| Letters to the Editor | 28 October 1998 |
Reader Questions "Meal Plan Scam"
Unfortunately, what could have been an interesting exploration of what contributes to the cost structure of institutional settings (“The Meal Plan Scam,” October 7, 1998) got bogged down with some side issues that detracted from the author’s ostensible purpose. In addition, I think a sharper focus less burdened with ideology might have done a better service for the U-M community.
Prior to working for the University, I was Associate Director of one of the major Hillel Foundations, so I think I have a pretty good perspective on at least one of the meal plans that Mr. Oslick investigated. Let me hasten to say that I do not work for University Housing, and I do not claim to know anything specific about the cost structure of Housing’s meal plans.
With respect to kosher meal plans, it is simply wrong to presume that there is a large difference in the food cost structure for kosher establishments than others. It is probably true that if you set out to provide the cheapest food possible in a given environment that kosher food will cost more than food in non-kosher settings. But most food plans do not attempt to provide the cheapest food possible. They attempt to provide what their customers want, and that usually means investing in at least some products that cost more than bare-bones necessities. With good menu planning it should be possible for a kosher meal plan to compete with other types of plan.
As a person who honors Jewish dietary law, I also feel that it is important to clarify that kosher food does not equate to expensive. I strongly doubt that my family’s grocery bill is any higher than the typical Ann Arbor household’s. Certainly, kosher meat is sold at a premium price. But that can be balanced against a plan in which a family consumes a bit less meat than the American average while eating more foods prepared from scratch rather than purchased in processed form.
The article would have gained more credibility for me had the author presented information on whether the non-University plans defrayed their facility and administrative costs through the plan charges, or whether these costs were paid for by donations or volunteer labor arranged by the plan operators. Since the Hillel plan was noted to be operating with a subsidy, my suspicion is that the rates do not reflect the cost of cleanup, utilities, or facility repair.
Finally, I was disturbed by the references to the employee salaries and benefits which clearly are a cost factor for University employees. Speaking not as a University employee, but as a father who will soon be sending his two children to some university environment, I would feel better knowing that all the employees who will be in a service role are earning decent wages, obtaining adequate health insurance, and providing something towards their retirement. It appears that the author of the article would rather eat more cheaply even if it means those employees will have none of these benefits, but we will have to disagree about this.
Finally, please note that this letter reflects my personal opinion and is not offered in my official University capacity.
Jack F. Love
Mr. Love,
It appears we come from two perspectives. I believe the purpose of the University meal program is to provide sustenance to students living in the Residence Halls. You, however, feel it is a welfare program to aid minimally skilled workers by paying them far above their market value. I question exactly how far your goodwill goes. Do you boycott all restaurants that pay their workers below $10 an hour? How about supermarkets? Or does your goodwill only extend to other peoples’ money — the thousands of families socked by outrageous rent?
As to your assumptions about the Hillel program, the statistics I quoted came directly from Hillel’s chef, who also orders food. While you are correct in asserting that somewhat of a “substitution effect” occurs in food selection, from personal experience (I keep kosher) I know it cannot remotely cancel the premiums associated from kosher food.
I admit I am unclear if Hillel’s figures include the cost of utilities and equipment repair, although they do include the cost of kitchen cleanup. However, with the general meal plan these costs are trivial compared to the price of food and labor, so I doubt that these costs could alter the figures significantly.
Lastly, you claim that my “ostensible” purpose got in the way of good reporting. I find this interesting, since I reported facts, and avoided postulating a solution. Perhaps these facts about burdensome labor and management costs are unpleasant for you, nevertheless they exist — and continue to burden students.
Cordially, a fire-breathing, Dark Ages Ideologue,
Jacob Oslick
Reader Asks Where Bockhorn's Collar Is
Hey Lee, I read your article, “The Way You Wear Your Hat...” (October 7, 1998), then I looked over at your standing head — where is the collar on your shirt? A picture is worth a thousand words. I was going to count the words in the article, but you get my point, don’t you?
Jody Reynolds
School of Information
Administrative Offices
Touché. Actually, we had been meaning to change the column pictures after the first issue, but in our haste during production we neglected to do so before printing the October 7th issue. I hope you find my new picture less hypocritical, and more appropriate for a Junior Member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. — LFB
This article was published in the 28 October 1998 edition of The
Michigan Review (Volume 17, Number 3).
For questions or comments, see the Contact
Information page.