The Spectrum's editorial "Union Dispute Unfair to Workers" in the Jan. 28 issue regarding the university cleaning staff's "union dispute" is confusing.
The Spectrum was vocally opposed to the tuition increase last year, often citing the rising costs of attending UB. But now, in one of the rare publicized instances of the school actively attempting to save money and cut costs, the paper decries the "double standard" of using non-union cleaning staff.
Basically, The Spectrum wants UB students to get all of the benefits of attending UB, with minimal increases in the cost of that education. This is understandable.
When the university uses even the smallest cost-cutting technique in an area that does not affect a single educational or social aspect of university life, however, The Spectrum denounces the decision. Many students, myself included, take issue with some of the policies and practices of the UB administration. But to perfunctorily oppose any decision made by the school is ridiculous.
UB has no commitment to unionized labor, as the paper asserts. Rather, it has a commitment to providing its students with the best education possible at a minimal cost. Why does The Spectrum advocate a greater cost to the student with no additional benefit? It is senseless.
