Letters to the Editor
Get the facts on Taco Bell
Dear Editor:
Re: “Boot the Bell,” [Jan. 31, 2005].
It is clear that the author, Jacob Gerber, did not present the facts in a fair light. The Coalition of Immokalee Workers has been demanding that Taco Bell force its suppliers to pay its workers an additional penny per pound of tomatoes picked. On May 20, 2004, Taco Bell, a subsidiary of Yum! Brands, issued an official press release in response to the boycott, stating, “Taco Bell actually is paying 11 cents more per pound of tomatoes today than it did when the CIW started its boycott against the company in 2000. The actual cost increase far exceeds the 1-cent per pound increase the CIW has sought for three years.”
The statistics from Mr. Gerber’s article are outdated, and in fact, Taco Bell has done much more to solve the issue. More information is available regarding Yum! Brand’s responses to the tomato issue at www.tacobell.com. It is imperative that students have all the facts from both sides when determining whether or not to retain Taco Bell on campus.
In addition, Gerber has grossly misrepresented the sentiments of Steve Hoffner (who ironically has not been responsible for Dining Services since December and is now executive vice president of Quadrangle Housing). In the meetings I had with Hoffner and Bon App‚tit, it was determined that there should be a large random survey in which students would have input on whether or not Taco Bell’s contract would be renewed, and rightly so.
Stating that Hoffner has “made it very clear that he has no concern for the Immokalee workers” is an outright lie. Dining Services supports the Student Worker Alliance’s campaign to improve working conditions for the Immokalee workers. However, it should be the students, paying thousands of dollars for food, who determine whether Taco Bell stays or goes based on their personal food preferences and accurate facts of the tomato issue.
If you have any input on the Taco Bell issue that you would like to share with the Food Committee, you can email [email protected]
-Jeff Zove,
Chair, Student Union Senate Food Committee
We’re not to blame for our privilege
Dear Editor:
Re: “Confessions of the private school graduate” [Feb. 2, 2005].
Daniel Milstein’s “privie guilt” is a softer way of labeling upper class-white-heterosexual-able-etc.-male guilt. I think it is important to remember that we, as individuals, are not responsible for the system, or the history of colonialism, or America, or our parents’ privileges and opportunities. Therefore, we should regard each other as individuals, not pillars of an institution.
Just as we should not judge people’s personalities based on their parents’ income, if we are comparatively privileged we should not feel burdened with guilt. You are no more responsible for your parents’ income than the next person, regardless of trust funds, new cars, private schools and so forth. Guilt doesn’t get anyone anywhere, and though it’s a logical response of emotion, it’s not the most logical conclusion to draw from the realities of life.
To move things forward, and in order to overcome the (not necessarily deserved) image of the entitled spoiled brat, those of us with privilege (which includes everyone at the University) must show through our actions a commitment to social justice and equality.
-Samantha White,
Class of 2007
Popularity: 1% [?]
Related Posts
Print This Post