Students left short changed

Students left short changed

by Bridgette Davis

Short-changed literally by a lack of refunds for unused transfer dollars. Short-changed figuratively by a lack of justification for the loss.

In a story titled”Meal plans not such a scam” (Jan. 31) Ken Birkenholtz, Simpson’s vice president for business and finance, told Staff Writer Jessica Savage that most schools do not refund unused meal plan money because it’s more work than its worth. This response is purely poor customer service.

Imagine that you go to a restaurant, finish your meal, and give the waitress a $20 bill. She checks her apron, looks at you and says, “I’m sorry, I don’t have change and ‘it’s just more work than it’s worth’ for me to go to the register and get the money that I owe you.”

Surely, this would upset anyone. You may wonder whether this is a glitch designed to profit the restaurant or whether the waitress is pocketing the change.

The same can be asked of Simpson’s poor service. Is this a benefit built into Sedexho’s contract or does Simpson benefit from students’ unspent dollars?

Birkenhotz was quoted as saying, “Typically our cost is based on the assumption that students will use all of their money [at the Grill]. We encourage students to use all of their money.”

These statements, and the assumption that-by contract-Simpson pays Sedexho up-front for its dining services, would lead one to believe that Sedexho benefits from the unspent transfer cash. If this is the case, many more problems arise.

Does Sedexho try to stop students from using their flex? Certainly, there’d be no efforts to improve quality and choices if this leads to losses. Attempts to curb spending seem apparent at the end of the semester. The cupboard remains bare, despite students’ efforts to stock up on non-perishable items and the grease that they’ve avoided the whole semester just to get their money’s worth.

This is an ethical issue. Whether Simpson or Sedexho benefits is of no consequence. (Though, if Simpson claimed the cash, it would indirectly reach students.)

Regardless, students deserve the rights that accompany patronage. We ask Simpson to march back to that register and give us our change, or at least a good explanation.