Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (June 2, 1977)
f-editorial-> Job should be opened up Jan Oliver was elected ASUO President largely be cause of her promise to open student government up to any and everyone interested. She fulfilled that pledge with one notable exception: the Office of Student Advocacy (OSA). The OSA is designed to provide the ASUO with a professional agency responsible to develop research pap ers for ASUO projects, represent the ASUO at public meet ings, file discrimination complaints for individual students and aid them in their fights with the University bureaucracy. The assignments are difficult ones requiring the work of a professional, and the $12,500 annual salary allotted for the agency’s director reflects the need to compete on the professional market. Unfortunately, there was no com petition when the job was filled. Don Chalmers, a long-time student government participant, was placed in the ASUO’s highest paid position with no effort made to attract other applicants or publicize the position, a questionable action. There was nothing illegal about Chalmers’ hiring, he has a personal services contract with the ASUO president clearing the selection of any affirmative action problems, but the fact that he was hired without a search raises some serious ethical questions. The University and the commun ity at large are filled with people who would jump at a chance for a job paying $12,500 a year, and they should have been given a chance to apply. How well Chalmers has performed in his position is a subjective question. There are those who would say he has saved the students money far in excess of his salary, and those that claim he is lining his pocket at the expense »L _ _P>. . 1 iL _ __»•_•_ _ _ a 1_ _ • ■ ui u it; J5iuut?iuo. dui u ic Ljucouui i id iiui iiuw yuuu d juu Chalmers has done, but why was he handed the position without first considering who else was available? According to then ASUO Vice-President Jamie Bums, Chalmers was selected because of his knowledge of stu dent government and the procedures and personalities elsewhere in the University. But could Burns and Oliver be sure someone else on campus didn’t have a better grasp of those things than Chalmers? Not without a good search they couldn’t. The situation is complicated further by the fact that Chalmers was closely aligned with Oliver’s campaign and was an advisor during the early days of her administration. Both Burns and Chalmers admit the OSA was designed with Chalmers’ help, and he had a better idea of the direc tion the office was to take than anyone else could have. Maybe, but placing someone in a $12,500 a year job without a search reeks of in-house favoritism and poor public policy. On July 1, Chalmers' contract with the ASUO will expire, and it will be up to Gary Feldman to renew it or not. Under normal circumstances, that decision should be based solely on Chalmers’ performance during the past year. But given the way Chalmers was chosen this year, the job should be thrown up for grabs. And, given Feldman’s close personal ties with Chalmers, Feldman should invite people to join him in making the decision of whether to renew Chalmers’ contract. When so much money is in volved, there should be no doubt that everyone was given a fair shot at the job. That doubt exists now. V. Letters Molluskan terror The world around us is crumbl ing into a mass of social Oompas and skrunch bars while we seem to be sitting idly by. I can understand the wars of liberation in Southern Africa, the political unrest of the Middle East and the emergence of James J. Kilpatrick as the neo-Nazi prophet of the 70s. What I fail to under stand is how a group of mollusks can conceivably hijack a Dutch commuter train and hold over a hundred men, women and chil dren hostage. I know Europeans were gullible, but this is ridiculous. This must be some kind of cruel joke played on us innocent folk by those dastardly punks of yellow journalism hiding under the guise of Associated Press writers. It’s almost as hard to believe as the same poor-taste joke played a lit tle over a year ago when these news parasite-types tried to get us to swallow some story about a group of crustaceans hijacking a i trans-Atlantic airliner. Come, who do you think we are. registered Republicans? If, by some cruel twist of fate, these molluskan terrorists actually turned out to be an angry species of mostly shelled aquatic inverte brate animals, I wouldn't blame them for (as your 5-26-77 back page headline said) “displaying their hostages." We humans dis play our hostage gold fish, snails and guppies in fish tanks in almost every home in the nation. And what’s more, we do it proudly! How can we blame these tiny defenseless molluskan terrorists for their actions? Better yet, how can the Dutch authorities negotiate with them? (I suppose once you’ve developed the wind mill to near perfection, you can talk to angry mollusks.) But, we of the free world better take note of what is happening today. If the endangered Whales were to realize the publicity they could garner for the cause by tak ing a few Russian trawlers and Japanese floating factories hos tage, we’d be staring Planet of the Apes right in the eye! Kevin Harden Sophomore— Pre-journalism m & Nicj toi&ncnt, tow toorw... wu let xavid m ww was utm #r -t|)ii i Beer Garden experiment a success The time has come to establish a tavern on the University campus. The experimental Beer Gardens have been going on now since the summer of 1975. For nearly two years now the Oregon Liquor Control Commission, in its divine like manner, has doled out an allotment of two-hour permits (now extended to three) for use at the Beer Gardens. They do not give out enough to cover the school year, in case some of you wondered why the Beer Gardens were not held every week. As I have already mentioned, the Beer Gardens were originally designed as an experiment to allow students, faculty, and administrators an opportunity to decide whether or not serving beer on campus would be detrimental to the University or surrounding community. It is my opinion that with the growing number of those attending the Beer Gardens, and the favorable response I have gotten from students on campus, I feel the majority of students on campus favor such a proposal Although the $41,648 budget deficit that the EMU Food Service experienced last year will be reduced this year, there is still a need for an increased budgetary infiux to beef up the already depleted EMU coffers and I feel a well run tavern could fill that need. The large profit margins experienced by more suc cessful taverns in town, and our own Beer Gardens cannot be denied as a good source of revenue. The opposition to having a tavern on campus lies at the administration end of Oregon Hall, where there is fear that students may end up attending classes in a quasi-inebriated state, or end up running through campus in our birthday suits acting like "deranged idiots.” The fact remains that drinking beer on campus does not increase any existing possibility of going to class with alcohol on our breaths due to the already close proximity of off-campus taverns. What it does do, however is give both students and faculty a more convenient place to meet for lunch or after class for a good sandwich and cold beer, and help alleviate cramming into other establishments for the same reason. Being a frequenter of many taverns in town, and a beer pourer at EMU beer functions, I have come to the opinion that the crowds that come to the EMU are not coming there to disco (there was a good square dance there this term, however), or get crocked to the gills. All they want to do is sit down and bullshit over a beer. The numbers of both Faculty and University Staff that has attended past Beer Gardens is very encouraging, as it is a great way to sit down and get to know a professor who might not normally leave campus for a beer (although some do, of course). The point of the matter is that it has already been proven at other campuses like Berkeley that having a tavern on campus is not that drastic a measure, nor does it destroy the University mind, as some would have us believe We, as responsible adults, can make proper judgements as to whether or not a beer or glass of wine is going to cause us to black out during our next class (no matter how exciting the lecture is). It makes sense to me that the money I spend on alcohol could go to the institution I attend rather than the businesses that feed off the University populace. In addition, there will be the additional student oppor tunities for employment that exists at all University businesses whether they are privately contracted out or not (such a situation exists at the newly-opened Baskin Robbins, and would most probably exist for a campus tavern). The University administration and students should take a look at the one remaining Beer Garden this Friday and decide for next year whether or not such a proposal seems feasable. Robert Jorgensen EMU Food service Worker Senior-General Science Conflict of interest On May 17 a public hearing was conducted by the University re garding a rent increase proposed for Amazon and Westmoreland Housing. After two hours of tes timony opposing the rent hike, Dean John Lallas stated, A copy of the hearing transcript will be made available to interested par ties.” The next day I went in for a copy but was told that the quality of the tape was so poor a transcript was not worth doing. A cost-benefit study had shown the administra tion it just wasn’t worth it. After weeks of missing classes, prepar ing testimony and then presenting it for two hours, this was like telling the residents, ‘‘You shouldn't have bothered.” We have insisted on a copy however, and since this was prom ised it is now being done.. .by, of all people, the Housing Office. The same folks who brought us the rent increase in the first place. Just as they did last year, the year before...etc. They’ll be typing up two hours of testimony opposed to their views—not one person a greed with their position. Now, the last thing I would want to suggest is a conflict of interest. Bill Groesz Senior— Journalism Advertising agency I am disappointed in the University's policy hot to grant pro fessors tenure unless they get something published. (Emerald May 24) In the case of Associate Professor Dave Barker, for one, the University will lose out. I took a freshman biology course from him once and I know this guy can teach. In my book, anybody who can take a subject you’ve hated your whole life and make it clear and understandable, and foster an interest in it that you can con tinue to build on when the nine weeks are over, is a good teacher. But you know what will happen? They’ll get some crummy old hack in here who can’t tell a stu dent from a rosebush. Any non biology major will hate the course and cut classes and swear never to go near the subject again. Only people with abnormal persever ance or who know the material al ready will be able to get through the course. Then maybe aftdr two years the Boss will have figured out, at the tuition-paying students' expense, that the guy is lousy and they'll get rid of him (her). But most likely if he’s published a lot of good arti cles with U of O after his name, they’ll keep him around. What is this, anyway? A school or an advertising agency? Kate Gawf Senior-Architecture Letters policy The Emerald will accept and try to print all letters containing fair comment on ideas and topics of concern or interest to the University community. Because of space limi tations, letters must be no more than 250 words, typed, triple spaced, dated and signed with the person is major. No unsigned letters will be published. Longer opinion columns will be published whenever possible after being submitted to the editorial page editor. The limit on opinion col umns is 800 words, using the same format as letters.
