Point of Clarification

A little explanation regarding Brad Reed's post: As The Illuminator, when not defending the College in fights to the metaphorical death, is primarily the ESEA's newspaper, various union members (actually, any who want) can be contributors. If they are technically savvy and not sociopaths, they will also have admin privileges, and admin rights. The Editorial Junta acts collectively as the paper's ringmaster.

During this crisis, especially given the ESEA's deep involvement in defending the interests of faculty, students and staff, it makes sense for The Illuminator to send dispatches from the vanguard. Some of these will be silly and intended to let off some of the constant karmic pressure we put on ourselves as we keep the pressure--through simply stating the truth--applied to KY and his minions.

Other posts will be serious. Given the disposition of the Junta, and its writers, these will often be snarky, bitchy and caustic. So be it.
Our intention is to allow anyone to comment on anything, and to not buzzkill anyone while they get their rant on. In fact, we affirmed this last month when we encouraged folks to put their names on their opinions. It's wholly understandable folks don't want to be counted, at least not yet.

As tensions rise, and as KY and his praetorian guard raise the ante with their increasingly insane demands, idiotic threats and unexplainable fits, people are getting understandably furious, and the comments sections of the posts are slouching more and more toward pure venom. This is to be expected, though it's ultimately counterproductive toward our shared goal of riding KY and his remora-like toadies out of town on a rail.

It's also time to stand up and be counted, if you can muster the courage. What would happen, do you think, if every single Dean agreed to confront KY at once? Or if they told him his--or JS's--koo-koo directives were foolish, and they could stuff them in the tailpipe of the CQI bus? Or if every Dean went to the board, in a group, in a show of solidarity? Or if the entire Edison community simply started doing what was right, en masse, by students and each other, ignoring the not-well people at the top, all the while treating KY as an elderly relative in the throes of dementia, letting him think he runs the show, allowing him to collect his outsized perks and paycheck and strut around like an aging peacock, when he deigns to visit campus?

Oh, yes. The Junta understands. Folks have families, kids, mortgages, working without the protections of tenure about 2/3's of faculty enjoy. KY would probably non-renew Jesus for healing people without permission. We know. Mike Taint knows. Phil Lootens and Denny Myers know. Michael Perry knows.

It's clear KY cares nothing for law and contract, unless it benefits
him, and many on the tenured faculty risk his attempted firings, or actual firings that have no operative effect because they violate the ESEA contract. This we suffer on top of our defense against the scheming bad faith, ill-will and mischief of his underlings, which cost us bother, effort, bad juju, and angina to fight, not to mention thousands of dollars in legal fees possibly as we prepare to protect our interests, all while enduring the bittersweet heat of Edison's halls, chins raised, forcing ourselves to meet the mad, rheumy glares of those who hate us, and intend to do us, our families, and our careers, harm.

Right, right. Woe is us. The martyrs.
That's not the message we intend to send in support of Reed's move to limit commenting to folks who register. The point is this: say whatever you damn well please, short of libel. And have the courage of your convictions when they are to the extent exhibited by some of the anonymous comments. Use a pseudonym, or a nom de guerre, if you please. Register, so we can discuss comment moderation with you, any concerns we might have about assertions that don't seem to add up, or simply to let people know an actual person is out there somewhere, standing behind the words!

The powers we besmirchin' know exactly who belongs to the Editorial Junta, and we
hope they do. Hell, it's the ESEA secretary's stated responsiblity to maintain this site! And before you think 'easy for us to say', you should know the Junta contains in its revolving prankster's cabal, tenured faculty, untenured faculty, adjuncts, administrators, staff and community members, and we receive good intelligence on a daily basis from inside the college, often from the unlikeliest of places. So join us! Go on the record, won't you? We're all at risk. The load is heavy. Your hands can help carry it.


XITS said...

No doubt anyone who looks close enough would deny that mistakes were made.

Has anyone else actually gone to see Dr. Yowell about any of this? I have talked to him in the past about some of these very issues. While he did not "fix" what was causing the problem, he moved me to a much safer place in the institution where I could be much more effective in my job. In my case, the problem was the Usual Suspects stealing credit for work I and my staff do.I thank him for this and other times he has came down on my side.
Talk to him, do something/anything because this has got to stop. Many of us cannot take much more of the not knowing if we will be employed next year or not.

Finding a job is stressful enough. I would rather lose this one quick so I can just get on with finding another.

Chance said...

The posts by XITS (above) and "Still Taking Notes" have made conciliatory-sounding comments which seem to suggest a desire to reach out to Dr. Yowell in what amounts to an effort to offer an olive branch of "healing", or to "talk" in hopes of getting some kind of meaningful consideration or response. Both naively project some unjustifiable good faith toward a president and administration that repeatedly have proven themselves unworthy of such generous consideration.

Dr. Yowell and his minions don't play fair -- and cannot be expected to suddenly turn over a new leaf and become exemplary leaders or role models. That just won't happen. Dr. Yowell wants what he wants, at whatever cost or by whatever means he feels are required or justified. He does not adhere to the kind of ethical or moral standards that most of us refer to as "fair play".

To suggest taking the high road in these matters strikes me as putting "playing nice" above winning. I do not see that as an option. I'm not saying "play dirty", because, frankly, such is unnecessary. The facts are clear, and they are more than enough to justify removing the current leadership. (Board members, are you listening? The facts ARE clear.)

These suppositions that there may be some sort of conciliatory outreach possible with Dr. Yowell are absurd. There is no way to patch things up and move forward. Given all that has transpired recently, as well as over the last few years, how could anyone allow there might be some way to continue with this president and administration? It is not an option.

The only way forward for Edison is through new leadership. The Board has to grasp this and then act. Any resolution of this situation which does not include a new administration will not work.

The faculty did not make a nearly unanimous vote of no confidence without good cause. The message was very clear by a margin of 44-1. It says change must happen, because this president cannot lead our institution any longer. It's very clear and simple. And it is a fact, just ask them.

Leadership requires at least some level of trust, and there is no trust whatsoever. It has been thoroughly destroyed, mostly by half-truths, misinformation, contradictions, intimidation and retribution. It was further destroyed by a series of personnel and financial actions which have been questionable at best, and undeniably detrimental to the college.

It is a leadership which perhaps, as suggested, did have good intentions once upon a time, but now not only fails to lead, but which exists mainly to serve its own interests and purposes. And, as we have seen, a leader who answers to no one is surely doomed to failure.

I am hopeful the Board can step out from behind the cloak of isolation and managed information (that has been so carefully crafted by this president and administration) to look at the unfiltered facts pouring forth from so many directions and persons. The time for change has arrived. We are desperate to move on and start anew.

Finally, if there is healing to be done, it needs to fall on the side of those who sit with letters of non-renewal for 2009-2010, and those living from check to check on wages so low they could qualify for public assistance, and those who have been intimidated, and the many others who have been so not "valued" by this leader and this administration. Heal them first.

Respectfully submitted for your consideration.

Editorial Junta said...

Chance, the Junta agrees with you. "Notes" and Reed are likely trying to distinguish between the Board--which has been the entity making conciliatory overtures by agreeing to listen to us, apparently in good faith without KY's mediating, not vice versa--and the Usual Suspects. The Junta doesn't trust KY, nor do we think there can be a rapprochement. This crisis may not soon end through cooperation between Academic Senate and the Board. That does not mean it will not end. Have faith that KY will take the wrong decision whenever the right one is offered. The bad guys' edifice will sooner than later collapse of its own weight, and many of us are more than happy to push.