ADMXNISTRA’FWB PfiAC?€°“%S EN THE. MANAGEMEEV‘? G? 33‘8935‘3? ”L’Afi’LGYEEQ ZN QES‘DENCE HALL 9309 Séis‘l‘v’iCi Titans {05‘ fire 3mm :z‘if 2d. 5, :. £8 ‘XEGAN SYA‘E‘E COLLEGE .. " a 1.; .. q Rafi-2‘: Louisa flackwi d,“ 4 ._ g." xifia 1‘1‘4-11.-1 44 1! ‘ 11 .. +5.... .... ...? ............;.....:;.... 9......5xf : . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. L... r. . , .3.§1! 1..-: . . . ‘r... .. ..l. ‘f ..I. J. .. . 2% gm; ....-§i~!~s . 1 p ;.:. _ . In. L. n. . < . . .. I...2.1.20.1»...Jvouvo. outaax... .0 . ._ . To... ... ... . a . . .. . . . . .. 7.3.“: ._ . . . . 3 . . . . . .. . .y L . ... . :. ...... : .-....H. . .. . . .... .-.vo\. H . .uo ....nlvofivxii‘wcsuflt. . 3;! 34.0.1513“: .5 . . 3 . . . . . 4 o) .....I...‘ 7~ 0.... ml. M1 ...a. 32.3 ...r‘... 7.721.... 3.4.3: “Ty: ..L.w»..w..._..u~ 77.....IJ.:L. ......... 4.3.4:... “T“. . I... £23: “W..H..'—...l. . .....wa .......o..?.. 2:». l... .7. ”V3. . T ., ... - . ... -. . . . i C . . .. a . .17.. .... .... ... .. .x . . . . . .vx \ II .. ...-... . W . ... “V. 35;... ‘..meWJuJTVIA.an_M.-W1.VM.:.fiudQ‘ . . av... Q T: . z. T a .. . . . ._ . . ... »‘ ..- . .. . . . .... ... . .. . ..I . Q . - . ... ' .v ‘ - I 0. ' n p x t L \I . ‘ .. . i ‘ | K ’ n . J n‘ I ‘ . 7! « 1. i ’ ~ .I' . v ‘ It. "111,-” ‘E‘U 1 . "i . i 1 i ' ‘ ‘ v .‘t a . 1 . ‘ I z } j { L J r r I “ A t . ) x i; __ t ‘i This is to certify that the 7 J '_ u thesis entitled ,— "Administrative Practices in the ;‘L 33.; Management Of Student Mployees in " fl Residence “all Food Service". 5, pm: presented by Ruth Louise "“cNeal has been accepted - towerds fulfillment of the requirements for M. S. Institution ij.= _ ' degree in‘defir—iiféfiation ' j.“ . i A‘ I. 1 _ ‘2‘ . I I" l‘ t i (.1 . t W 1 ,7“ An ' .‘ ‘ f ‘ ‘ I» w a A ‘1 5% égl 5/ l.‘ / -~«—-——— - .v ~ \ Major professor 5M Date August 12, 1946 _ 3,: In“ .3} ' \ "~ r f: w " H ‘ | 31' M495 I W | r ! ‘Vi w-Wfl a V-V“ ““““ p I _-—y‘ ‘VT‘VI—frw— ‘- M‘. ‘7 ‘ I f' I ’ § ‘ l 1 I , r r ‘ . ., N ‘1 i' ‘ .4 ‘ l T T v \ .‘ ‘ l ‘ ‘A “ "' O ‘1 l . I : 1 I '7. 1 . I J. .t ‘ I r l K ‘ t I j‘ w u r. .. . (."‘ I - '7 51 ‘ f . u l t r" ‘ y if. ‘ .‘ 7 \" 1' ‘ . I I . )" -\ ' . d5 3'! .= a . 3n. A n" e t ' ‘H "“‘I{ 1' by? ‘ \' 1 ‘_ 1“ v.3 3.. ', -.t"§l "A. Li A.‘ fl- _ 4E‘\.-I% L f'f'f‘V'v . .. - ...; . ... 5. autism " _ M— _ . ... ... . .. ... . .. . «.... ..n... .........Joaacl.x:._...... 1. ... « ... 1.2.1.34. 1...... . :1 ..A .. .vnl.?l.'ll’b.li .I. .EIS. F .I. .I". .«nnl: 4".u . .. fliunbii .‘J .v 1 l .. ..n“ \w ‘ 1 ... . ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICES IN THE MANAGEMENT OF STUDENT EXPLOYEES IN RESIDENCE HALL FOOD SERVICE By Ruth Louise McNeal A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Home Economics 1946 THFC‘: 7/ZL/*~I(. , ma ‘0." idib’x}h) ACKNOWLEDGMEJTS I wish to eXpress my deepest appreciation and most sincere thanks to Mrs. Mabelle S. Ehlers for her guidance in the conducting of this study and the writing of the thesis; to Mr. Bert O'Beirne for his many helpful suggestions and assistance during the study; to Dr. W. D. Baten for his assistance in interpretating the data gathered; and to the many others who nave so greatly aided in making this study possible. TABLE OF CONTENTS” Page Introduction ———————————————— ““I’ Purpose of Study and Definition of Terms — - A Review of Literature ———————————— I. The Extent of Student Employment in Residence Hall Food Service - — — - 5 II. Personnel Aspects of Student Employment ————————————— 8 III. Studies in Student Employment - - - 11 Method of Procedure ------------- 13 Collection of Data from Questionnaire — - - — 15 A. Types of Jobs Available in Residence Hall Food Service — - - — 15 B. Selection of Student Employees - - - 19 C. Training of Student Employees - - - 25 D. Supervision of Student Employees - - 27 E. Promotion ------------- 29 F. How is the Student Employee Compensated ------------ 31 G. Time and Record Keeping —————— 5 H. Limitations on Food -------- 36 I. Absences, Tardinesses, and Substitutes ———————————— 36 J. Handling of Student Employee Grievances ————————————— 9 K. Breakage —————————————— '2 L. Coats, Uniforms, and Laundry — - - - 43 M. Separate Dining Room for Student Employees ————————————— 4% N. Time of Eating for Student Employees ------------- #5 0. Guest Privileges ---------- 45 P. Turnover of Student Employees - - - 6 Q. Type of Service and Number Served per Student Employee -------- #8 R. Advantages and Disadvantages of Student Employees --------- 52 S. Problems Arising from Student Employment ------------- 55 T. Guidance and Counselling Phase of Student Employment --------- 56 Summary ------------------- 61 Conclusions - -' .............. Literature Cited .............. Appendix .................. TABLES“ I & II III IV VI CHARTS II III CHARTS AND TABLES The Average Wage Rate Per Hour for Student Employees in Residence Hall Food Service Frequency Distribution of Number Served Per Student Employee at Breakfast Frequency Distribution of Number Served Per Student Employee at Luncheon Frequency Distribution of Number Served Per Student Employee at Dinner Comparative Wage Rate Per Hour for Regular and Student Employees Types of Jobs Available in Residence Hall Food Service for Ken Students Types of Jobs Available in Residence Hall Food Service for Women Students Frequency Distribution of Wage Rates Page -..-uln- 33 53 17 32 A'llllll‘l' INTRODUCTION Financial aid for.college students is almost as old as institutions of higher education themselves. Walter J. Greenleaf, specialist in higher education for the Federal Government, in his "Working Your Way Through College" (19) has recorded the earliest ex- ample of student employment in American colleges when he cites the case of one “Zachariah Brigden“ who attended Harvard College from lb5h to 1657, and re- ceived payment for his services 'ringinge the bell and waitinge.” The record reveals that charges against him included "commones and sizinges," or board, food and drink ordered from the buttery; tuition; "Study rents and head," or room and bed; "fyer and oandell,‘ or heat and light; while on the credit side of his ledger was Isilver, sugar, wheatt, malte, Indian (corn), hooge, and a bushel of parsnapes.' Contrasted with this record, Yale University reported in 1938 that earnings by students from jobs obtained through university channels totalled $321,000 for one term of eighteen weeks (21). Green- leaf estimates that, in one year, two hundred students from 611 colleges earned thirty—five million dollars. Student employment has indeed become of age! Today we find that colleges of the nation are feeling the effects of war in many ways. More opportunities for attending colleges at partial government expense are presenting themselves, while, at the same time, for a large number of students, part-time employment remains the only way by which they can meet the costs of higher education. The day when one became a “self-made man" through perserverance is rapidly passing. Increased interest is being shown on the part of faculty and administration in finding part-time Jobs for students to enable them to maintain themselves in college. As Newman warns, “it must not be forgotten that the cost of obtaining higher education includes a great deal more than tuition, books and laboratory fees. A large percentage leave homes and they or their parents must provide living costs at sohool.”(10) To bear witness of this fact, his studies of em— ployment problems of college students have shown that approximately one-third to one-half of the youth in colleges in the United States are working part- time to supplement their incomes. One of the most common methods of reducing his expenses is for the student to work for his board. He can economize on clothing, live in a less desirable room, and cut down on social activities; he can get along fairly well with a minimum of books and supplies; but adequate meals he must have if he is to continue his studies satisfactorily and main- tain his health and well-being. Most colleges and universities offer some means of employment whereby a student may earn his meals. Dormitory food service, Union buildings, Commons, restaurants and hotels in nearby towns, fraternity and sorority houses, co-operative houses, boarding houses, even college health services may employ students as part-time workers. This study is con- cerned primarily with Opportunities for the employ— ment of students in residence hall food service. .yl lind|illltl “I. 1...: I. PURPOSE OF STUDY AND DEFINITION OF TERMS The challenge confronting the food service manager of a college residence hall food service lies not in the production of good food alone. There is an equally great challenge in the selection and direction of employees to make each individual a part of a smooth-running organization. Whether or not we recognize it as such, every organized unit has its personnel policy. The purpose of this study is an attempt to find out what policies and procedures are used in certain college food service units in the management of student employees and to determine which of such policies and procedures seem to be most satisfactory. For the purposes of this study a personnel policy will be taken to mean that group of principles which those in supervisory positions follow in their direction of student employees for a maximum of efficiency. These policies may be in a written form, or they may be recognized procedures for which there is no formal or written statement. A student employee will be considered as any regularly enrolled college student who works in the food service department primarily for his board. Both men and women students who come under this category are included. -u. REVIEW OF LITERATURE It is inevitable that the increasing emphasis upon the importance of higher education would bring with it concern over how a college education can be made available to all who seek one. The literature in this field will be reviewed here under the follow— ing headings; first, the extent of student employ- ment in residence hall food service units; second, the personnel aspects of student employee management; and third, studies that have been carried out in the field of student employment. I. The Extent of Student Employment in Residence Hall Food Service. Greenleaf (19) has asserted that waiting on tables is the most popular Job with the self- supporting student. Grace Augustine (2) substantiated his assertion in her study “Some ASpects of Manage- ment of College Residence Halls for Women," when she found that in the colleges which she studied students wait tables in 90 percent of those institutions em- ploying students and wash dishes in 61 percent. The four most typical positions for student employees in the house and food departments are found to be waiters and waitresses, dish-washers, general kitchen workers, and house cleaners. In the same study Dr. Augustine found that 96 percent of the 120 institutions co-Operating in her study used student labor in residence and dining halls. Harriet Hayes (6) reported that 98 percent out of the 125 institutions which she studied employed students in their food service departments. The increasing need for financial assistance to students has made the employment of students in dining halls a real factor in the management of residence hall food service. Bryan and Zabriskie (16) made a study of Operating costs in educational institutions. They found that a majority of educational institutions employ students for short periods, supplementary to full-time or regular employees. Consideration has also been given to the economic, social and educational advantages of student labor in their study with these conclusions: "Economically, part-time employment is advantageous to the student but not necessarily to the institution. Paid employees demand higher wages but accomplish the work in less time, the time re- quired for students being approximately 20 percent greater than that for full-time employees. "Socially and educationally, student employment is of value primarily in institutions where all -6- rn l‘l|‘l‘.l', ’ul't .. . nu- students do a certain amount of work. This tends to dignify the common task, to establish correct standards, to promote co-Operation, school spirit and democracy. It teaches correct procedures in cookery, household engineering, and organization and management." They have gone on to add the following cautions: "these results are only possible when a trained and capable director is in charge, when demands on time are fair, when a healthful attitude is shown toward work, and when the point of view is, at all times, educational." Robinson (28) has stated that two out of every five persons attending institutions of college grade are scholastic ”hitch-hikers", working their way through college. ”They drive cabs and wait on tables; they clerk, tutor and Jerk sodas; they peddle spark- plugs, scented soaps and subscriptions to magazines; they beg, they borrow and a few of them inevitably steal. Two-thirds of their waking hours are spent in feeding and housing their bodies; with what is left of their time and energies they go through the motions of studying for a degree." Robinson evi- dently feels that student employment is undesirable; that it puts too great a burden upon the student to maintain himself financially. II. Personnel ASpects of Student Employment The most interesting part of living is assuredly our human relations. Metcalf (26) reminds us that "society is gradually becoming aware of the immensity and complexity of the problem of recog- nizing human values in work relations; whether in an industrial or educational field." Lloyd-Jones (8), prominent figure in student personnel work at Northwestern University, believes that progress in personnel is dependent upon the discovery of new, or the refinement of old, methods for the observation of the individual and his environment. She adds, "theoretically nothing in an educational institution is an end in itself; but everything is there for the sake of the student. Every requirement and every Opportunity finds its justification in the contri- bution it makes for the development of the youth.” Certainly in a college set-up there is no more vital personnel work than with snident employees. We find that personnel work is not only new, it is of extreme importance. A group of specialists in personnel work (27) have defined personnel administration as "that phase of management which is concerned with the effective use of human beings in an organized enterprise —- business, governmental, educational, or social. It deals with human relations within the organization; the relations between the worker and management, be- tween the worker and his job, and between the worker and his fellow-workers. By centering attention on the worker's well-being, morale and capacity to produce, it increases the effectiveness of management." Tead and Metcalf (ll), well-known authorities in personnel literature, say, “personnel adminis- tration is the planning, supervision, direction and co—ordination of those activities of an organization which contribute to realizing the defined ends of that organization with a minimum of friction, with an animating Spirit of co-operation, and with a proper regard for the genuine well-being of all members of the organization." They agree that its success is tested by its demonstrated or demonstrable ability to result in a more effective and economic application of labor to production, or to forward all the aims of the corporation. Today we read, hear and even bandy phrases ourselves about the I'morale“ of a group. There is an old adage to the effect that a “happy workforce is a productive workforce." This is more than a "sentimental platitude;“ it is recognized as one of the basic principles of good supervision. The creating and maintaining of a high degree of morale in his working group could well be called any executive's principal reSponsibility. Halsey (21) has this to say about the develOp- ment of morals as a vital part of a personnel policy, “morale in a business or industrial organization is an attitude of emotional readiness which enables the worker to turn out more and better work without increase in fatigue, which causes him to enter enthusiastically into the activities and endeavors of the group with which he works; and which makes him less susceptible to outside influences, especially those which base their appeal on the premise that management's sole interest in him is to get all it can and to give as little as possible in return. It is purely emotional, in that it has to do entirely with how the worker feels about his Job, his supervisor, and his company, rather than with the actual facts. —-—But, and this is most important, morale cannot be bought, or ordered, or reasoned, or even persuaded into existence. It can be created only by introducing into the work situation conditions favorable to its development." III. Studies in Student Employment Even though the increase in student employ- ‘ment is widely recognized, the available studies giving actual statistics are limited. A study conducted at Ohio University (30) in 1930 shows that out of 2200 women students, 8 percent were entirely self-supporting, 11 percent earned most of their eXpenses, and 23 percent earned a small amount to- ward them. Ohio State University (10) conducted some studies in 1936-37 which revealed that of 3061 employed men students, 600 did restaurant work at the University or in fraternity or sorority houses connected with it. The Institution Management Department of Iowa State College carried out a study in 1933 on "The Administration of Student Labor in College Dining Halls“ (5), in which food service units in various colleges using student labor were compared.with the systems in use at Iowa State. A high degree of correlation in practices was found to exist. Bryan and Zabriskie (16) studied student labor in educational institutions and found that students required approximately 20 percent more time in doing tasks than regular full-time employees. -11... .3. u . .4‘\ Fl) I1|.Il Ll: . 4“ Enochs and Yoder (17) did some comparative studies of full-time and part-time employees in hospital work. They found that the degree of efficiency was considerably affected when part— time workers worked along with regular, full-time employees. The full-time employees seemed capable of setting and maintaining a level of performance which part-time employees could not attain alone. -12.. METHOD OF PROCEDURE A questionnaire was prepared and sent to ninety three colleges and universities in the United States. All land grant colleges were contacted plus state colleges and universities selected at random. Those selected were coedu- cational and derived some of their support from tax funds. This questionnaire was designed to cover the most pertinent points considered in the supervision of student employees in residence hall food service units. Information was sought on such points as : types of jobs available to students in food service units; how are student employees selected; who does the hiring and discharging; what is the basis for selection, financial need, scholar- ship, or what; how are student employees trained once they are selected; how is the student employee compensated for his work; what records are kept about the individual employee; are guest privileges given student employees, such as "free“ guests; what are the most common problems arising in working with student employees. The form used was such that checks, numbers, and short answers would suffice. A copy of the complete questionnaire is found in the appendix. Fifty—two colleges and universities co- Operated by sending data concerning their particu- lar policies and practices. This was a response of 55.9 percent. Six of the replies contained little or no usable information, due to war—time plans, elimination of student employees for the present time, and, in one case, the closing of the college itself. Wherever information was inade- quate for clear interpretation, the data were not used. The data received were compiled and a blanket tabulation made, with no college names appearing. An analysis of practices was made, indicating those practices and procedures considered "most satisfactory" by food service managers. -14- COLLECTION OF DATA FROM QUESTIONNAIRE A. Types of Jobs Available in Residence Hall Food Service As Greenleaf (19) has asserted, and Dr. Augustine (2) substantiated, food service Jobs rank among the most pOpular with the self-supporting student. The accompanying charts (Charts I and II) show the average number of students employed in the various jobs available to men and women students; this data being gathered from the questionnaire in the present study. The food service units reSponding to this survey show an average per unit of 7.7 men student employees serving as bus boys. The average number of men employed for counter service is 10.} students per unit. It is possible that these two Jobs of bussing and counter service overlap, as was indicated in a few replies. The average number of student waiters employed per unit was found to be 24.8. As several food service managers pointed out in their replies, the men students classified as “waiters" are often scheduled to other Jobs as well. That is, a so-called waiter may also be scheduled as a member of the dish- washer crew. ._._23 «En- Om>OIE$D mum—232 w0< ON ON 0. O. m... 0 (IA 0.0— mMIFO DD «303 EOOmmeFm 9D 02 7:50 ham—2 N-m_ DZ_2¢mm mmFZDOU NN w>0m mDm 9.2835 2%,- mo... mesa-mm coo..- ._._O|_n-§w mwmfig w0< ON 9 O_ m 0 ON— meHO 3—H m can-o m.m_ ESE do 93% m w 3 EU oh.- zmz: 02.96: m m-m_ ozimouzma m y g as; mmmEZ-s m.m__ mo_>mmm mmszaoo mezmoaem zmzo-s do... mesa-mm 000... ....4: 828.83 2. mam-4.2% 80: ...o mud: __ km> ...O ZO_._.Dm_m._.m.O >U2m30umu _: PmOanzu HZMODFm Zw_>_ 10... In 9 n. ADNBUDB H :1 TABLES I AND II THE AVERAGE WAGE RATE PER HOUR TO STUDENT EMPLOYEES IN RESIDENCE HALL FOOD SERVICE For Men Student Employees: 'W@3e_hate : Frequency Product of (cents) % Variates 22 1 22 25 i 1 25 30 3 90 5 2 70 s 2 76 0 12 M80 #5 4 iso 1 48 1 45 50 11 550 5 2 110 53 l 58 M0 1709 1709 g 40 = 42.7 or 43 cents per hour For Women Student Employees: Rage Hate EFrequency ‘Product of (cents) I Variates 25 5 75 30 t 4 120 , 35 4 140 33 3 14a 0 10 #00 h} l #3 45 u 180 50 i 8 400 55 1 55 58 1 58 i it 39 1615 1615 7 39 = u1.u or #1 cents per hour -33- The colleges reporting showed that “7.8 percent of the students employed were paid in money alone while 23.9 percent received board as compensation. Nearly 28 percent paid student employees through a combination of money and board. One college said that its usual procedure was to give the student full board in return for definite hours of work, plus one dollar per week bonus if there had been no tardiness during the week. In the present study, where the student employee is compensated by money alone, board is deducted from his college bills in 21.7 percent of the cases, while 23.9 percent said that the student received money payment out of which he is eXpected to pay his board bill. There are several ways by which student employees in food service are compensated. In their study "Student Labor in Educational Institutions", Bryan and Zabriskie (16) found these methods of payment most commonly used: 1. A specific rate in cash per hour. 2. Meals of definite value in return for time worked. 3. Time check of definite value applied on meal bills. M. Room in return for time worked. 5. Credit in Home Economics courses. They also found an increasing tendency to pay a defi- nite rate in cash.for a specified time, the most -Zu- .‘l frequent rate in their study being fifty cents per hour. G. Time and Record Keeping A record of the time put in by student employees is kept by 91.3 percent of the colleges reporting in this study. Of these, M5.6 percent use a time clock of some accurate system of checking time. In “5.6 percent of these schools, student employees are re- quired to report their working time to the person in charge. Only 23.9 percent of those answering the questionnaire said that student employees were re- quired to do a Specific amount of work to earn their board. Employment records are kept by 76 percent of the colleges reporting, while 17.u percent keep no records of student employment. The importance of keeping adequate personnel records cannot be minimized. The form of these records should be such as to give information con- cerning the employee at a glance. His attendance and punctuality on the Job, his general appearance and attitude, how well he carries out instructions, his ability to get along with his working group, —35- how he reaponds to criticism, the length of time that he is employed, advancements made; these, and many other items make a valuable record for refer: ence. It is quite possible that the student employee's Job in college is the only "experience” he can list in applying for later work. If a manager has a record of performance while he was employed, she is prepared to write helpful references. H. Limitations on Food One hundred percent of all colleges reporting in this study said that student employees receive the same type, quality and amounts of food as is served in the residence hall dining room. A few eXplained that, in reality, the student employees usually received more than the residents since left— overs were frequently put out on the "early” line or the student employee cafeteria line and could be chosen in addition to the regular menu. I. Absences, Tardinesses and Substitutes The occurence of absences, tardinesses and substitutions on the job increases considerably the problems of supervision. Colleges reporting in the present study allow excused absences varying from zero to five per month. Many reported that they had no definite rulings on excused absences and that such absences vary with the individual and his reasons. Responses to the questionnaire indicated that 52.1 percent suSpended student employees from work for tardiness or unexcused absence. A warning usually precedes such suspension. Repetition of the offense means dismissal in 54.3 percent of the cases. The number of offenses varied from two to six, de- pending upon individual attitudes and the reasons for absence or tardiness. Some attempt is made to weigh individual cases and not have hard-and-fast regulations which lack flexibility. In 60.8 percent of the colleges reporting, dismissal from one food service unit means that the student employee is not hired in other units on campus under the same management. A few managers reported that they handled this phase of management through an "honor system“, but that a scarcity of workers the past few years has made the establish— ment of any definite policies difficult. In 88.2 percent of the schools reporting student employees are allowed to have occasional substitutes on their jobs. The number of substitutes a student employee may have each month is limited by 19.5 percent, this restriction varying from two to four or five substitutes for a one month period. In 5H.3 percent no limit is placed on the number of substitutes the student employee may have. In 63 percent of the schools substitutes are required to "train in" for most of the food service Jobs. The "training in" usually consists of a short period of training for learning the basic funda- mentals of the Jobs in which they eXpect to substitute. It may be two or three meal-times of service where the prOSpective substitute works with a regular student employee to become a little acquainted with the Job. Food service managers answering the questionnaire were especially desirous of having well—trained substitutes in reaponsible positions, such as head waitress or dishwasher. It is difficult to formulate any definite policies on absences, tardinesses and substitutions on the Job. The loss in efficiency when a compara- tively untrained person takes a regular student employee's place, the increase in dish breakage, and the break in the group's working harmony tend to make the Job of supervision more difficult. To balance the disadvantages of having substitutes, there are some advantages. Most of the students who are ”subs” do the substitute work with enthusiasm and a hope that they will get a permanent job in the unit. H1. UK‘t Substitute work provides excellent training for the student and Opens for the manager a new avenue for selection of student employees. In the matter of absences and tardinesses, it is difficult to determine how many should be permitted. The importance of being on the Job on time cannot be emphasized too strongly in working with student employees in food service. It is the obligation of the food service department to serve meals on time. When a student employee is first employed in the department he should clearly understand his part of this obligation. Scheduling of student employees is, at best, a problem, and his co-operation in carrying out his schedule to the letter is essential. J. Handling of Student Employee Grievances Policies that tend to improve or develop morale are, in a measure, means of preventing or settling employee grievances. In the present study several methods were said to be used in settling the grievances of student employees. As was eXpected, the means most frequently employed was personal conference with the manager of the food service unit. The student employee group is usually small enough that its members feel free to come directly to the supervisor. Often the problem is such that a group conference of the workers is advisable, the problem being worked out through this method. Sometimes it is merely a schedule adjustment, unimportant in relation to the whole system, but vital to the individual concerned. Several methods of handling employee grievances were revealed in the answers to the questionnaire. Monthly meetings, boards of control, student leaders elected from the group, regular counselling, meetings for "heart-to-heart” talks, and transfers to other Jobs were all suggested as workable means of settling problems of student employees. In 52.1 percent of the colleges reporting, it was stated that some staff member was specifically responsible for listening to and caring for grievances. The dietitian or manager of the particular unit was usually the person reaponsible. Only 21.7 percent reported that student employees were instructed as to the procedure to follow in alleviating a grievance. On the other hand, 47.8 percent said that no information of this kind was given student employees. The attitude reflected here seemed to be "why anticipate them, they think up enough on their own, " as one answer put it. u This kind of policy seems wrong since in our business one should strive to maintain group awareness and co-operation. In most cases the grievance may be settled rather easily. It is often the result of simple misunderstanding and becomes serious only when neglected. Obviously, therefore, the wise course of action is to provide means of immediate recognition and speedy adjust- ment. No one can be eXpected to show enthusiasm for his work if he feels that the management is against him, that he is mistreated, and that he has not been given a fair deal. As Hoslett (22) tells us, "we are all prone to give advice, to settle the other fellow's problem on the basis of what we would do; not realizing that he looks at the problem through a different set of eyes; that he has a different background, education, mental ability and morals from our own." Whyte (29) substantiates Hoslett's opinions when he says, "a supervisor can best show his interest by becoming a receptive listener, by en- couraging the workers to talk out their problems. This is important in any industry. It is essential in the restaurant.” -41- .. s $|nlfil gilt”... . . p ..h K. Breakage In 28.2 percent of the colleges reporting in this study it was said that there was some report of dish breakage made in their food service depart— ments, while 63 percent said that no report was made. In 30.4 percent of the colleges keEping records, breakage is reported to the persons in charge and 19.5 percent have the breakage recorded on charts designed for this purpose. Answers to the questionnaire showed that 84.7 percent of the schools do not charge individuals for dish breakage incurred by them, except in a few instances where the breakage was due to extreme carelessness. The practice of keeping student employees aware of the expense involved in breakage was approved by 54.3 percent. Employees are kept aware through price lists posted at strategic points and through inventories of breakage with cost of re- placement. Some food service managers reported that records of breakage and accompanying costs were kept “Spasmodically." Breakage and replacement of same is an im- portant item in the institution budget. -42- 01:... Dishes suitable for the hard usage which an institution gives them are eXpensive and it be- hooves managers to keep their employees aware of this fact. Definite regulations as to the number of dishes of various kinds to be stacked on trays help to prevent breakage from overloading. L. Coats, Uniforms and Laundry Waiters' uniform coats are furnished for men student employees in 78.2 percent of the colleges reporting. Only 43.4 percent furnish uniforms for the waitresses. The cost of laundering waiters' coats is paid by 73.9 percent of those reporting, while 60.8 percent pay the laundering cost of waitress' uniforms. The number of coats or uniforms laundered each week varied from two to four or more for each person. This study shows that it is a fairly common practice for men employees to have waiters' coats furnished and laundered. Uniforms for waitresses are supplied less frequently, but the cost of laundering is usually borne by the institution, though, in general, more institutions launder men's uniforms than women's. When an institution does furnish the uniforms which it requires employees to wear, it has better control over the appearance and upkeep of the uniforms. They may be withheld from use when in need of re- pair or when they have reached the point at which they should be discarded. Like uniforms make a more attractive dining room or counter. Furnishing uniforms for employees means additional expense in the purchase, upkeep and issuing, but it pays dividends in appearance on the job. M. Separate Dining Room for Student Employees Of the 46 colleges reporting usable infor- mation, 84.7 percent have no separate dining room for student employees. They eat in the regular dining room which house residents use. There are one or two definite advantages for student employees when they have a dining room of their own. It is much less formal and the student employees are usually allowed to smoke in their own dining room. On the other hand, from the stand- point of supervision, having student employees eating in the main dining room makes it easier for the manager. She has a better Opportunity for checking if students are not on the job on time; it saves time and energy for her in locating the errant employee and getting him on the job. -44- From the standpoint of courtesy and table manners, eating in the regular dining room has distinct advantages. There is almost always as appearance of hurrying on the part of the student employee. His time for eating and for work is limited. Haste has a tendency to make him forget his table etiquette. It has been the observation of the writer that, when student employees eat in the regular dining room, there is a definite im- provement in manners at the table and with their fellow-workers. N. Time of Eating for Student Employees Of the colleges reporting in this study 76 percent have a special time for student employees to eat. An early line is opened by 82.6 percent for student employees, where they eat before work- ing their scheduled Jobs. A few are necessarily scheduled to work early, so that they cannot eat with the "early" line. The one big advantage in having employees eat early is that it frees them for the work period. It helps to remove the temptation to eat while on duty. 0. Guest Privileges In the present study 56 percent allow student employees to have guests. The percentage of those who charge a regular guest rate for employees' guests is 60.8. Although 80.4 percent allow no "free" guest privileges, a few stated that, in case of one or two members of the immediate family visiting, the student employee might be allowed to entertain them free of charge. This practice is definitely in a minority. P. Turnover of Student Employees The length of service for student employees varied from one month to four years. An average of two years was reported most frequently. However, several managers responding to the questionnaire added that the past few years were hardly indicative of a general trend, eSpecially for men students, since military service who made it necessary for many to leave school who would have continued working, if in school. In the present study 88.2 percent reported that most student employees worked the entire school year (September to June). The most common causes for resignation from jobs on the part of student employees were: draft calls, leaving school, too heavy schedubes, moving into fraternities or sororities, graduation and too much money. _Ufi- Ir In the past few years they summer almost enough money school year, therefore had during the school period. It was interesting to common cause for discharge was chronic tardiness or absenteeism. said earlier, the importance of being on to schedule in food service work. causes for discharge were: were able to earn in a to see them through a less need of a Job note that the most of student employees As has been it is impossible to overemphasize time and adhering strictly Other common indolence, poor work, lack of co-Operation, dishonesty, inefficiency, lack of dependability, shirking and failure to follow schedules, misbehavior on duty and not seeing the Job through. By "turnover“ is meant the "extent of shift and replacement necessary for the maintenance of the work force" (22). While some turnover is desirable for bringing in new employees, high turnover is a source of serious problems. It re- quires that more time be spent in selection, training and supervision of the new employee; with an accompanying loss of efficiency in the work— force while this process is going on. Some turnover is unavoidable and a certain amount even desirable, but, as a general rule, a high turnover of employees - 'TV' l.‘ whether part—time or full-time - is costly to the management, is wasteful, and is a serious obstacle to full utilization of available work forces. Q. Type of Service Used and Number Served Per Student Employee In the present study, the data gathered from this part of the questionnaire were inadequate in most cases for clear interpretation. The figures used here were taken from twenty-one of the replies which gave usable information. Tables 3, 4 and 5, pages 49, 50 and 51 show the frequency distribution of these twenty-one colleges, resulting in an average of 16.4 residents per unit served per student employee at breakfast; 1% served per student employee at luncheon; and 15.4 served per student employee at dinner. The figures for table service are very in- adequate. Only four replies provided data on this phase. The average number served per student employee per unit in these four cases was 16 both noon and night. Several managers replying to the question— naire indicated that they were still Operating food service under over-crowded conditions and war—time restrictions. ('5' TABLE V FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF NUMBER SERVED PER STUDENT EMPLOYEE AT DINNER (Cafeteria Style Service) Number Served Frequency Product of per student Variates employee __ 8 l 8 9 1 9 10 2 2O 12 2 24 14 1 14 15 2 30 16 4 6 18 4 72 2 2 no 24 l 24 30 l 30 21 335 335 f 21 3 15.4 residents served per student employee at dinner served cafeteria style. Normally, they said that they would be having dinner service at night and some at noon, but that circumstances at the present time prohibited this practice. In their study in 1931-32, Gleiser and Guthrie (5) found that the average number served per student employee where table service was used was 16 to 17 persons. The average number served per student employee in cafeteria service was 40 persons. R. Advantages and Disadvantages of Student Employees The relative rate per hour for full—time employees is higher than for student employees. In this study the average rate per hour for student employees (men and women) was 42 cents per hour; while the average rate for regular employees.doing the same type of work was 48 cents per hour, usually plus full board. Table 6 on page 53 shows frequency distribution of wage rates for regular employees. In interpreting the'average cost per hour of student employees and regular employees, one should bear in mind the findings of Bryan and Zabriskie (16) that student employees require 20 percent more time than regular employees to do the same amount Of work. -62- TABLE VI COMPARATIVE WAGE RATE PER HOUR FOR REGULAR AND STUDENT EXPLOYEES For Regular Employees: Rate 'er Frequency Product of Hour cents) _Xariates 30 3 20 33 2 o6 E6 2 72 O 3 120 42 1 42 45 4 180 47 3 141 49 l 49 50 8 400 52 l 52 53 1 53 60 2 120 65 1 65 7O 1 7O 75 l 75 98 1 98 37 1769 1769 f 37 = 47.8 or 48 cents per hour average for regular employees. For Student Employees ( For detail, see Tables I and II, Page 33) ‘Avg.'Rate per hour (cents) Men Student Employees 43 Women Student Employees 41 84 84 a 2 = 42 cents per hour average for student employees. Of the colleges answering the questionnaire, 76 percent said that from the standpoint of personnel management they preferred full—time employees to student employees. Only 13 percent stated a preference for student employees, and the remainder said that in residence hall food service there was a place for both full-time and student employees. The chief reason stated for preferring full-time employees was that it takes less time for training and supervising. As was stated above, student employees take 20 percent more time to do a comparable amount of work as is required by full-time employees. There are certain advantages to the food service manager in employing students. Student employees are a source of labor which is almost always availab1e. Student employees give the manager a valuable contact with student life for, as Gibbs (18) points out, in managing residence halls, it is hard to tell where the manager's job ends and that of a social director begins since so many of the problems have a decidedly “personnel“ aspect. Students have free hours available at the time when they are needed in food service. Finally, employing students helps to maintain a high standard of personnel. Among the disadvantages of employing students are the increased problems of training and super- vision. Part-time employees, whether students or not, require more checking and supervising than full-time employees. Students are in school primarily for study and their class schedules and outside activities are continually interfering with work schedules. Too often their work is hastily and indifferently done. There is often an attitude that the job is temporary and does not matter. It has been stated in the reSponses to the question— naire that they "take too much for granted," "have too divided interests,” and are "unadulterated nuisances from a management viewpoint." It was also stated that student employees "eXpect parental favors,” which is not clear as to meaning. The probability is that students eXpect the attention and concessions from the manager that parents usually bestow upon them at home. S. Problems Arising for Student Employment Several problems were listed by food service managers as being "most common" in student employ- ment. Those most frequently mentioned were class schedules (classes at hours when students are needed for work), extra-curricular activities, accelerated -15... . 11.4% ‘. school programs crowding too much on the student, carelessness with prOperty, laxness in work and too many excuses. Lack of familiarity with sanitary measures and sanitation in food service was mentioned frequently as a problem. "Green" help and failure of student employees to accept the problems of the unit also play an important role in success- ful student employment management. Answers to this part of the questionnaire showed that 58.6 percent thought that many of their problems could be eliminated through a more careful selection of student employees. The big drawback to this in recent years has been the shortage of men students from which to choose good employees. In reply to the question as to whether their problems could be lessened through a "governing board" or like organization within the student employee group, 54.3 percent said no. They felt that groups of this kind were often too slow in taking action. A few indicated that this was probably a good practice provided that there was a staff member trained in personnel management who was ac- quainted with the functionings of such a board. T. Guidance and Counselling Phase of Student Employment Some attempt is made to identify and adjust personal difficulties of student employees in 73.9 percent of the colleges. The results were generally conceded to be good. Such interest in the individual encourages him to do a better job and leads to improvement in appearance and manners. A few managers reported that the effect of personal interest was hard to Judge objectively. One reported "any Special attention given usually leads to more demands." Personal conferences for informing student employees of their strong points as well as their deficiencies are held by 82.6 percent. The food service manager of one college reported that each student employed there was scheduled for a regular conference of this kind two times each semester and that the good effect of this was unmeasurable. In 30.M percent of the colleges reporting, it was felt that conferences of this nature had a definite effect upon the number of students dis- charged for inefficiency, but a majority declined to comment. Managers in 54.3 percent felt that a system whereby personal interest is shown in the student employee has a good effect upon his standards and performance of work. Student employees are given Opportunities to assume responsibility for teas, scheduling and the like by 52.1 percent, while 39.1 percent offer no such training. The comments on student reaponse to this kind of reaponsibility were: "good," “believe it should be encouraged," "makes them feel more a part of the organization," “increases the poise and efficiency of workers,“ "most of them respond eagerly, depending upon the individual," and "they appreciate actively the confidence thus shown in them." We must bear in mind, however, that, without doubt, students selected for reSponsibilities of this kind are ones carefully chosen and groomed for the job, and are probably not the "run of the mill" type. The food service manager occupies a rather unique position in personnel management. She is the "boss,“ but, at the same time, she is the confidante and counsellor of many young peOple in her charge. Hunter (21) says that residence hall managers should recognize the problems the young student faces away from parental supervision, and that she should be able to advise on social conduct if the occasion arises. She needs to be well- trained in all phases of institution and personnel management. Yoder (1”) recommends that we bear in mind at all times "one large aspect of personnel control is and must continue to be concerned with the identification and measurement of distinctive individual differences and the adjustment of non— pathological personal difficulties and grievances." The Opportunity to participate in the planning and decision—making should be given student employees. The supervisor needs to take advantage of every opportunity to bring the employee's point of view to problems pertaining to his work. What does every employee want? Cantor (3) has listed four basis wants, namely: security in his work, recognition on the part of others that he is doing his job well, a feeling that he is an important part of a group - that he "belongs", and a chance to express himself in some way, to do something in his own peculiar way. Morale has been referred to as "an attitude’ of emotional readiness" (21). The supervisor of the food service unit does much to establish and main- tain the morale of her student employee group. Urwick (12), Director of the International Management Institute, held at Geneva in 1943, has this to say about morale: "it is brittle, sensitive stuff, the spirit of any good undertaking. When it is good it is unmistakable, when it is bad it is a choking fog, which undermines the courage and stifles the efforts of even the best then and women.among the personnel. It is destroyed only in the face of continued unfair treatment." Magoun (25), Associate Professor of Human Relations at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, amplifies Urwick"s convictions when he states: "Without good executive and supervisory example, it is useless to eXpect good results from the employees. A supervisor or executive gives a pattern of acceptable conduct in everything that he does and cannot turn his influence on and off like a faucet, or later repudiate what he has done. The way he uses or abuses his privileges gives the other people in the company a measure of his stature as a man. There is no such thing as a good crew or a bad crew; there are only good leaders and bad leaders." .35“ ”as S UMKA BY A questionnaire was prepared and sent to 93 colleges and universities asking information con- cerning their administrative policies and pro— cedures in the management of student employees. A summary of findings of the 46 questionnaires returned follows: A. Types of Jobs Available in Residence Hall Food Service. 1, An average number of 7.7 men students per unit serve as bus boys, 10.3 are employed for counter service, 2h.8 serve as waiters, 10.6 serve as dish- . washers, 5.8 are employed for pot and pan washing, 3.2 are engaged in cleaning and mOpping work, 1.7 are employed for storeroom work, and there are miscella~ " neous Jobs employing 6.0 men students per unit. 2. An average number of 3.2 women students per unit are hired for counter work, 15.H are engaged in waitress duties, 8.3 are employed for dish-drying, 3.3 are engaged in salad or pantry work, 1.5 are employed for office work in the department, and 7 are employed for miscellaneous jobs. B. Selection of Student Employees 1. Selection is based on personal interview by 58.7 percent, 8.7 percent rely upon written appli- cation, and 32.6 percent use a combination of the two methods. [It 2. Financial need is a requirement for selection in 67.4 percent of the cases, although the need is investigated in only 58.7 percent. A scholarship level of "C" or better must be attained in 69.8 percent of these schools. Previous eXperience was required for office work only. References are asked by 23.9 percent but are usually not investigated. 3. In 52.1 percent of the colleges studied here, the manager of the fodd service hires and discharges student employees. The dietitian in charge has this reSponsibility in 43.4 percent. A. The number of hours of work a student may carry is limited by 63 percent. Students are not allowed to hold more than one Job on campus in 36.9 percent. 5. Physical examination is required by 80.4 per- cent of the colleges for students employed in food service. 6. There was no objection to employing students who are members of social fraternities by 8.3 percent. C. Training of Student Employees 1. Printed instructions for student employees are provided by 62.5 percent. The instructions are of a general type in 63 percent of the colleges. 2. A probationary term of training is in effect in only 26 percent of the schools. D. Supervision of Student Employees 1. The student employees are directly responsible to trained supervisors in 20.4 percent of the colleges. E. Promotion 1. Promotions, as such, were reported by 41.3 percent, while 52.1 percent said that they had no system of promotion. F. How is the Student Employee Compensated? 1. The average rate per hour paid is #3 cents for men students and 41 cents for women students. The most common rate is #0 or 50 cents per hour. 2. Student employees are paid in money alone by 47.8 percent while 23.9 percent receive board as compensation. A combination of money and board is paid by 28 percent. G. Time and Record Keeping l. A record of time worked is kept by 91.3 per- cent. Of these, 45.6 percent use a time-clock or some accurate system of checking time. 2. Employment records are kept by 76 percent. / -03- H. Limitations of Food 1. One hundred percent of the schools reported that students receive the same type, quality, and amounts of food as is served in the regular dining room to residence hall residents. 1. Absences, Tardinesses, and Substitutes 1. Suspension from work for tardiness or inex— cused absence is practiced by 52.1 percent. Repetition of this offense means dismissal in 54.3 percent of the cases. 2. The number of offenses allowed varies from two to six. 3. Substitutes are allowed by 8S.2 percent of the colleges reporting. No limit on the number of substitutes is set by 5M.3 percent. 63 percent require that Substitutes be "trained in" before they are approved substitutes. J. Handling of Student Employee Grievances 1. Personal conference between supervisor and employee is the most common means of settling grievances. 2, A staff member is Specifically in charge of handling grievances in 52.1 percent of the schools. 3, In 47.8 percent of the colleges no information as to grievance procedure is given. K. Breakage 1. There is no report made of breakage in 63 percent of the schools. Students in 84.7 percent of the schools are not charged for breakage incurred by them. L. Coats, Uniforms, and Laundry 1. Waiters' coats are furnished by 78.2 percent and waitress' uniforms are supplied by 43.4 percent. 2. The cost of laundering coats is paid by the institution in 73.9 percent of the cases and that of laundering uniforms is paid in 60.8 percent. 3. The number of coats or uniforms allowed each week varies from two to four. M. Separate Dining Room for Student Employees 1. There is no separate dining room for student employees in 84.7 percent of those contributing information. N. Time of Eating for Student Employees 1. There is a Special time for student employees to eat in 76 percent of the schools. 0. Guest Privileges 1. Student employees are allowed to have guests in 56 percent of the colleges. 2. A regular guest rate is charged by 60.8 percent. No "free” guest privileges are allowed in 80.4 percent of these schools. P. Turnover of Student Employees 1. The length of time a student was employed was most frequently two years. 2. Students work the entire academic year (September to June) in 88.2 percent of the cases. Q. Type of Service Used and Number Served Per Student Employee 1. With cafeteria service, an average of 16.4 residents are served per student employee at break— fast, 18 at lunch, and 15 at dinner. 2. For dinner service an average of 16 persons was served per student employee. R. Advantages and Disadvantages of Student Employees 1. The average wage per hour for regular employees engaged in the same type of work as student employees was 48 cents in this study; for student employees 43 cents. -66- 2. From the standpoint of personnel manage— ment, 76 percent prefer full-time employees to student employees.’ S. Problems Arising from Student Employees 1. The most common problems in student employ— ment were: class schedules, extra-curricular activities, accelerated school programs, laxness, and too many excuses. A more careful selection of student employees was thought by 58.6 percent to be a way of lessening these problems. 2. A "governing board" or like organization within the group as a means of lessening problems was rejected by 54.3 percent. T. Guidance and Counselling Phase of Student Employment. 1. Some attempt is made by 73.9 percent to identify and adjust personal difficulties of student employees. 2. Personal conference with student employees as a means of indicating their strong points as well as their deficiencies is practiced by 82.6 percent. Conferences of this nature were generally conceded to improve working performance. -637... 3. Student employees are given opportunity to assume responsibilities by 52.1 percent of the schools. The reSponse to this practice was termed satisfactory to excellent. CONCLUSIONS The results of this study show considerable uniformity of administrative practice in the management of student employees in residence hall food service. Generally Speaking, the practices follow approved personnel management procedures; such as: selection and training of employees; systems of promotion, of compensation, and of record-keeping; and the adjustment of grievances and problems peculiar to the business involved. It would be well for institution managers to consider more carefully the personnel angle of the job. When the department managed reaches a stage of development where a large number of people are employed, it becomes more than a place to prepare and serve food. It has reached the stage of being a "small business" in all phases, managerial, personnel, and production. Since our present colleges and universities give every indication of growing rapidly within the next few years, it is well to be prepared for the increased scope of institution management. The training of new managers in the field will need to include far more than just the fundamentals of food service. Such persons will need an ample and working knowledge of personnel problems and solutions, of directing social activities in gnaup living, and of making livable homes out of residence halls. Prospective managers need to recognize the importance of the factors which Ruth Lusby (24) calls essential to a smoothly-working organ- ization: "loyalty to the institution, reSpect for the managers, congenial co-wcrkers, adaptability of the worker to his task, a pleasant working en- ‘cironment, definitely defined duties, fairly equal- ized work; hours, wages and vacations fair; courtesy expected by the employee in his relations with co- workers, guests and manager; courteous treatment by his employer; praise and appreciation given where due, kindly criticism given where needed and in private." She goes on to say that it is seldom, if ever, necessary to 'command' the respect due the manager. Reapect is usually given where it is deserved and loyalty accompanies reSpect. If institution managers and instructors see to it that their employer- employee relations reflect credit upon their mana- gerial methods and are examples of high standards in human relations, if they build toward a goal of happiness in service by manager and employees, they need not fear that the students working in our college dormitories and dining halls will leave the classroom to go into managerial positions with any but fine and true ideals. ‘55: v.l‘i5t§..t!ufi$flbt.§‘ . . . T ._ . . r . LITERATURE CITED BOOKS l. Angell, Robert Cooley, A Study in Undergraduate Adjustments, University of Chicago Press, 1930 2. Augustine, Grace M., Some Aspects of Management of College Residence Halls for Women, F. S. Crofts and Company, New York, 1935 3. Cantor, Nathaniel, Employee Counselling, Industrial Organization and Management Series, McGraw—Hill Book Company, New York, 1945 u. Emerson, Harrington, Twelve Principles of Efficiency, The Engineering Magazine, New York, 1912. 5. Gleiser, Fern W. and Guthrie, Elsie Ann, The Administration of Student Labor in College Residence HallSLThesis for Master's degree, Iowa State College, 1932. Abstract, Journal of the American Dietetics Assoc., Vol. 9, No. 3, p. 213—215, Sept. 1933 Hayes, Harriet, Collgge Operated Residence Halls Ox for Women Students in 125 Colleges and Universities, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, 1932 -\I 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. Hockenbury, Myron Downey, Make Yourself a Job, Dauphin Publishing Co., Harrisburg, 1936 Lloyd-Jones, Esther McDonald, Student Personnel Work at Northwestern University, Harper Bros., New York, 1929 Lyford, Carrie A., The School Dormitory, M. Barrows and Co., Boston, 1932 Newman, Samuel Clayton, Employment Problems of College Students, Published by American Council on Public Affairs, Washington, 1942 Tead, Ordway and Netcalf, Henry C., Personnel Administration, 2nd Ed., McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1926 Urwick, L., The Elements of Administration (From International Management Institute, Geneva), Harper Bros., New York and London, 19M4 West, Bessie Brooks and Wood, LeVelle, Food Service in InstitutionsL_John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1938 Yoder, Dale, Personnel Management and Industrial Relations, Prentice-Hall, Inc., New York, 1943 PERIODICALS 15). 17. 18. 20. 21. Bradford, Leland P., "Building Employee Security," Personnel, 22:4:215-221, January, 1946 Bryan, Mary DeGarmo and Zabriskie, Alice M., “Student Labor in Educational Institutions," J1. Home Economics, 21:2:105—106, Feb., 1929 Enochs, Hildred and Yoder, Dale, "A Comparative Study of Full—Time and Part-Time Employees," J1. Am. Diet. Assoc., 8:8:J5-60, August, 1932 Gibbs, Elizabeth C., "Cross—Educating the Residence Hall Staff,“ J1. of Home Economics, 34:1:17, January, 19M2 Greenleaf, Walter J., "Working Your Way Through College," Vocational Division Bulletin No. 210, U. S. Office of Education, 1941 Hall, Milton and Mallard, William P., "Making Employer-Employee Co-cperation Practicable," Personnel, 22:4:237-247, January, 1945 Halsey, George D., "Developing Morale: The Executive's Most Important Responsibility," Personnel, 22:4:251-259, January, 1946 -7u- \. 0 m5, ‘1‘" .- o d 22. 24. 2‘; 27. 2S. Hoslett, Schuyler Dean, "Listening to the Troubled or Dissatisfied Worker," Personnel Journal, 22:1:52-57, July, 1945 Hunter, Melissa, "Problems of Residence Hall Managers," J1. Home Economics, 29:5:297-300, May, 1937 Lusby, Ruth M., "Teaching Employer-Employee Relationships," J1. Home Economics, 21:11:324— 926, November, 1929 Magoun, F. Alexander, "Principles of Disciplining," Personnel, 22:3:161-170, November, 1945 Ketcalf, Henry C., "Selection and Education of Employees," J1. Am. Diet. Assoc., 13:3:155—159, March, 1942 National Roster of Scientific and Specialized Personnel, "The Profession of Personnel Ad- ministration," Personnel Journal, 24:7:265—267, January, 1946 Robinson, Henry Morton, "Wbrking Your Way or Your Professor," Readers Digest, 18:1094, 1931. Condensed from College Humor, March, 1931 4-..'.<—__J ‘ .-.': V‘ - _. 30. Whyte, William F., "Human Relations in the Restaurant Industry," Jl. Home Economics, 33:2 / 71—73, February, 1940 Zorbaugh, Grace S. M., "Student Economic Problems and the Counsellor," Yearbook of the National Assoc. of Deans of Women, Washington, 1930, p. 115—120 f APPENDIX COLLE}ES CO—OPEFATING IN THIS STUDY ALABARA Alabama Polytechnic Institute, Auburn University of Alabama, University State Teachers College, Florence ARKANSAS University of Arkansas, Fayetteville CALIFORNIA Chico State College, Chico grasses Colorado State College, Fort Collins Western State College of Colorado, Gunniscn ggznesm CUT University of Connecticut, torrs Teachers College of Connecticut, New Britain DELAWARE University of Delaware, Newark HAWAII University of Hawaii, Honolulu IDAHO University of Idaho, Moscow ‘I. {Tiiijlnmue “1.5.? .. Jul... .,.,-. x. ...o.a v y’ ‘si ILLINOIS Illinois State Normal University, Normal University of Illinois, Urbana INDIANA Indiana State Teachers College, Terre Haute I O ‘v‘I-A. r, State University of Iowa, Iowa City 1 K NSAS Fort Hays State Teachers College, Fort Hays University of Kansas, Lawrence ‘ LOUISIANA Tulane University, New Orleans Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge Southern University of Louisiana, Scotlandville EABYLAND University of Maryland, College Park MAS U) ACHUSETTS Massachusetts State College, Amhurst MICHIGAN Michigan Northern State Teachers College, Marquette Central Michigan College of Education, Mt. Pleasant Michigan College of Mining and Technology, Houghton Michigan State College, East Lansing Michigan State Normal College, Ypsilanti ‘uwmo-ms' 3' .‘u ' .. . MINNESOTA University of Minnesota, Iinneapolis KISSISSIPPI Mississippi State College, State College MISSOURI University of Eissouri, Columbia Teachers College of Kansas City, Kansas City If OICTAI‘IA Montana State College, Bozenan NEBRASKA University of Nebraska, Lincoln NEW HAMPSHIRE University of New Hampshire, Durham NEW YORK Cornell University, Ithaca NEVADA ——.—.—~ University of Nevada, Reno NORTH CAROLINA Appalachian State Teachers College, Boone NORTH DAKOTA University of North Dakota, Grand Forks ass. University of Akron, kron -70; OKLAHOMA Oklahoma Agriculture and Mining College, Stillwater PENNSYLVANIA Pennsylvania State College, State College RHODE ISLAND Rhode Island State College, Kingston SOUTH CAROLINA Clemson Agricultural College, Clemson SOUTH DAKOTA South Dakota State Teachers College, Brookings TEXAS A. & M. College of Texas, College Station 1%..“ _sINGTON State College of Washington, Pullman WEST VIRGINIA Concord College, Athens University of West Virginia, Morgantown WISCONSIN University of Wisconsin, Madison State Teachers College, LaCrosse EDITING University of Wyoming, Laramie NAME OF COLLEGE QUESTIONNAIRE Checks, numbers, or short answers will suffice in most cases for identifying the practice you follow. A. Types of Jobs Available in Residence Hall Food Service I. For men student employees Number Avg,_rate per_hr. a. Bus boys t_fl-“7 K ) b. Counter service ( ) ( ) c. Waiters ( ) ( ) d. Washer ( ) ( ) e. Pots and Pans ( )' ( ) f. Hopping & cleaning work ( ) ( ) g, Neat cutting ( ) ( ) h. Storeroom work ( ) ( ) 1. Other ( ) ( ) 2. For women student employees Number Avg rate per hr. a. Counter service ( ) b. Waitress ( ) ( ) c. Washer or dish drying ( ) ( ) d. Mending linens, etc. ( ) ( ) e. Salad or pantry ( ) ( ) f. Office-time, book— keeping, food cost,etc ( ) ( ) g. Other ) ( ) 5. Selection of Student Employees 1. Method used ( ) a. Personal interview ( ) b. Written application 2. Requirements for employment ) a. Financial need 1. Is student's need investigated? Yes ( ) No ( ) ( ) b. Scholarship level required? ( ) c. Is previous experience necessary? I. If so, for which Jobs? ( ) d. References necessary? 1. Are references investigated? Yes ( ) No ( ) Who does hiring and firing ( ) a. Manager of food service? ( ) b. Dietitian in charge? ( g 0. Supervisor of food service? ( d. Other? 4. Outside work — other than school work. a. Is the number of hours of work a student may carry limited? Yes ( ) No ( ) 1. Is he allowed to hold more than one job on campus? Yes ( ) No ( ) 2. If so, must he maintain a certain scholarship level? Yes ( ) No ( b. Who determines the amount of hours he may carry? 5. Is a physical examination required? Yes E g No a. Does the college health service report this? Yes ( ) No b. How often? 0. Is there objection to employing students who are members of social fraternities? Yes E g No Training of Student Employees 1. Do you have printed instructions available to student employees? Yes ( ) No a. Are these general instructions? Yes E g No b. Are they instrufitions for specific Jobs? Yes ( ) No 2, Are all of your instructions given orally? Yes ( ) No ( > 3. Is there a probationary term of training for new student employees? Yes ( ) No ( ) Supervision of Student Employees 1. Are student employees directly reSponsible to a trained supervisor? Yes ( ) No ( ) 2. Are they reSponsible to the dietitian in charge? Yes ( ) No 3. Are they reSponsible to the manaqer of the residence halls? Yes ( ) No I ) Any other? ) Promotion 1. Do you have a system of promotion? Yes E g No What is the nature of the promotion? Is the promotion to what the student employee considers a "better" Job? Yes ( ) No ( ) Is the promotion based on length of service, performance of Job, or what? is the Student Employee Compensated? What compensation does the student employee receive? ( ) a. Money alone? ( ) b. Board alone? ( ) 0. Combination of money and board? If compensated by money alone is board deducted? Yes ( ) No ( 5 What is the average rate of pay per hour for student employees in food service? a. For women employees? ( ) b. For men employees? ( ) Time and Record Keeping lo 3. Do you keep a record of time worked? Yes E g No a. Is there a time clock or some other accurate system of checking in use? Yes ( VV No b. Is the student employee required to report working time to the person in charge? Yes E g No If no record of time is kept, does the student employee perform a Specific amount of work to earn his board? Yes ( ) No Are employment records kept for future reference; as for recommendations, etc. Yes E ) ‘ No ) Limitations of Food 1. Do student employees receive the same type, quality, and amounts of food as is served in the residence hall dining room? Yes ( ) No ( ) l. 2. I. Absences, Tardinesses and Substitutes How many excused absences are allowed a student employee each month? ( ) Are student employees suspended for tardiness or inexcused absence? Yes ( ) No Does repetition of the offense mean dis- missal? Yes ( ) No a. How many offenses may occur before dis— missal results? Does dismissal from one flood service unit mean that the student employee is not hired, in other units under the same management? Yes ( ) No Do you allow student employees to have substitutes on their jobs? Yes ( ) No ( ) a. Is there a limit to the number of substitutes a student employee may have per month? Yes ( ) No What is this limit? . Do the substitutes have to be "trained in" before they are approved substitutes? Yes ( ) No 00‘ J. Handling of Student Employee Grievances l. 3. How do you handle grievances in your setup? Is someone Specifically reaponsible for this phase of personnel management? Yes E g No Are student employees instructed as to grievance procedure? Yes ( ) No ( K. Breakage I. Do you have some system whereby breakage is reported? Yes ( ) No ( ' a. Is it reported to the person in charge? Yes ( ) No b. Is it written on a chart or list for this purpose? Yes ( ) No Do you charge individuals for breakage in- curred by them? Yes ( ) No Au¢%"ffl.‘ .. ..s ' I ‘. 31' N, 3. Are your student employees kept aware of the eXpense involved in breakage alone? Yes ( ) No Coats, Uniforms and Laundry 1. Does your department furnish waiters' coats for the men employees? Yes ( ) No ( ) 2. Are uniforms furnished for the waitresses? Yes ( ) No ( ) 3. Does the food service department pay for the laundering of waiters' coats? Yes ( ) No ( ) waitress' uniforms? Yes ( ) No ( ) A. What is the average number of coats or uniforms allowed laundered each week? Dining Room for Student Employees 1. Is there a separate dining room for student employees? Yes ( ) No Time of Eating for Student Employees 1. Do you have a Special time for student employees to eat? Yes ( ) No ( ) 2. Do student employees eat before working? Yes ( ) No ( Guest Privileges 1. Are student employees allowed guests? Yes ( ) No 2. Are they charged a regular guest rate for their guests? Yes ( ) No ( ) 3. Do student employees have any "free" guest privileges? Yes ( ) No ( ) Turnover of Student Employees 1. What is the average length of service for student employees? ( ) 2. Ho most student employees work the entire school year (September to June)? Yes ( ) No 3. What is the most common cause of resignation on the part of student employees? 4. What is the most common cause for discharge of student employees? Q. Type of Service Used and Number Served Per Student Employee Breakfast Luncheon Dinner 3 Service Number Service Number Service Number 2 Cafeteria V Table 3 Service § R. Advantages and Disadvantages of Student Employees 1. Relative cost of employing students versus employing full-time workers: a. What is the average wage per hour for student employees? b. What is the average mass per hour for full-time employees? I ) 2. Supervision of student employees a. From the standpoint of personnel manage- ment do you prefer 1. Student employees ( ) 2. Full-time employees ( ) S. Problems Arising from Student Employmem: 1. What are some of the most common "problems" arising? 2. Could you eliminate any of these by a more careful selection of student employees? Yes ( ) No Do you believe that your problems could be lessened through a student "governing board" or like organization within your student employee group? Yes ( ) No ( ) Guidance and Counseling Phase of Student Employment 1. Is some attempt made to identify and adjust personal difficulties? Yes ( ) No ( a. Any results? Do you attempt personal conferences as a means of informing student employees of their strong points as well as their } deficiencies? Yes ( ) No ( ) r a. Has this system had any effect on dis- } missal of students for inefficiency? Yes ( ) No ( ) b. Has this system had any effect upon their performance of work? Yes No ( ) Do your student employees have a chance to assume reaponsibility such as schedulin supervising: teas, etc. ? Yes ( ) No ) a. What is their reaction to this type of reaponsibility? IV. I v \ . \ . . . »’ ‘.|1. . u..‘.u$d\. ./ .I I- 011:? .I.. tel-«It'll! [‘1‘ 1 . LL? ....n u...- blnrll | l I l .n l l 1 1'1 II III . I II 1 [I'll .vlr’ ._ Tméfinfiuraefiii, . . In: C 2;... ,.. %,%V x . -~ " “,r‘P. . "- 4: I‘v- . <._ ’0‘ I “We: magnetism Feb 7 45 um 49 Jul: Ml ~ N 2° '58 >3 '~.L :1 1,. ..I, w" . . I W... -. _- . : $31.5 ‘. ‘ . . . I v p . fl . . )VL s ... v i _ 4" . . . .. _ . .- .. I . Ii‘ . ‘ I . n . I .... . N . .. r .. . . _ . - . . .r . ...; ... . . . .- . 4 . - 2...»... 9 n I . r II \ I a a .t I \ .. ‘5‘ a .rv...o . 5 l v i v 1 l . v I I f .1. I 4 . v. .. .\ r . .. aux. . . . II . - I . finnth-.uut.. t I I v c I v I I i . .\ I . .P. .\ W ... . . n . v .... t . I .y I I . I . . ..-. . . . s _ I. I. ... I. o . c .I. 1 . IA ~ . v .. I . V . A . Q I I a . . .. . v. .. I I . . r _ I... . . .. t _v. \ . . _ . If .\ , . \ . I . It I . . a ..\ . . . I . v r . I . .. a I » IL 3 Q ?. n; v I . I) I . .. . i If! I i w s. a p I . F I e I. e a .o . . \ . . . c I . t b . ..- . wk. I . . . . l. . . .l 7‘ ‘ . b v . I nun; . t . o . o . .. .. . I» . . _. . .. . . . . . . . J . . .. . . . . ... I}. s. . . ... .« ...... . I. I . . .... .. .4 . .f ”)4 IV .a I. .\. . . . . . . .. .. .. . .. . . . .. . ,. .. ....H. .. . . .. an.» H .. ...; . . . . I z . I . . \l U. . .1. .. ... . v D c . . . . 4 I u . t .. .I.-'. I . c. ”0‘ «.329 I . \ a 4. .I . ’1 ... . u. - ... r . a .. u ..r. . ...... . .I....» . e O I I . ‘ II I. -.b I VII .- .. .. \ .. .... I ... . . .. . .. .... . . . 93.1. ... ..m .I o In . . . \ \. .I 4.. , ifiin . ..I . .I.. .5} ... -.‘.. . . .a .. . ”....Ia «..- “A “Wain“... . l I t \V L I . I i l . . ¢ .u.\i.sgc. . .I. I . -.... a . . c. . o l I . . a \n .. vhl. .3 .I. . .. ... ...ito‘ , . T _ I . o I. . . .. 4 HOL‘..G.M.IM . .. .....l. 0.14... . I O .' I Q. . . I .. - . t . . I I. _ .. .. .. .. u . . fig: 51‘. o I I . ~ . I . . J -. .... . I... A. u .. of.“ .I . 0.. . . . . . . . . . . .I. w. ... “LVN... ...... e . . .. . I I , e . .. . . . . . . . . 51V. Qt» ..k. ”I: - \. . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . ...} Ax. .IJJ .4-..’ I..II. I. . I . . . I. . .. . , .... I. ... Ill?“ .Avvvn l .I \I ... .. . . I \I.. .. ... I . . . .. .. I . . . .. ....QI‘VP‘O Kretl..sl I. a . .. I I. . . . 1 . . .I.. 1.. . . .n. .. . . .. . ..I t”... a 0 . I . . I. . I . L I e . .. I I. VI. 5'? .0 . A... \ .0 . . I . . . . 4 . . . .. . . . . ... . . ... . . . .... ..I .. . . ..4. ..x ... I .14.. - .... l K». . I m.v . . .I‘u. I. ..H. . . . ..-; .. . ..A. . I .\4 . . I. I H.I4 Any. ; 4.... -..... -.. ... . . .. ; I I‘ I o I, - .I.. .. I e .r . I. a I .‘ .T ..J . ... .I “I cl .l ”‘80. . '0‘ .... . I ... . ... . l r I v .4 4» If II . I‘. .0» I .\ ...?I I kv‘-.‘I§ ... .7 I. ) . ... ‘ . . If. A.-- ...: ... . 1.1.}..- I . .I.. ..v .\. . . . . “PI. . p l . . .I . . . .. ..I . v6. . Oh. . e ..3 «c .' . .. h.- s . u. f .Q. A. . U . . “I! .I ~ I . (I 1‘ .9 .I .I‘ o r‘....;.. I) . a ....- «LI -. \FL . .. I‘VIV. .I IV .. v1. , ....” ...)r I - a It I . . . . . . 9.. W .. 3 c . .II \1' ‘ . c o . . a I g o . a I. I .vJ V: I ”11.“! I ...l .OI . _. no I L J?! . p 3 I . . e 9? (II '\ ...arzn . e . 1 ... . . .. . . . .. . I (v fl». C ..A. I a . . . .. \. . .. . I . . . . .. . ..-. . . . ..~..... '1» . . . . . . INA-.4 . - . , .. . , . . . . l v I O 4. . . ‘I o ‘. I I . . . 4. .. ...o 141.-. . . . .1 M..._ \o t. 9.“ I‘o s I . r .‘ o ‘-.. ’. I I ‘Q'. "1 \ t . I. Z .. .. . .I . I I . . . . I . . . . . . o . .. .. . . . . t . s .I. . . .. . ._ . I . I .. . . . .. ... .I . I 4 .. I .. . .. .. .... .... . I.. H II . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ., . . . . . ... . . t . . . .. . . . . . . . . I . . . .. v. C «.... P,“ . . I .. . .. . .. .. . . .. .. . .. .. . . .. . . . ._ . v... . . .7)! O.:~t‘ an. . . .. J .-.\;I .o . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ... . . vs wt. . ctr/II“; p\ f . r o . ‘JI...’ .. . . . . . . ... . I. . . _ . . . . . _ 3 . . . . 1.. . r .0. 3... . .. . , . . . . , . _ . . . .. . . .I a . . .I. .43.). . .. .. u . . . II . x .. . . . I . . . . . . .. u . ... \l «5. Q. ..| ..8 v r c . .. .... . . .. . . . .. .. . .. . . . . . Z . . .. . . . . . l . . (a... . 89 3V I I . . . .. . . . . .. . . . _ . . . ... .. . . . . . .. ... . . . ... . . . . hm ...). “‘NflMr III. I :Ile‘LM \v . . . . . . . . I . . . I . J ... I. . .. . . I . e ... . a . .. I . .. . .....I I . . .. n . .. . . . _ . . .. ... . u .. .. . . ... . . .. . . ... . .I v _. . .Iqasi .4" n. ..1“. .I. . . .. . . . . ... .. ... . . . .. . . ... . ... .... . .... . ... . . .. . I. . . . .. II . I. ... . I I . . ..~ . . . . . . I . .. .. . . .. . I _ «meta... . Min. ”.0 . .. I . . .. . . I .5 .I. .. .. . . . . . I . . . .. . v . . . I . . ..u . . I I .. .. ... . . . . . .. .. . - r v .. . .. . ...... . )1 I‘ f . o I I ’ 1 ... f .. I . I I ... . . .. 5 I (\ . .I;...\.r.\~ I. . A. . x - I. 4w. I . I - 4 I . II I I. .4 . - : .5 .I.. . . . . . I .. a . .r . . . .I. I '.I. t .Q I.Q.\J'o Vlah ..I alI.I ulo‘ .. f4. I.nv ,. . _InwnnhI..II—,- DUI I I ... kl .. . .I I... I .I .§ 4 II I ~ .1»)... AI ..‘. . Q. .o.\..~ ..A/.“I 1 ‘-¥. . ‘- ... ...I....uvu¢3:IvO~. {Ito}: .IogaIv 3... I , . . . . I ...u .. .n I ...v’... .I I .c P. . .. I. ... I. . . . . d . t . , . p .‘3 ‘.O'..Io .I?~ . . I, I. uII a... r u .. e . 4 . ..Iu. . I c . . 1i 1 .. i . r .4! .... . . lg....}-. . . . ._ I: . .I. . : . t . . . '0. fun; Ludhkflnoc. ...om.‘. I ....n.7. . .. UN... .. I u . . H .d :I« I‘vnwocfivufildvdt\4o:t IIIIIQII . . ... .A. I ) e g \ I” .. .....0 .tr. . 4 ... ..IL ..I. ....i e m .n I .I., I -Kunn‘.i«hn*¢th . .. I: . .I.... . . ..u . ...... ..L. ...w..; .. . . .. ..I . .. . .. . . . .Ita. . . .... ...} .... . .. . L. ...).. . .. s. . . .. . . . . . ,. . . . _. .- . . .. .. ......E.....1d9z¢. a . . . .- . . ...l . . ...: . e . . . . . .I.“? o. .q . . I II I . I .... a ._ v. .I. .I .I. r. .. . . . .. 31...... .‘g..flq . _v 3.”..Ndhvue...‘ _ v. .. 9 . . ~ . _.\I s '5‘. ......f . . . I .... .r—ew; . -. . gg...£u¥r . . imp... a. ...;fiu . .. . . ......mengexfi. :I \Vll I _ , 4 . . . u i . oso.\:.~‘ .... . v. I . .n . d; IIw$.~.- r ..I... 4 Re. ..., . AU~L¢~ “oh 0 _ . v . ../ ... d . ‘ . . .. rte...“ . J :. I .. .. . . ..\ ~m-~773e€~ . . . . . . .. w . . . . . . . h . u u ‘ r .l . a . . . . .I . «KW. . .5“ r;in?£3~=:....::E. . . , . .. .. .. .. . . . . .. I. I 405‘. ’q .n. ICHIGRN STRTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES “Ill!” 1 0 lllll Illlll ll 9 11" I11 I11” 312 3 1 1 8 550 gm