Student government members should be precluded from payment for their role as representatives of the student body, but that doesn’t mean they do not deserve compensation.
The relevant question is not the moral issue of whether CSG members deserve compensation. Rather, the appropriate question is: are all members of CSG equally entitled to payment from University?
The answer to that question is undoubtedly no.
The CSG passed a resolution this semester advocating that Chatham establish a compensation program to financially support all members of the student government for the time and effort required for their activities.
In response, Abigail Hakas, the Communiqué’s opinion editor, wrote an impassioned opinion piece arguing that all members of CSG should receive pay for their “labor.”
Hakas argued that CSG members provide a service to the University by representing Chatham students, admonished what she viewed as “free labor” and pointed out that certain members of CSG are already being paid.
However, contrary to the implication of Hakas’ opinion, no member of CSG is currently paid for their labor. The compensation to which Hakas referred in her opinion are stipends granted to CSG executives and class presidents. Stipends are offered as a form of compensation to cover costs of living while allowing individuals to pursue educational goals — such as internships, research or leadership experience.
This definition is, and should be, applied narrowly.
If any student whose extracurricular activities could be said to benefit their education in some way were eligible for a stipend, then members of most student organizations would be eligible for a stipend.
After all, almost every student organization could be argued to provide some educational benefit, however remote it may be.
Such broad application would require the University to provide stipends to students involved with student organizations who gain either purely personal benefits, such as the enjoyment of engaging in activities with peers, or who gain minimal educational benefits. This would be financially untenable and unreasonable to ask of the university, particularly during a financial deficit.
Though it may seem unfair, a line must be drawn somewhere, and the University seems to have done so by providing stipends only to those in prominent leadership positions. To restrict stipends to those who gain substantial educational benefits from leadership experience is a reasonable line to draw.
To demonstrate this point, consider the responsibilities of those in CSG leadership positions compared to regular senate members.
Executive board members enforce the CSG constitution and bylaws, issue executive directives to the University on behalf of CSG, must maintain a GPA of 2.8 and each member of the executive board serve as committee chairs and appoint members to their respective committees.
Furthermore, each member of the executive board has individual responsibilities including creating and distributing the written agenda for senate meetings, recording the minutes of senate and executive board meetings, monitoring class council spending, facilitating correspondence between CSG and student organizations, organizing town halls, and more.
Similarly, class presidents serve as the heads and chairs of their respective class councils and appoint students to vacant positions on those councils.
Meanwhile, senate members not in those leadership roles have far fewer responsibilities.
Regular CSG senate members are only required to hold and attend 10 legislative meetings each semester, serve on and attend meetings of one committee and vote on legislation and the approval of members nominated by CSG leadership to positions in the student government.
Regarding office hours, members of CSG leadership also have much more responsibility.
Regular senate members are only required to hold one office hour per week. In contrast, the executive president must hold five hours per week, all other members of the executive board must hold four hours per week and class presidents must hold three hours per week.
Considering these facts, it cannot be denied that CSG members in leadership positions bear more responsibilities and time commitment and have greater opportunities for skill development. Thus, the line that the University has drawn to determine who receives stipends is a reasonable one.
Nevertheless, it remains important to address the moral question of whether CSG members deserve some form of compensation for their activities.
I believe the answer to this question is yes, but payment, whether as a stipend or a paycheck, is an inappropriate means in these circumstances.
Therefore, I encourage the University to establish a compensation program to provide financial relief to all CSG members through alternative means such as deductions from tuition, free housing or meals, or a similar form of financial support.
In doing so, the University could compensate CSG for its hard work and ease the financial burden of participating in student government while avoiding the consequences of overbroad provision of stipends or paychecks to student organizations.
