Read the Maintenance Management Advisory Panel’s Final Report

A full story is coming in the Collegian tomorrow, but here is the final report from the Maintenance Management Advisory Panel (MMAP) founded after this summer’s Sodexo controversy. Here are several key points (though it’s worth reading the whole document):

  • The MMAP chose to present four different methods the College could use to address problems plaguing maintenance operations at Kenyon. They did not express a preference for any one of the four, but provided the pros and cons of each.
  • They said a majority of panel members found that the proposals of UE Local 712, the union representing skilled tradespeople, are not enough as a stand-alone plan. However, they expressed a wish that these proposals be part of any solution that the College chooses.
  • They recommended against working with Sodexo Inc., but not outsourcing as a whole.
  • The decision of how to proceed is now the administration’s to make.

President Nugent’s response is here.

Listen to the October 3rd public forum between MMAP members and the Kenyon community here.
And read The Kenyon Observer ‘s analysis herehere and here.

9 responses

  1. To whom it may concern:

    This panel was a joke and a waste of the college’s resources. They came to a noncommittal decision and have reverted us back to square one in which Kohlman makes the decision. This is not about money because the opportunities to save money without screwing over the workers exist and have been fully articulated. This is about Unions. The administration does not want to deal with unions. Kohlman, the Nuge, and elements of the administration would rather us go the Scott Walker, Mitt Romney, and John Kasich route of busting unions, lowering wages & benefits, and leaving a crater where there was once community and beneficial interdependence.

    Further, this panel ignored serious issues regarding the outsourcing of other contingents on campus. If maintenance goes, do the Custodial workers follow? What about Campus Safety? What about administrative assistants? What about IT? What about our partnership with AVI? Granted, we aren’t going with Sodexo (as per the astute recommendation of the panel), but these multinational corporations are all alike and will provide comparable services. The issue was never Sodexo’s track record of human rights abuses (though those were the insulting icing on the cake of condescension presented by the administration in June), but rather the damage that any outsourcing would do to the community today.

    The two student “representatives” were unelected appointees. We mean this not due to their placement on the panel (which were unelected positions), but in terms of their credibility as student representatives. McDuffy ran unopposed for student body president (yes, yes, shame on us for not running a viable alternative, but doesn’t this also demonstrate a perceived lack of credibility and power inherent in student government politics?). Marting was appointed to the building and grounds commission, not elected.We are disappointed at their participation in such an obvious ploy to make outsourcing easier to swallow.

    With the Nuge leaving at the end of this academic year, these decisions are inappropriate and ill-timed. We are on the cusp of a transition which could see many new faces at Kenyon as part of the turn over of administration. These decisions, which will affect future generations of Kenyon, should not be made by potentially outgoing bureaucrats.

    Moving forward, the community (students, faculty, Knox County residents) must maintain awareness of the workings of the administration. This is our campus and nothing will change that unless we voluntarily relinquish our stewardship over this great school.

    If the school opts not to outsource in two years, then we will gladly eat any and all crow. But, this administration gives us little by way of hope when it comes to relinquishing any power or pride.

    Best,

    The Romantic Dogs

    • This post is remarkably uninformed and dismissive. Kenyon students would do well to investigate the MMAP minutes and the report itself rather than this boilerplate invective.

    • a) correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t our partnership with AVI a result of outsourcing? Outsourcing is not the big bad evil you think it is.
      b) Off topic, but….”These decisions, which will affect future generations of Kenyon, should not be made by potentially outgoing bureaucrats.” I’ve heard roughly the exact same argument against students voting locally, which I have a feeling you supported…funny how principles change depending on whether the decision-makers are making the decisions you want them to make?

      • (not op)
        a) AVI is an ohio based company and our food service has been outsourced for most of the past century
        b) Yes, that is off topic.

    • The two students on the board seemed unnecessary.
      These students didn’t and aren’t going to have any power or say in this matter.
      Kenyon really doesn’t care about student opinion.

  2. Pingback: Peirce Pressures « The Thrill

Share your thoughts on this post.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: