UPDATED: 10:25AM 5/7/2009
According to sources at the meeting, Yvonne Peña and Sandy Rodriguez were at the meeting (splitting the shift) and watched as Senators asked questions regarding the age of the applicants. I'm not sure what's worse, not going to the meetings, or going and sitting idly by as people who you are responsible for break the law. It's not like they aren't aware of this provision in FEDERAL law, they've given notice to past Senates, Publications boards, and other student bodies, that it is ILLEGAL to ask someone their age during a job interview. I would think Sandy would have learned her lesson about breaking FEDERAL LAW when she disclosed student SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS in 2007.
_______________________________________________
Another Senate meeting, another no-show by Yvonne Peña. As a couple of commenters and contributors have pointed out recently, maybe the Senate wouldn't have so many problems if their advisors did their job. For example, yesterday the Senate violated a number of fair employment, and equal access laws, on top of a number of University policies, and even ASUN laws, when they tried to rationalize not appointing an applicant based on age.
Newbies, that's discrimination. It's the same as if you said "she's a girl so we can't appoint her," or "his wheelchair might get in the way at the table," or any other type of discrimination. As one of our contributors points out in her analysis of groupthink, there are hundreds of students on campus who are over the age or 25. There are even people as old as 70 or 80 (omg) who go to classes. These people deserve representation, and you have no right to discriminate against candidates because "they're too old." Grow up.
But back to the subject at hand: if they had a proper and qualified advisor present, the arguably illegal acts might not have happened. In the past when the Senate started to consider illegal things, the advisor usually stood up and bitches at them. Yvonne, your job isn't to watch; your job is to ADVISE. In case no one has mentioned it, you're the Senate's advisor. Let me give you a definition of what an advisor is:
Advisor - noun1. one who gives advice.
That means you're supposed to speak up. You shouldn't be leading the discussion, but you shouldn't just sit there looking stupid (there are 22 senators for that). We know you're not a lawyer (that's pretty obvious) nor qualified in governmental systems, but you should still know University policy and proper hiring practices. Selecting a new Senator is an EMPLOYMENT matter. That means it falls under labor law. That means they can't engage in prohibited discrimination.
My hope (maybe unfounded) is that over the summer Ms. Peña reads some books (I'm sure Lupus could recommend a few) and get to know the body that you're advising. We know you were thrown in the deep end last year. Tough shit. Get over it. You have three months over the summer break to get yourself aquatinted with the rules, laws, constitution, etc. When the Senate comes back from its summer recess, you need to bring your A game. As I'm sure Sandy has told you numerous times, this is a learning experience, FOR THEM, not you (well, for you, too, but mainly for them). You're supposed to be their teacher. You're supposed to GUIDE them, ADVISE them, HELP them, MOLD them (dare I say do what student development professionals are supposed to do and DEVELOP them). From what I can tell, all you did last session was sit on your ass and get paid. And look how that turned out.
Posts
