Strong advocacy saves MOP

After a week of frustration over the change in hours of the Merchants on Points food delivery program, Duke Dining has reversed the policy. Rather than forcing MOP eateries to only deliver between 7 p.m. and midnight, the administration will allow vendors to deliver during open hours, at least for the next year.

The retraction in policy comes after a wave of student backlash swept across campus, and with good cause. The absence of a public announcement until two days after the change took effect­—and even then only in The Chronicle—rightly roused student ire. A hamstrung MOP program could only reduce student options and their access to well-priced off-campus venues. This is not to mention the disregard the move expressed for Durham businesses dependent on student food dollars.

Assistant vice president for housing and dining Rick Johnson argued that the reduction in MOP hours would allow on-campus eateries to attract more business during lunchtime hours, and would force meal soloists towards a more community centered dining experience. A thriving dining community sounds an enviable goal— but it is a goal that only makes sense on a campus where community dining spaces are widely available. This is not Duke, at least not yet.

Duke Dining is no stranger to foisting sudden policy changes on the students it serves. The sudden change in MOP availability reminds us of the extension of the dining fee last year. Then, a deal between former Duke Student Government president Mike Lefevre and former vice president for campus services Kemel Dawkins was buried during an administrative power shift. Likewise, Rick Johnson—who had only just been hired when the new policy was born last January—cited a Spring 2011 Duke University Student Dining Advisory Committee discussion which he did not take part in as evidence of student input in the new policy.

This amounts to a delayed announcement of a seven months old program, justified on the basis of a conversation which only took place after the program was conceived. Johnson’s eventual decision to restore MOP is redeeming, but it hardly remedies these errors. By not publicizing the shrinkage in delivery hours, the administration showed blatant disregard for the opinions and interests of students. If the new policy was conceived of last year, there was plenty of time to work through the particulars with students. At the least, common courtesy ought to have lead the administration to announce the change to students and restaurants before they made large financial decisions with incomplete knowledge.

Student leaders showed strong resolve even as they were pushed out of the conversation. Although DSG president Pete Schork purports to have caught wind of the change along with everyone else, DSG’s ability to respond within the week may have saved the program for this year. DSG’s use of student frustration as mandate for change augurs well for student input this academic year.

Students have a right to be involved in issues that they have a direct stake in. Policy changes without student input always risk their own self-destruction. At least when it comes food, students will make sure their voices are heard.