Harvard Economist Quits University Panel on Wages, Saying It Heard Only One Side By AUDREY Y. WILLIAMS
One of the better-known members of a Harvard University committee studying wage and employment policies at the college has resigned, saying that the group does not welcome the views of people who oppose mandating a minimum "living wage" for Harvard's lower-paid workers.
Caroline M. Hoxby, a prominent Harvard economics professor, announced her immediate departure from the Harvard Committee on Employment and Contracting Policies in a letter published Monday in the university newspaper, The Harvard Crimson. Ms. Hoxby, an education economist, said in an e-mail message that her letter would have to "stand for itself" and declined to comment further about her decision.
"I am ashamed to admit that my university does not currently have an atmosphere that fosters the free exchange of ideas on this topic," Ms. Hoxby wrote in her letter to The Crimson.
Ms. Hoxby's resignation coincided with a public forum at the university on Monday in which the committee was scheduled to share some preliminary data on the university's lower-paid employees and hear from representatives of various groups, including students campaigning for what they consider a minimum living wage.
"We will continue to value her input regardless of whether she is on the committee or not," said Lawrence F. Katz, a professor of economics and chairman of the committee on employment policies.
The committee was formed in May, following a highly publicized three-week sit-in outside the university president's office. The sit-in's organizers, the Progressive Student Labor Movement, staged the protest to highlight their demand that the university pay Harvard employees a mandatory minimum wage of $10.25 an hour.
Neil L. Rudenstine, then president of the university, selected the committee members. The group was made up of 11 faculty members, including Ms. Hoxby; three unionized Harvard employees; two administrators; and four students.
In her letter, Ms. Hoxby wrote that so far, only groups lobbying for the mandatory minimum wage have testified before the committee, including representatives from the Harvard Living Wage Campaign, the Harvard Workers Center, and the four unions that represent university employees. Mr. Katz, however, said testimony had come from a much wider range of organizations and individuals.
"The committee takes its role very seriously," Mr. Katz said. "We want to hear all viewpoints, and we've gone to unprecedented lengths -- especially for Harvard -- to hear from all sides."
One of the committee's student members, Matthew Milikowsky, had wanted to cut by one the number of students speaking in favor of the living-wage campaign at Monday's forum, so that there would be more time to hear from people in the audience. Ms. Hoxby noted in her letter that she was "shocked to hear the scorn" with which her fellow committee members greeted his request.
In an e-mail message, Mr. Milikowsky wrote that although the Progressive Student Labor Movement is very vocal, it is a "tiny minority group on campus" and that he "thought it preposterous that half of the students speaking would represent the living-wage campaign." He was "very sorry" that Ms. Hoxby had resigned, he wrote, and added: "I think her presence was extremely valuable on the committee."
Mr. Katz said he could not say whether the committee would find a replacement for Ms. Hoxby or what impact her absence would have on the group. He did say that the committee was still on track to present its formal recommendations for wage policies to the university's president, Lawrence H. Summers, by December 19.
------
[the letter <http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=121810>]
Harvard Crimson - October 22, 2001 Flawed Process on Wages
By CAROLINE M. HOXBY Contributing Writer
The Harvard Committee on Employment and Contracting Policies (HCECP), popularly known as the Living Wage committee, is charged with considering Harvard's practices with respect to lower-paid workers. It is also charged to seek the views of all members of the Harvard community.
If a committee is to make a fair decision, it must either have process imposed on it (as in Congress, where committees are chosen from both parties; or as in court, where the prosecution and defense both present cases) or it must be filled with highly principled people who will act in a balanced way, even when they do not have to. I believe that the HCECP has neither the process nor the principle to fulfill its duties, and therefore I have resigned from it as of Monday, Oct. 22, 2001.
From the beginning, it has been obvious that the HCECP did not have process. Its membership is far from balanced-it contains several people who have an explicit pro-living wage agenda and it contains no one with an opposing agenda. Former President Neil L. Rudenstine convinced me to join the committee only by telling me that it would have a quorum of highly principled people who would ensure that its proceedings were fair. Yet, every decision the committee has made suggests otherwise. Just consider the testimony it has heard. Apart from hearing from administrators and contractors who have presented institutional information, it has heard exclusively from groups lobbying for the living wage: the Living Wage Campaign, the Workers Center, a Workers Forum and all four unions that represent Harvard employees. The committee has not heard one presenter who has made a positive case against the living wage, and it stops hearing testimony today.
We know that Harvard's community has a diversity of opinions and that there are groups, such as the Employment Policies Institute, that present ethical and practical arguments against the Living Wage. So, why is the committee hearing only one view? I am ashamed to admit that my university does not currently have an atmosphere that fosters the free exchange of ideas on this topic. Anyone who speaks publicly against the Living Wage risks being demonized, and the committee has chosen to offer the community no way to express its views except by making a public appearance. We ought to offer people a way to express themselves that is not punishing and yet is likely to be given some weight. (Yes, you can write an e-mail, but you can guess how much weight these have been given.)
I had supposed that the principled people on the HCECP were also concerned that our proceedings did not have the appearance, let alone the reality, of balance. Thus, when Matt Milikowsky (the only undergraduate on the committee not associated with the Living Wage Campaign) suggested that we hear from one fewer Living Wage campaigner at tonight's public forum so that we could have more time for voices from the floor, I was shocked to hear the scorn with which the principled people greeted this modest proposal for a more representative hearing. None of them even voiced sympathy with Milikowsky's concern that we were not hearing from a cross-section of Harvard students.
Worse, when I tried to address Milikowsky's concern by suggesting that we might ask for a referendum (such as the Undergraduate and Graduate Student Councils have carried out on past occasions), the principled people began to insult Harvard students to avoid hearing from them. Harvard faculty said that Harvard students were too uninformed to be listened to and that we could not possibly expect to learn anything from them. One professor argued that Harvard students should not be allowed to express their views because they were such dupes that they could be hoodwinked by any competent pollster into saying what the pollster wanted them to say. Another began loudly exclaiming, "This is not a democratic process. This is not a democratic process!" The stands these professors were taking were in direct violation of the principles they have advocated in writing for years. Not one principled person spoke up for the principle of representativeness or even for the acumen of the Harvard student body.
Students, workers, alumni and general community: I have not found that your diverse views are respected by the HCECP, and I believe that has neither the process nor the principle to act with the fairness that will convey legitimacy.
Professor of Economics Caroline M. Hoxby '88 is a former member of the Harvard Committee on Employment and Contracting Policies.