Staff photo by Richard lavitt
WHAT GOES UP... — Jugglers w:t.n the Royal Lichtenstein One-Quarter Ring circus entertained students Wednesday in front of the Von KleinSmid Center. See story page 18.
or
Volume LXXXIX, Number 57 University of Southern California Thursday, December 11, 1980
11	PERCENT increase
Parking staff granted wage hike
By Ezell Gray, Jr.
Staff Writer
University officials recently decided to issue parking attendants an 11 percent wage increase which had been withheld from them for more than five months because of negotiations with Teamsters Local Union 911.
Carl Levredge, director of University Security and Parking Operations, said the decision to release the raises, which were given to all university employees in July, was because "we felt this was beginning to create a hardship on the attendants."
The university withheld the increase because it was waiting for the ruling of a National Labor Relations Board hearing on
charges it brought against the Teamsters. The university charged the union engaged in unlawful conduct during a June election in which the parking attendants voted to unionize.
The hearing, which began on Wednesday, is scheduled to conclude this afternoon, but the report may not be available for several weeks, said Lewis Gordon, a board spokesman.
While waiting for the hearing to begin, the attendants were in legal limbo because they are not subject to union by-laws and will not receive union benefits until the matter is resolved.
The university always intended to give the raises, the question was when to do so.
"The money was always in the budget, but we didn't allocate it in July. I conferred with Anthony Lazarro (vice president of Business Affairs) and university attorneys and we decided to give the increase," Levredge said.
In the attendants efforts to unionize, the university has charged the Teamsters tampered with the election. Some of the university's charges are directed at Lee Kincaid, parking attendant. Kincaid, who was an observer at the election, had a list of all parking attendants voting and checked off their names as they voted. This may have intimidated the attendants the university has said.
Resolution asks for Student Affairs funds
By Darren Leon
Staff Writer
Earlier this year, a shortfall in the general funds forced Jim Appleton, vice president of Student Affairs, to cut the budgets of all the programs under his jurisdiction, including 528,000 from the Health Center.
In hopes of preventing similar cuts in Health Center budget in the future, the Student Senate approved a resolution Wednesday calling for the administration to allocate adequate funds to Student Affairs programs.
The second part of the resolution asks the Board of Trustees to have President James H. Zumberge instruct the vice president of Student Affairs not to reapportion Health Center funds to other non-health related functions.
The 528,000 reallocation was the third such act by Appleton. Eleven thousand dollars was taken in 1978-79 and in 1979-80.
A report compiled by the senate's Student Affairs Reasearch-Ac-tion Unit said that the Health Center was established in 1949 by then university president, Fred D. Fagg, to provide "clinic and infirmary services to students." The plan was approved by the Board of Trustees and the purpose of the Health Center's fee has not been changed since.
The senate objected to the Appleton's actions because the Health Center's funds, provided by student fees and not the general funds, were removed without student knowledge.
Appleton opposed the second half of the resolution as a challenge of his authority as vice president.
"It is very clearly established that I have the requirements in the four years 1 have been here," Appleton said. "My practice has been impeccable in getting student word on management. In fact, the board has vested in the president and me as his officer, the authority, following consultation, to make these judgments."
"The Student Senate recognizes the problems that you have with your budget restraints and we do support the efforts you've taken to work with the budget," said Mercedes Marquez, a senator. "I am still bothered that the students are told that it's for a specific purpose, and it's not used for that purpose.
"I still believe that it is unethical, I don't believe, to tell you the truth, after working on this committee, I don't think that you do have the authority. I think that the Student Senate will have to challenge this. We will do this through the Board of Trustees directly," Marquez said.
(Continued on page 19)
Low-interest loans to fire victims not a panacea
By Ruben Castaneda	In any region that has been
In the wake of fires that re-	declared a disaster area due to
cently ravaged Southern Cali-	a natural catastrophe, munici-
fomia, many survivors face the	palities (non-profit organiza-
task of rebuilding their lives	tions such as public schools,
and their homes.	churches and government
Some victims will turn to	owned buildings) are eligible
low-interest loans from the fed-	for grants, Vinso calls "free-
eral government to facilitate	bies."
their financial recuperation.	On the other hand, house-
What they don't know is that	holds are eligible only for
they may be worse off, finan-	loans.
daily, after "recovering" than "They can borrow it, but
they are immediately after the	they still have to pay it back;
fire.	it's a debt," Vinso said. "You
"People are adding signifi-	use the money to rebuild, then
cantly to their liabilities when	what have you got? The same
they assume new loans to re-	house, but more debts than
build. The idea that victims of	yesterday. You have the old
natural disasters quickly re-	mortgage, plus the new mort-
sume normal lives because of	gage to the federal govern-
financial help from the govern-	ment, and most people are un-
ment is a myth," said Joseph	der-insured and will have to
D. Vinso, professor of finance	reacquire personal belongings." and business economics. The federal government of-
Vinso has done disaster re- fers Small Business Administra-search for the National Science tion (SBA) loans to cover the Foundation for eight years.	(Continued on page 7)
High electricity cost prompts conservation study
Air conditioning units cited as power wasters
By John Lamb
Staff Writer
The cost of electricity for the university, estimated to reach 56 million for the year, has prompted a newly-developed commission to make several recommendations on cutting energy costs.
The Energy Conservation Commission, in a report to President James
H.	Zumberge and Zohrab Kaprielian, outgoing executive vice president, said that while new facilities have been constructed on campus, "energy effiency was not an important criterion."
The commission added that the university is now’ faced with "high cost energy and a campus of energy-obsolete facilities."
Jn the report, the commission said the university has two major options: 1) to reduce utility use (with an emphasis on electricity), or 2) to increase the utility budget by approximately
51	million for 1980-81 with further increases forecast for the future.
Robert Linnell, chairman of the commission and director of Institutional Studies, cited two types of energy waste prevalent on campus.
"Energy waste of the first kind, namely one involving useless consumption, is easily identified but sometimes difficult to stop because someone has forgotten to turn off the lights or the coffee pot or the Xerox machine," Linnell said.
A fair amount of energy is wasted in this fashion, he said, and costs the
university "in the ballpark of hundreds of thousands of dollars a
year."
More energy is wasted in buildings, such as Waite Phillips Hall, that have central air conditioning and heating. Such systems are designed to cool or heat the entire building, not individu al rooms. Therefore, energy will be used to heat an entire building even though there may only be a few people present.
"We've got buildings that were built in an era of cheap energy," Linnell said, "and now we have to cope with them in an era of high-cost energy.
"For example, many of our buildings have sealed windows and cen-
tral air conditioning systems, which are either on or off," he said. "You can't work in your office on a hot summer day or even in the cold winter or ever- in normal weather without the system on. The building is sealed. It gets stuffy. You've got to have the system going.
"There may be a couple of people working in a couple of offices, and you've got a w'hole building running on one system."
Linnell, a former university professor who taught a course on energy, said the cost of running these central air conditioning systems can vary, depending on size, from 5100 to "several hundred dollars" a day.
(Continued on page 3)