November 20, 2008

Rutgers Unions File Complaint Over University's Refusal to Release Emergency Information

Two unions at Rutgers University have filed a legal complaint with a New Jersey state agency, alleging that university officials have refused to release comprehensive campus-emergency plans to Rutgers’s committee on health and safety training.

Amy Bahruth, a professor who serves as the committee’s co-chair, says the emergency information posted on the university’s Web site is inadequate.

“Some information is provided on the Rutgers site. However, many pieces of a comprehensive plan are missing or significantly limited,” she said in a statement issued by the Rutgers branches of the American Federation of Teachers and the American Association of University Professors.

University officials have denied any wrongdoing, and say they are fully compliant with the state’s Open Public Records Act, which includes an exception for “emergency or security information or procedures … which, if disclosed, would jeopardize security of the building or facility or persons therein.” The public disclosure of the entirety of the university’s emergency-operations plan falls under this exception, Rutgers officials say, because doing so could compromise the safety of the campus. —Caitlin Moran

Comments

1. Perhaps an appropriate action for the workers would be a “Armor Day.” Get all the workers to show up in bullet proof vests one day, military helmets the next day and on the third dangle gas masks from their necks while at work.

   I am not sure I ever heard of a more absurd response from university management after asked for safety measures.

   A plan that, if disclosed, jeopardizes the building or facility — but potentially harms the workers is … well, not a very good plan now, is it?

   Tell me when to show up in my gear, I will stand in solidarity when the worker actions begin.

   — Union Review    Nov 21, 06:18 AM    #

2. As an industrial hygienist, I help develop emergency action plans. Not only should the union have the complete plan, the union should have been asked to participate in the development of the plan. These workers are the ones that I have seen over and over catch flaws in the plans the “experts” and the administrators make. They catch the flaws because they have intimate knowledge of the campus, its power and mechanical systems, and the like. They also are the ones that will make things work properly in an emergency, so they must be fully informed about their part in the actions and why these actions were determined to be the appropriate ones. It is patronizing in the extreme to withhold parts of the plans from the workers. The only time emergency plans should be withheld is if there is a large informed and highly trained/armed force that is protecting something of national security such as the life of the president, a neuclear plant, etc. Campus police or local town police do not qualify as a reason to keep the plans secret.

   — Monona Rossol    Nov 21, 07:21 AM    #

3. Let see, Rutgers has a GREAT safety plan. Since it is not released, it will not be compromised. If not released, no one will know their function. It sounds a lot like Catch-22. I just hope that they can even find the plan if it is needed.

   — Joe the Screwed    Nov 21, 08:19 AM    #

4. Not trying to defend Rutgers for what seems on its face to be a ridiculous decision, but I have seen cases that were handled badly in the other direction. While my son was in high school, the principal (who is no longer there) released to the parents (through the PTA) the information that – in the event of a credible bomb threat all of the students/faculty would be evacuated to the football stadium adjacent to the school. This went out via email to every parent/person that was even remotely tied to the school. Many parents called the school board and complained that this sort of information should not have been given out because any Columbine wannabe would now know that they simply needed to convince the school that a bomb threat was credible (not difficult) to be able to have all 4000+ students as sitting ducks in the wide open stadium. Rutgers does need to think carefully about what information to release, but – they do need to be sure that folks will know what to do in an emergency situation.

   — me    Nov 21, 08:31 AM    #

5. #4 is one of the reasons certain information is not shared. Basically, by oversharing information we also are telling the “bad” guys what to do to find us. These are different times and the primary purpose now is to protect the campus community from those that want to cause harm — that is the higher risk.

   — Jax    Nov 21, 08:55 AM    #

6. First, to addres post #1, “Union Review” – the university’s statement does, IN FACT, say that releasing the information would harm “persons therein” the buildings, facilities, etc. Get your facts straight before you slam people, OK?

   Second, post #5 says it best: “…Oversharing information … tell(s) the ‘bad’ guys what to do to find us.” No security plan worth its salt is EVER posted in full for all the world to see. That would be utterly stupid.

   Don’t the faculty unions have anything better to do? Or, like most/all unions, do they just need to fabricate an issue in order to continue to justify their existence and continue taking dues in order to provide their union leadership with excellent salaries?

   I have been a staff member at 6 universities in 3 states, and my experience shows that faculty are ALWAYS the least likely to volunteer for the university’s crisis management team. They want to complain and moan about the security plan, but they never want to be part of producing it or take a leadership role in executing it. Because, after all, it’s much easier to whine than actually work.

   — SpeedyMom    Nov 21, 01:01 PM    #

Previous: Lawmakers Propose No Money for Colleges in Minimalist Stimulus Legislation
Next: 2 University Presidents Are Among 'America's Best Leaders'