Bill Clinton Cancels UCLA Commencement Speech

Equal pay for equal work

Maybe a burp from the past would have surficed. Sounds like somebody wasn't going to get compensation for a speech well prepared...

Support

What We as California Residents and U.C Workers togheder with U.C students accross the state are trying to do is to bring this Social Change into Our University System, tha is so badly needed. It is about RESPECT,DIGNITY that We all DESERVE ,holding U.C accountable for it's MISSION to ALL OF US based on these PRINCIPLES ON WHICH THIS INSTITUTION was founded more than 70 years ago, which are (1): TO EDUCATE ALL THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.(2):TO EMPOWER THE LIFES OF ALL THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. As a PUBLIC UNIVERSITY SYSTEM,IT BELONGS TO ALL THE TAX. PAYERS OF THI GREAT STATE.It is OUR UNIVERSITY It is our MORAL OBLIGATION TO MAKE BETTER FOR ALL OF US, NOT JUST THE EXE.PERSSONAL,WHO WE PAY TO HELP US RUN OUR UNIVERSITY SYSTEM.

eek

Wow. The internets are scary.

Apparently the entire UC system does a good job of instilling self-absorbed ignorance in its students. I thought it was just UCSD.

The least you could do is be indifferent about the loss of the "illustrious" commencement speaker. And invoking your "science" degree to make you feel like you are more deserving than someone else? Ouch.

Wake up! You are no better than anyone else. Much worse: you are being spoon-fed bogus visions of scientific grandeur by the UC system, while they harvest you to do research for them to keep profits high.

At the end of the day you will die and be gone like everyone else, and your degree won't save you from the regret of living a self-absorbed existence.

I'm a recent UC Berkeley alumni and was quite frustrated upon reading your representation of the current failed negotiations between the UC administration and AFSCME 3299.

The cancellation by commencement speakers in previous years was not due to failed contract talks but regarded a completely separate issue in which custodians on four of the UC campuses fought to earn equity wages (i.e. an equitable amount comparative to that earned by people doing the same jobs at nearby schools). The state government gave money to the UC system to increase custodial wages, but it took two years for the University to adequately reimburse custodians for their work. By reporting on failed negotiations instead of on what actually happened you have enabled the UC administration to continue hiding behind its inaccurate reputation as a victim in these "labor disputes" as you call them. If UC administrators and executives cared about graduating UCLA seniors, the 20,000 employees that keep the universities and medical centers running they would have settled a fair contract and kept Clinton as a commencement speaker. Also, comments such as those expressed in your concluding sentence about Assembly Speaker Nuñez as well as your introduction about "a never-ending labor dispute" indicate a clear bias and do not accurately represent the issues at hand. 20,000 UC employees are now working without a contract, at hospitals and medical centers as well as university campuses. Workers at some of the best public institutions in the nation are living in poverty.

I hope you take my comments into consideration, because thousands of lives are affected by these negotiations in ways far more important than anything that could be said in one speech.

Clinton made a big mistake

I'm outraged by Clinton's cancellation. I graduated from UCLA last year and it was a beautiful ceremony and a day I will remember forever. Clinton's actions are not helping workers but rather harming students who are not at fault. In order to keep the unions' favor, he lost the support of us, the students, who are the next generation of voters. While I had a lot of respect for him before this incident and even voted for Hillary, I have lost my respect now.

I agree that workers should be paid fairly, however, this is an entirely separate issue and should not interfere with commencement ceremonies.

typical democrats

Typical liberal antics. Only care about politics and how they are viewed. Speaking at a commencement is for the graduating seniors, the ones that worked their asses off for 4+ years, not for the striking laborers. If Clinton was a bigger man (which he is obviously not) he would have crossed that picket line and not disappoint the thousands of students that was looking forward to seeing him speak. If UCLA would have invited a Republican they would have had a commencement speaker. I wonder if her wife losing the primary has any influence on him not coming. The speech probably would have been a huge Hillary plug.

Congrats grads, but don't blame the workers

As a recent college grad from a Big Ten school, and incoming UCI grad student, I can sympathize with UC graduates who wanted to see Clinton and others speak. I can attest to the hard work each of you have put in the last 4 or more years. However, commencement is not just about the speech, and these cancellations should not affect the pride and sense of accomplishment you all should feel for your achievements. Finally, the UC system has known for a month that Clinton might cancel, and should have expected the same throughout the system. Instead, they waited until the last minute, and are now using these shows of solidarity to further trash and attack workers, who are not even picketing this event. And campus workers should not be forced to subjugate their own survival for the sake of revelry. It is unfortunate that students have been caught in the cross-fire, but this was a choice the UC has made. They have continued to stall negotiations. But this behavior extends beyond just workers, and fits a general trend of abusing those upon whose back the University is built. They raise tuition without raising aid, and raise executive salaries while real wages at the bottom plummet. Without these workers, the wonderful quality of education would not be what it is, and the University needs to recognize this, and treat them accordingly. And as UC students, we have an obligation to support our campus workers, because our own education depends on it.

Take a moment to really frame why this happened...

For those folks judging Clinton & the workers harshly, The UC workers were left with little choice after a lot of hemming an hawing from the administration. You think they like "messing" with your graduation, NO! Some of these people's own kids are surely effected and they have had to work as hard as Bio-girl and her parents, if not harder to get to the proud point of having a UC grad in the family.

You guys are going into the workforce out there, and there are many regulations and policiesthet may just trip up your "american dream" not to mention your shot at sustainable living, degree or no degree. If you take one lesson with you from this maybe it's that if you're lucky enough, maybe you'll find a place where your co-workers will make some tough choices to stick up for each other, and avoid ending up at a place like Enron.

Clinton at UCLA

Hooray! Not only are the graduates saved from hearing who-knows-what sort of jibberish from a lying blowhard, but they're getting a good lesson in politics and the power of unions. Sounds like a win-win to me.

The bottom line is that Clinton, Nunez and Waxman all could have done more effective things to support the workers. For example, why not work with AFSME and student groups thru out the UC system to organize a gigantic protest rally in front of the UC Offices in Oakland? (I commend the effort of what happened at UC Santa Cruz) Student groups from all UC campuses, AFSME labor union leaders and elected officials could come together and pull their resources to hire buses and all agree to meet in front of the Oakland headquarters for a rally. Clinton, Nunez and Waxman could be among the invited guest speakers, with Clinton as the key-note.

Also, it would be interesting to find out how much money has been contributed to Clinton's foundation and the past campaigns of Nunez and Waxman by both AFSME and the University of California. If Clinton, Nunez and Waxman really want to take a stand, they could refuse to ever take another dime from the University of California; if they really wanted to make a statement, they could return all the money they have ever received from the University of California and donate it to charity.

The bottom line is that all three of these guys are politicians who are refusing to do the right thing. I really think those who commend and give kudos to Clinton, Nunez and Waxman for their decision are truly misguided. Backing out of one's stated commitment, especially one as so important and big as the graduation of college students, shows absolutely no respect and is a reflection of poor judgement. Workers do not win anything by them backing out of their speaking engagements. AFSME does not win. The University does not win. And certainly students do not win.

I wish AFSME would have put pressure on the politicians to NOT back out of their commitments. This truly would have shown class and grace. But the bottom line, it was the politician's decisions: cliche political decisions that show a lack of integrity and do nothing to solve the issue at hand.