Yes, there is a problem of Antisemitism in Columbia, and a senior administrator dismissing it with snarky comments is bad, very bad, in fact, even if the revelation came from a right wing rag.
The suspensions are reasonable. Trying to defend senior administrators snarkiness at racism is not.
The texts didn’t seem particularly damning to me but if you’re passing notes during a session, digitally or otherwise, you should probably practice better opsec than “none” if you want them to stay private
I don't think the texts were antisemetic at all or even anti Zionist. They were just snarky. But it tells me that these senior admins don't take antisemitism seriously or don't think the problem exists. This is disqualifying.
I think we have all seen presentations on very important topics that frustrate us. That these administrators sent texts to express their frustrations should not be disqualifying, IMHO. It's often just a form of venting and needs to be considered only as weak evidence of bias.
Maybe. Texting or messaging colleagues during a presentation is very common. And, I think the content here is not too bad in that context. A suspension seems like an overreaction. Unless there is a prior history, this seems like an unusual situation warranting only a warning about professionalism.
As with many incidents, though, I'm biased by knowing how little examples of more egregious conduct (particularly sexual assault and harassment) are punished (suspension being the most common penalty). So, relatively speaking, suspension seems harsh in this context.
I suspect that if we were to read the texts of any of these deans in full we would find a great deal of frustration directed at a number of involved parties, without great ideological correlation.
CU has not been short on infuriating jackasses in recent times or possibly ever
I’m more willing than you are to cut some slack to venting- it’s not like “he’s a prick independent of the merits of his argument” is a foreign sentiment to me, or I suspect to you- but I do think they need to confirm that these admins are taking the problem seriously.
If privately expressing snark at a legitimate problem is disqualifying for a University job we have a serious problem at every institution and only the most joyless awful people will work in education.
If someone has a job with the private employer, and they don't take the job seriously, it is disqualifying, no matter how the employer finds out about the fact they don't take it seriously. This is not a criminal proceeding.
I thought the one about fundraising was kinda antisemitic. But I also didn’t have a problem with the one saying it was tough to listen to but they were trying to keep an open mind.
Private communications like this exist in a context we are not part of. You read them as about serious antisemitism, they could easily have meant them to be about false charges of same.
Moreover, you're allowing yourself to be manipulated by those who profit from your out of context judgment.
It's protected active, private and outside the scope of employment. Let's review everything your ever wrote in private and see if there is something that can be used to fire you - is a bad way to run a University
Disagree, respectfully. Text exchanges between senior admins during a university function, about the university function, are within the scope of employment.
Omri as a University employee you really should be against a view that any communication you have with a coworker is within the scope. If true all your texts with every University employee is now open for review and discipline. You don't want to open that can of worms.
I agree. But there is a difference between what is subject to sunshine laws, and what is within the scope of employment. This was certainly within the scope of employment, but probably wouldn't be discoverable had they been more careful.
No I am talking about your boss demanding to see your phone so they can check for everything you talked with another employee because it's within the scope. There is no privacy from your employer for acts within the scope.
They were deans at a university event. I’ll defer to people who understand the dynamics of university administration, but I don’t see how that could be outside the scope of employment.
It was scuzzy to take photos of their screens, but the deans wrote what they wrote where it could be seen.
Of it were private, then it would not be subject to public scrutiny.
if it were published, then it would not be private, and would have possible consequences.
That is pretty much how Universities are run most places.
I haven’t seen the texts or know pretty much anything about the situation. I was legitimately asking because for months anti-zionism has been falsely called antisemitism by so many. I think it’s a fair question to ask all things considered.
„Attention! I’m an intentionally uninformed person who came to make a minority group beg (again) for its struggle to be taken seriously because I enjoy exhausting the energy of that minority group currently facing staggering levels of violence and hate! A trans rights flag makes me progressive”
None of the texts are about “Zionism” at all. One could be interpreted as antisemitic. One was just rude. One was not even that.
But also, if you don’t know either way, it’s weird to ask that question.
It’s wierd, at a time when anti-zionism is regularly being falsely calles antisemitism to make people look bad to ask if something is actually antisemetism or not when you don’t know?
How are you meant to learn anything you don’t know if you don’t ask? There’s nothing wierd about asking questions
