Last time I checked, Dartmouth was smack in the middle of a budget crisis that led to the termination of numerous staff members. So why is so much money being wasted on student employees who perform negligible jobs?
Let me preface my argument by stating unequivocally that there is nothing wrong with students working on campus. On the contrary, student employment can be a rewarding experience that boosts resumes, enables vital work-study programs and augments financial aid packages. The College profits too, since students work for much less money than full-time workers with benefits.
Instead of the option being used appropriately, however, the administration has allowed pointless student jobs to proliferate across campus. While many posts have purpose and help Dartmouth run more efficiently in some way, there is a large category of almost-worthless jobs that essentially entail paying a student to sit for hours while doing little to no actual work.
These jobs exist everywhere on campus. The library is a major culprit, with, for example, a post at the reference desk for a student to sit 20 yards from similar spots at the circulation and information desks after the real reference librarians depart for the night. I understand that someone needs to ensure books are not stolen, but these students simply do homework for hours, without answering any questions that cannot be taken somewhere else. Similarly, there is the job in the Hopkins Center for the Arts gallery, where students are paid to sit, ensure no one steals the art and refer sporadic visitors to informational brochures. Ubiquitous extra employees at Topside and the Fitness Center round out some of the more high-profile slacker-jobs.
Perhaps it is unfair to single out these positions, and every job certainly comes with some level of responsibility. But the token effort required and lack of even a minimal standard of actual work in many of these jobs makes it obvious that the posts either should be eliminated, or the students occupying them should be given more duties. It would be so easy to, with some extra training and a broader purpose, make sure all jobs improve campus life in some way. For example, why can't the reference staffers be thoroughly trained to help student research needs? Shouldn't the art gallery employee be an expert docent of sorts? Instead, students are paid to just sit and do their own work for hours.
As a Dartmouth employee myself, there are certain things that I expect of campus jobs. The tutors at the Student Center for Research, Writing and Information Technology, like myself, are required to undergo rigorous training to deal with all types of projects, papers and situations all with the expressed goal of contributing as much to the campus as possible by helping any and all who come by the RWiT center. While the hourly pay isn't anything spectacular, I feel satisfied knowing that I earned every penny by providing an essential and helpful service. Can the same be said about everyone who sits at a desk for hours doing his or her own work with minimal interruption?
These cases may seem minor, but added up they make a budgetary impact. When the College is cutting full-time employees, decreasing services and instituting a hiring freeze, no waste should be overlooked. If the jobs are necessary, give them more duties; if they aren't, eliminate the positions and use the money to shore up other services in this budget crunch.
Some might argue that the College has to provide a certain number of student jobs for financial aid, so there isn't any harm in letting some of them exist as excuses to do homework. But there are so many more meaningful and useful occupations out there for students than answering two questions in five hours. Why not take some of the money away from current jobs and put it toward students as research assistants? Or, better yet, give it to students who want to do their own research. There must be an endless number of better options than paying for jobs a mindless automaton could perform admirably.
The total outlay to people working these jobs may be only a fraction of the amount of money dedicated to employment, and a relatively small figure overall. But how can the College keep a straight face when pretending to have pursued every option in cutting $40 million from the budget? Every time we see another student employee studying for a midterm or watching YouTube videos while on the job, it is a slap in the face to every full-time employee who has been laid off.
