On June 25, the Office of the Chancellor released a statement declaring the University’s commitment to raising its minimum wage to $15 an hour for regular employees and basic service contractors by July 1, 2021. In the statement, newly-inaugurated Chancellor Andrew Martin wrote that he had implemented this policy because it was “the right thing to do,” highlighting in particular Washington University’s role as a major employer in the St. Louis region as well as its commitment to “helping all members of our community lead fulfilling lives.” However, as further reporting from Student Life established, this wage increase did not extend to all workers on Wash. U.’s campus; it excluded undergraduate and graduate workers.

Executive Vice Chancellor for Administration Hank Webber explained the decision to Student Life as such: “The strong majority of the views of the people involved were that there’s a fundamental difference between those whose time here is enrolled at the University as students and are working, but their primary role is as students, and those people… [whose] full-time role at the University is as an employee or a contractor.” According to Trent McDonald, a graduate student worker in the English department, Washington University Graduate Workers’ Union (WUGWU) has heard the same line of reasoning in their conversations with administrators, who pinpointed the educational experience as Wash. U.’s commitment to their students, regardless of whether or not those students are also employees. I spoke to McDonald in hopes of unpacking the University’s justification for this exclusion.

One aspect of the decision may have been the idea that the minimum wage raise will have a greater impact applied to non-student workers, as they are supporting families that will be in St. Louis for a long time. For students, on the other hand, said McDonald, “you can just repackage wages at the grad level to be called a stipend,” which fails to acknowledge the amount and essential nature of the work that these students do for the University. Furthermore, as Student Life’s Staff Editorial on childcare at the University a few weeks ago explained wonderfully, Wash. U. students struggle to support families too. “At the undergrad level,” continued McDonald, “you just have an attitude that work is just like, a little bit extra, or it just helps out.” While that may be the case for some, extensive coverage by Student Life cites other undergraduates who say they depend on campus employment—many of us know of or are such students ourselves.

The other factor in the University’s reasoning, one that truly brings the inconsistency of the University’s statements on this issue to light, is the suggestion that Wash. U. students, in some nebulous, undefined way, are just not really a part of the St. Louis community.

This new wage policy arrives alongside Chancellor Martin’s flagship goal of improving Wash. U.’s relationship with and impact on the St. Louis and Missouri communities. During his inaugural speech, Martin told the crowd, “It is time to double down on our role and impact in St. Louis… We are Washington University because of St. Louis. We are proud to be Washington University in St. Louis. And today I am calling for us to be Washington University for St. Louis.”

But for McDonald, excluding students from the minimum wage raise only emphasizes the so-called Wash. U. bubble, splitting town from gown, city from campus and St. Louis community member from Wash. U. student. “90% of the student body is not from Missouri, let alone St. Louis, so the civic responsibility of saying, we’re Washington University in St. Louis, the division is in part already there,” said McDonald. “If the goal of the University is to get [students] degrees…then it’s like, ‘Oh, ok, well they’re not in the community, then. We don’t have a civic responsibility towards them. They’re going to be gone!’”

In reality, students are at least as much an asset of and for the University as its bank account. If Wash. U. really wants to make a lasting impact on St. Louis, promoting identification with the city instead of drawing artificial distinctions, such as it does with its uneven application of the $15 an hour minimum wage, would represent a much more meaningful and long-lasting commitment. Unfortunately, the policy’s exclusion of current students—the largest cohesive group of people in St. Louis affiliated with the University—from decisions meant for the community’s benefit reveals an important truth: even at the administrative level, the separation between Wash. U. and the St. Louis community is alive and well.