Letters to the Editor

Grievance procedure already available to U

In the article "Graduates not in harmony over union," staff reporter Kelly Hildebrandt writes: "Some of the improvements the union activists would like are better wages, a better health care plan and the creation of a grievance procedure."

I would like to point out that student employees, academic as well as non-academic, already have the right to file employment grievances under the University's grievance policy.

This policy sets forth an internal University process for the good-faith review and resolution of employment grievances filed by employees of the University, including faculty, academic, professional and administrative staff, civil service staff and student employees. The policy was approved by the Board of Regents in April 1993.

John E. Blair,executive assistant, University Grievance Office

Comments on Daily ad policy

First, I think there is a substantial difference between the Daily and the Star Tribune and Pioneer Press. Your readership is the University community and, as a guess, consists of at least 60 percent underage readers. This should cause the Daily to hold itself to a higher standard than the other papers, which are directed mainly at adults.

My opinion is that the Daily should not publish ads for gentlemen's clubs and similar businesses because of the number of underage readers and the focus of the paper. For similar reasons, tobacco advertising should not be run. The health risks associated with all forms of tobacco are high enough that the community is better served without such ads, especially for free products.

Alcohol is another matter. Used responsibly, it is not a problem. There are many bars around campus that depend on University-affiliated patronage and who offer more than just drinks. Your present policy on alcohol advertising is sufficient.

Karl Dahm, graduate student,Institute of Technology

The fact that the Daily accepts advertising from bars and other places that sell alcohol is not the problem. Alcohol is a legal substance for those who are 21 years of age or older, and your ads do not suggest otherwise. The problem is that the Daily often runs advertising which clearly promotes and encourages irresponsible and excessive alcohol consumption.

Last quarter I met with the Daily's business manager and his management team to discuss possible changes in the Daily's alcohol advertising policy. Unfortunately, I left the meeting feeling that the Daily's legitimate concern for revenue generation would override their collective desire to do what is in the best interest of the students who pay the fees that support the Daily. I understand the concern that revenue might be lost if certain ads were rejected, but the benefits of rejecting these ads for students and the entire University community far outweigh the potential lost revenue.

Alcohol misuse is a major problem facing colleges across the nation, including the University. In 1998, approximately 50 college students died as a result of excessive drinking or accidents caused by alcohol consumption. Since the start of the academic year, approximately eight such deaths have occurred. The University is working hard to prevent such occurrences on our campus by trying to create an environment in which excessive and irresponsible alcohol use is not encouraged, tolerated or supported. Some of the Daily's ads are contradictory to these efforts.

Ads which offer free alcohol to women do not encourage responsible alcohol use. Ads which allow customers to buy drinks with pennies do not encourage responsible alcohol use. Ads which offer specials on drinks or beers with a higher alcohol content than a standard alcoholic beverage without informing the consumer do not encourage responsible alcohol use. Ads that encourage people to consume as much alcohol as they can before the price increases do not encourage responsible alcohol use. One of the basic principles of ethics is to "do no harm." The Daily's alcohol advertising policy is a violation of this principle.

In its finals week issue, the Daily ran two ads that clearly encourage irresponsible drinking behavior. One encouraged students to "Adjust your study schedule around our nightly drink specials" and advertised a "Student Study Break" with 25-cent taps from 7 p.m. until closing. Another ad promoted "Bladder Buster Wednesday," when taps are 20 cents until someone has to go to the bathroom. These are two examples of the type of ads the Daily runs on a regular basis.

In the past several years, Boynton Health Service has placed thousands of dollars into advertising in the Daily to combat alcohol misuse among students. It is unfortunate the Daily chooses to willingly accept Boynton's money for these ads, while at the same time running ads which negate our message, often in the same issue. Many University departments and groups have decided to change their policies in recent years to help support the University's efforts to combat alcohol misuse. Within the past two years, Housing and Residential Life has created two substance-free residence halls and has begun to evict students who are repeatedly caught drinking illegally; the Department of Men's Intercollegiate Athletics has cancelled a lucrative contract with Minnesota Brewing; and the fraternities and sororities have adopted a new alcohol policy that prevents chapters from providing alcohol to guests and requires a strictly adhered-to guest list.

It's a shame that the Daily, which is often cited as being the best college newspaper in the nation, is unwilling to set an example for its peers and to follow the examples set by other members of the University community by changing its alcohol advertising policy.

Amelious Whyte,coordinator,Chemical Health Programs, Boynton Health Service