Since settling with Dr. Ivor van Heerden for a near-half million dollars in his wrongful dismissal suit, LSU’s line, straight from LSU Interim System President and Chancellor William “Bill” Jenkins, is that further discussion is “no longer relevant, warranted or appropriate.” Indeed? For an institution of higher learning, should not truth matter? We require accountability of students, staff and faculty, why not of upper administration and our Board of Supervisors?
Especially when these same individuals have been involved time and again in practices that bring enormous costs in lawyers and settlements. Besides staining LSU’s image, should they now also speak for LSU?
Some of the same individuals were responsible for derailing a search that brought in the chancellor at that time, more because of his political
connections in Washington than for his qualifications. LSU’s own rules were violated and a unanimous Faculty Senate Executive Committee recommendation not to proceed were set aside. They now continue that pattern by ignoring faculty opinion on the search for president/chancellor, that position itself created by fiat and the search being run, this time under interference from state politicians.
That chancellor was annoyed that his fellow Washington friends at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers were being held responsible by Dr. van Heerden for the failure of New Orleans levees after Katrina. Two vice chancellors tried to keep him from speaking out in public, ostensibly because they and some others feared that this might cost LSU grant monies.
This obvious violation of basic elements of academic freedom was clear from the start. A letter published in The Advocate drew 47 signatories within two days, representing faculty from across campus. Yet, the administration did not deign to answer the faculty. In
typical fashion, they tried to draw out legal proceedings over years that compel most in such situations to give up. Hiding behind legalisms and secrecy, no institutional learning takes place, claiming the next victims who fall afoul of these rulers.
Dr. van Heerden did not give up, saying that “the fight was all along for academic freedom.” It behooves the rest of us to show some of that courage and integrity in standing up for our basic values, that this is an institution of higher learning dedicated to the pursuit of truth. LSU has the shameful distinction of being the only flagship campus on the American Association of University Professors’ censure list for its actions.
Only when the judge’s pre-trial rulings said LSU could not suppress certain evidence, specifically emails showing egregious acts behind the firing, did LSU settle. Among these acts were failing to take a faculty vote before the administrators fired him and taking a vote later to cover up. This echoes similar action when the chancellor in question was hired and given tenure, for which he was not qualified, all in a few rushed hours, the relevant faculty’s vote taken after the fact.
The provost of that time may have moved on, as has that chancellor (and the next ones as well), but the same president and other individuals involved continue with no accountability for their actions. Policy statements, Grievance Committee reports, and even physical laws of causality seem to have to give way to administrative arrogance. There is no faculty representative on the Board. LSU has a policy statement requiring faculty input in evaluation of administrators, but an investigation four years ago on its implementation drew a concerted refusal by provost and deans to answer the Faculty Senate.
Such abuse of university values simply should not stand. Since the recent verdict, the administration itself should have been in the lead to disclose all, welcome the collective wisdom in the faculty, and adopt procedures to prevent repetitions.
In the current restructuring under Jenkins and a so-called search, the Board and
administrators are meekly bowing to pressure from state politics without any serious faculty input, rather against expressed opposition including strongly worded resolutions by the Faculty Senate. The hiring of outside firms to run the search, in itself objectionable on more grounds than for the fees wasted, is used as a cover to evade open disclosure of names of candidates and of deliberations that as a state institution is required of LSU. More importantly, for a university in search of truth and best practice, this is mockery of what those words mean.
Students, staff, faculty and the public should demand an end to this and a thorough re-examination and accounting of how LSU is being run. LSU belongs to us and we should not countenance a few at the top continuing to besmirch our university and broader university values.
