Ask almost any Portland State student receiving a stipend and they will tell you that they feel overworked and underpaid. It is a fact of life when you are living off of a stipend in a student position.
But the idea behind working for a stipend as a member of a student group is an educational benefit that is awaiting you at the end of the road.
That is the tradeoff students make sometimes: experience over money.
Apparently the Associated Students of Portland State University and the Student Fee Committee lost sight of that last Friday when they approved raises for themselves, and then decided to push forward a policy for 5 percent across-the-board individual position stipend increases for all student groups.
According to the revisions that were made by the Educational Stipend Review Committee and approved by the General Student Affairs Committee, the 5 percent increases were not supposed to take effect until academic year 2009-10.
But SFC Chair Aimeera Flint said there was confusion about when the increases would take effect, and the SFC ruled to make them effective immediately.
An increase of 5 percent will be made to the stipend of any student working for an SFC-funded group, including the Vanguard.
On the other hand, the ASPSU and SFC stipend increases ranged from 1 percent to just over 19 percent, with student body president Hannah Fisher receiving the lowest boost in pay and SFC Vice Chair Tanja Miljevic getting the highest.
Ironically, it was Miljevic who questioned the decision during last Friday’s meeting, stating that it would be a “bad reflection on ASPSU and the SFC, as we would be approving our own raises,” according to the meeting’s official minutes.
Yes, that is a bad reflection to say the very least.
After all, the raises are coming out of student fees, and the body that is receiving the stipend increases is also approving them.
Flint contends that the increases were a foregone conclusion because last year’s SFC recommended that some stipends should be increased.
The recommendation comes in the form of a note at the bottom of ASPSU’s budget, and clearly states, “This SFC non-bindingly recommends ….”
Unfortunately for this year’s administration, “non-bindingly” proves it was only a suggestion and consequently the increases were not reflected on the group’s budget this year.
Like everyone else, ASPSU was stuck with the budget they inherited.
That is until Fisher and ASPSU Vice President Kyle Cady advocated to the stipend committee–charged with revising the stipend policy roughly every two years–for their stipend cap to be increased substantially.
The stipend committee granted ASPSU the increase, which is the money the SFC approved for the group to have last Friday.
Fisher and Cady told the stipend committee they would use the additional monies to fund three previously unpaid bodies–the Student Senate, Elections Board and Judicial Board–but did not mention that some would be used for stipend increases, said Amiee Shattuck, director of Student Activities and Leadership Programs.
Shattuck also served on the stipend committee.
Fisher and Cady, who were also on the stipend committee, said they previously explained to the stipend committee that a portion of the funds would be used for stipend increases. And they added that they have been completely transparent of their desire for raises since June.
Regardless of whether that is the truth or not, it is exactly the point.
Somewhere along the line, ASPSU and the SFC forgot their primary function: to represent the students of PSU.
That is the reason they were elected to office, not to throw their power around and collect a few more bucks a month on the students dime just because they can.
No matter how they try to justify it, the raises are being paid via student fees, and that is just plain wrong.
This campus is teeming with mistrust of student government. Many think they will never accomplish anything while in office.
Except this year Fisher and her staffers were actually making some progress.
First, ASPSU has had great representation around campus to push voter registration, and then it helped lobby for an additional $4 million to be allocated to the Oregon Opportunity Fund, which a state representative said played a role in it passing.
The problem is those feats will be overshadowed by this abuse of power, effectively stifling ASPSU’s growing momentum and bringing their leadership into question.
Like a famous Stan Lee character once said, “With great power comes great responsibility.”
Let’s hope ASPSU and the SFC remember that every time they receive their paychecks this year.