Oregon daily emerald., February 23, 1973, Page 10, Image 9

Elections...
Continued from Page 1
Loveys decision to have ballot slogans for candidates printed in
German violated that implication.
Second, one proposed constitutional amendment. “D,” was not
printed chi the official election ballot along with the other three — it
was printed on a separate piece of paper, instead, because of
University Press printing deadlines for the official ballots. Itkin said
separating “d” from the other proposed amendments “might have
influenced" voters.
After several senators spoke in favor of Itkin's motion, the senate
voted 21 to zero, with four abstentions, to approve it. Zukin told the
senators after the vote that “we may have to revote on this at a later
date” because the action may violate by-laws.
However, after Itkin’s motion passed, the senators wait on to
quickly pass a series of related motions that were based upon their
action to invalidate the election.
Senators voted to (1) set up a new election for Feb. 28 and March 1,
(2) place the ASUO President personally in charge of administrating
the new election, and (3)) authorize ballot slogans to be {Hinted in
English and proposed constitutional amendments to be printed on the
official ballots.
In the wake of the passage erf the election invalidation motions, the
senate then verted 16 to four, with two abstentions, to breeze ASUO Vice
President Loveys' salary until the outcome of impeachment
procedures against him had been determined ASUO Senate President
Aukin had announced earlier in the meeting that formal impeachment
procedures, as initiated by the senate’s governing committee, would
begin next Monday. The governing committee has initiated im
peachment procedures against Loveys because of his role in the fall
term. 1972. ASUO election
The senate invoked an “emergency clause" ruling twice during
the evening — on the motion which tagged the ASUO President with
the responsibility for administrating a new winter term election, and
on the motion which froze Loveys' salary.
The “emergency clause,” when invoked by a two-thirds majority
by the senate, rules out an executive veto mi the motion involved.
In other business, senators approved a motion by ASUO Senator
Andy Holcomb to not put newly appointed ASUO Chief Administrative
Assistant Bill Schaub on the ASUO payroll until Schaub’s appointment
had been approved-by the senate.
Holcomb said the executive was dragging its feet in taking Schaub
through the senate approval process, because the executive was
waiting for students to vote to abolish the senate so that senate ap
proval would not be needed. Holcomb’s motion was approved by voice
vote.
Matthews wins award
Brian Matthews, the young University physicist who
recently constructed one of the few models in the world of an
enzyme molecule, has been selected by the National Institutes of
Health (NIH) to receive a Research Career Development
Award.
Matthews. 34, is an associate professor of physics and
research associate in the University’s Institute of Molecular
Biology.
The award amounts to approximately $100,000 over a five
year period.
Unfair labor practices
claimed by Eric Stovall
Eric Stovall, former employee
of the American Ship Dismant
les in Portland, charged
Wednesday night that unfair
labor practices by that company
were responsible for his ter
mination Feb. 2, and for his two
subsequent arrests on charges of
trespassing on company
premises.
“I had to allow myself to get
arrested in order to prove an
important point,” he told an
audience of about 50 students in
214 EMU. The point that must
ultimately be tested, he said, is
"whether or not federal laws,
designed to protect the workers’
rights, really do so.”
By ROS1 WILLIAMSON
Of the Emerald
Stovall, a former University
student, was elected in January
as shop steward of the Portland
local of the International Union of
Operating Engineers. He was
fired while attempting to assist
employees in formulating a list of
14 grievances to be filed against
the company. “It was unclear,’’
said Stovall, “whether my duty
as shop steward included
talking with the workers on
company time.”
The list of grievances, ac
cording to Stovall, included
withholding pay, questions of
jurisdiction and seniority, and
complaints about sanitation and
working conditions. “Ship
dismatling is incredibly hot and
dirty work,” Stovall explained.
“We work an eight-hour day with
only one-half hour off for lunch.”
He said workers are constantly
subjected to lead and zinc fumes,
as well as hot crude oil. “I have
scars all over my body from the
burns I’ve received while
working,” he said.
Stovall pointed out that, ac
cording to the National Labor
Relations Act, “employees have
Fifteen testify in opposition to
bill setting educational goals
By TRUDY NUTTER
Of the Emerald
Opposition to a bill settling goals for Oregon
education (Senate Bill 1) was heard Wednesday
evening at a Education Committee hearing in
Springfield.
Committee Chairer Ed Fadeley explained the
bill would set goals for all levels of education in
Oregon. SB 1 defines functions of the State Board of
Education, the State Board of Higher Education,
local school districts and other school governing
bodies.
It also requires them to adopt a set of goals
which are consistent with state educational goals
and guidelines:
Individuals equipped with the skills and
knowledge essential in a complex society.
Lives enriched by the arts and humanities.
Individuals able and willing to accept their
responsibilities as citizens.
Individuals qualifed for entry into occupations
leading to economic self-sufficiency and able to
provide society with qualifed manpower.
The generation and dissemination of knowledge
acquired by research.
Individuals physically healthy to meet the
demands of society.
Provision for a lifetime of learning.
Fifty persons attended the meeting with fifteen
lestifying-all in opposition to the bill.
“It is not possible” stated C.A. Bauers, who
identified himself as a teacher from the Eugene
area “to set goals for education on a legislative
level." Many agreed, holding that legislators know
little about education and therefore, the matters
this bill attempts to govern should be left to the
educational system.
Others opposed the bill for its “broadness” and
“ambiguity”. Rich Paul of the Eugene Education
Association objected to the wording of certain
sections. “How do you define ‘skills and knowledge
needed to live in a changing society’?” he asked.
“Senate Bill 1 asks for measurable goals”
queried Art Tegger of Lane Community College,
“but what of immeasurable goals?”
Committee member Victor Atiyeh, who chaired
the Interim Education Committee which drew up
the bill asked for ways for formulating goals for
education. “We’ve worked with educators. TTiey
were responsible for most of the input on this bill.”
He went on to say that “We all want these goals, but
how can we accomplish them?”
The part of the bill dealing with higher
education met little opposition. “The mission of the
State Board of Higher Education,” the section
states, “is to insure effective higher education
programs through the efficient governance of
public state colleges and universities.”
Guidelines for higher education include such
statements as “the state board shall assign highest
priority the teaching-learning process in state in
stitutions.” the “state board shall establish uniform
procedures for evaluating faculty and staff
members in state colleges and universities,” and
“ he state board shall make itself available for
contact with students and faculty desiring to be
heard.”
the right at any time to present
grievances to their employer and
to have such grievances adjusted
...” Stovall took his list of 14
employee grievances to the union
office, he said, but they refused to
process it.
He emphasized, however, that
his attack is not against the
union. “I see the union as a very
necessary organization to
protect, at least minimally, the
rights of the workers,” he said.
In this dispute, however,
Stovall said he is dealing with a
"weak craft union, established by
the company, for the company,
and not for the men.”
The first of two trespassing
charges brought against Stovall
in connection with this dispute
occurred when he refused to
leave company premises
following his termination. He
remained on the grounds, he said,
in order to obtain further
testimony from employees
concerning grievances they had
filed. That trespassing charge
has since been dropped
“They're afraid to give me a
trial,” Stovall said, “because
4 " I'
they know I’ll call witnesses and
they’ll have no one left down
there to work for them. They just
couldn’t afford that right now.”
“As shop steward, 1 felt I had
every right to attend the
meeting,” he said. “I asked them
to hold the meeting on neutral
ground, but they didn’t comply.
Management has since agreed
to prepare a proposal of set
tlement for some of the 14
grievances filed against them by
employees. A grievance con
cerning Stovall’s termination,
however, was separated by the
company from the original list.
There has been no official word
from American Ship Dismantlers
in regard to Stovall’s possible
reinstatement.
To Stovall, however, this is not
just a personal battle for a job.
“This is an intense struggle,” he
said
“It’s hard to say whether I am
winning or losing. But that
doesn't matter — at least we’ll
have a better idea, in the end, of
where the rank-and-file workers
really stand in the legal system of
this country.”
Everybodys' Business I
ic^=4
Nuclear Council may
have ‘sincerity’ gap
By DREX HEIKES
Of the Emerald
I had heard so many bad things about the Nuclear and Thermal
Energy Council prior to their arrival in Eugene Wednesday for a
public hearing on the nuclear and thermal plant siting report that I
expected them to be ogres.
Talking with “environmentalists” I got the impression that the
typical council member was a guy who would lease out his grand
mother as a catcher’s mitt.
I was suspicious of the council and prepared to hear them talk out
of both sides of their mouths.
Wednesday came. I walked into the hearing and glanced toward
the NTEC members ... ten of them at large in the city council
chambers.
But in the next two hours my mind changed. Perhaps the council
wasn’t so bad. They seemed to take a genuine interest in each and
every testimony.
They asked questions — better yet — relevant questions. When
William Holser, professor of geology at the University, told the council
that air corridors hadn’t been included in the siting report, the council
wanted to know who they could contact in order to obtain information
on air traffic.
When Eugene Water and Electric Board General Manager Byron
Price told the council that EWEB had made several meteorological
studies in the state, council members wanted to know what the results
were of the research done in the Willamette Valley.
So why do a large number of people feel the council is diabolical? I
started checking.
Two preliminary hearings similar to Wednesday’s had been held
prior to the final report and a number of environmentally oriented
groups had testified at them. Many of these groups were represented
Wednesday. Members of these groups felt that NTEC had ignored
virtually all of the public testimony offered in the preliminary
hearings.
One complaint was that the same testimony had to be presented
for the third time simply because it hadn’t been considered before.
Another had asked that meterological conditions be included in
the report, but they weren’t. Still another felt the council was wrong in
declaring all areas of the state suitable for nuclear plants unless
proved unsuitable. She was upset because the council had “repeatedly
ignored the pant.”
The groups were pessimistic about the chances of altering the
final report because they felt their previous efforts had failed so
drastically. According to these groups, NTEC had been just as con
siderate and "interested” during the preliminary hearings as they
were Wednesday.
The message was clear — these guys give you a smile, a kind word
and a lot of attention, and then file your testimony in the trash. The
question in their minds is one of the council’s sincerity.
Since, by definition, the chief source of input to the council is
supposed to be the public and because a tremendous amount of
testimony was presented at the hearing, the truth about NTEC will be
borne out in their actual response to the testimonies.