Do you think it is valid to point to Chancellor Gee’s high salary and money spent on his house’s renovation as evidence that lowest paid workers’ salaries are too low?
"Yes and no. This is like comparing apples to oranges, but Gee should definitely share some of the wealth. The Living Wage is a reasonable cause."
Rachael Geisler, Junior
"I think that the “chancellor versus janitor” argument actually weakens the case that Vanderbilt employees are poorly compensated. They are poorly compensated as it is, and that should be the only reason why this is such an immediate concern."
Jean Son, Junior
"While I feel that we should make a greater effort to raise the pay of our staff, I believe that Vanderbilt should be able to pay Chancellor Gee what it wishes."
Blake Hooper, Senior
"I think that the wage markets are completely different, and, regardless of what is right, this an attempt to stir emotions without providing any argument of substance."
Joseph Williams, Sophomore
"It is comparing apples and oranges, but when Vandy has $6 million to spend on renovations for a house that was already standing and livable, yet workers are asking for higher wages to support their families—that says something about our priority and concern."
Brittany Simmons, Freshman
