"Fire is motion / Work is repetition / This is my document / We are all all we've done / We are all all we've done / We are all all we've done / We are all all defenses."

- Cap'N Jazz, "Oh Messy Life," Analphabetapolothology

Saturday, March 10, 2007

"i think we can all agree..."

...the Miami administration is not being straight with us.

as a previous post indicated, Miami University is paying its FULL-TIME employees SUB-POVERTY wages. (that is, the wages paid by MU are not sufficient to keep employees and their dependents above the federally-defined poverty line.)

furthermore, research done by social workers and non-profit organizations in Butler County indicates that 200% (twice) the federally-defined poverty line is actually the more accurate representation of financial independence in Oxford and its vicinity.

Students for Staff (the Miami University students' living wage movement) requested the 200% data after a meeting with Human Resources director Car0l Hauser indicated 32 staff members are possibly living below the poverty line, and 112 are eligible for food stamps.

the low numbers indicated to Ms. Hauser that there was no problem at Miami, and that Students for Staff (SFS) should "reconsider what [we] are supporting." (we, of course, strongly disagree...)

that was in early December. we just got the 200% data, after much persistence on the part of my friend Dylan (see email correspondence below).

-----Original Message-----
From: [my friend Dylan]
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 9:56 PM
To: [Car0l Hauser]
Subject: re: data

Dr. Hauser,

I still have not received any word on the data I requested last month. Should I make an appointment? We really want to know the 200% number. If the issue is the number of calculations you have to make let me know. As I suggested before if you want to give us a computer file we could perhaps figure it out on our own.


Dylan Daney

------------------- Original Message -------------------
Subject: RE: data
From: "Car0l Hauser"
Date: Thu, March 8, 2007 9:48 am
To: [my friend Dylan]

There are 0 employees with no dependents who make less than 200% of the poverty level. There are 127 employees with 1 dependent who make below $26,400, 200% of the poverty level for 1 dependent.

With 2 dependents, 200% of the poverty level is $33,200. Our numbers go all the way up to 9 dependents. In that case 200% of the poverty level is $80,800. From your past work, I think we can all agree that we don't need to go beyond one dependent.

Thanks, Car0l

Car0l Hauser, SPHR
Senior Director Human Resources
15 Roudebush Hall
Miami University
Oxford OH 45056


Ms. Hauser suddenly seems to believe that only staff members with one dependent are relevant, refusing even to state how many workers with 2 dependents are not making sufficient wages to support their families. in our last meeting, we received data on ALL staff, regardless of the number of dependents they claimed. the current data is thus incomplete, as 32 is the total number from ALL classified staff who are possibly living in poverty, and 127 is only the total from among the workers with only one dependent. thus, there are certainly many many more workers than just the 127 they are willing to identify.

recap! ...
last meeting:
(all workers, those with 1 to 9 dependents)

recent data:
(only those workers with 1 dependent)

*note that the total numbers for those values in ()'s are totally different, with the denominator of the latter being far smaller than the first, but the numerator in the latter being larger than the first.
= the problem is MUCH larger than Miami administration are willing to explicity admit. but no less evident, based on simple math.

after all, 127 > 32 anyway you cut it.



LA said...

Hey, I just wanted to say I dig your style and like your writing. It is good to see other people who think on the same wave length and are free to write it. Unfortunately I am already stuck in the corporate world, but stay tuned. You may see a bandit blogger soon :)!

Take care, and happy belated birthday!

stephan!e lee said...

thanks a lot, LA. is LA your geographical location as well as an alias? i've never been to LA, tho i want to eventually. i'll have to i guess, if i ever hope to become a gaffer.

pls do consider becoming a bandit blogger. by no means must u quit ur day job. you gotta eat, right?

as long as your job and ur blogging don't contradict each other too much, and u can maintain ur integrity and self-knowledge along the way.

and as others will attest, we need more bandit bloggers in the world!

take care,

LA said...

No, LA is not my location, but merely a tagname. Although I have been there a few times (but not my favorite place). Everyone there is trying to be something, rather than trying to be who they are...

Don't limit yourself to only LA, NYC is a huge opportunity in the waiting for the likes of many people.

As far as blogging, one day..stay tuned...until next time

a new fan ;)

stephan!e lee said...

hello again, LA! so glad you came back!

i'm not really serious about LA. i prefer San Francisco any day. i think i'd like to move there eventually (if i don't get out of the country, that is). SF is probly the closest to getting out of the country, ideologically, as you/i can get.


stephan!e lee said...

p.s. your "tagname" reminded me of a song by the Raveonettes called "Ode to L.A."

have u heard it?
it's so fun and fantastic, it's sick.

anyway, thought i'd share, since i'm listening now and enjoying the sunny day outside...


la said...

I never heard the song, but you sold me especially since it helped you make up a new word...Im going to look it up, do you know if iTunes has it or do I need to rummage the old way??

Still not liking why you hating on NYC, i have lived in san fran and you are right about it being different (california in general is) but I think we have our own flavor. If you go, I want you to drive there, when you see the California border (in the US!!!) you will understand what I am referring to when I say different..

hope to hear from you again soon!

stephan!e lee said...

i never said i didn't like NYC, i just like CA cause it's warm and sunny.

when i visited NYC for the first time it was the winter after 9/11, and i remember this vitality to the city that really charmed me. it was so vibrant and vital.

i haven't been back since, but i'd like to, just don't have the $ right now.

still, i remember it being soooo cold. it's too hard on my old bones. ;-)

la said...

You are forgetting that was before all the greenhouse gases hit the air :) Not sure if you hear about the weather we are having this winter, but it is off the wall. 60 degrees on Saturday, then 12 degrees Monday, doesn't even make sense...

I have to say the random weather is the only reason i turn on my television these days. In either case, the next time you make a trip come visit during Autumn. Viewing the foliage in central park while enjoy the wonderful days and chilling nights makes you fall in love every day!

ciao bella!