During its July meeting, the IHL Board approved MUW's request to privatize its campus maintenance and cleaning services through a five-year contract with Sodexho, a Maryland-based food and facilities management company. Here are IHL Board comments as reported in the Columbus Commercial Dispatch:
"There will be more efficient operations of the facilities. It's a win-win-win situation," said state College Board member Ed Blakeslee of Gulfport, who chairs the College Board's real estate and facilities committee.
However, voting against the plan was board member Scott Ross of West Point, saying MUW is "essentially firing 60 people." He expressed concerns about the impact this will have on employees' government pensions.
A Democrat just elected West Point's new mayor, Ross expressed misgivings about public services being taken over by the private sector.
"I think this is the wrong way to do business," he said.
While supporting the change, board member Amy Whitten of Oxford acknowledged the anxieties that some MUW employees may have.
"I can imagine how painful this is up on the campus. Fear of the unknown is a very compelling issue," Whitten said.
These quotes are more support for the conspiracy theory. If this were USM, no one would care about any employees being hurt by this, especially if it were Shelby's idea to do it.
USM-Gulf Coast DID privatize its janitorial services, this Spring in fact, causing considerable grief and anxiety at Gulf Park. Although there was a good deal of discussion of all this on this board, I can't seem to remember that the IHL had to actually vote to authorize privatization. Did Malone fly this one under the radar? Or was there some form of IHL approval of the outsourcing of USM-GC janitorial?
jack wrote: These quotes are more support for the conspiracy theory. If this were USM, no one would care about any employees being hurt by this, especially if it were Shelby's idea to do it.
Probably a few of those 60 people who will be fired live in West Point. Scott Ross is simply standing up for some folks who voted for him. Would he take the same stance if the privatization of services were happening, say, at Alcorn?
However, voting against the plan was board member Scott Ross of West Point, saying MUW is "essentially firing 60 people." He expressed concerns about the impact this will have on employees' government pensions.A Democrat just elected West Point's new mayor, Ross expressed misgivings about public services being taken over by the private sector."I think this is the wrong way to do business," he said.
ahem . . can we NOW acknolwedge the lack of imagination that it took for the Board to fail to anticipate the potential conflict of interest that might happen from having someone occupy a political position during their tenure on the Board.
If the principle of the Board is to isolate it from political meddling, then you don't open the door by allowing someone who holds political office to sit on the board. Ross should have waited until his terms was over to run.
What I constantly learn in the state is how easy is for some people to have their cake and eat it too, principles be damned.
stephen judd wrote: What I constantly learn in the state is how easy is for some people to have their cake and eat it too, principles be damned.
You're entirelyc orrect, Stephen
But as I mused upthread, would Ross have voiced the same objection if the privatization had been taking place on the opposite end of the state from West Point's voters? If the answer is "yes," then he is acting on principle. In order to prove that he's acting on principle, Ross will now have to become the "voice against privatization" on the IHL board!