Waffles and Workers

Recently, rumors that hot breakfast would no longer be available in the House dining halls created quite an uproar on campus. Though the fate of Veritas waffles may be at stake, I trust that the student body can speak for itself about such matters. I am more concerned with another potential budget cut that would involve layoffs of low-wage workers, particularly because their voices are not always heard.

Laying off Harvard’s workers is unjust because they should not have to bear the heaviest burden of a crisis that they did not create. Layoffs devastate people’s lives and families, contributing to the economic crisis because people without jobs can no longer afford to pay for basic needs. The onus that we face is finding a way to make these unjust cuts unnecessary ones by seeking out other means of meeting Harvard’s new budgetary demands.

The Faculty of Arts and Sciences faces a massive $220 million deficit for next year. In order to address this gap, Dean Michael Smith has announced a restructuring of FAS. With every change, there will inevitably be a constituency that objects, but Harvard should emphasize an ethos of shared sacrifice as we weather this process. The deans, along with the Harvard Corporation, should conduct a transparent process to address the deficit in such a way that harnesses the wealth of intelligence and creativity on campus and assures us that all voices are heard.

The most symbolic measure of shared sacrifice would be reducing the salaries of highly paid administrators and senior faculty. Though these measures would not be enough to balance the budget on their own, graduated pay cuts could save many jobs. Other universities have committed to this, and Harvard needs to do so as well.

There are many other changes that Harvard could make to reduce personnel costs without laying off workers. For instance, FAS pays its employees during the vacation between Christmas and New Year’s. Cutting that paid vacation could save millions of dollars.

Students must also make sacrifices. Perhaps every House does not need a $500 grant from the College Events Board for a Yardfest pregame. While it would be disappointing if the Office of Residential Life no longer funded decorations for House Committee events, it would be more devastating to see clerical workers lose their jobs. These trade-offs abound at an institution like Harvard. Luckily, we can still have fun without spending upwards of $10,000 on a House formal.

Of course, there are those who argue that Harvard’s mission lies in its academic pursuits and that we must therefore accept layoffs as inevitable and eat our Veritas waffles in peace. These people forget that the budget cuts are already hurting the educational mission of the school.

More importantly, these people fail to recognize that teaching morality in a classroom means nothing if you cannot act with the same integrity that you hope to teach. Yes, Harvard must do what it does best—teach, research and foster learning—but we cannot shy away from the responsibility to be an upstanding institution. If Harvard lays off its workers, it will only contribute to the economic crisis of our time. Now, more than ever, is an opportunity for Harvard to stand as an example of moral integrity.

Luckily, Harvard is better equipped to weather this crisis than almost any other institution. I am confident that through the creativity and intelligence of our community, a great deal of money could be saved without cutting jobs. Harvard’s endowment is massive—no matter how much money we’ve lost in the current crisis. And we continue to enjoy the financial perks of being a nonprofit, which means that we do not pay taxes on the endowment money that we have amassed over the years.

To put it more bluntly, Harvard has the largest university endowment in the world, and it should not be afraid of using this capital to sustain itself during the current recession. Perhaps the deans and the Corporation should release more endowment money to schools like FAS in order to ensure that budget cuts can be made without layoffs. Right now, the FAS budget deficit of $220 million comes directly from an eight percent decrease in endowment money being funneled into FAS. Although it would be unsustainable over the long term, Harvard could dip further into its endowment over the next year or two in hopes that the economy will begin to grow again.

Unfortunately, important decisions like these are made by the Harvard Corporation in an opaque and secretive manner. This process should instead be exposed to intellectual debate within the Harvard community. We must outline criteria in order to move forward so that people whose lives and families are at risk are not left out of this process.

Although every budgeting decision is a difficult one, Harvard is better poised than the rest of America to show the depth of its ethical decision-making. To that end, Harvard can and should avoid layoffs.


Megan A. Shutzer ’10, a Crimson editorial writer, is a social studies concentrator in Dudley House. She is a member of Student Labor Action Movement.