Dining's future spurs concerns

Some members of a committee considering outsourcing Dining feel the University is ignoring them. Although administrators contend that employees and students are "engaged" in the process of determining whether the University should outsource its dining services, several critics fear a repeat of the tight-lipped decision to outsource facilities management to Trammell Crow Co. Both the Philadelphia-based giant Aramark Corp. and the smaller, California-based Bon Appetit Management Co. journeyed to Penn last semester to discuss what their respective firms could offer the University, according to Marie Witt, director of support services for Penn's Business Services. As part of a year-long food services study by the consulting firm Cornyn Fasano, the University asked each company to address late-night food services, campus catering, athletic concessions and dining possibilities at the Perelman Quadrangle. The $69 million Perelman Quad, which will link the renovated Irvine Auditorium with College, Houston, Williams and Logan halls, is designed to create a student center in the heart of campus. Construction is scheduled to be completed by 2000. Officials will not solicit bids from the firms until after a meeting scheduled for early February where the 15 employees, students and faculty members comprising the Dining Services Steering Committee will be briefed on the issue, Witt said. But while the committee is charged with deciding whether to outsource dining to both firms, one firm or keep the service operated by the University, many committee members expressed concern about whether they will actually have any impact on the decision-making process. "[Administrators] are walking us through it," Committee member and College senior Andrew Hertzmark said. But other committee members were less confident that the University was keeping them informed and listening to their advice. "The committee hasn't developed any recommendations," committee member and fifth year Engineering graduate student Jason Eisner said. "My guess is that the committee is only a rubber stamp in all of this." According to committee member and Hospitality Services Director Don Jacobs, the word "steering" in Steering Committee is a misnomer, as the members do not actually direct the administration's actions. "'Steering' is a strange word," he said. "We hear all of the input and are kept up to date." While committee member and Wharton senior Alan Danzig said the administration is currently receptive to suggestions from students, he explained that officials have free reign when adopting a final policy. "The [administrators] seem receptive, but you never know if they incorporate your ideas," he added. And according to committee member and Dining Services Director William Canney, officials simply told the committee they would announce a decision in early February. The last four committee meetings have relied heavily on administrators' presentations, with a minimal amount of discussion, committee member and Slavic Languages Professor Peter Steiner said. He added, however, that administrators know they must adequately consult members of the University community before reaching a decision -- or risk an onslaught of complaints. "If [officials] just announce a decision, someone will scream 'foul', " he said. Many faculty members, employees and students "screamed 'foul'", however, in October, after administrators announced a decision to outsource facilities management to Dallas-based Trammell Crow. The landmark agreement affected about 160 University employees. Many people criticized officials for failing to consult them before the decision was made. Facilities managers below the top level were excluded from the decision-making process in an effort to focus the discussion on all parties' best interests, Executive Vice President John Fry said in October. At the time, many employees not directly affected by the deal expressed concern about the secretive practices that could become commonplace in future outsourcing ventures, such as Dining Services. But this time around, the University set up a committee to ensure that more people are involved, although the amount of interaction between the committee and the decision-makers is subject to interpretation.