Alumni Luncheon Interruption to Demand Fair Wages for UCSC Workers

Your claim that the interruption was "widely supported" by those in the room is clearly refuted by your own pictures. The shots, including "George Lunch", show a group of people who look uncomfortable, if not embarrassed by, the sophomoric theater presented by Bradley, T, and the rest of bakers dozen.

Same old-same old. Juvenile tactics that bolster your need for ego gratification, but do little to change the minds of those in the middle. By bursting in and disturbing, you feed your own egos, but do little to change the minds of those on the fence. And by protesting to a group of alums in Santa Cruz, you're essentially preaching to the converted in any case. Why not take it up to UCOP, where people don't already feel the same way?

Being loud and proud with a picket line outside would have delivered the message. Breaking into the room and prancing around with signs like a group of Che Guevara wannabes only reduced the message to political theater.

Take a closer look at your pictures, and see the truth. Those are not the expressions of people who are "widely supporting" you. Those are the faces of people who wish you weren't interrupting their lunch.

(I do though, give Bradley bonus points for his tres chic Ecuadorian handwoven peasant shoulder bag. That is the height of "activist" fashion. Kudos my boy, you rocked that look.).

Great personal attacks...

While you sit at your computer bashing peoples' actions and calling them unproductive, you even take it to the next level and personally attacked the journalist who provided you with these photos. (Which you may not be able to see if he weren't there.)

Awesome.

So much more awesome and productive than those pesky protesting students and workers.

i love how the people not around the chancellor are supportive, yet the people around him are like "OMGZZ fucking college hippies, go back to '67!!!"

I didn't go to this Alumni thing, but if I had I would have wanted to know what the latest protests that were going on were, now that I have weekends off and can afford to take time off to go. Maybe they should have a tour of the Student Center or wherever it is that the student orgs hang out as part of the program. I was too busy working, paying for my tuition and my food for the last two years of my schooling --- too busy to protest anything and tied to just one job all year long so I could not think of having an internship for just the summer. I hope these student protesters have it better.

Most students who participate/resist actively in order to not have to work so much and so hard just to live comfortably.

Think of the UC dining hall workers who are protesting during their shifts.

So maybe, someday, people will have equal opportunities and not have to pay an arm and a leg for higher education in the U.S. If so, your children will be thanking those students.

This protest came at the wrong place and the wrong time. As an individual who supports the workers on campus and has attended past actions that they have put on, this protest was ill-thought out. The predominantly students who planned the event alienated the administration that they want to win over. Activism is not about creating an "us" and "them." Activism is demanding for social change by working with all interests. I hope AFSCME and the students who support them continue to support practical protest in the future that doesn't create this unfair and biased dichotomy.

I agree with the previous post. There is a time and place for such things and I don't believe that this was it, considering that it came at a point in the lunch where the university was honoring some of it's employees.

To claim that there is a form of practical protest (or activism) is to say there are good and bad protestors. In order to make these issues evident you have to engage in visible ways of confronting the administration and those that enact these policies. The fact that students informed alumni about issues currently going on at campus is important because it lets them know that the struggle for fair wages continues and needs to be addressed even in situations where a luncheon might sound better. Do the workers who have to tackle on more jobs ever get a break to feed their families?

Once again, a diversity of tactics is crucial in a campaign for social justice. There is no such thing as practical protest because while some forms of protest might be effective, raising consciousness and awareness ultimately beats doing nothing which is what these students (and workers) did at this event.

Certainly there are good and bad protesters. Those who engage in tactics that endanger peoples safety, or who personalize a protest to further their own private agendas or need for ego gratification come immediately to mind as what I'd term "bad" protesters.

And while I don't think these were bad protesters, I do think they used bad tactics.

You say "In order to make these issues evident you have to engage in visible ways of confronting the administration and those that enact these policies. ". What is non-visible about the activites they enacted before and after the lunch? Picketing outside, chanting loudly, handing out informational flyers, and engaging one-on-one with guests who wanted more information. All of these tactics were in evidence, all engaged participants.

...what's the point of storming into a room, disrupting a meal, and pushing aside an alum to take her mike away? Overkill IMO, and a poor choice of timing and audience.

For one thing, you're preaching to the converted. The majority of UCSC alums, imo, already support wage increases for staff, and understand the current situation. For another, none of the people who enact these policies were in that room.

I think the kids got used by the union on this one. As evidenced by the fact that union staff didn't storm the room themselves, but instead let the students do it for them. Union staff knew that was inappropriate and would be grounds for responsive action..so they sent the kids in instead.


And yes, the workers get breaks. Paid breaks. You know that. Should we protest their next break to voice our displeasure at their disrupting lunch on Saturday?

"For one thing, you're preaching to the converted. The majority of UCSC alums, imo, already support wage increases for staff, and understand the current situation."

Then I hope the demonstration encourages more alums to move beyond supporting wage increases to taking significant action to ensure that wage increases and a fair contract are granted to UCSC service workers. Support is wonderful, thank you, but actions speak louder than words. What actions will the alumni take to ensure a fair contract for UC service workers?

After the luncheon ended, many of the alumni personally thanked students for visually and vocally taking action.

What else exciting happened during Reunion Weekend? Were there other surprises as well?

I was at the lunch and was disappointed by what I saw. I felt so bad for the employees who were being honored for their years of service, only to have it interrupted by protesters who demand respect but give none. I felt bad for the employees who worked for months to put together this event to have it ruined. I felt bad for the students who protested and treated people poorly who likely support their cause and made it nearly impossible for them to enjoy their visit to campus. I felt bad for the students who worked many hours to call alumni and ask for their donations, only to have the presentation heckled by someone who claims to support students and workers.
This protest disrespected so many people on so many levels who have no power to change the system-wide issues being addressed that day. I for one am sympathetic to issues of living wage and equity, and was completely turned off by the whole thing.

Thank you for describing so well the same feelings I have about this incident.

While I admire the conviction of the protesters, I don't support their methodology. Hopefully, hearing thoughtful opinions such as yours will remind them that life and opinions are not black and white, but also encompass a larger number of shades of gray in between those two extremes.

I feel like these students have fallen into the well meaning but overly simplistic trap of thinking that "your either for us or against us", which ignores the reality that there are myriad credible viewpoints situated in between those two ends of the spectrum.

Protesters? I think you made yourselves feel empowered, but I don't think you did much to change the minds of the undecided in your direction. And please, don't kid yourself that we needed to be educated to the issues. We're aware of them. The fact that I don't boycott a campus I love and event I enjoy due to one contentious component of that complex campus is naive. There are many good things about the campus, and I can support the campus while still caring about and trying to change the bad.

"This protest disrespected so many people on so many levels who have no power to change the system-wide issues being addressed that day."
Go ahead and elaborate on that.
I believe that everyone who was in that room has power to change the system-wide issues we are addressing. Students who worked many hours to call alumni and ask for their donations also have power to make systemic change.

I have struggled with how to respond to the protest, which occurred during an event honoring one of my favorite U.C.S.C. instructors, Stephen Gliessman. I have wrestled with whether the interest in gaining publicity for a worthy cause disrespected or honored him, his legacy, and his rights also as an employee. As someone involved in organizing and coordinating “actions” during my time as a student- which included being arrested for occupying the chancellor’s office to protest fee hikes, trying to stop the destruction of elfland (whose main redwood fairy ring was I think directly under the dining hall, yet another reason for conflicted emotions), and bringing a regional Student Environmental Action Coalition conference to campus- I am familiar with this choice of tactics. After graduation I also continued to organize and participate in actions, for instance in the Seattle WTO protests, and needless to say I have had many of my ideological foundations, that seemed so clear as a student, seriously challenged.

The previous posters have expressed the range of emotions I felt during the disruption. Rather than pretend that I know the full range of discussions that went into your choices, I would like to ask a few questions for the organizers that weren’t clear to me as an attendee- what are the overall goals of this movement? How were they advanced through your choice of tactics? Were there other methods that would have been more effective at reaching me, as an alumnus, to take action- if that was your goal? What specifically were you asking me or the Alumni Association to do? Again these things were not clear from the protest.

Although I know that those of college age are all knowing, myself included (and it will piss you off to hear this, it did me when I was there), I wonder if you can still incorporate a little of the wisdom of the alumni, who you will also be one day soon. Taking pictures of the food, for example, in what I would consider a misguided effort to show the social class of the attendees, alienates the alumni that a prior poster said were the target, which doesn’t help motivate them to take action. That the action seemed entirely disconnected from Prof. Gliessman was also, I have to say it, just downright rude. Think of yourself, in 20-30 years time, receiving an award and having it so disrupted. Stephen and others may legitimately think it is a testament to his legacy, but I’m not so sure. I think for example he could have been personally contacted to notify him of your intentions. This would have added a personal touch that was definitely missing.

From my experience as an organizer, I have learned the importance of graduating actions, and increasing the intensity with each step. In this vein, why wasn’t Stephen consulted? Why weren’t the organizers of the Alumni event contacted beforehand, to negotiate with the power of the threat of disrupting it. You would have added significantly to your profile, and probably extracted significantly more concessions than simply seizing the stage for a few minutes. Was the Alumni Association itself contacted, to ascertain their level of support, beforehand? How about now afterward (was there follow through with those you targeted)? Were there efforts made to build a coalition with the UCSC AA before the action? After? How do you think they will respond to your entreaties now that this is their first impression of you and your group?

As I said, I remain somewhat conflicted about the action. I’m glad to see students organizing and taking action, but I think taking care to choose appropriate tactics, and graduating them to reach clear goals, with a strategy calibrated accordingly, is more likely to succeed than short sighted, attention gathering, “classic” confrontation, us-them based tactics. In this case us is you in a few short years- think about that. I got your message, as someone mentioned, before and after the event; what was gained through the disruption?

Thanks for your answers, and to the students- if you can retain your sense of the purity of “the movement” after graduation when faced with the actual complexity of life outside the academy, then I’m not sure you’re being entirely open minded.

In solidarity,
Alumni32

MMQ- I appreciate your point that we ALL have the power to make change. I believe though that if the goal of those participating in the protest was to call those in the room to take significant action on the issue, it did not achieve it's objective, and in fact, sort of turned off people like me who are inclined to be supportive. I really appreciated the students who distributed fliers and such about the contract issues prior to the start of the event, and felt that was an appropriate way to express their concerns.
I think if we all want to walk around shouting and demanding some form of respect, we also should demonstrate our own commitment to that value. Again, I think interrupting and basically taking over an event right in the middle of a presentation to honor people for years of service to students is at least a case of bad timing. Also, some alumni in that room who volunteered for the past year to help the campus raise funds to support worthy things like undergraduate scholarships for low-income and under-represented students (for example) don't deserve to have that contribution heckled and devalued.
So some of us are busy with commitments like family, jobs, community service, and other things, and don't have the time or inclination to pick up signs and march or take "action" on these issues, please don't take for granted that we care about these issues but may not agree with your tactics. Hopefully there's room at the table for all of us. Maybe post an address where we can write to someone and express our support for service workers who deserve a living wage.

There's nothing I can say that can even come close to the significance of what alumni32 said above, but I'll say it anyway.

"John was given time to speak on the microphone,
but then the microphone was cut.
Good thing John had a bullhorn on him."

Sooo... You burst into their event and they GAVE you time on the mic. Right?

But when that wasn't enough, you used a bullhorn? You actually issued pronouncements to an unwilling audience in an enclosed room with a BULLHORN? What were you thinking? Were you still so high from the 4/20 event that you somehow forgot how unbelievably fucking irritating it is to have to listen to anything through a bullhorn?

As a longtime union guy who SUPPORTS the cause of the UCSC workers, if someone interrupted a commendation of one my fellow WORKERS with a bullhorn, said person would no longer be holding that bullhorn. What I want to ask is, where were the balls of the people in that audience? To just sit there and take that crap? Also, did the people outside with the picket signs KNOW this was going to be done and approve of it? I suspect this may have been a breakaway group.

If you were among the hundreds of alumni and friends who returned to UCSC a few days ago for Reunion Weekend, thanks for coming! We hope you enjoyed reconnecting with fellow UCSC grads, faculty, and students.

Due to popular demand, a webcast of our first-ever Reunion Weekend Intellectual Forum, on innovation and education in a global society, is now available; click here.
http://intellectualforum.ucsc.edu/forum08.shtml

Thank you to all donors to this year's UCSC Reunion Class Challenge. Alumni celebrating five- through 40-year reunions have donated more than $301,000 in 2007-08, nearly double last year. If you haven't yet participated, we welcome your reunion gift here.

Check out the Reunion Weekend 2008 web photo gallery here.
http://alumni.ucsc.edu/reunions/Reunion_Weekend_2008/index.htm

We welcome your suggestions for future reunions events. Give us your input here.

We hope you'll plan to join us next spring for Reunion Weekend, planned for April 25, 2009.

I opened the door.
I was the alumnus who opened the door at the April 26 All-Alumni Luncheon, letting in the protestors supporting the University workers.
To answer a previous post: No, it was not planned that way. I have no idea how the organizers of the protest planned it. I just know that I found myself on the wrong side of a picket line. To someone who has been involved in the labor movement since I attended UCSC myself (including working as an organizer for the very workers who were seeking our support), this was intolerable.
So I opened the door, and invited my guests in.
Was this "rude" and "ill-timed?" Are any effective protests polite and planned with the consent of the institution protested against?
And yes, I do believe it was effective.
While alumni, such as myself, come to these events to reminisce and see old friends, the University holds these events to solicit donations. Interrupting that solicitation is like putting a picket in front of a store to interrupt the retail transactions inside; it is felt by the University. Whether or not Chancellor Blumenthal is directly involved in negotiations with AFSCME, those who are will certainly hear of this (which was less likely to happen if I hadn't opened the door).
I am proud of what I did, and my wife and son with me were proud. Those there who knew me were not surprised.
Moses was not exactly polite with the Pharoah, and walking out in the middle of constructing the pyramids was "ill-timed." The spirit of Passover survives.

You invited your guests in? But it's not your party; you're a guest, along with the other 200+ guests. That's the equivalent of buying yourself a movie ticket then thinking you have the right to invite your guests in to join you. It also shows a disregard for the wants or opinions of the other 200+ guests in attendance.

As for the Moses comparison? You sir, are no Moses.

If the student body and some of the alumni feel so strongly about increasing the wages of some worker on campus, they can do so in two ways.
The alumni that are for this move should increase their yearly giving to the university. If they don't give then they should start. And if an alumni goes to any UCSC event they should make a donation at the door to help pay for their share of the event
The students that are for the wage increase will surely be willing to have their tuition increased.
Activism should not just be about calling out a situation. It should also be about offering solutions.

Read my lips: Raise my taxes!
The University should be supported by higher (income) taxes, so that university education is free to all California residents. That was the original concept of UC. Even when I attended, 30 years ago, it was relatively inexpensive. Now I will have to take out a second mortgage to send my son to UC. I'd rather pay higher taxes to allow everyone who qualifies to attend.