Recruiting forum sparks debates, controversy Students and community members speak out on nondiscrimination policy

Author: Ben S. Salkowe

Community Council heard arguments on the College's nondiscrimination policy and recruitment procedure Monday from a large group of students, faculty and staff at a panel discussion held in Dana auditorium. Having heard from the community, the Council will begin deliberation next week to formulate a recommendation of action for President Ronald D. Liebowitz.

"We hope to make a recommendation to the President in the next few weeks," said Ann Hanson, dean of student affairs and co-chair of Council.

The policy under debate concerns the College's procedures for allowing employers to use campus facilities and resources to recruit students. Under the current non-discrimination policy, any employer wishing to recruit on campus must sign an agreement pledging non-discrimination in hiring or hold an informational meeting explaining their hiring practices, before they may use Campus facilities and resources. This policy has generated controversy since Captain David Doucette of the United States Marine Corps used the procedure to hold an information session on U.S. Code Title 10, the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which prohibits openly gay individuals from joining the military. After the information session, Doucette was allowed to recruit students on campus.

A faculty resolution was recently passed 62-28-4 advising Liebowitz to modify the College's current policies and procedures in order to eliminate the exemption clause for groups with discriminatory hiring practices that offer an informational session on their policy.

A five-member panel led Monday's discussion. The panel included Associate Archivist and National Guardsman Mike Knapp, Baldwin Professor of Mathematics and Natural Philosophy Mike Olinick, Dan Morosani '05, Kathryn Babin '07 and Professor of Russian Kevin Moss.

The panel members each offered personal statements and then took questions and comments from the audience. In general, participants expressed disagreement with the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, but varied in their positions on the College's non-discrimination policy.

"[The policy] states that employers who are unable to sign the non-discrimination agreement may recruit on campus if they are willing to hold a public meeting 'to explain' their policy," said Olinick, an opponent of the College's current policy. "We would be forced to permit the Ku Klux Klan or the American Nazi party to recruit here if they were willing to "explain" their restrictive membership practices."



In Favor of the Status Quo



Supporters of the policy argued that allowing the military to recruit on campus would promote valuable discussion of a policy that is set by legislators and not the military. "Students who disagree with the military's policies would get the opportunity to raise awareness about what they think are unfair rules of conduct [and] students interested in careers in the military would be able to find out more," said Morosani, who first brought the policy to discussion by working to bring the military to campus. "It baffles me that our professors want to repress such an exchange of ideas."

Babin also said the current policy should be maintained to allow students to make their own choices and opinions. "I believe that a central part of our liberal education at Middlebury is informed and challenging debate and discussion -- in and outside of the classroom," she said.

Knapp also argued for the policy, "If we are unwilling to hear the arguments of those with whom we disagree, then we do ourselves a great disservice, the potential ramifications of which could be incredibly far-reaching," he said.



In Need of Reform



Moss criticized the argument in favor of the policy saying the issue was not about free speech. "Hiring is conduct, not hiring is conduct. And they don't hire our students, they exclude them, they discriminate against them. Conduct. And conduct unbecoming. We should not endorse discrimination or allow it on campus," he said.

J.S. Woodward '06, student co-chair of the Community Council, also said he did not believe the notion that the policy promoted discussion of discriminatory practices. "If it requires a figure of controversy that inspires fear, hatred or mourning in members of this community to incite discussion among us, then we have some other very major issues to address entirely separate from the College's non-discrimination policy," he commented following the event.

Audience members asking questions and making comments on the policy were similarly divided over whether the policy should be modified. Several students asked whether those supporting the current non-discrimination policy would be more concerned if the military's discrimination was against other, larger minorities - such as African-Americans or Jewish students.



A Compromise Proposed



Towards the end of the 90-minute forum, Heidi Schuerger, an Oracle Database specialist for the College who recently served as civil affairs non-commissioned officer with the 4th Civil Affairs Group in Iraq, stood up and suggested points for compromise between supporters and opponents of the policy. After her comments several students in the audience were moved to applaud.

"I'm not really taking a position for or against the current policy," Schuerger told The Campus. "But I think it's clear that the policy the way it's currently stated isn't accomplishing what it's trying to accomplish."

Schuerger said Doucette had poorly represented the Marine Corps and argued that a more effective discussion of the military's policy and restrictions on the military's access to the campus might be points of compromise.

"At the very least, any briefing by a recruiting organization must satisfy the intent of the policy. If we know that an organization does not meet our policy but has satisfied the criteria of the informational briefing, we should still restrict their access to the campus, out of respect for those members of the community who may be offended by their presence and/or activities."

Woodward said he was opposed to compromises which still permitted military access to the campus. "In my eyes, one cannot compromise ideals while simultaneously maintaining one's integrity," he said.

Moss said he did not think a non-discrimination policy could have exceptions. "Either we allow discriminating organizations on campus or we don't."

Supporters of the current policy, however, said they would be open to discussion on a compromise. "If military recruiters had to stay away from dining halls or other high-traffic areas, but were still allowed to send all-school e-mails announcing recruiting visits and use classrooms to make presentations at night, that might be an acceptable compromise between the College and the military," said Morosani.

Knapp, agreed with Schuerger. "I like [her] suggestions," he said, "and I think I pretty much agree with her position." Knapp said he was not sure how a compromise might be reached that honored the spirit of the non-discrimination policy and also permitted access to the military.

Schuerger also suggested that the students on campus who currently serve, plan to serve or have friends or family serving in the military should create an organization on campus. "They should certainly consider having an organization that supports them. They should be getting together to discuss these issues," she said. "I would not be surprised if they said the military could not recruit on campus, and I would support a group to help the military on campus."

The Council could not specify a timeframe for their decision on the College's non-discrimination policy, but members said the questions and comments provided by students would stir good debate over the policy.

At the heart of the
discussion, it seems, will be a question offered early in the forum by James Davis '07, who asked what the intent of the current policy was.

Davis questioned the panel, "What do [you] see the point of a non-discrimination policy being if it allows discriminatory recruiters to come in?"



For submissions on this topic, please see Opinions, page 8.