While the Communication Workers of America Local 14177 have recently agreed to a labor contract with New Era Cap Company, the company has yet to prove that it is committed to ensuring the safety of all of its employees. Problems still persist in the company's factories, where workers endure an abnormally high rate of puncture wounds, musculo-skeletal disorders and instances of carpal tunnel syndrome. New Era management has yet to prove that the safety and health of the company's workers is its priority.

New Era's shortcomings extend beyond the safety conditions at its plants. When New Era workers joined the Communication Workers of America last year, New Era management retaliated with lay-offs and shifted production to non-union facilities in an attempt to subvert its workers' rights to freely organize and improve their working conditions. The company demanded its employees take pay cuts while increasing the speed of production lines, a practice that would have increased the physical danger to workers.

With the 11-month strike finally settled, the University must closely monitor New Era's labor treatment to determine the most ethical response to the company. While interim President B. Joseph White has pledged that the University will not renew its contract with New Era, this course of action is now complicated with the new contract. Although Prof. Larry Root, chair of the University Committee on Labor Standards and Human Rights, does not foresee any changes in the University's plans, it is possible that the contract with New Era could be extended beyond Oct. 1 if other parties take action.

Incoming President Mary Sue Coleman or other top administrators could possibly disrupt the University's decision. However, Coleman should recognize that New Era has yet to significantly reform its practices and the contract should still be terminated unless New Era unequivocally proves that they are committed to workers' rights.

At this important juncture in the University's treatment of labor unrest, Coleman is qualified in to lead the University. At the University of Iowa, Coleman chose to terminate the university's contract with the company after thoroughly reviewing the safety of New Era factories. Coleman adhered to the recommendation of Iowa's Charter Committee on Human Rights. Coleman should use her response to New Era at Iowa as precedent for her choices at the University.

As only the fourth school in the nation to terminate its contract with New Era due to labor abuses, Coleman's actions at Iowa were incredibly significant. Coleman's decision was the first instance where Iowa had utilized its Code of Conduct for apparel licensees to terminate a contract. While Coleman was willing to enforce labor standards at Iowa, New Era did not provide a significant source of revenue for Iowa. Coleman must be willing to uphold labor standards for companies that offer the University lucrative contracts, such as Nike, and must aggressively monitor the safety of their facilities to uphold the University's Code of Conduct for apparel licensees.

The University cannot simply believe the promises of New Era executives and accept the new contract as reason to extend the contract after October. The University must remember that the contract merely settles issues of compensation and while it is an important first step for the company, the safety and health of New Era workers has yet to be adequately resolved. The safety and health of the workers who manufacture Michigan clothing should be a paramount concern for the University administration.