Students at New York University, expressing their activism, held a protest last weekend against the high prices of university merchandise. About 20 students stripped down to bras and underwear outside the Kimmel Center, aiming to shed light on workers’ rights and the origins of pricey items like $106 sweatshirts.
During the event, which coincided with families visiting for Square Weekend, the crowd chanted, “Students, workers, unite! Solidarity forever!” as they marched through the campus. It was a scene of youthful exuberance mingled with a serious message.
Members of the International Labor Solidarity student group carried signs reading “Stop Secret Sweatshops” and “Show Your Clothes,” focusing on what they describe as poor working conditions associated with the university’s merchandise. This was part of an ongoing effort for transparency in how products sold at the university’s bookstore are produced.
Saesha Jindal, a sophomore involved with the group, emphasized their goal: “We are using our strengths as students to work in solidarity with the garment workers who make the apparel that the university profits from,” she explained. The bookstore features brands like Champion and Lululemon, sourcing from multiple countries.
Jindal and fellow activist Jamie Heseltine pointed out that while NYU does disclose some information about its supply chain, it stops short of revealing all the factories involved, raising suspicions about the university’s practices.
Heseltine expressed frustration with the lack of actionable steps from the administration, suggesting that the university may be trying to obscure labor law violations associated with its apparel. “This is an active decision to cover up labor law violations,” he remarked.
In response, Joseph Tirella, NYU’s senior director of executive communications, stated that all university merchandise is made under a code of conduct to ensure fair labor standards are met, emphasizing that partnerships would be closely monitored.
Heseltine described the protest as part of a broader campaign called Follow the Thread aimed at increasing transparency. Reactions to their demonstration were mixed, with some families supporting the cause while others appeared confused or disappointed by the approach.
One observer questioned the overall impact of such protests. Neetu Arnold, a policy analyst, pointed out that while these actions can draw attention, they may not genuinely benefit the workers in the long run. “At worst, this activity becomes a political stage,” she noted, highlighting concerns over its effectiveness.
