Students Against Sweatshops and the Living Wage Campaign joined forces at the "Rally for Justice" on March 9 to demand that the University change its employment practices.

Since then though, the groups, both offshoots of the Progressive Student Labor Movement (PSLM), have achieved very different levels of success.

At the rally, the University announced a policy of full disclosure of all Harvard apparel factory locations and endorsed a living wage for all overseas workers, fulfilling two of the major goals of Students Against Sweatshops. Harvard and the student group have been in negotiations ever since.

But for the Living Wage Campaign, justice has yet to be done.

Campaign members have protested, leafleted and tried to publicly embarrass the administration but have succeeded only in winning the appointment of an advisory Faculty Committee, with no formal executive powers.

And until the University agrees to pay its employees at least $10 an hour, the campaign vows to continue its strategy of "public humiliation."

Going Public

The Living Wage Campaign has put this strategy to good use over the last month.

During pre-frosh weekend, the group greeted visiting students with an information booth and leaflets at the Office of Admissions and interrupted President Neil L. Rudenstine's welcoming address by presenting him with a certificate declaring him the "Worst Employer in Boston."

Rudenstine accepted the award and simply proceeded with the address.

Just last Friday afternoon, the campaign held a rally at the John Harvard statue to support the union of Harvard security guards and museum workers, which is currently involved in contract negotiations with the University.

"Harvard has outsourced a lot of security for a fraction of the pay, and the union guards that are left have been working without a contract for a three years," says Aaron D. Bartley, a first-year law student involved in the Campaign. "It exemplifies the University's desire to save a few nickels and dimes."

While the University has not responded to the campaign's specific demonstrations, members say this is to be expected. And the lack of response has not dampened their enthusiasm; the group is planning a major demonstration for May 11.

"We know that what makes Harvard give in is public embarrassment," says campaign member Amy C. Offner '01. "In the past this has been what's been effective."

"We have to make sure as many people as possible know about Harvard's shameful policies," Offner adds. "That's our real threat for them."

Offner says the campaign is "doing really well" in attracting the support of community members.

She says the group has collected over 1,000 student signatures on petitions, as well as the support of about 50 Faculty members and several Harvard unions.

"It seems like everyone on campus knows who we are and what our reasoning is," Offner says.

Bartley says he feels the group can involve even more community members with increased outreach.

"People need to look around and notice dining hall workers, notice security guards--people who are providing essential services," he says.

The System at Work

The one concession that the Living Wage Campaign has won from the administration is the establishment of a Faculty task force to examine Harvard's current employment practices.

The task force, composed of seven Faculty members, met for the second time last Thursday.

Representatives of the Living Wage Campaign, including Bartley, attended the meeting, which he says went surprisingly well.

"From my point of view, the committee is off to a productive and meaningful start," Bartley says. "I was impressed by their openmindedness and willingness to listen."

The committee is chaired by D. Quinn Mills, Weatherhead professor of business administration, and includes professors of economics, health care policy and law, in addition to administrators such as Sally H. Zeckhauser, vice president for administration, and Kim A. Roberts '70, director of labor and employee relations.

Bartley says the task force seems to be looking at the issue from a non-biased standpoint.

"Most people said they had never thought about the issue before. They're starting with a clean slate," he says. "They seem interested and open to take a good look at low-wage labor on campus."

Mills says it is the committee's responsibility to fairly listen to the campaign's concerns.

"Our job is to study and make recommendations," he said. "I don't have any doubt they will be taken seriously."

Still, Bartley says this will not halt the Living Wage Campaign's community activism.

"We know that if we fade away and discontinue our public demonstrations...the political will to make a decision [won't be there]," he says.

Keeping the Pressure On

Students Against Sweatshops are also cautiously optimistic about their approval of the University's response to their demands.

PSLM member Daniel M. Hennefeld '99 says Harvard's endorsement of the group's anti-sweatshop principles is only in response to the rising tide among colleges across the country.

"These principles are becoming standard all over the country," Hennefeld says. "Schools look bad if they don't have [them]."

In addition, while the University has endorsed the group's goals in principle, the two diverge widely over the remaining issues of monitoring and enforcement.

In March, Harvard announced its affiliation with the Fair Labor Association (FLA), a monitoring organization designed to oversee several universities. According to PSLM, the University is also looking into independently hiring the accounting firm Price-Waterhouse-Coopers.

Students Against Sweatshops say they can't rely on either group because they are both tied to corporate interests.

Group members say they want Harvard to set up an independent monitoring system--free from the influence of manufacturers--and to establish a formal committee that will shape the University's anti-sweatshop policy.

According to Hennefeld, the committee should be composed of students, faculty and administrators, and should have the power "to make formal recommendations to the president and the corporation."

"The decision to enroll in FLA is something that the committee should have been involved in," Hennefeld says.

While Students Against Sweatshops have been pushing the administration, members say they have yet to receive an adequate response. Last week, the group received a letter saying that such a committee could not be formed by mid-May as PSLM requested, or even by the end of semester.

"We see it as an attempt to exclude students," Hennefeld says.

If the demands of Students Against Sweatshops are not met, Hennefeld says the group may have to resort to demonstrating publicly, in addition to negotiating, much like their Living Wage counter-parts.

"We don't see the two as irreconcilable," Hennefeld says. "It looks like it may take more public confrontational actions to get Harvard to do this now."