33 % said, "Yes."
57.5% said, "No."
9.5% said, "No opinion."
V. Additional Information Gleaned from the Committee Poll
In answer to questions designed to mould preferences for one or the other type of job, here, for once, opinion was definitely on one side in that a sizeable majority of both previous T. S. E. workers and student waiters would prefer the former type of employment if both were available.
The poll also included the question "Would you favor the abolition of the 10 and 14 meal a week rates and the introduction of a $9.00 a week rate for 21 meals for all students?" This question . . . the following response: VI. Suggestions 1. Any student waiting jobs should be complementary to the T. S. E.; no T. S. E. jobs should be replaced. 2. Despite the fact that 57.5% of the men who answered the poll declared opposition to student waiting if it could not reduce the board rate, the sympathetic majorities in answer to the question sounding opinion on a test lead us to believe that the plan should be tried this fall in one or two of the Houses. The introduction of student waiting would lower board costs by only a very small amount if at all, an amount which might well be offset by some of the disadvantages to student waiting. Any savings brought about by reorganization of the dining halls in the direction of greater efficiency would, on the other hand, be pure gain. The only justification for the introduction of student waiting is that it would supplement the work of the Temporary Student Employment plan in providing jobs for students. If is on this ground, and in view of the considerable support for such a plan expressed by undergraduates, that the committee recommends that student waiting he given a thorough trial in one or two Houses.