Comments on: Admins Announce, Fail to Explain Barnard’s New Required Meal Plan

By: transfer

transfer — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 04:50:04 +0000

I was BC’10 before I transferred down to Texas, and I have to say this sucks for all my old friends still going there (though I do catch myself craving that thin crust pizza– the bbq chicken was sooo good!) I definitely emphasize with y’all!

By: bc '11

bc '11 — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:09:19 +0000

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the plans listed are a “minimum amount” for each class year. So first years only get one choice (same as now), but sophomores get two (the one determined by their residence or the unlimited). Juniors can choose from all the plans above their class year and seniors can choose from all the plans. More limiting in some ways, but less limiting in others. Personally, I think the current meal plan options are terrible – I really don’t need or want meals at Hewitt. These choices are much better, but I resent being forced to have one of them.

Yeah, I agree about the sophomore/junior thing. Do they think sophomores are too immature to cook and then, magically over the summer, they blossom into healthy, accomplished chefs? They can justify forcing the sophomores to pay more, so they’re going to do it.

By: Yes

Yes — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 20:36:14 +0000

It should definitely be Flex. At least that’s real money.

By: BCSophomore

BCSophomore — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:32:39 +0000

I don’t really think that the new plan adds any variety to our choice of meal plan. There might be a greater variety of food on which to spend points, but from what I understand students will only have ONE choice of meal plan, as determined by your class year (and if you’re a Sophomore, by residence). If anything, this is MORE limiting than the 4 options we’re currently given.

Also– is the lifestyle difference between a Sophomore and a junior (who say, both live in CG) really enough to warrant such a drastic difference in the required meal plans? A difference of 40 meals and nearly 2x the points? Seriously, who thought up this plan, because I have trouble believing any of my fellow students would authorize that decision…

By: anonymous

anonymous — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 07:20:16 +0000

I remember eating there as a prospective student (I’m class of 2011 now) and it was good.

The pizza she is referring to is the same exact pizza now in Hewitt, so I don’t understand why they refer to it as “coming back”… It’s been in Hewitt since McIntosh was demolished… And it is pretty good, you are right.

By: Well...

Well... — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 05:24:19 +0000

We’re all assuming it is inefficient because there are five stores in the neighborhood that serve better food at lower prices.
Employing union employees may have something to do with it, but I’m not so sure. Many of the employees of companies the university contracts out to (security guards, for instance) are not unionized. I’ve talked with the guy who owns the asian smoothy shop in Lerner, and he and his buddy aren’t unionized.

If they opened up the spaces to whoever was willing to pay rent we would end up with better, cheaper food. Invisible hand, invisible hand.

By: bc 11

bc 11 — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:16:57 +0000

i don’t think they would, because columbia is way too big to have every undergrad eating at john jay and the places in lerner (not that everyone with a meal plan will use it, but probably more would if they were forced to pay for it). i think they think it’s going to work at barnard because we’re smaller, but considering how horribly crowded hewitt and java city are during peak hours, it’s going to be a disaster next year.

By: yea,

yea, — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:13:51 +0000

where did you here this? this seems interesting, if that’s the case…

By: thanks.

thanks. — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:12:35 +0000

aside from it being required, which is of course problematic, i think this is actually somewhat of an improvement. i always felt that the dining plan options were horribly limited. i’d personally be willing to get this plan if it wasn’t required (i usually get the 50 lunch/points plan anyway). i hoping that some type of compromise can reached on this.

By: answer

answer — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:06:01 +0000

Per semester, so seniors have to pay 800, juniors 900, etc

By: question

question — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:55:38 +0000

does anyone know if the points/plan that’s listed in the email is per semester or for the entire year?

By: actually

actually — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:43:22 +0000

I think the point was more that throwing temper tantrums won’t convince the administration to treat you like adults.

Also, assuming prices will remain similar to those in the past, almost all of these plans will be well under $1,000. Only sophomore quad residents and first years will be required to pay that much, which isn’t a change.

By: ...

... — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:35:39 +0000

I think you may be a little quick to accuse here… How familiar are you with Aramark’s finance situation? Saying they are “inefficient” and implying that Barnard is getting kick-backs is a lot of accusations with nothing to back it up in your post. Union contracts probably have a lot to do with this, as a later poster has pointed out. Also, we have to keep in mind that we’re in New York City, so cost of running a business is significantly higher then elsewhere. I don’t know why this whole process seems to shout “corruption!” to so many people, especially when SGA was apparently involved in negotiations. Let’s investigate further before we make such claims.

By: duhhhh

duhhhh — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:29:23 +0000

TAKE DOWN THE UNIONS! RAHHHHHhhh

By: yes

yes — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:28:18 +0000

agreed