Government Relations Links
Education Advocacy
Foundation Law
Funding Public Education
Legislative Districts
 |
Click here and enter your zip
code to get your state legislators' contact information.
Education Advocacy
Foundation Law
Funding Public Education
Legislative Districts
|
Click here and enter your zip
code to get your state legislators' contact information.
 |
NEA RateSmartsm
Credit Card
Save money with one of the lowest rates anywhere.
.jpg) |
Below is a letter I sent to the members of the Alabama State University (ASU) Board of Trustees concerning an ever-growing list of issues that are occurring at my alma mater. We have a number of members at this institution who will be adversely affected by the unlawful actions of the board. This organization must insist that every employing school board, at every level, follows the law when it comes to hiring, firing, and organizational structure.
Gentlemen, what in the world is going on at ASU? On Tuesday, September 2, 2008, Interim President William Harris announced the reorganization of Alabama State University’s (ASU) administrative structure. Among other things, the new plan creates two new vice president positions, several associate vice president positions, and consolidates all university administration under the two vice presidents. If two vice presidents will oversee the operations of the university, what will the interim president do? It appears that under this plan, three persons will run the University. I do not know of any University in the state or region with such an arrangement. This troika is a sham. For more details of this contrived plan one needs to review the new organizational chart which was recently released. There are three major legal impediments to the interim president’s actions.
First, the interim president’s actions violate state law. Section 16-50-23, Ala. Code 1975, makes it abundantly clear that “the Board of Trustees shall have the power to organize the university.” It goes on to say that “the Board shall appoint … officers, professional, and operating personnel as the interest of the university may require.” While these actions are taken at the recommendation of the president, it is for the board and the board alone to organize the university, to create positions, and to hire individuals to fill those positions. In short, the president proposes and the board disposes. This reorganization has never been presented to the board.
Second, the interim president is acting in violation of our by-laws. Article VI, Section 3 of our by-laws unequivocally provides that the vice president for finance shall be responsible to the president, and accountable to the board. Having the vice president for finance accountable to the board and answerable only to the president helps to ensure that we have the information we need to guard the financial health of the institution and no president can declare him or herself innocent of financial improprieties.
Third, the interim president’s actions are in direct contravention of this board’s policies concerning the filling of vacancies and creating new positions. When the president seeks to create a new position, at the vice presidential level, policy dictates that he or she presents the proposal to the board for approval. If the position is approved, a job description, job qualifications, and salary schedule must then be approved by the board. Then, the position must be advertised in national publications, forwarded to the State Department of Labor, and posted at ASU on the various bulletin boards, so that those who desire to apply for the position may do so, and the most competent person for the position may be found. Next, the Department of Human Resources eliminates those who are unqualified on paper, and then a committee must interview the applicants and recommend three of them to the president. The president then selects one and recommends a candidate to the board for approval. Even though the policy has existed for more than a quarter of a century, the interim president took it upon himself to bypass this process. This is illegal, and the interim president knows or should know better.
We must remind ourselves that current or potential employees are not going to allow ASU to violate its employment policies of nondiscrimination and equal protection without legal action. If we insist on violating the law, we are inviting a lawsuit. Lest we forget the Craig Case!
Aside from these obvious legal impediments, there is a question of fundamental fairness. ASU is an equal opportunity employer. How are opportunities equal when jobs are created and filled with no opportunity for anyone to apply? No individual can be shut out of these jobs because of race, creed, color, national origin, or gender, including the ASU president’s position. Thus, advertising these positions is imperative.
I do not know if any promises or commitments have been made to anyone behind closed doors. But I do know that the board cannot avoid its obligation to ensure all federal laws, state laws, and university policies are followed. Allowing the interim president to ignore existing laws governing employment at ASU will undermine our credibility for years to come. The board must correct this problem.
I know some of you will take exception to the position that I raise herein. For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone, who has the University at heart, would expect me, or anyone else, to remain silent while the University drifts into oblivion. I am not going to stand idly by and see our university compromised. If I have to stand alone, I’ll go alone. The alumni association should be more vocal. Individual alumni who love this school have an obligation to oppose any threat to ASU. The Faculty Senate should also register its concern. Protecting and advancing ASU is all of our responsibility. If others would speak out in behalf of the University, I would speak less often. ASU needs advocates and defenders.
You have likely noted that I have emboldened the word interim throughout this memorandum in describing the status of our current chief executive. This was done to highlight the fact that the public was told, when this president was brought back, that it was in a temporary, interim capacity and that we would be moving forward with the Administrative Reorganization of ASU and the search process for a permanent president. Every day we are without a permanent president sets us further behind. I ask now – should an interim president, whose term is expected to be short, be reorganizing the University?
Shouldn’t any changes to the organizational structure of this institution be left to the next permanent president of ASU? Unless, of course, the permanent president has been picked and we just don’t know it. I trust that the Presidential Search Committee that we established in February is moving expeditiously to find a permanent president. Alabama State University is in trouble; and for those who do not recognize it, only confirms that we are in even more trouble.
Finally, I warn each of you that this issue is very serious. Notwithstanding one’s opinion of this memorandum, you took an oath to uphold the law in overseeing ASU. Therefore, “choose you this day,” who you will serve – whether it is the university or some individual, but as for me, I will serve ASU.
I trust that you are men of your word and will fulfill the oath that you swore before Almighty God to uphold.
The board should waste no time in rendering the interim president’s action as “Null and Void.”