|
spectacle
|
 |
« on: November 04, 2009, 12:38:37 PM » |
|
An interesting article from Inside Higher Ed... Many colleges now require criminal background checks of all new employees. But the University of Akron -- in what some experts believe is a first -- is not only requiring a criminal background check, but is stating that new employees must be willing to submit a DNA sample.
The requirement was added quietly and is now receiving attention -- and criticism -- because an adjunct faculty member at Akron quit this week, citing the new rules. "It's not enough that the university doesn't pay us a living wage, or provide us with health insurance, but now they want to sacrifice the sanctity of our bodies. No," said Matt Williams, who had been teaching four courses this semester in the communications and continuing education programs. I'm not sure I'd be willing to submit to a DNA swab for the privilege of living in Akron, Ohio. Maybe this is also the school that was requiring new faculty to live on campus... (interthreaduality)
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 04, 2009, 12:39:41 PM by smithfieldmuse »
|
Logged
|
I think this thread is going well. Don't you think this thread is going well?
|
|
|
|
barred_owl
|
|
« Reply #1 on: November 04, 2009, 01:36:42 PM » |
|
Heh. No, UofA doesn't require faculty to live on campus (they barely have room for students to live on campus!), but I can tell you that the faculty member quoted in the IHE article (Williams) has been very vocal, both locally and nationally, about the rights and employment circumstances of adjunct instructors. I'm not surprised to see his name associated with this latest development. I'll be waiting to hear/read what UA full-time faculty have to say about this, too. I imagine the search committees that are currently working on new faculty hires will have some new hurdles to tackle. Here is an editorial from the Akron Beacon Journal about this turn of events: http://www.ohio.com/editorial/opinions/68829857.html |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
...I can't help rooting for the underdog underbird. |
|
|
|
spectacle
|
|
« Reply #2 on: November 04, 2009, 01:42:57 PM » |
|
Heh. No, UofA doesn't require faculty to live on campus (they barely have room for students to live on campus!), but I can tell you that the faculty member quoted in the IHE article (Williams) has been very vocal, both locally and nationally, about the rights and employment circumstances of adjunct instructors. I'm not surprised to see his name associated with this latest development. I'll be waiting to hear/read what UA full-time faculty have to say about this, too. I imagine the search committees that are currently working on new faculty hires will have some new hurdles to tackle. Here is an editorial from the Akron Beacon Journal about this turn of events: http://www.ohio.com/editorial/opinions/68829857.htmlHa - I took some classes at Akron U in a past life. It's such a funny place in so many ways. One of my friends just took her kids to Disney World and said they had fingerprint scanners at the front gates. Next: Retinal scanners to get into your local post office? It's all so 007. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I think this thread is going well. Don't you think this thread is going well?
|
|
|
|
hegemony
|
|
« Reply #3 on: November 04, 2009, 04:35:30 PM » |
|
They do not have fingerprint scanners at Disney World.
I'm wondering what she mistook for fingerprint scanners.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Tragedy tomorrow, comedy tonight.
|
|
|
|
kaysixteen
|
|
« Reply #4 on: November 04, 2009, 04:36:15 PM » |
|
Did they actually say why they want to collect DNA? What can they do with it, seeing as they are a private entity, not the state? What will happen to it once it is collected, and what will happen to the results?
Why would Disney want fingerprint scanners for its customers? Aren't they concerned most customers will, ahem, point their finger at em the other way?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
concordancia
|
|
« Reply #5 on: November 04, 2009, 04:39:09 PM » |
|
They do not have fingerprint scanners at Disney World.
I'm wondering what she mistook for fingerprint scanners.
Huh, SeaWorld does. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I like money. I like to buy stuff and experiences with money.
|
|
|
sad_goat
Nothin' but love for ya
Distinguished Senior Member
Posts: 2,610
Requiring tolerance from the tolerant every day.
|
|
« Reply #6 on: November 04, 2009, 04:40:27 PM » |
|
Did they actually say why they want to collect DNA? What can they do with it, seeing as they are a private entity, not the state? What will happen to it once it is collected, and what will happen to the results?
Why would Disney want fingerprint scanners for its customers? Aren't they concerned most customers will, ahem, point their finger at em the other way?
Why, they will clone more adjuncts of course. Where do you think we come from in the first place? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
In other words, it is a moral and philosophical question, not a question of details.
...it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. - James Madison |
|
|
|
barred_owl
|
|
« Reply #7 on: November 04, 2009, 04:49:46 PM » |
|
I think your questions, K16, touch on the problems that ACLU and others have zeroed in on in this case. Without knowing the details of what was contained in the email message to faculty, it sounds like there isn't really a plan. Presumably, the DNA samples are part of "background screening," but what they might be screening is unclear. They (the university) could, I suppose, be looking for matches within criminal DNA databases, but the costs to process and analyze the DNA samples and then access those databases could be pretty high. So, if they collect the samples for potential future analysis (i.e., holding onto the samples until they're needed), the questions about privacy and sample storage become even more important.
Heaven help us if part of the "plan" for the use of such samples is some sort of means of detecting pre-disposed genetic conditions that would affect health insurance coverage decisions.
UofA is a state university, by the way, not private (although I could be misinterpreting the first part of your question, K).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
...I can't help rooting for the underdog underbird. |
|
|
|
spectacle
|
|
« Reply #8 on: November 04, 2009, 05:06:43 PM » |
|
They do not have fingerprint scanners at Disney World.
I'm wondering what she mistook for fingerprint scanners.
Huh, SeaWorld does. Oh, that's so weird. I wonder if she just got confused by a swiper or something. Bizarre. SeaWorld, though? That's even weirder. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I think this thread is going well. Don't you think this thread is going well?
|
|
|
isotope
A Ronnie James Dio Approved
Distinguished Senior Member
Posts: 1,311
I like to move it move it.
|
|
« Reply #9 on: November 04, 2009, 07:13:59 PM » |
|
They do not have fingerprint scanners at Disney World.
I'm wondering what she mistook for fingerprint scanners.
Huh, SeaWorld does. Oh, that's so weird. I wonder if she just got confused by a swiper or something. Bizarre. SeaWorld, though? That's even weirder. Actually, they do have the scanners. I think is what they are talking about: http://www.themeparkinsider.com/flume/200609/186/ I did it for the past two years with my pass. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
There is nothing more metal than riding in a rocket ship shaped like a guitar. Except for maybe the lightning"Dr. Isotope, you sure do talk about poop a lot." -- student |
|
|
anthroid
Annoying bad luck snails
Distinguished Senior Member
Posts: 16,002
No happy socks because nobody gets Manitoba.
|
|
« Reply #10 on: November 04, 2009, 07:30:50 PM » |
|
Back to OP: this is the craziest thing I've ever heard of.* I cannot fathom the point of this. I guess I will not ever apply to U of Akron, ever.
*OK, I've heard of weirder things but U of Akron has been a reasonable place up until now. This is seriously odd.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Do you hail from Planet Hello Kitty? It's like an action movie, but boring.
|
|
|
|
alleyoxenfree
|
|
« Reply #11 on: November 04, 2009, 11:04:35 PM » |
|
Considering that some freshmen are underage, it may be a lawyerly attempt to have what they need to do background checks on ALL employees (faculty and staff). If they want to run the DNA of people who have keys to the dorms, for instance, they might have received a legal opinion that they must request the same from all employees.
Pure speculation. Either that, or Akron is Dick Cheney's undisclosed location after all and there's more going down there than we know.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lurquita
|
|
« Reply #12 on: November 04, 2009, 11:15:21 PM » |
|
Well, you know.... I AM a respectable woman, a Ph.D., a grown up. A lady, as it were.
If I were not all of those things, I would offer to send them a stool sample in a jar so that they could get their DNA from my cr@p.
But I am a dignified, respectable woman so it would never even occur to me to think such a thing, much less write such unadulterated sass on a respectable forum such as the CHE gathering.
Lurquita, deep in whose heart lurqs a real SMART ALECK
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 04, 2009, 11:16:36 PM by lurquita »
|
Logged
|
"When I negotiate, I want to see the other guy's blood on the table" (Mozman)
|
|
|
|
barred_owl
|
|
« Reply #13 on: November 04, 2009, 11:44:13 PM » |
|
Just did a little internet searching for more updates on this issue. A couple of points stood out from a CBS news blog: 1. The proposed purpose is for criminal background checks. Presumably, the rationale is that collecting DNA now from prospective hires will position the university to compare samples to an in-development Ohio Highway Patrol DNA database (i.e., the OHP database is not yet complete, but UA wants to be "ready" for when it is). 2. The new requirement was enacted by the Board of Trustees/administration without consultation with the faculty senate, and right before Fall semester started. 3. The requirement may be in violation of the federal Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, but there are differences in the interpretation of the Act (of course). 4. Williams (the adjunct who resigned) is rattling a lot of sabers, but probably doesn't have a leg to stand on, legally. The ACLU, however, may have much more ammunition in launching legal action against the university. 5. No details, yet, on how samples will be collected or stored. Current faculty will not have to submit samples, and adjuncts will not have to do so every semester when their contracts are renewed--apparently, only new hires will be required to submit to sample collection. The university's spokesperson has stated that "...employment is completely by choice. Nobody has to submit one [background check]; you're always free to find other employment." Here's the link to the CBS News blog, for those who are interested. Following the links in the blog to some of the email communication was very interesting. Here is the text of the "rule" from UA (looks like it might be from the faculty handbook): http://www.uakron.edu/ogc/docs/11-22_8-5-09.pdf Note that implementation of the background checks will be under the authority of HR personnel. Eep! |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 04, 2009, 11:47:54 PM by barred_owl »
|
Logged
|
...I can't help rooting for the underdog underbird. |
|
|
|
pinkmouse
|
|
« Reply #14 on: November 05, 2009, 05:04:50 AM » |
|
Next: ankle monitors to keep track of how much time you spend on campus.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
