and we waved at each other, and of course David saw me too. I don’t know you so it is interesting that you despise me without ever talking to me or knowing me. I really think that the blog should address the issues and not be a personal attack, I don’t understand what purpose these personal attacks serve. Sincerely Robin Souza

  59. Anonymous

    Dear Katie, I was not an escorter, maybe you have me mixed up with an escorter. I was standing at the glass door on the North side from about 5:02 til about 5:20 making sure that no one unauthorized entered the building. Lamar saw me, and we waved at each other, and of course David saw me too. I don’t know you so it is interesting that you despise me without ever talking to me or knowing me. I really think that the blog should address the issues and not be a personal attack, I don’t understand what purpose these personal attacks serve. Sincerely Robin Souza

  60. Anonymous

    Dear Katie, I was not an escorter, maybe you have me mixed up with an escorter. I was standing at the glass door on the North side from about 5:02 til about 5:20 making sure that no one unauthorized entered the building. Lamar saw me, and we waved at each other, and of course David saw me too. I don’t know you so it is interesting that you despise me without ever talking to me or knowing me. I really think that the blog should address the issues and not be a personal attack, I don’t understand what purpose these personal attacks serve. Sincerely Robin Souza

  61. Michelle

    Robin –

    First of all – there have been absolutely NO personal attacks.

    Don’t play the victim role.

    You have been criticized for your actions. Maybe that is fair — maybe that is unfair. We can debate that. However, do you believe that a public employee’s actions should not be scrutinized?

    If you happened to be Jane Doe carrying out the same disrepsectful actions towards the students and trying to protect the administration’s lack of progress on this issue you would still be criticized.

    For every action there is a reaction Robin. Again, stop playing victim. Take responsiblity for your actions the way the students and workers have.

    Now, back to the REAL issue.

    Students and Sodexho Workers:

    1) Organize and lobby members of the CA State Legislature. Do it next week. ASAP. They are going on break for a month or so.

    In particular, lobby the Latino Caucus Members since they make up the majority and they represent the majority ethnic group of Sodexho workers.

    2) Write letters and make appointments with:

    a) Boxer
    b) Feinstein
    c) Pelosi

    etc.

    Embarass the university for their inaction on this matter. Bring pressure from all levels.

    Unfortunately it’s what makes change happen. When Vanderhoeff is on local and /or national TV having to explain why UCD is the ONLY UC that treats its foodservice workers this way…he may be more inclined to negotiate than to send in his lackey Dennis Shemeck.

    Keep up the great work!!!

  62. Michelle

    Robin –

    First of all – there have been absolutely NO personal attacks.

    Don’t play the victim role.

    You have been criticized for your actions. Maybe that is fair — maybe that is unfair. We can debate that. However, do you believe that a public employee’s actions should not be scrutinized?

    If you happened to be Jane Doe carrying out the same disrepsectful actions towards the students and trying to protect the administration’s lack of progress on this issue you would still be criticized.

    For every action there is a reaction Robin. Again, stop playing victim. Take responsiblity for your actions the way the students and workers have.

    Now, back to the REAL issue.

    Students and Sodexho Workers:

    1) Organize and lobby members of the CA State Legislature. Do it next week. ASAP. They are going on break for a month or so.

    In particular, lobby the Latino Caucus Members since they make up the majority and they represent the majority ethnic group of Sodexho workers.

    2) Write letters and make appointments with:

    a) Boxer
    b) Feinstein
    c) Pelosi

    etc.

    Embarass the university for their inaction on this matter. Bring pressure from all levels.

    Unfortunately it’s what makes change happen. When Vanderhoeff is on local and /or national TV having to explain why UCD is the ONLY UC that treats its foodservice workers this way…he may be more inclined to negotiate than to send in his lackey Dennis Shemeck.

    Keep up the great work!!!

  63. Michelle

    Robin –

    First of all – there have been absolutely NO personal attacks.

    Don’t play the victim role.

    You have been criticized for your actions. Maybe that is fair — maybe that is unfair. We can debate that. However, do you believe that a public employee’s actions should not be scrutinized?

    If you happened to be Jane Doe carrying out the same disrepsectful actions towards the students and trying to protect the administration’s lack of progress on this issue you would still be criticized.

    For every action there is a reaction Robin. Again, stop playing victim. Take responsiblity for your actions the way the students and workers have.

    Now, back to the REAL issue.

    Students and Sodexho Workers:

    1) Organize and lobby members of the CA State Legislature. Do it next week. ASAP. They are going on break for a month or so.

    In particular, lobby the Latino Caucus Members since they make up the majority and they represent the majority ethnic group of Sodexho workers.

    2) Write letters and make appointments with:

    a) Boxer
    b) Feinstein
    c) Pelosi

    etc.

    Embarass the university for their inaction on this matter. Bring pressure from all levels.

    Unfortunately it’s what makes change happen. When Vanderhoeff is on local and /or national TV having to explain why UCD is the ONLY UC that treats its foodservice workers this way…he may be more inclined to negotiate than to send in his lackey Dennis Shemeck.

    Keep up the great work!!!

  64. Michelle

    Robin –

    First of all – there have been absolutely NO personal attacks.

    Don’t play the victim role.

    You have been criticized for your actions. Maybe that is fair — maybe that is unfair. We can debate that. However, do you believe that a public employee’s actions should not be scrutinized?

    If you happened to be Jane Doe carrying out the same disrepsectful actions towards the students and trying to protect the administration’s lack of progress on this issue you would still be criticized.

    For every action there is a reaction Robin. Again, stop playing victim. Take responsiblity for your actions the way the students and workers have.

    Now, back to the REAL issue.

    Students and Sodexho Workers:

    1) Organize and lobby members of the CA State Legislature. Do it next week. ASAP. They are going on break for a month or so.

    In particular, lobby the Latino Caucus Members since they make up the majority and they represent the majority ethnic group of Sodexho workers.

    2) Write letters and make appointments with:

    a) Boxer
    b) Feinstein
    c) Pelosi

    etc.

    Embarass the university for their inaction on this matter. Bring pressure from all levels.

    Unfortunately it’s what makes change happen. When Vanderhoeff is on local and /or national TV having to explain why UCD is the ONLY UC that treats its foodservice workers this way…he may be more inclined to negotiate than to send in his lackey Dennis Shemeck.

    Keep up the great work!!!

  65. Anonymous

    Wow, I re-read the portion on Robin, it seemed pretty mild, not sure why people are getting so bent out of shape on that, compared to what Shimek did to the students, where’s the outrage there???

  66. Anonymous

    Wow, I re-read the portion on Robin, it seemed pretty mild, not sure why people are getting so bent out of shape on that, compared to what Shimek did to the students, where’s the outrage there???

  67. Anonymous

    Wow, I re-read the portion on Robin, it seemed pretty mild, not sure why people are getting so bent out of shape on that, compared to what Shimek did to the students, where’s the outrage there???

  68. Anonymous

    Wow, I re-read the portion on Robin, it seemed pretty mild, not sure why people are getting so bent out of shape on that, compared to what Shimek did to the students, where’s the outrage there???

  69. Mary

    Robin –

    I think that a person can despise another for their actions or inactions when that person sees injustice take place and does nothing but contribute.

    It’s fair and it’s reasonable.

    I agree with Michelle. Don’t play victim. Stick to the REAL issues.

  70. Mary

    Robin –

    I think that a person can despise another for their actions or inactions when that person sees injustice take place and does nothing but contribute.

    It’s fair and it’s reasonable.

    I agree with Michelle. Don’t play victim. Stick to the REAL issues.

  71. Mary

    Robin –

    I think that a person can despise another for their actions or inactions when that person sees injustice take place and does nothing but contribute.

    It’s fair and it’s reasonable.

    I agree with Michelle. Don’t play victim. Stick to the REAL issues.

  72. Mary

    Robin –

    I think that a person can despise another for their actions or inactions when that person sees injustice take place and does nothing but contribute.

    It’s fair and it’s reasonable.

    I agree with Michelle. Don’t play victim. Stick to the REAL issues.

  73. Anonymous

    “Anonymous” –

    The response was mild. It’s an attempt to distract from the real issues at hand, which are:

    1) Vanderhoef violating the Principles of Community when it’s of convenience to him;

    2) Dennis Shemeck acting as the UCD bully towards students and others in the meeting.

    3) UCD’s failure to negotiate with the UNION and Sodexho workers who deserve to be UCD employees with a good salary and benefits.

  74. Anonymous

    “Anonymous” –

    The response was mild. It’s an attempt to distract from the real issues at hand, which are:

    1) Vanderhoef violating the Principles of Community when it’s of convenience to him;

    2) Dennis Shemeck acting as the UCD bully towards students and others in the meeting.

    3) UCD’s failure to negotiate with the UNION and Sodexho workers who deserve to be UCD employees with a good salary and benefits.

  75. Anonymous

    “Anonymous” –

    The response was mild. It’s an attempt to distract from the real issues at hand, which are:

    1) Vanderhoef violating the Principles of Community when it’s of convenience to him;

    2) Dennis Shemeck acting as the UCD bully towards students and others in the meeting.

    3) UCD’s failure to negotiate with the UNION and Sodexho workers who deserve to be UCD employees with a good salary and benefits.

  76. Anonymous

    “Anonymous” –

    The response was mild. It’s an attempt to distract from the real issues at hand, which are:

    1) Vanderhoef violating the Principles of Community when it’s of convenience to him;

    2) Dennis Shemeck acting as the UCD bully towards students and others in the meeting.

    3) UCD’s failure to negotiate with the UNION and Sodexho workers who deserve to be UCD employees with a good salary and benefits.

  77. Anonymous

    Funny how people say “negotiate with us” when they mean “agree to our demands.”

    Also interesting that these protests by “food service workers” don’t seem to cause any disruption to food service on campus.

  78. Anonymous

    Funny how people say “negotiate with us” when they mean “agree to our demands.”

    Also interesting that these protests by “food service workers” don’t seem to cause any disruption to food service on campus.

  79. Anonymous

    Funny how people say “negotiate with us” when they mean “agree to our demands.”

    Also interesting that these protests by “food service workers” don’t seem to cause any disruption to food service on campus.

  80. Anonymous

    Funny how people say “negotiate with us” when they mean “agree to our demands.”

    Also interesting that these protests by “food service workers” don’t seem to cause any disruption to food service on campus.

  81. Anonymous

    Anonymous said:

    “Also interesting that these protests by “food service workers” don’t seem to cause any disruption to food service on campus.”

    Goes to show you how loyal they are to their jobs. You’ve just proven a point for them.

  82. Anonymous

    Anonymous said:

    “Also interesting that these protests by “food service workers” don’t seem to cause any disruption to food service on campus.”

    Goes to show you how loyal they are to their jobs. You’ve just proven a point for them.

  83. Anonymous

    Anonymous said:

    “Also interesting that these protests by “food service workers” don’t seem to cause any disruption to food service on campus.”

    Goes to show you how loyal they are to their jobs. You’ve just proven a point for them.

  84. Anonymous

    Anonymous said:

    “Also interesting that these protests by “food service workers” don’t seem to cause any disruption to food service on campus.”

    Goes to show you how loyal they are to their jobs. You’ve just proven a point for them.

  85. 無名 - wu ming

    political support is very important, it was one of the reasons that the university ultimately came to the table and negotiated a decent contract with academic student employee union back in 2003-2004. as long as they’re dealing with students or low-wage employees, they will stall and disregard your demands, but once they get pressure from their peer class, they tend to become more willing to deal.

    it is good to see wolk on the right side of this, but the food service workers would do well to gather a larger number of sympathetic pols, and make life difficult for vanderhoef et al.

    if councilmember souza is interested in standing with the workers, all he has to do is show up or speak out on their bahalf. i have seen heystek, yamada and thompson at prior protests, but souza has not showed up to my knowledge.

    as the old song goes, what side you on?

  86. Doug Paul Davis

    I think anonymous raises two very good points that need to be discussed here.

    The first point is the suggestion that negotiate means “agree to our demands.” From my discussions, I don’t think that is the approach the protesters are taking at all. In order to negotiate both sides have to be willing give some, and the university has thus far refused to give an inch from the perspective of the protesters.

    Second point is I think an insinuation that the food workers are not the ones involved in these protests. I think the food workers have made it a point not to interfere with campus food service. I think that was a conscious decision on their part.

    That said, I can tell you and can show you photographs that back me up, there were MANY protesters who were in fact food service workers, including some yesterday. So that insinuation is completely false, if that is indeed what was being insinuated.

  87. 無名 - wu ming

    political support is very important, it was one of the reasons that the university ultimately came to the table and negotiated a decent contract with academic student employee union back in 2003-2004. as long as they’re dealing with students or low-wage employees, they will stall and disregard your demands, but once they get pressure from their peer class, they tend to become more willing to deal.

    it is good to see wolk on the right side of this, but the food service workers would do well to gather a larger number of sympathetic pols, and make life difficult for vanderhoef et al.

    if councilmember souza is interested in standing with the workers, all he has to do is show up or speak out on their bahalf. i have seen heystek, yamada and thompson at prior protests, but souza has not showed up to my knowledge.

    as the old song goes, what side you on?

  88. Doug Paul Davis

    I think anonymous raises two very good points that need to be discussed here.

    The first point is the suggestion that negotiate means “agree to our demands.” From my discussions, I don’t think that is the approach the protesters are taking at all. In order to negotiate both sides have to be willing give some, and the university has thus far refused to give an inch from the perspective of the protesters.

    Second point is I think an insinuation that the food workers are not the ones involved in these protests. I think the food workers have made it a point not to interfere with campus food service. I think that was a conscious decision on their part.

    That said, I can tell you and can show you photographs that back me up, there were MANY protesters who were in fact food service workers, including some yesterday. So that insinuation is completely false, if that is indeed what was being insinuated.

  89. 無名 - wu ming

    political support is very important, it was one of the reasons that the university ultimately came to the table and negotiated a decent contract with academic student employee union back in 2003-2004. as long as they’re dealing with students or low-wage employees, they will stall and disregard your demands, but once they get pressure from their peer class, they tend to become more willing to deal.

    it is good to see wolk on the right side of this, but the food service workers would do well to gather a larger number of sympathetic pols, and make life difficult for vanderhoef et al.

    if councilmember souza is interested in standing with the workers, all he has to do is show up or speak out on their bahalf. i have seen heystek, yamada and thompson at prior protests, but souza has not showed up to my knowledge.

    as the old song goes, what side you on?

  90. Doug Paul Davis

    I think anonymous raises two very good points that need to be discussed here.

    The first point is the suggestion that negotiate means “agree to our demands.” From my discussions, I don’t think that is the approach the protesters are taking at all. In order to negotiate both sides have to be willing give some, and the university has thus far refused to give an inch from the perspective of the protesters.

    Second point is I think an insinuation that the food workers are not the ones involved in these protests. I think the food workers have made it a point not to interfere with campus food service. I think that was a conscious decision on their part.

    That said, I can tell you and can show you photographs that back me up, there were MANY protesters who were in fact food service workers, including some yesterday. So that insinuation is completely false, if that is indeed what was being insinuated.

  91. 無名 - wu ming

    political support is very important, it was one of the reasons that the university ultimately came to the table and negotiated a decent contract with academic student employee union back in 2003-2004. as long as they’re dealing with students or low-wage employees, they will stall and disregard your demands, but once they get pressure from their peer class, they tend to become more willing to deal.

    it is good to see wolk on the right side of this, but the food service workers would do well to gather a larger number of sympathetic pols, and make life difficult for vanderhoef et al.

    if councilmember souza is interested in standing with the workers, all he has to do is show up or speak out on their bahalf. i have seen heystek, yamada and thompson at prior protests, but souza has not showed up to my knowledge.

    as the old song goes, what side you on?

  92. Doug Paul Davis

    I think anonymous raises two very good points that need to be discussed here.

    The first point is the suggestion that negotiate means “agree to our demands.” From my discussions, I don’t think that is the approach the protesters are taking at all. In order to negotiate both sides have to be willing give some, and the university has thus far refused to give an inch from the perspective of the protesters.

    Second point is I think an insinuation that the food workers are not the ones involved in these protests. I think the food workers have made it a point not to interfere with campus food service. I think that was a conscious decision on their part.

    That said, I can tell you and can show you photographs that back me up, there were MANY protesters who were in fact food service workers, including some yesterday. So that insinuation is completely false, if that is indeed what was being insinuated.

  93. Richard

    the distinction between “negotiate” and “meet our demands” is just another red herring put out by pro-administration posters

    the fact is, Vanderhoef is not willing to make Sodexho workers university employees and permit them to have union representation, so much so that he refuses to meet with the union representatives that they have selected

    one wonders if he has so kind of irrational fear of contagion if he encounters them in the same room, if so, perhaps it could be assuaged by having everyone wear surgical gloves and masks, or, alternatively, they could engage in a teleconference with each at separate locations

    as usual, the defenders of the administration want to talk about anything, parse language to create linguistics discussions, anything other than the fact that Vanderhoef and the administration are adamantly refusing to engage the Sodexho workers on the fundamental questions as to their employment status and representation, and humiliate both the students and their Mrak Hall security staff and employees in pathetic displays of their authority

    –Richard Estes

  94. Richard

    the distinction between “negotiate” and “meet our demands” is just another red herring put out by pro-administration posters

    the fact is, Vanderhoef is not willing to make Sodexho workers university employees and permit them to have union representation, so much so that he refuses to meet with the union representatives that they have selected

    one wonders if he has so kind of irrational fear of contagion if he encounters them in the same room, if so, perhaps it could be assuaged by having everyone wear surgical gloves and masks, or, alternatively, they could engage in a teleconference with each at separate locations

    as usual, the defenders of the administration want to talk about anything, parse language to create linguistics discussions, anything other than the fact that Vanderhoef and the administration are adamantly refusing to engage the Sodexho workers on the fundamental questions as to their employment status and representation, and humiliate both the students and their Mrak Hall security staff and employees in pathetic displays of their authority

    –Richard Estes

  95. Richard

    the distinction between “negotiate” and “meet our demands” is just another red herring put out by pro-administration posters

    the fact is, Vanderhoef is not willing to make Sodexho workers university employees and permit them to have union representation, so much so that he refuses to meet with the union representatives that they have selected

    one wonders if he has so kind of irrational fear of contagion if he encounters them in the same room, if so, perhaps it could be assuaged by having everyone wear surgical gloves and masks, or, alternatively, they could engage in a teleconference with each at separate locations

    as usual, the defenders of the administration want to talk about anything, parse language to create linguistics discussions, anything other than the fact that Vanderhoef and the administration are adamantly refusing to engage the Sodexho workers on the fundamental questions as to their employment status and representation, and humiliate both the students and their Mrak Hall security staff and employees in pathetic displays of their authority

    –Richard Estes

  96. Richard

    the distinction between “negotiate” and “meet our demands” is just another red herring put out by pro-administration posters

    the fact is, Vanderhoef is not willing to make Sodexho workers university employees and permit them to have union representation, so much so that he refuses to meet with the union representatives that they have selected

    one wonders if he has so kind of irrational fear of contagion if he encounters them in the same room, if so, perhaps it could be assuaged by having everyone wear surgical gloves and masks, or, alternatively, they could engage in a teleconference with each at separate locations

    as usual, the defenders of the administration want to talk about anything, parse language to create linguistics discussions, anything other than the fact that Vanderhoef and the administration are adamantly refusing to engage the Sodexho workers on the fundamental questions as to their employment status and representation, and humiliate both the students and their Mrak Hall security staff and employees in pathetic displays of their authority

    –Richard Estes

  97. Doug Paul Davis

    Josh:

    They are getting paid around 10 per hour, they want to get paid 12 per hour. The big difference though is they are paying $100 per week for bare-bones health care, whereas university employees are paying $25 per week (I Think it is per week) for much better health coverage. Imagine making only $1600 per month before taxes and then having to pay out another $400 for health insurance.

  98. Doug Paul Davis

    Josh:

    They are getting paid around 10 per hour, they want to get paid 12 per hour. The big difference though is they are paying $100 per week for bare-bones health care, whereas university employees are paying $25 per week (I Think it is per week) for much better health coverage. Imagine making only $1600 per month before taxes and then having to pay out another $400 for health insurance.

  99. Doug Paul Davis

    Josh:

    They are getting paid around 10 per hour, they want to get paid 12 per hour. The big difference though is they are paying $100 per week for bare-bones health care, whereas university employees are paying $25 per week (I Think it is per week) for much better health coverage. Imagine making only $1600 per month before taxes and then having to pay out another $400 for health insurance.

  100. Doug Paul Davis

    Josh:

    They are getting paid around 10 per hour, they want to get paid 12 per hour. The big difference though is they are paying $100 per week for bare-bones health care, whereas university employees are paying $25 per week (I Think it is per week) for much better health coverage. Imagine making only $1600 per month before taxes and then having to pay out another $400 for health insurance.

  101. Don Shor

    DPD: Please verify those health insurance figures. Depending on their deductible and various other factors, they could getter better health coverage buying individual plans at Kaiser.

  102. Don Shor

    DPD: Please verify those health insurance figures. Depending on their deductible and various other factors, they could getter better health coverage buying individual plans at Kaiser.

  103. Don Shor

    DPD: Please verify those health insurance figures. Depending on their deductible and various other factors, they could getter better health coverage buying individual plans at Kaiser.

  104. Don Shor

    DPD: Please verify those health insurance figures. Depending on their deductible and various other factors, they could getter better health coverage buying individual plans at Kaiser.

  105. Anonymous

    Here is the website. These are the rates for employees making $43,000 or less per year. Employees making more per year pay more per month for their plans, so it’s what you might call a sliding scale. Note that these are the monthly rates. Also note that the benefits are ONLY for employees that are getting full or midrange benefits, (not short term workers, they only get core benefits) Also, something I have not seen mentioned yet is that these employees would change from a weekly (?) pay to monthly. All us UCD employees (except students assistants) are paid on a monthly payroll. This may be a bit of a surprise to adapt to when/if the workers become UCD employees. Sincerely, Robin

    http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/employees/
    health_welfare/medical/costs/
    medical_less_43k.htm

  106. Anonymous

    Here is the website. These are the rates for employees making $43,000 or less per year. Employees making more per year pay more per month for their plans, so it’s what you might call a sliding scale. Note that these are the monthly rates. Also note that the benefits are ONLY for employees that are getting full or midrange benefits, (not short term workers, they only get core benefits) Also, something I have not seen mentioned yet is that these employees would change from a weekly (?) pay to monthly. All us UCD employees (except students assistants) are paid on a monthly payroll. This may be a bit of a surprise to adapt to when/if the workers become UCD employees. Sincerely, Robin

    http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/employees/
    health_welfare/medical/costs/
    medical_less_43k.htm

  107. Anonymous

    Here is the website. These are the rates for employees making $43,000 or less per year. Employees making more per year pay more per month for their plans, so it’s what you might call a sliding scale. Note that these are the monthly rates. Also note that the benefits are ONLY for employees that are getting full or midrange benefits, (not short term workers, they only get core benefits) Also, something I have not seen mentioned yet is that these employees would change from a weekly (?) pay to monthly. All us UCD employees (except students assistants) are paid on a monthly payroll. This may be a bit of a surprise to adapt to when/if the workers become UCD employees. Sincerely, Robin

    http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/employees/
    health_welfare/medical/costs/
    medical_less_43k.htm

  108. Anonymous

    Here is the website. These are the rates for employees making $43,000 or less per year. Employees making more per year pay more per month for their plans, so it’s what you might call a sliding scale. Note that these are the monthly rates. Also note that the benefits are ONLY for employees that are getting full or midrange benefits, (not short term workers, they only get core benefits) Also, something I have not seen mentioned yet is that these employees would change from a weekly (?) pay to monthly. All us UCD employees (except students assistants) are paid on a monthly payroll. This may be a bit of a surprise to adapt to when/if the workers become UCD employees. Sincerely, Robin

    http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/employees/
    health_welfare/medical/costs/
    medical_less_43k.htm

  109. Anonymous

    The easy protests are the ones where we don’t need to decided which side we are on; supporting farm workers when we aren’t involved in agriculture or going out to the test site in Nevada when we want to spend our spring break protesting. The hard choices are when our own jobs pit us against our neighbors and co-workers.

    I feel sorry for everyone that has been been caught up and collaterally damaged by the administration’s intransigence. These things have a way of out living the conflict. The Chancellor is damaging the community.

    Further, the belligerence of the Chancellor’s assistant is revealing, troublesome and shameful.

  110. Anonymous

    The easy protests are the ones where we don’t need to decided which side we are on; supporting farm workers when we aren’t involved in agriculture or going out to the test site in Nevada when we want to spend our spring break protesting. The hard choices are when our own jobs pit us against our neighbors and co-workers.

    I feel sorry for everyone that has been been caught up and collaterally damaged by the administration’s intransigence. These things have a way of out living the conflict. The Chancellor is damaging the community.

    Further, the belligerence of the Chancellor’s assistant is revealing, troublesome and shameful.

  111. Anonymous

    The easy protests are the ones where we don’t need to decided which side we are on; supporting farm workers when we aren’t involved in agriculture or going out to the test site in Nevada when we want to spend our spring break protesting. The hard choices are when our own jobs pit us against our neighbors and co-workers.

    I feel sorry for everyone that has been been caught up and collaterally damaged by the administration’s intransigence. These things have a way of out living the conflict. The Chancellor is damaging the community.

    Further, the belligerence of the Chancellor’s assistant is revealing, troublesome and shameful.

  112. Anonymous

    The easy protests are the ones where we don’t need to decided which side we are on; supporting farm workers when we aren’t involved in agriculture or going out to the test site in Nevada when we want to spend our spring break protesting. The hard choices are when our own jobs pit us against our neighbors and co-workers.

    I feel sorry for everyone that has been been caught up and collaterally damaged by the administration’s intransigence. These things have a way of out living the conflict. The Chancellor is damaging the community.

    Further, the belligerence of the Chancellor’s assistant is revealing, troublesome and shameful.

  113. Anonymous

    The Sodexho workers want to be UCD employees. They want to be a part of the UCD health care plan and receive UCD benefits (retirement, etc.) just as Robin Souza, Larry Vanderhoef, and Dennis Schemeck receive these benefits and perks.

    It should be no different for food service workers than it should be for UCD administrators.

    They do not want to buy an individual Kaiser plan. If they did they would have already done so.

    I love the way that Vanderhoef defenders try to defend the embarrassing and greedy nature of Larry Vanderhoef and the university trying to give the workers other options.

    Thank goodness these people are not at the negotiating table. It’s always about what’s best for them but not others that reveals their true nature and shows an ugly side of humankind.

  114. Anonymous

    The Sodexho workers want to be UCD employees. They want to be a part of the UCD health care plan and receive UCD benefits (retirement, etc.) just as Robin Souza, Larry Vanderhoef, and Dennis Schemeck receive these benefits and perks.

    It should be no different for food service workers than it should be for UCD administrators.

    They do not want to buy an individual Kaiser plan. If they did they would have already done so.

    I love the way that Vanderhoef defenders try to defend the embarrassing and greedy nature of Larry Vanderhoef and the university trying to give the workers other options.

    Thank goodness these people are not at the negotiating table. It’s always about what’s best for them but not others that reveals their true nature and shows an ugly side of humankind.

  115. Anonymous

    The Sodexho workers want to be UCD employees. They want to be a part of the UCD health care plan and receive UCD benefits (retirement, etc.) just as Robin Souza, Larry Vanderhoef, and Dennis Schemeck receive these benefits and perks.

    It should be no different for food service workers than it should be for UCD administrators.

    They do not want to buy an individual Kaiser plan. If they did they would have already done so.

    I love the way that Vanderhoef defenders try to defend the embarrassing and greedy nature of Larry Vanderhoef and the university trying to give the workers other options.

    Thank goodness these people are not at the negotiating table. It’s always about what’s best for them but not others that reveals their true nature and shows an ugly side of humankind.

  116. Anonymous

    The Sodexho workers want to be UCD employees. They want to be a part of the UCD health care plan and receive UCD benefits (retirement, etc.) just as Robin Souza, Larry Vanderhoef, and Dennis Schemeck receive these benefits and perks.

    It should be no different for food service workers than it should be for UCD administrators.

    They do not want to buy an individual Kaiser plan. If they did they would have already done so.

    I love the way that Vanderhoef defenders try to defend the embarrassing and greedy nature of Larry Vanderhoef and the university trying to give the workers other options.

    Thank goodness these people are not at the negotiating table. It’s always about what’s best for them but not others that reveals their true nature and shows an ugly side of humankind.

  117. Don Shor

    “They do not want to buy an individual Kaiser plan. If they did they would have already done so.”

    I was not suggesting they should do so, or that they should be satisfied with their current health plan costs. I was simply questioning the costs that have been presented to us on this blog. I find it hard to believe that Sodexho workers are paying $400 a month for health insurance, given that anyone could buy it for less at Kaiser. They may be paying that much, for all I know. It would be nice to have some documentation, since the hourly wage difference is relatively small and the health insurance appears to be the main point of the protests.

    That was my point. Sorry you didn’t understand it.

    Actually, it’s a pretty simple question. If there is a Sodexho worker reading this blog, would you please tell us what your monthly cost is for health insurance? It would help to clarify the issues here.

    What is amazing to me is that the University apparently covers nearly all of the cost of health insurance for employees if they opt for Kaiser or other HMO’s, at least according to the link provided by Robin. Most of us pay far, far, far more for health insurance. I wonder what portion of the UC budget is for employee health coverage.

  118. Don Shor

    “They do not want to buy an individual Kaiser plan. If they did they would have already done so.”

    I was not suggesting they should do so, or that they should be satisfied with their current health plan costs. I was simply questioning the costs that have been presented to us on this blog. I find it hard to believe that Sodexho workers are paying $400 a month for health insurance, given that anyone could buy it for less at Kaiser. They may be paying that much, for all I know. It would be nice to have some documentation, since the hourly wage difference is relatively small and the health insurance appears to be the main point of the protests.

    That was my point. Sorry you didn’t understand it.

    Actually, it’s a pretty simple question. If there is a Sodexho worker reading this blog, would you please tell us what your monthly cost is for health insurance? It would help to clarify the issues here.

    What is amazing to me is that the University apparently covers nearly all of the cost of health insurance for employees if they opt for Kaiser or other HMO’s, at least according to the link provided by Robin. Most of us pay far, far, far more for health insurance. I wonder what portion of the UC budget is for employee health coverage.

  119. Don Shor

    “They do not want to buy an individual Kaiser plan. If they did they would have already done so.”

    I was not suggesting they should do so, or that they should be satisfied with their current health plan costs. I was simply questioning the costs that have been presented to us on this blog. I find it hard to believe that Sodexho workers are paying $400 a month for health insurance, given that anyone could buy it for less at Kaiser. They may be paying that much, for all I know. It would be nice to have some documentation, since the hourly wage difference is relatively small and the health insurance appears to be the main point of the protests.

    That was my point. Sorry you didn’t understand it.

    Actually, it’s a pretty simple question. If there is a Sodexho worker reading this blog, would you please tell us what your monthly cost is for health insurance? It would help to clarify the issues here.

    What is amazing to me is that the University apparently covers nearly all of the cost of health insurance for employees if they opt for Kaiser or other HMO’s, at least according to the link provided by Robin. Most of us pay far, far, far more for health insurance. I wonder what portion of the UC budget is for employee health coverage.

  120. Don Shor

    “They do not want to buy an individual Kaiser plan. If they did they would have already done so.”

    I was not suggesting they should do so, or that they should be satisfied with their current health plan costs. I was simply questioning the costs that have been presented to us on this blog. I find it hard to believe that Sodexho workers are paying $400 a month for health insurance, given that anyone could buy it for less at Kaiser. They may be paying that much, for all I know. It would be nice to have some documentation, since the hourly wage difference is relatively small and the health insurance appears to be the main point of the protests.

    That was my point. Sorry you didn’t understand it.

    Actually, it’s a pretty simple question. If there is a Sodexho worker reading this blog, would you please tell us what your monthly cost is for health insurance? It would help to clarify the issues here.

    What is amazing to me is that the University apparently covers nearly all of the cost of health insurance for employees if they opt for Kaiser or other HMO’s, at least according to the link provided by Robin. Most of us pay far, far, far more for health insurance. I wonder what portion of the UC budget is for employee health coverage.

  121. Anonymous

    “…Most of us pay far, far, far more for health insurance.”… has the disturbing subtext of our private- sector Middle Class being squeezed and angered at those who receive public sector benefits. Public sector employment is disparaged when the dream of being part of the private-sector economic boom is on the table. Distain can morphe into anger when the promised “filter-down” economics fails to materialize.

  122. Anonymous

    “…Most of us pay far, far, far more for health insurance.”… has the disturbing subtext of our private- sector Middle Class being squeezed and angered at those who receive public sector benefits. Public sector employment is disparaged when the dream of being part of the private-sector economic boom is on the table. Distain can morphe into anger when the promised “filter-down” economics fails to materialize.

  123. Anonymous

    “…Most of us pay far, far, far more for health insurance.”… has the disturbing subtext of our private- sector Middle Class being squeezed and angered at those who receive public sector benefits. Public sector employment is disparaged when the dream of being part of the private-sector economic boom is on the table. Distain can morphe into anger when the promised “filter-down” economics fails to materialize.

  124. Anonymous

    “…Most of us pay far, far, far more for health insurance.”… has the disturbing subtext of our private- sector Middle Class being squeezed and angered at those who receive public sector benefits. Public sector employment is disparaged when the dream of being part of the private-sector economic boom is on the table. Distain can morphe into anger when the promised “filter-down” economics fails to materialize.

  125. katie

    id like to point out that economics are not the issue yet. Right now its about human rights, and Sodexho’s violations. We want UC Jobs, and we’ve waited far too long, and much longer than other UCs, to get them. Waiting until the contract runs out (3 more years), would be rediculous.

    People need respect now.

    As far as money goes, how can we (student, worker, and union organizers) even begin to discuss where the money comes from if the chancellor won’t discuss it with us? We don’t have access to their books, and we’re not mind readers. Each university comes up with the funds in ways that fit their situation. Shimek won’t tell us what could work. instead he avoids the real issue, pits students against workers, and talks about student fees to scare us away. the reality is that no one knows where the money is going to come from, but we can’t even START to figure it out until the chancellor speaks to a union rep, who’s job it is to find funding solutions, and entertains the idea of UC Jobs.

    and to Robin Souza- if you want to talk about personal attacks, just wait until some woman stands at a door with a walkie talkie and a police officer with the sole intention of preventing you from entering a building you have no intention of entering. there were only ten of us there, and you have no idea who i am. How can you ask me what purpose the personal attacks serve? i have no idea, why don’t you ask Larry or Dennis. And please don’t shift blame from yourself by referring to “escorters”. The fact that there is even a difference is appaling. One persons job is to push us out the door, another person’s job is to keep us out? Who’s job was it to watch us from the corner of the room? or to sit on the couch watching us from the corner of his eye? Who’s job was it to spread rumor’s about the “sodexho campaigners” to the Mrak employees?

    Don’t dodge the issue. i dont know you, and im not personally attacking you. im angry at whoever had the job of discriminating against me, and you happen to be one of those people. You could change that very quickly, but you choose not to.

    THe real issue is UC jobs. Don’t talk about how aware you are, and how youve protested, if youre not going to stand by your words. if you understand where we’re coming from, and you understand our frustration, and you see how we’re being treated and ignored, why don’t you do something? How can you be sympathetic and indifferent at the same time?

    Don’t talk to me about personal attacks until you actually experience one. And don’t tell me what your job is until you actually do it.

    if this sounds angry, its because i am.

  126. katie

    id like to point out that economics are not the issue yet. Right now its about human rights, and Sodexho’s violations. We want UC Jobs, and we’ve waited far too long, and much longer than other UCs, to get them. Waiting until the contract runs out (3 more years), would be rediculous.

    People need respect now.

    As far as money goes, how can we (student, worker, and union organizers) even begin to discuss where the money comes from if the chancellor won’t discuss it with us? We don’t have access to their books, and we’re not mind readers. Each university comes up with the funds in ways that fit their situation. Shimek won’t tell us what could work. instead he avoids the real issue, pits students against workers, and talks about student fees to scare us away. the reality is that no one knows where the money is going to come from, but we can’t even START to figure it out until the chancellor speaks to a union rep, who’s job it is to find funding solutions, and entertains the idea of UC Jobs.

    and to Robin Souza- if you want to talk about personal attacks, just wait until some woman stands at a door with a walkie talkie and a police officer with the sole intention of preventing you from entering a building you have no intention of entering. there were only ten of us there, and you have no idea who i am. How can you ask me what purpose the personal attacks serve? i have no idea, why don’t you ask Larry or Dennis. And please don’t shift blame from yourself by referring to “escorters”. The fact that there is even a difference is appaling. One persons job is to push us out the door, another person’s job is to keep us out? Who’s job was it to watch us from the corner of the room? or to sit on the couch watching us from the corner of his eye? Who’s job was it to spread rumor’s about the “sodexho campaigners” to the Mrak employees?

    Don’t dodge the issue. i dont know you, and im not personally attacking you. im angry at whoever had the job of discriminating against me, and you happen to be one of those people. You could change that very quickly, but you choose not to.

    THe real issue is UC jobs. Don’t talk about how aware you are, and how youve protested, if youre not going to stand by your words. if you understand where we’re coming from, and you understand our frustration, and you see how we’re being treated and ignored, why don’t you do something? How can you be sympathetic and indifferent at the same time?

    Don’t talk to me about personal attacks until you actually experience one. And don’t tell me what your job is until you actually do it.

    if this sounds angry, its because i am.

  127. katie

    id like to point out that economics are not the issue yet. Right now its about human rights, and Sodexho’s violations. We want UC Jobs, and we’ve waited far too long, and much longer than other UCs, to get them. Waiting until the contract runs out (3 more years), would be rediculous.

    People need respect now.

    As far as money goes, how can we (student, worker, and union organizers) even begin to discuss where the money comes from if the chancellor won’t discuss it with us? We don’t have access to their books, and we’re not mind readers. Each university comes up with the funds in ways that fit their situation. Shimek won’t tell us what could work. instead he avoids the real issue, pits students against workers, and talks about student fees to scare us away. the reality is that no one knows where the money is going to come from, but we can’t even START to figure it out until the chancellor speaks to a union rep, who’s job it is to find funding solutions, and entertains the idea of UC Jobs.

    and to Robin Souza- if you want to talk about personal attacks, just wait until some woman stands at a door with a walkie talkie and a police officer with the sole intention of preventing you from entering a building you have no intention of entering. there were only ten of us there, and you have no idea who i am. How can you ask me what purpose the personal attacks serve? i have no idea, why don’t you ask Larry or Dennis. And please don’t shift blame from yourself by referring to “escorters”. The fact that there is even a difference is appaling. One persons job is to push us out the door, another person’s job is to keep us out? Who’s job was it to watch us from the corner of the room? or to sit on the couch watching us from the corner of his eye? Who’s job was it to spread rumor’s about the “sodexho campaigners” to the Mrak employees?

    Don’t dodge the issue. i dont know you, and im not personally attacking you. im angry at whoever had the job of discriminating against me, and you happen to be one of those people. You could change that very quickly, but you choose not to.

    THe real issue is UC jobs. Don’t talk about how aware you are, and how youve protested, if youre not going to stand by your words. if you understand where we’re coming from, and you understand our frustration, and you see how we’re being treated and ignored, why don’t you do something? How can you be sympathetic and indifferent at the same time?

    Don’t talk to me about personal attacks until you actually experience one. And don’t tell me what your job is until you actually do it.

    if this sounds angry, its because i am.

  128. katie

    id like to point out that economics are not the issue yet. Right now its about human rights, and Sodexho’s violations. We want UC Jobs, and we’ve waited far too long, and much longer than other UCs, to get them. Waiting until the contract runs out (3 more years), would be rediculous.

    People need respect now.

    As far as money goes, how can we (student, worker, and union organizers) even begin to discuss where the money comes from if the chancellor won’t discuss it with us? We don’t have access to their books, and we’re not mind readers. Each university comes up with the funds in ways that fit their situation. Shimek won’t tell us what could work. instead he avoids the real issue, pits students against workers, and talks about student fees to scare us away. the reality is that no one knows where the money is going to come from, but we can’t even START to figure it out until the chancellor speaks to a union rep, who’s job it is to find funding solutions, and entertains the idea of UC Jobs.

    and to Robin Souza- if you want to talk about personal attacks, just wait until some woman stands at a door with a walkie talkie and a police officer with the sole intention of preventing you from entering a building you have no intention of entering. there were only ten of us there, and you have no idea who i am. How can you ask me what purpose the personal attacks serve? i have no idea, why don’t you ask Larry or Dennis. And please don’t shift blame from yourself by referring to “escorters”. The fact that there is even a difference is appaling. One persons job is to push us out the door, another person’s job is to keep us out? Who’s job was it to watch us from the corner of the room? or to sit on the couch watching us from the corner of his eye? Who’s job was it to spread rumor’s about the “sodexho campaigners” to the Mrak employees?

    Don’t dodge the issue. i dont know you, and im not personally attacking you. im angry at whoever had the job of discriminating against me, and you happen to be one of those people. You could change that very quickly, but you choose not to.

    THe real issue is UC jobs. Don’t talk about how aware you are, and how youve protested, if youre not going to stand by your words. if you understand where we’re coming from, and you understand our frustration, and you see how we’re being treated and ignored, why don’t you do something? How can you be sympathetic and indifferent at the same time?

    Don’t talk to me about personal attacks until you actually experience one. And don’t tell me what your job is until you actually do it.

    if this sounds angry, its because i am.

  129. Anonymous

    Good points Katie. To reiterate the point that DPD made, Mrs. Souza already outed herself and her viewpoint.

    “If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees?”

    That’s the rhetoric of the university, not the words of someone supportive of the workers.

  130. Anonymous

    Good points Katie. To reiterate the point that DPD made, Mrs. Souza already outed herself and her viewpoint.

    “If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees?”

    That’s the rhetoric of the university, not the words of someone supportive of the workers.

  131. Anonymous

    Good points Katie. To reiterate the point that DPD made, Mrs. Souza already outed herself and her viewpoint.

    “If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees?”

    That’s the rhetoric of the university, not the words of someone supportive of the workers.

  132. Anonymous

    Good points Katie. To reiterate the point that DPD made, Mrs. Souza already outed herself and her viewpoint.

    “If it were not such a good employer, then why are the Sodexho workers striving to become UCD employees?”

    That’s the rhetoric of the university, not the words of someone supportive of the workers.

  133. Anonymous

    Here is a easy way to deal with seperating protesters from protest supporters: wear badges. The protestors that need to be watched by police and kept out of a building wear a specific type of badge or something. LIke “arrest me if I tresspass or disrupt things!”

    Then the supporters can walk where they please because they are supporters and are wearing the supporter badges. It could say “here to listen and watch!” They agree to not protest and merely spectate! Even you can get in the building DPD.

  134. Anonymous

    Here is a easy way to deal with seperating protesters from protest supporters: wear badges. The protestors that need to be watched by police and kept out of a building wear a specific type of badge or something. LIke “arrest me if I tresspass or disrupt things!”

    Then the supporters can walk where they please because they are supporters and are wearing the supporter badges. It could say “here to listen and watch!” They agree to not protest and merely spectate! Even you can get in the building DPD.

  135. Anonymous

    Here is a easy way to deal with seperating protesters from protest supporters: wear badges. The protestors that need to be watched by police and kept out of a building wear a specific type of badge or something. LIke “arrest me if I tresspass or disrupt things!”

    Then the supporters can walk where they please because they are supporters and are wearing the supporter badges. It could say “here to listen and watch!” They agree to not protest and merely spectate! Even you can get in the building DPD.

  136. Anonymous

    Here is a easy way to deal with seperating protesters from protest supporters: wear badges. The protestors that need to be watched by police and kept out of a building wear a specific type of badge or something. LIke “arrest me if I tresspass or disrupt things!”

    Then the supporters can walk where they please because they are supporters and are wearing the supporter badges. It could say “here to listen and watch!” They agree to not protest and merely spectate! Even you can get in the building DPD.

  137. Anonymous

    I remember the story of a US President who was elected due in large part to his refusal to cross a picket line. What happened to polititians that honored the producers, the workers, like Heystek and unlike Souza.

  138. Anonymous

    I remember the story of a US President who was elected due in large part to his refusal to cross a picket line. What happened to polititians that honored the producers, the workers, like Heystek and unlike Souza.

  139. Anonymous

    I remember the story of a US President who was elected due in large part to his refusal to cross a picket line. What happened to polititians that honored the producers, the workers, like Heystek and unlike Souza.

  140. Anonymous

    I remember the story of a US President who was elected due in large part to his refusal to cross a picket line. What happened to polititians that honored the producers, the workers, like Heystek and unlike Souza.

  141. Anonymous

    Where will they get the money, everybody is wondering?

    From the Hundreds of Thousands in contributions to the UCD Administration and Campus Unions.

    From the large profits of Sodexho once they are kicked out for good (a couple of years after gaining university status, I assure you).

    And from a small increase in fees for students living in the Dorms– which would be LARGELY mitigated by the increased revenue from former Sodexho Profits now redistributed, and former Sodexho Donations now redistributed, to Students and Student Workers.

  142. Anonymous

    Where will they get the money, everybody is wondering?

    From the Hundreds of Thousands in contributions to the UCD Administration and Campus Unions.

    From the large profits of Sodexho once they are kicked out for good (a couple of years after gaining university status, I assure you).

    And from a small increase in fees for students living in the Dorms– which would be LARGELY mitigated by the increased revenue from former Sodexho Profits now redistributed, and former Sodexho Donations now redistributed, to Students and Student Workers.

  143. Anonymous

    Where will they get the money, everybody is wondering?

    From the Hundreds of Thousands in contributions to the UCD Administration and Campus Unions.

    From the large profits of Sodexho once they are kicked out for good (a couple of years after gaining university status, I assure you).

    And from a small increase in fees for students living in the Dorms– which would be LARGELY mitigated by the increased revenue from former Sodexho Profits now redistributed, and former Sodexho Donations now redistributed, to Students and Student Workers.

  144. Anonymous

    Where will they get the money, everybody is wondering?

    From the Hundreds of Thousands in contributions to the UCD Administration and Campus Unions.

    From the large profits of Sodexho once they are kicked out for good (a couple of years after gaining university status, I assure you).

    And from a small increase in fees for students living in the Dorms– which would be LARGELY mitigated by the increased revenue from former Sodexho Profits now redistributed, and former Sodexho Donations now redistributed, to Students and Student Workers.

  145. Anonymous

    John Garamendi, Lt. Governor for CA is speaking this Sunday at a champagne brunch. The cost is only $5 for students and $15 for the general public. I think that students and Sodexho workers should simply provide him with a signed letter informing him of what is taking place at UCD and asking him to try to help matters. No protest, just a simple request. You never know, he may be able to help.

  146. Anonymous

    John Garamendi, Lt. Governor for CA is speaking this Sunday at a champagne brunch. The cost is only $5 for students and $15 for the general public. I think that students and Sodexho workers should simply provide him with a signed letter informing him of what is taking place at UCD and asking him to try to help matters. No protest, just a simple request. You never know, he may be able to help.

  147. Anonymous

    John Garamendi, Lt. Governor for CA is speaking this Sunday at a champagne brunch. The cost is only $5 for students and $15 for the general public. I think that students and Sodexho workers should simply provide him with a signed letter informing him of what is taking place at UCD and asking him to try to help matters. No protest, just a simple request. You never know, he may be able to help.

  148. Anonymous

    John Garamendi, Lt. Governor for CA is speaking this Sunday at a champagne brunch. The cost is only $5 for students and $15 for the general public. I think that students and Sodexho workers should simply provide him with a signed letter informing him of what is taking place at UCD and asking him to try to help matters. No protest, just a simple request. You never know, he may be able to help.

  149. Richard

    actually, if you are going to be at the Garamendi event, a more visible public presense should be considered, such as, say, for example, an informational picket

    an opportunity to be seen, and hand out information to not just Garamendi, but all of the attendees

    it would be interesting to see if the UCD administration would overact in typical fashion with an absurd security presence as they did earlier this week

    –Richard Estes

  150. Richard

    actually, if you are going to be at the Garamendi event, a more visible public presense should be considered, such as, say, for example, an informational picket

    an opportunity to be seen, and hand out information to not just Garamendi, but all of the attendees

    it would be interesting to see if the UCD administration would overact in typical fashion with an absurd security presence as they did earlier this week

    –Richard Estes

  151. Richard

    actually, if you are going to be at the Garamendi event, a more visible public presense should be considered, such as, say, for example, an informational picket

    an opportunity to be seen, and hand out information to not just Garamendi, but all of the attendees

    it would be interesting to see if the UCD administration would overact in typical fashion with an absurd security presence as they did earlier this week

    –Richard Estes

  152. Richard

    actually, if you are going to be at the Garamendi event, a more visible public presense should be considered, such as, say, for example, an informational picket

    an opportunity to be seen, and hand out information to not just Garamendi, but all of the attendees

    it would be interesting to see if the UCD administration would overact in typical fashion with an absurd security presence as they did earlier this week

    –Richard Estes

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for