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.

EDITORIAL BOARD

Friday, September 21st, 2007

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 University-affiliated 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.

Discussion

All comments are moderated by Kansan.com staff. For our full user policy, click here.