Pay raises just one reason LEO may take action

To the Daily:

I am employed as a course coordinator (Lecturer IV) in the Department of Romance Languages. Only one other lecturer in my department has nearly as many years of service. Nevertheless, someone recently beginning the job earns only slightly less than I do. This is my reward, my loyalty tax, for some 16 years of teaching, advising students, curriculum development and service to the University. One of the achievements of the Lecturers’ Employee Organization in our first contract was to partially rectify this kind of inequity with the promise of a salary bump after a successful performance review by our departments.

However, the spirit of the LEO contract is being subverted by the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts’s insistence on sticking to its old way of doing things. LEO’s contract negotiators wanted the performance reviews to occur in the order of seniority, to provide earlier compensation for the most loyal and often most poorly paid employees. The University has refused. Instead, here is the way LSA would like to review a Lecturer III/IV this year: notify the lecturer this fall that he is up for review; review him in winter 2006; send the result of the review to the LSA executive committee in fall 2006; approve the review in April 2007; and finally, grant the raise the following September – roughly a year and a half after passing the review – thus closing the circle on an unbelievable piece of logic all based on ignoring the contract.

Fortunately, lecturers are no longer powerless to fight back, and if we decide to take action this semester, here is one of several reasons why.

Dennis Pollard

Lecturer

 

Racial preferences create damaging stereotypes

To the Daily:

Under your headline Sharpton Blasts MCRI (10/28/2005) appears a lengthy account of a rally of Detroit high school students on the University campus, held to oppose the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative. That initiative, when adopted in 2006, will forbid all racial discrimination in Michigan, and all preferences by race in university admissions. Your accurate account reports a great deal of passion – but very little rational argument in defense of race preferences.

The closest approximation to an argument was offered by Alex Moffett, vice president of the NAACP, who said: “If affirmative action is taken away from this campus, then students of color will cease to be on this campus.” She apparently believes that without charity and lowered intellectual standards there would be no way for blacks and other minorities to win their places at a fine university. What could be more insulting to blacks than that? Her premise is both false and patronizing. There are, I am certain, many outstanding black scholars who do not want to be treated like intellectual beggars, and who do not need such condescension.

Race preferences cast a cloud over the accomplishments of all members of the minorities preferred. Race preferences undermine the intellectual standing of black students. The MCRI, by ending race preferences, will allow the intellectual achievements of black scholars to receive the full credit they deserve. The MCRI will, when adopted, put an end to the insinuation that blacks, without charity, are incapable of successful intellectual competition.

Minorities are discredited and undermined by race preferences. Ending race preferences will be a very great service to them.

Carl Cohen

RC professor

 

Moffett viewpoint racist toward white community

To the Daily:

In response to last week’s viewpoint by Alex Moffett (Silence and armbands, 10/27/2005):

I’m sorry, Ms. Moffett, but you can’t have it both ways. You speak of unmentionable acts of prejudice and racism by the (I presume) white, male campus community and how that has made you feel like an outcast or unequal. In the next breath, you espouse the belief that you should be treated differently (by getting affirmative action). Which is it? Do you want to be treated fairly (based on your credentials and achievements) or do you prefer to be “given” extra special treatment due to your “considerable disadvantages?”

There may be a day when all races, colors and creeds “will finally get over the racism and the denial of racism inside each and every one of us that has oppressed people of color since the inception of this country.” But not as long as there are those people who feel that they should be given extra-special treatment to become “equal.” Any time a minority makes the decision to accept special treatment from the majority, he is subverting his own efforts at equality.

You are correct, racism is very subtle – sometimes it comes in an opinion piece written by a minority in the Daily.

Richard Grubb II

Alum

 

Parking restrictions will hurt blue-collar ‘U’ workers

To the Daily:

Our wonderful city of Ann Arbor is at it again. The new Burns Park residential parking zone has made it more difficult for students and employees to find parking for school and work. In the article Students angry about $25 tickets for parking on street (10/27/2005) Ann Arbor Councilman Leigh Greden (D

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.