Editorial: Housing must increase transparency following meal swipe discrepancies
By Editorial Board
Oct. 25, 2015 11:40 p.m.
UCLA Housing did something right Thursday when it restored some swipes to students.
While it’s good that Housing has successfully fixed its mistake, that doesn’t absolve it of any criticism, as there is still much that needs to be improved. From the point Housing discovered the system error that inflated students to the point it restored swipes it took away, it failed to communicate with residents about the situation. Housing needs to restore confidence by being transparent about what caused the error and how it intends to ensure that it doesn’t happen again.
In the future, Housing officials should also make sure to prioritize communicating with students instead of waiting for public outcry to be prompted into action. Errors in the swipe system should not be handled so poorly as to elicit weeklong news coverage and several hundred student complaints. The fact students had to rally to see a fair response was unnecessary and reveals the little regard Housing has for residents.
Housing has been reluctant to give out information from the start. When the Bruin inquired Housing on the matter on Oct. 13 to confirm students’ rumors, Housing seemed unaware of the issue, asking for more details. More than a week later, Housing sent out a sudden e-mail Wednesday saying it had artificially raised Hill residents’ swipes and it had corrected the matter by deducting the swipes students had used between the start of term and Oct. 1, when the glitch occurred.
On Thursday, after heavy backlash from students upset over lost swipes, Housing restored students’ swipe counts to the standard amount – two swipes per day for students with the 14 Premier meal plan and three swipes per weekday and two swipes per weekend day for students with the 19 Premier meal plan.
Housing listened to students’ outcry, even responding with humor on its Twitter account.
To be fair, Housing likely would have had to take a significant hit in its dining revenue if it did not reduce students’ swipe counts. But the fact still remains that students had to go through the trial even though they were not at fault. All students did was look at how many swipes they had and try to use them appropriately.
The compromise Housing eventually made should have been its first move. Any lost revenue should have been considered the consequence of its lack of timeliness in handling the situation. If the system error had been addressed sooner, less swipes would have been mistakenly used.
That Housing was not aware of the internal error until contacted by students and media outlets proves that there is a severe lack of oversight. And without an explanation as to how they plan on correcting and preventing the problem, students can’t be sure that it won’t happen again.
Moreover, the initial response, which included a promise of one extra themed dinner, which would still require a swipe students may not have had, was inadequate at best and insincere at worst.
A student replying to the Bruin’s poll on the story had acutely described the situation as “a restaurant serving you the wrong food and forcing you to eat it.”
For the most part, Housing has fixed the situation for students, but its lack of care in handling the issue and unprofessional response to student concerns is something they will have to continue to work on.
