University Daily Kansan, KS
09-21-07
Editorial: Senate redress evaluated
Within Big 12 context, benefits not unjust
Student senators at The University of Kansas receive 15 in-state credis per
semester and salary. This compensation is on par with similar packages at other
Big 12 Universities.
This year, seven Student Senate officials will each receive roughly $14,700 in
tuition and salary compensation. This development arrives amidst questions of
whether Student Senate does more work vis-à-vis other student organizations
and whether this work deserves an admittedly generous financial package. After
examining KU’s student government in the context of other schools in the Big 12,
it is apparent that these leaders’ compensation is neither unfair nor out of the
ordinary.
Among Student Senate’s responsibilities are allocating funds to student groups,
lobbying local and state governments on campus issues (such as deferred
maintenance) and implementing positive changes on campus. Fall Break, the
Student Recreation Center and the Multicultural Resource Center are all the
result of Senate initiatives. Senate goals for this year include instituting a
“Deadweek” between the end of classes and finals and providing a nighttime
campus shuttle to ensure safety for students. A lack of knowledge of Senate’s
achievements should not be construed to mean that Senate has none.
Upon researching the methods by which other Big 12 schools compensate their
student government officials, neither the sum of KU’s compensation nor its
manner stand out as unreasonable. The University of Nebraska at Lincoln, the
University of Texas at Austin and Iowa State University all provide some sort of
tuition credit, and virtually all of the respondent schools provide some sort of
monetary compensation in the form of salary, tuition and/or scholarships.
It was also not unusual for schools to provide practical assistance, such as
parking passes and work-study programs. The University of Nebraska at Lincoln
student body president, David Solheim receives football tickets in addition to
tuition assistance and a parking pass.
Iowa State University provides by far the most generous compensation
package. Current Student Body President Brian Phillips is receiving roughly
$28,000 this year for full out-of-state tuition, fees and room and board. Phillips
pointed out that this kept him from having to seek outside employment (which
most schools forbid their officers to do), allowing him to give full attention to his
duties, which include overseeing $5 million in allocation funds. Both Phillips and
Andrew Solomon, student government president at the University of Texas at
Austin (who receives $10,000 annually in tuition and salary), said that when
divided by the hours that they and other compensated officials work per week,
this payment ends up being less than the federal minimum wage.
Student government officials also pointed out the great opportunity cost involved
in serving as executives.
Defending KU’s compensatory policy, Matt Wagner, student body president at
Kansas State University, said, “It is important to remember that these student
leaders are sacrificing a position of employment outside of the University, where
they could be making significantly more money during the school year than what
they are from dedicating their time, talents and efforts in representing the student
body of KU.” Other officials echoed this sentiment, saying that service exceeded
pay and that student government officers would be willing to serve even without
wages.
Before implementing new policies, schools such as Kansas State University and
the University of Texas at Austin researched other schools’ payment methods
(including conference schools and other universities across the country).
Respondents were adamant that officials never voted to knowingly give
themselves a raise; votes were cast in the full Senate without knowing who would
specifically benefit (in KU’s case, the decision to increase compensation came
from KU administration, not from within the Senate itself). In most cases, the
people voting to increase compensation will never be personally affected.
It may come across as unfair to compensate Senate officials but not other
campus leaders. Bluntly, Student Senate (in terms of the time demanded of the
seven compensated executives) cannot be compared to most other Universityaffiliated organizations on campus. Such organizations rely on Student Senate
for funding and support; Senate is a supranational entity in the context of KU.
Groups could exist without Senate, yes, but would be responsible for their own
means of operation. Without funding from Senate, most groups would be unable
to attend conferences, host events or schedule guest speakers without
substantial outside funding at the cost of their members. In addition, the vast
majority of senators will remain uncompensated, as their campus group
counterparts are. While money is a perk, it is probably not enough to motivate
anyone to run for higher office who wouldn’t have done so regardless of pay.
Rather than viewing Student Senate compensation for the top seven officials as
unfair or unwarranted, it should be seen as a way of ensuring that officials have
the means to fund their educations, while at the same time fulfilling their
obligations to the University.