New West Network

The Constitution, the University, and Free Speech

By Nick Gier, New West Unfiltered 10-26-09

THE CONSTITUTION, THE UNIVERSITY,
AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH

By Nick Gier, President, Higher Education Council,
Idaho Federation of Teachers, AFT/AFL-CIO

Habib Sadid, an award-winning engineering professor at ISU for 22 years, has been banned from campus and is facing dismissal. He is charged with being personally abusive and disruptive thereby preventing his college from fulfilling its mission.

On October 23 a faculty appeal board released a report in which, by a vote of 4-1, it found insufficient evidence for Sadid’s termination. The majority concluded that due process had not been followed, and that the lack of documentation for such a serious charge was “disturbing.”

Professor Sadid has been tenured since 1994, and a tenured professor can be fired for professional incompetence, a felony conviction, or moral turpitude.

The charges against Sadid fall outside of these categories, and he believes that his criticism of the ISU administration is protected by the First Amendment.

The university attorney, however, counters that constitutional free speech is not absolute, and that faculty members may not undermine the operation of the university with personal vendettas and other “unprofessional” behavior.

Richard Jacobsen, dean of the ISU College of Engineering, claims that the actions of Sadid and another faculty member fit the “classical definition of insubordination, coupled with a complete lack of collegiality.” Furthermore, the dean maintains that the problems in the college are not due to a “lack of leadership but more one of followership.”

Collegiality is the virtue of being a good colleague, and has as its ideal the demonstration of mutual respect and support among people sharing the same vocation. Collegiality can thrive only in setting of equality not one of “followership.” True colleagues are equal with all and subordinate to none.

Because they are not elected by their faculties as their European counterparts are, American deans and presidents are not necessarily accountable to the professors they lead. They undermine democratic decision-making every time they veto faculty decisions, while governing boards can veto any decision campus executives make.

The hierarchical model of university governance makes it very difficult for faculty to air their grievances and communicate their concerns without fear of retaliation.

Personal outbursts at faculty meetings may not at all be due to “mental instability” as Dean Jacobsen suggests, but a symptom of deep frustration dealing with an unresponsive and undemocratic system.

Former President ISU Richard Bowden admitted that the previous engineering dean was “not the best administrator,” so there may well be very good reasons for long lasting faculty resentment that Sadid and others have been expressing openly and boldly.

Collegiality is a virtue and an ideal, but one cannot require any virtue as a condition of employment (other than the virtues of industry and talent), and certainly one should not make lack of it a reason for firing a tenured professor.

In claiming that Professor Sadid’s First Amendment rights may be limited, the university’s attorney is no doubt citing the 2006 Supreme Court decision Garcetti v. Ceballos, in which the court ruled that public employee free speech rights may be limited while performing “official duties.”

The justices explicitly wrote that this decision may not apply to college and university professors, and Cary Nelson, President of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), has stated that ISU’s use of Garcetti v. Ceballos “represents a dangerous application of [the case] to a faculty member at a public institution of higher education.”

AAUP guidelines for the suspension of faculty also insist that “immediate harm” to other persons must be clearly demonstrated, which of course the ISU has failed to do.

There is no question that academic tenure protects professors’ freedom to teach, following traditional classroom decorum, any content they deem appropriate in their classes, and to pursue any research topic they wish to propose. Without the protection of tenure, faculty members would be very vulnerable to political or other ideological pressures.

Our academic campuses must remain our society’s essential bastions of free speech and free inquiry. College and university administrators must proceed with utmost caution if they intend to stifle not only those conditions under which learning and research occur, but also the conditions under which decisions about university governance take place.

I challenge ISU President Arthur Vailas to support faculty autonomy and heed the advice of the four members of Sadid’s appeal board. Sadid has hired some of the best employment attorneys in the state, so Vailas could avoid a costly legal battle and more embarrassment for his already embattled administration by doing the right thing.

Nick Gier taught philosophy at the University of Idaho for 31 years. Read or listen to all his columns at www.NickGier.com