Melissa Click, Missouri professor filmed asking for 'muscle,' is fired

[piezoe]

I don't know much about this case, I just saw a brief video is all. Unless she was posing a physical danger to others, was breaking laws that are routinely enforced, (not laws to stifle dissent) it is a bad idea to fire her, no matter how bizarre her ideas might seem to you or me.

Political interference in public universities is a very bad thing if you wish to preserve your own freedom. If she was fired for moral or political reasons, and the fact that the vote was 4 to 2 strongly suggests that she was, then it is wrong and very damaging to fire her.

A typical State University has a budget in the neighborhood of some sizable fraction of a billion dollars. The cost of a small percent of faculty that are neglecting their duty or politically stepping on toes is minuscule compared to the risks posed by letting politicians, or their appointees, decide who should be hired and fired at our universities. These firings can never by justified on the basis of the salary paid to someone with whom you don't agree, but I very often hear that kind of talk.

In the current movement to make public educational institutions operate as businesses, as though knowledge and good judgment could be manufactured like shoes, and in the increasing influence of corporations in government, I see signs of fascism creeping into both American politics and American government. This could eventually prove very bad for many of us. We should speak out against this trend and resist it however we legally can. If we don't, eventually it will become illegal to do so.

I hope those fascists and anarcho-capitalists out there will not be disturbed by my libertarian leanings, but if they are, I wish to make it their problem and not mine. My libertarian leanings have no doubt been influenced by the way I was brought up and my liberal arts, university education.

 

[gwb-trading]

I don't know much about this case, I just saw a brief video is all. Unless she was a posing a physical danger to others , was breaking laws that are routinely enforced, (not laws to stifle dissent) it is a bad idea to fire her no matter how bizarre her ideas might seem to you or me.
Political interference in public universities is a very bad thing if you wish to preserve your own freedom. If she was fired for moral or political reasons, and the fact that the vote was 4 to 2 strongly suggests that was the case, then it is wrong and very damaging to fire her. A typical State University has a budget in the neighborhood of some sizable fraction of a billion dollars. The cost of a small percent of faculty that are neglecting their duty or politically stepping on toes is minuscule compared to the risks posed by letting politicians decide who should be hired and fired at our universities.

Calling in muscle to physically assault someone will typically get you fired from a state university. The question is why it took this long and did not happen within hours.

 

[Max E.]

Political interference in public universities is a very bad thing if you wish to preserve your own freedom.

So can we assume you are against public funding for universities? Or is it only that you want politicians to shut up and stroke a check, and allow animals like this woman to operate unimpeded?

She threatened students who were recording the ridiculous protest, these students pay money to go to that school...... and you think ppl should just shut up and allow a psychopath like that to operate?

 

[piezoe]

Calling in muscle to physically assault someone will typically get you fired from a state university. The question is why it took this long and did not happen within hours.

Was she calling for for someone to physically assault someone? Or was that the interpretation? Was she given a fair hearing? I do not know the answers. But if she was actually asking that someone be physically assaulted, surely the vote would have been 4 to 0 to fire her, not 4 to 2. Doesn't that vote raise a red flag with you?

 

[Max E.]

Was she calling for for someone to physically assault someone? Or was that the interpretation? Was she given a fair hearing? I do not know the answers. But if she was actually asking that someone be physically assaulted, surely the vote would have been 4 to 0 to fire her, not 4 to 2. Doesn't that vote raise a red flag with you?

It raises a red flag with me that 2 of the supposed smartest people in the room would vote against firing someone who threatened to assault a student journalist.

Doesnt that raise a redflag with you?

 

[piezoe]

So can we assume you are against public funding for universities? Or is it only that you want politicians to shut up and stroke a check, and allow animals like this woman to operate unimpeded?

She threatened students who were recording the ridiculous protest, these students pay money to go to that school...... and you think ppl should just shut up and allow a psychopath like that to operate?

As I said, I don't know hardly any details. And even if I knew more than I do I can't imagine I would be describing her as a psychopath, but perhaps. My concern is that she may have been fired for political or moral reasons which is suggested to me by the non-unanimous vote.. I would hope she would be supportive of students wanting to record, if that was all they were doing, a campus protest event.

 

[piezoe]

It raises a red flag with me that 2 of the supposed smartest people in the room would vote against firing someone who threatened to assault a student journalist.

Doesnt that raise a redflag with you?

If that is the actual case, it does raise a red flag with me. Let me just point out that none of us were there and we have to get all our information second hand. And in my case, essentially third-hand from you guys. In the brief video I saw, there was no information that could have remotely been interpreted as this incident has been interpreted. But I wasn't there. If the incident is as you are reporting to me then her firing should be determined by University officials on the advice and consent of the faculty and definitely not at the level of political appointees only. That is a very dangerous thing to condone (Condone means 'to overlook.' It doesn't mean 'to approve.')

 

[gwb-trading]

Was she calling for for someone to physically assault someone? Or was that the interpretation? Was she given a fair hearing? I do not know the answers. But if she was actually asking that someone be physically assaulted, surely the vote would have been 4 to 0 to fire her, not 4 to 2. Doesn't that vote raise a red flag with you?

Yes, she was calling for muscle to threaten and physically assault a student. This is a complete violation of faculty behavior standards.

If a professor wants to deal with a student committing an offense they must summon the campus police. This is clearly written in the employee conduct guidelines.

She seriously violated the guidelines for conduct of employees, she should have been immediately terminated.

 

[piezoe]

Yes, she was calling for muscle to threaten and physically assault a student. This is a complete violation of faculty behavior standards.

If a professor wants to deal with a student committing an offense they must summon the campus police. This is clearly written in the employee conduct guidelines.

She seriously violated the guidelines for conduct of employees, she should have been immediately terminated.

If the situation is as you describe it, I agree, she committed an offense that can not be tolerated on a university campus. In that case however the University should initiate her dismissal, with the concurrence of the State Universities Regulating body. And any dismissal must always be after a fair hearing. (And I hope that is how it was handled.) To not have a hearing would be to follow the 'business model' which is very damaging to our universities. Her firing should not be initiated at the regulatory, or political level. but at the University level.

Our State universities should be allowed to operate as autonomously as possible and as free from any political interference as possible if we hope to get the maximum return for our tax dollars spent on higher education. I remain concerned about creeping political interference with public universities. A person can argue, as is often done, that if you are paying you have the right to decide what is taught. This is the 'business model'. It is a very bad model if you want the best universities possible, measured by the traditional criteria of a quality education. The U.S., major universities have a world wide reputation as being among the very best, and that is why students come here to study from all over the world. It would be a mistake to tamper with this very successful model.

 

[gwb-trading]

If the situation is as you describe it, I agree, she committed an offense that can not be tolerated on a university campus. In that case however the University should initiate her dismissal, with the concurrence of the State Universities Regulating body. (And I hope that is how it was handled.) Her firing should not be initiated at the regulatory, or political level. but at the University level. Our State universities should be allowed to operate as autonomously as possible and as free from any political interference as possible if we hope to get the maximum return for our tax dollars spent on higher education. I remain concerned about creeping political interference with public universities. A person can argue, as is often done, that if you are paying you have the right to decide what is taught. This is the 'business model'. It is a very bad model if you want the best universities possible, measured by the traditional criteria of a quality education.

The Board of Curators provides governance for the university. It is also the top level entity that makes decisions on recommendations from the administrators for the firing of professors. This firing is hardly a political interference situation. All the proper channels were followed; the only question is why it took so long. This is something that should have been completed within a week.