Serving Boone, Blowing Rock, Banner Elk, and other towns of the North Carolina High Country
Founded 05-05-05
April 17, 2008 issue
Protest Momentum at ASU Sheds Light on Complex Issue
Story by Garrett Simmons and Kathleen McFadden
Following the arrests of six students at Appalachian State University on Friday April 11, Chancellor Ken Peacock issued a statement outlining the events leading to the arrests. The students, representing United Students Against Sweatshops, had gathered in the B.B. Dougherty administrative building on Wednesday April 9, to protest the fact that the university had not signed on to a proposed Designated Suppliers Program that would cover the manufacture of licensed ASU apparel.
Prior to the protest, High Country Press received several messages about the planned act of “civil disobedience, pointing out that the protesters’ aim was to be arrested. After the protesters assembled for their sit-in, Vice Chancellor for Student Development Cindy Wallace met with them to discuss their issues, and at the end of the day, instead of having the students arrested, the administration allowed them to continue the sit-in at B.B. Dougherty overnight, and then for another day and night.
In his statement on Friday, Peacock said the arrests were unavoidable given the actions of the protestors. He stated the students had rejected all compromises offered by the administration over the last six months, and that the “realities of university resources” could not allow the students to continue occupying the building through the weekend. Peacock said the students were made aware of the consequences if they decided to remain in the building.
In response, members of the USAS issued their own statement outlining “19 misrepresentations” of the events by Chancellor Peacock as they percieved them. A group of USAS members, including three of the six who were arrested, presented this response at a Student Government Association meeting on Tuesday, April 15.
Prior to the meeting, High Country Press received an email message stating, “a huge meeting [is] planned to address the noose incident, the USAS arrests, and possibly the resignation of several administrative staff.” The email did not indicate that the meeting was a regularly scheduled SGA meeting. The email also stated, “There will most likely be state administrators present.”
On the SGA website, however, was the following disclaimer: “An email has circulated on campus today stating that Student Government is sponsoring a forum/meeting in which the recent noose and USAS protest incidents will be discussed. While Student Government is holding its regular meeting tomorrow night, neither item is on the agenda and no administrators are scheduled to attend or present.”
However, discussion between SGA members and the USAS representatives was held at the end of the meeting on April 15.
During the discussion, the USAS appealed for support from SGA members in their efforts to have the charges brought against them the previous Friday dropped. The USAS members said the chancellor’s statement that the students were made aware of the consequences prior to their arrests was false. According to them, they were told they would be charged with second degree trespassing, but were in fact charged with first degree trespassing and disorderly conduct.
When SGA rules chairman Thomas Brigman asked the USAS members if they had intended to be arrested upon entering the building, USAS members said they had committed to staying until either their demands were met or they were removed.
The reason for such an ultimatum, they said, was that dialogue between USAS and the university had been too infrequent and ultimately ineffective.
While the events of last week brought public attention to the controversy over sweatshop labor for university apparel, the issue is not new. At Tuesday’s meeting, SGA President Forest Gilliam reminded attendees that the issue had been brought to SGA in September 2006.
As was the case then, the USAS is demanding the university implement the Designated Suppliers Program, a system designed to protect the rights of workers who sew university logo apparel. Under the DSP, universities are required to independently verify that factories meet worker rights as determined by the Workers Rights Consortium. The DSP requires university licensees to compensate factory workers’ wages if they are inadequate.
Appalachian is currently a member of Fair Labor Association, that, by a contract signed with the university, is responsible for maintaining fair practices in factories. The USAS, however, claims the FLA is nothing more than a “manufacturer’s charade.” The USAS states that the FLA board is headed by the very companies it is designed to investigate and could therefore be corrupt.
Gilliam stated that Appalachian’s concern with DSP in 2006 was that the program had not yet established itself as reliable. The decision was to wait until more research on the DSP was available. However, because Duke University is the only major university in North Carolina to conditionally adopt the DSP program, little research exists other than that of the DSP itself.
Other concerns surrounding is the DSP is its use of phased introduction to its programs with a minimum three-year commitment, questions about whether enough factories meet WRC standards to supply the university market and the economic impact of increased wages. The university’s position is that the questions from 2006 have not yet been answered.
The USAS members said they plan to continue taking whatever actions are necessary to bring about the changes they demand.
At the meeting Tuesday night, the SGA took no action on the USAS members request.