Brandeis University, like so many other colleges, offers a program known as work-study to help some students receiving fianancial aid pay not only tuition, but also personal expenses. In theory, this should be useful but upon further inspection, the program falls short.The work-study Web site claims that "students receive a weekly paycheck based upon actual hours worked. Like any job, work-study awards are generally used toward indirect expenses such as books, supplies, transportation and miscellaneous personal spending." Unfortunately , however, particularly because the program gives preference to these needy students, it is unfortunate that it does not actually help them keep up with their finances as promised. In fact, the inconveniences and problems with the program may even hinder a student's ability to properly take care of finances.

This particular system claims to pay salaries weekly. However, in certain circumstances, it appears that the program pays randomly without adhering to deadlines, yet insisting that its workers meet their regulated standards and deadlines. A friend of mine, who fears the repercussions of her complaints, was beside herself in frustration because her finances were in chaos after she took on two work-study-provided jobs in addition to a Division III team and classes and was paid only part of her wages after a month of working with no physical salary passed. She is still waiting for the remainder of her earnings from that month.

For Phonathon employees, like my friend, quitting their jobs is not a financially valuable option because they earn $10.25 per hour, one of the highest wages paid on campus. This high salary, however, loses its value when it is not paid within a reasonable amount of time; because bills and other payments are time sensitive, late paychecks can result in having to pay interest for bank accounts and phone bills.

In a similar case, another student who fears being fired noticed that after working at Lemberg children's center for three weeks, there was no trace of a check in the mail. When she approached her director with her concerns, the director responded that he forgot to give her the forms that allow her to be paid. While this payment system is not specific to work-study employees, the fact that those students are work-study speaks to the fact that the students are pressed in terms of finances. As such, it is even more important that supervisors are efficient in taking care of payment for those particular students, although supervisors should naturally be on top of their responsibilities in general.

Jessica Hose, the assistant director of student employment, said that "most of the time when there are problems like that, either the student or the supervisor has skipped a step" in the payment process.

Work-study jobs should be treated as legitimate, with guidelines to which both employees and employers must adhere. Supervisors should treat their employees as responsible adults receiving an earned salary and take the initiative to complete the payment process efficiently. Without this joint sense of propriety, the work-study program fails. It is discouraging that some employers are quick to take advantage of the work these students are doing; by not efficiently fulfilling the payment process, employers are not rewarding the student's efforts.

If work-study employees showed up as infrequently as some of their checks do, they would not keep their jobs and would not be worthwhile employees. As of late, work-study students are not consistently receiving the proper salaries that are promised to them. By expecting student responsibility and initiative, yet not demanding the same from employers, the work-study program can be a burden rather than a benefit.