To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

It is little wonder that the administration rarely resorts to defending itself with facts, judging from Mrs. Bunting's attempt in the Wednesday CBIMSON to invalidate the recent demands concerning wage differentials in the Radcliffe kitehens. Past attempts to justify the 90c differential be been men chefs and women cooks (who do the same work in different kitchens) have been easily exposed. Miss Russ, the Radcliffe dietitian, was the first to bungle it. At an interview with several student workers, she rationalized, "The men have more responsibility because the women feel less secure in the kitchens and look to the men for advice and support." and "two men can do the work of four women."

Mrs. Bunting is more sophisticated, however, as evidenced by her reply to the SDS demands in Wednesday's CBIMSON. She is aware that students would be sensitive to such "unelaborated" characterizations of women as "insecure," so she attempted to prove that male chefs have greater responsibility through "facts." But she got her facts wrong. She claimed tat for North House the ratio of chefs to students is 1:112 (two cooks and two chefs for 450 students), East and Sonth Houses 1:62 (four cooks for 250 students). We have bee working in the kitchens all term, and know that in North Housse a staff of four serves 100 to 500 people (official kitchen count-400 resident diners); in South House a staff of two serves 300-500 orienlal count-325). Thus the women cooks in fact have greater responsibility than the men chefs, and there is no justification for the wage differential-except male chauvinism.

Mrs. Bunting stated that "extra cooks are ordinarily used for special dinners when two meals must be prepared." In fact, Master Baxter's weekly gourmet dinners this term in South House have been prepared (along with the regular dinner) by a staff of two, except for two instances when three cooks were on (coincidentally) for a sit-down.

Mrs. Bunting tried to give the impression that our mans did not represent real grievances of the workers. Although she did visit the Radeliffe kitchens, her methods of investigation appear to have been pretty shoddy. During one "talk with a worker." Mrs. Bunting exclaimed how clean the dishes were, and the dishwasher agreed, having no idea at the time that Mrs. Bunting was trying to find out how well the dish machine worked. When ? student pointed out the reason for the visit, the worker answered, "Oh, if I'd known that's why she was here, I would have shown her the load of dirty trays that had just come out of the machine."

In presenting these opinions, we are making no attempt to replace the union or act as spokesmen for the workers, as Mrs. Bunting implied. We as students and as women demand an end to this clearly unjustifiable and malechauvinist wage differential, and we will continue to fight for better working conditions in kitchens and dining halls where we work and eat.