CAMPUS/AREA UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Thursday, January 27, 1994
3
Policy runs counter to recommendations
Task force opposes ban on relationships
By Stephen Martino Kansan staff writer
Banning consensual relations was a quick fix for the administration in August because of the dust raised by the Emil Tonkovich dismissal hearings.
Today, University Council will vote on
Today, University College will never whether to change the wording that bans relationships between faculty and students whom faculty could grade or otherwise evaluate. But interviews with members of the Special Task Force on Consensual Relations indicate that a ban was not what they recommended.
The reasons for opposing the ban, task force members said, were based on several factors, the foremost being the practicality of imposing a ban on private behavior.
"The task force members are opposed to a ban on consenting relationships," the task report says. "This opposition is both philosophical and practical."
"We said that these relationships were extremely upwise," said Joe Zeller, task force member and professor of ceramics. "But it seemed to us that you can't ban something that isn't illegal."
When the task force submitted its report, the two policy options it submitted contained the phrase "while not expressly forbidden" when referring to consensual relationships.
Those words do not appear in the policy that Council will vote on today.
In fact, the option that Council is considering once stated, "It is therefore unprofessional for a faculty member, administrator, or supervisor to initiate or accept such a relationship so long as a power differential exists."
Task force and Council members questioned whether administrators could construe a ban from that line.
Conflicts Over The Ban
Don Marquis, Council member and professor of philosophy, said the language would have created a ban. He said that it had been the opinion of a majority of Council members that the line would have created a ban, and a motion was brought to strike it from the policy. The motion was passed, and the line was struck from the policy at the Dec. 9 meeting.
Robert Friraud, head of Council and co-author of the policy on which Council voted, said the removed line had not been written to create a ban. But he conceded that the policy had been made weaker by its removal.
"It took the teeth out of the policy, and the administration was not able to accent the policy in that form," he said.
After Council passed the amended policy, it was sent to the administration, which said it could accept the first four points of the policy, according to a letter from Ed Meyen, executive vice chancellor. But the administration sought to make consensual relations, where an evaluative power exists, a violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct. Such a violation could result in disciplinary action, including termination.
At the Jan. 19 meeting of the University Senate Executive Committee, SenEx made some editorial changes to the administration's proposal but forwarded the rewritten part to Council for consideration at today's meeting. SenEx left in the clause that would make consensual relationships a violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct.
T. P. Srinivasan, head of SenEx, said that the group had achieved a compromise and had zeroed in on the real culprit.
it's the conduct that could come from the evaluative powers of a relationship." he said.
Marquis said that SenEx, by accepting the administration's position, was advancing a ban that it and the administration wanted — not what was discussed by the task force.
"What's quite amazing about SenEx adopting this is that SenEx is simply agreeing with the administration, and it's what the Council explicitly rejected," he said. "I was really under the impression that the Senate Executive Committee was supposed to represent the Council, faculty and students. To adopt this, after we explicitly rejected it, suggests that the Senate Executive Committee doesn't represent us at all, and perhaps we should elect a group that does."
Friauf said the policy that Council would be voting on today mirrored his views on the matter.
"I would like to see a good policy at the University of Kansas that included a limited ban," he said. "We've had a considerable number of Council members express their support. I feel reasonably comfortable it will pass."
Marquis safti he did not think that anyone could claim a victory in passing the policy when it still had to go through Council.
"My guess is that people on Council would say, 'Why are you doing this? You tried to shove through this policy in two different ways at our last meeting. It was rejected both times,' he said. "Now you're coming back to us with the same policy."
Paper denied Senate funds
Rv Heather Moore
Kansan staff writer
Who'sinations, an alternative student paper, was denied its request for $3,770 last night in the Student Senate Finance Committee.
The paper now may limit its production or go out of business altogether. Travis Harrod, Student Senate Executive Committee chair and sponsor of the bill, tried to put the bill before the finance committee, but many senators raised objections.
Alan Pierce, non-traditional senator, said the bill had been heard once before and had been ruled out of order. He said Harrod's presence at the finance committee meeting had constituted a conflict of interest.
"It was taken to StudEx, and the chair of StudEx is bringing the bill here," he said.
Eric Medill, holdover senator and head of the finance committee, said that Harrod — as StudEx chair — had stepped down when the bill had been brought before StudEx on Jan. 19. At that meeting, StudEx had discussed whether Who'sinations should receive financing since its interns could receive credit hours for their work. Senate bylaws prohibit Senate financing of organizations that give credit hours.
Who'sinations first was denied
The money trail Getting your organization's request funded.
Fill out a request at the Student Senate office
Your request is given to a senator who supports it.
Source: Travis Harrod, Student Senate Exec funds by the finance committee Dec. 12, 1993, when its request was ruled out of order because of the credit-hour issue.
"The circulation and the quality of the paper went up and so did the cost," he said. "Now they've run out of money, and they are asking for supplemental funding. It's likely that February could be the last issue."
Harrod said that Senate was punishing Who'sinations for doing its job well.
Jon Schwark, Kansas City, Kan.
That senator discusses
the request with you and helps revise it.
A line-item request is made before the finance committee.
"I feel like we have gone twice, and it's like, 'We're not dealing with you,'" he said. "I understand that there are important issues of procedures.
"I don't think Who'sinations will end," he said. "It will be a matter of not putting out that type of paper anymore."
Schwark said the paper probably would decrease its size and would distribute fewer issues around campus.
With approval, the request goes to the full Senate to be granted or denied.
Committee Chair S.A. Moore / KANSAN junior and senior editor of the paper, said that he felt put-off by the finance committee.
Taking a moment before venturing out into the rain, Arianna Leason, Lawrence sophomore, smokes a cigarette while sheltered by the canopy in front of the Kansas Union.
Amy Solt/ KANSAN
No butts about it, KU smokers must brave the cold to light up
Kansan staff write
By Angelina Lopez Kansan staff writer
Smoking a cigarette before his class begins, Dan Norwood stood outside Murphy Hall and shivered in the freezing wind.
"Having to smoke outside is a slight inconvenience," said Norwood. Topeka graduate teaching assistant.
But Norwood said it had not given him an incentive to quit.
A University policy, enacted July 1, 1993, forbids smoking in campus buildings and has left many smokers out in the cold. Huddled in jackets, they brave the elements for a smoke.
Ann Pierce, secretary at Watkins Memorial Health Center, said she usually smoked twice a day at work. She goes outside near the docking area on the east side of the building.
Norwood, who smokes five or six times a day while at work, said that because he couldn't smoke in his office, he spent more time working at home. However, he said he thought that the policy was fair.
"Before, when I walked down the fourth floor hall of Wescoe, there was so much smoke that it looked like a bar," he said.
"It's a pain, but it's only horrible when it's really cold," Pierce said. "I understand the reasoning for the policy, but I think people should have a place to smoke inside where they can't bother anyone else."
Jason Dailey, employee at Wesco Terrace, said he smokes four or five times a day at work. He said that having to smoke outside was not as bad as he had thought it would be.
"You just sit outside with your coat on," he said. "It only takes five minutes."
Beyond being an inconvenience, the combination of smoking and being outside in the cold weather makes many KU smokers more susceptible to colds.
Dennis Dahl, physician at Watkins, said that smoking suppressed the immune system, which made it harder for the body to fight colds. Cilia — small hair-like structures that are in the lungs and clean them out — are inhibited by smoking, he
said. This makes it difficult for them to rid the lungs of sicknesses.
According to information from the American Lung Association, smokers are sick in bed 16 percent more days a year than nonsmokers.
Dailey said he did not think that having to smoke outside affected a cold he had.
In fact, he said he liked the colder weather because it made smoking more uncomfortable and therefore he smoked less.
Wende Walston, Mansfield, Ohio, senior, said that although she understood the policy, she thought an area should be provided for people who want to smoke.
"Even teachers and faculty have to smoke outside," she said. "If there are that many smokers, a lounge should be provided for them to smoke in. My boss can't even smoke in her own office."
Pierce said there was, understandably, little sympathy for her plight.
"Having to smoke outside agnagates my cold," she said. "But if I have a cold, they say I shouldn't be smoking. What can you say?"
/