Grape Debate Intensifies as Referendum Approaches

Students clutching small candles gathered in the biting cold last night on the steps of Memorial Church for a vigil to recognize the alleged plight of workers in the grape fields of California.

An hour earlier, Adam R. Kovacevich '99, chair of the ad-hoc Grape Coalition, debated Roel Saldivar '01, member of Harvard-Radcliffe La Raza, the Chicano students' organization, in the Ecker room at Annenberg Hall, in an event sponsored by the Harvard Political Union.

Yesterday, gearing up for the grape referendum on Friday, both sides of the grape debate actively promoted their messages during the final stretch before Friday's referendum to decide whether to continue Harvard's boycott of grapes.

The first speaker at the hour-long vigil expressed anger at the Harvard community for its reaction to serving grapes in the dinning halls.

"As members of the Harvard community, I think we've come here tonight to express frustration and disbelief with the actions passed here at Harvard," said Felipe E. Agredano-Lozano '97. "I feel outrage that this is even up for a vote."

At the vigil, representatives of many organizations around campus, including La Raza, the Progressive Student Labor Movement (PSLM), Ballet Folklorico de Aztlan and UNITE, gathered in a circle and shared thoughts and experiences.

They concluded the vigil with a responsive chant in Spanish, accompanied by rythmic clapping.

Daisy M. Rooks, representative for the United Farm Workers (UFW) praised Harvard students for organizing the vigil.

"This is a great event. I appreciate you guys being here," she said. "I'm willing to do what it takes to help you win this."

She encouraged students to go door-to-door to spread their message.

"The grape referendum has been taken as a joke," said Sergio J. Campos '00, chair of the Latino Political Committee. "With this vigil I want to show that this is a serious matter."

Edgar Saldivar '99, present at the vigil, expressed the meaning it held for him.

"This vigil shows that there is a community here that cares. We run into people who have no understanding," he said. "It's important to stay strong. Our interests are much more greater and nobler."

Abandoning emotions, leaders on each side of the grape questioned debated the facts surrounding the grape question.

"A boycott is probably the most ineffective way of making improvements in the working conditions of the grape workers," Kovacevich said. "It is the easy way out."

He said students should instead send letters to government officials and grape growers to protest conditions.

Roel Saldivar disagreed.

"[The improvements since 1984] go to show the effect of the boycott," Saldivar said. "Slowly but surely things are being accomplished."

Students at the vigil agreed that no matter what the results of the referendum on Friday are, they will not drop the struggle for the workers' rights.

"If they vote to bring back the grapes, there are many other things we can do," said Eliana P. Kaimowitz '01. "That won't be the end of it."

Kovacevich refuted many of the statements made in material from the United Farm Workers (UFW) circulated by La Raza. He said that many of the statistics are from about a decade ago, and much of their information is exaggerated.

However, Saldivar replied that Kovacevich, whose parents farm grapes, should not use his own family farm to represent the entire grape industry.

Some of the students at the vigil said they had experienced the effects of conditions in the fields first hand.

Rosalinda Rosalez '01 worked in orchards in Northern California during the summers as a 15- and 16-year-old. She said workers experience terrible conditions.

"There are virtually no people in the unions because of ignorance. They think their wages are good," she said. "There was no dignity. I agree with grapes as long as they are picked by people who know what their rights are and have their rights respected."

In the debate, Saldivar focused on the dangers of pesticides in the grape fields and the need to protect workers and buyers from the potential poisoning effects.

But Kovacevich questioned the effectiveness of the boycott as a means to change working conditions.

"It is the height of Harvard student hubris to think that people are waiting on edge to see what our decision is," he said.

Kovacevich said students should have the right to decide whether or not they want to eat grapes. Introducing grapes into the dinning hall simply gives students this choice, he added, while still allowing those who prefer not to eat grapes to exercise their rights.

"We consider a vote to reinstate grapes to be a sign of respect of your fellow students' rights to be able to eat grapes throughout the school year," he said.

The Ballot Question

Students all over the campus have expressed disapproval with the decision by Harvard Dining Services (HDS) to include six choices on the ballot.

They said that voters will find the choices confusing and even those who have an opinion will not know which option to chose.

"I'm not happy and a lot of other people are not happy with the way Dinning Services handled the ballot. That's another issue," said Daniel M.Hennefeld '99 of PSLM.

Lizbeth F. Alatorre '99, an officer of La Raza, wrote a letter summarizing her concerns to HDS.

"I am severely dismayed at the new grape voting options available to students. The time frame [to educate voters is now] so small that I fear both groups will have to resort to 'guerilla' publicity tactics to publicize their views on the new choices," she said. "This...sets the stage for an uninformed vote.

But Kovacevich questioned the effectiveness of the boycott as a means to change working conditions.

"It is the height of Harvard student hubris to think that people are waiting on edge to see what our decision is," he said.

Kovacevich said students should have the right to decide whether or not they want to eat grapes. Introducing grapes into the dinning hall simply gives students this choice, he added, while still allowing those who prefer not to eat grapes to exercise their rights.

"We consider a vote to reinstate grapes to be a sign of respect of your fellow students' rights to be able to eat grapes throughout the school year," he said.

The Ballot Question

Students all over the campus have expressed disapproval with the decision by Harvard Dining Services (HDS) to include six choices on the ballot.

They said that voters will find the choices confusing and even those who have an opinion will not know which option to chose.

"I'm not happy and a lot of other people are not happy with the way Dinning Services handled the ballot. That's another issue," said Daniel M.Hennefeld '99 of PSLM.

Lizbeth F. Alatorre '99, an officer of La Raza, wrote a letter summarizing her concerns to HDS.

"I am severely dismayed at the new grape voting options available to students. The time frame [to educate voters is now] so small that I fear both groups will have to resort to 'guerilla' publicity tactics to publicize their views on the new choices," she said. "This...sets the stage for an uninformed vote.